Object

Preferred Options November 2021

Representation ID: 1392

Received: 13/12/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd

Agent: Pegasus Group

Representation Summary:

HC1 - housing mix better determined on site by site basis considering market demand. Policy should comment that requirement is subject to viability assessment. Definition of major development should reflect DMPO HC4 -policy does not define older person. Not clear if requirement for 10% bungalows will continue. Evidence needed to justify M4(2) building regs, as level proposed does not seem supported by the evidence and it would not be appropriate to require M4(2) and bungalows. HC9 - requirement for tree lined streets should only be in locations supported by the highways authority. HC11 - requirement for NDSS is not supported or justified by teh SHMA. If pursued then there should be some flexibility in this policy where only some fall below the requirement. HC12 - cost assumption for EV charging should be increased. HC17 - requirement for on site play as default is not supported, or is the requirement for open space to be centrally located, nor is the exclusion of incidental green space from the requirement. Clarification sought on whether attenuation basins are incidental. HC18 - policy should define sports standards expected and considered through the IDP and viability assessment. EC3 - requirement for Employment and Skills Plan not supported as TWs business model relies on sub contracting. NB6 - repetition of 2021 Building Regs Part L interim uplift is unnecessary and should be removed.