Who will but these new homes? Young people cannot get a mortgage for love nor money at present, and the financial situation does not look as though it will improve very quickly. Doubtless matters will have improved by 2026, but will it sustain these housing figures? The figures for Dwelling Size and Type for market housing and for likely Profile of Household Types requiring Market housing make interesting reading; they give (very roughly) 60% detached/semi-detached with high occupancy (working c

To develop the area as proposed would equate to a town the size of Crewkerne between ourselves and yeovil. The 22.5% requirement for all of South somerset to be dumped in one green area that is self-sufficient in itself. it is not brownfield but an area rich in history, sustainable food and local/social character. It is not on. Think again.

Overarching factors governing the decision as to what levels of housing Somerton is provided with in the future are, in my opinion; § The need to achieve much more affordable housing § More infrastructure to support housing. In my opinion planning decisions at present Core Strategy level and at the Delivery Plan level need to be clear about these matters before decisions on the quantity of housing expansion can be decided. I believe communities must expand or they eventually wither and atroph

I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed development of housing to accommodate between 10,000 or 16,600 households in the area on the southern border of Yeovil which also lies between the villages of Barwick and Stoford and East Coker. (I have seen the figures of both 10,000 and 16,000 quotes.) I believe this to be an unsuitable development both in its scale and location for a number of reasons. 1. Population Assuming an average household size of 3, the above proposal would

PLAN FOR SOUTH SOMERSET TO 2026 I am writing as a resident Corscombe who has read your plan for South Somerset, and believes it is likely to have a considerable impact on adjacent areas. Housing Demand and Supply I am very concerned with accuracy of the figures put forward as predictions for population growth in South Somerset. The Office of National Statistics predicts that population growth will only come from net migration until 2026, which over the last 6 years has been around 0.4%, and on

6.1 In conclusion we have the following concerns regarding the current draft of the Core Strategy: - It needs to be made clear that the proposed housing targets contained in the document are minimum figures to allow the flexibility to deal with issues of nonimplementation and second and holiday homes;

1. Housing Demand and Supply Office of National Statistics predicts population growth in South Somerset will only be from net migration until 2026 at an annual rate of 0.625% and over despite the average net migration rate over last 6 years being around 0.4% per annum and on a sharply falling trend! We think that the average growth in population of the last 5 years projected out to 2026 .... Realistically only support around 7.600 new households in all of South Somerset, not 16.600 as in the draf

Scale of Growth for the District and Main Settlements We note that draft policy SS3 proposes a lower level of overall housing provision than was included in the Proposed Modifications to SWRSS (16,600 dwellings as opposed to 19,700 dwellings). In light of the recent High Court judgments referred to above, and the evidence base established to support the figure of 19,700 dwellings, we do not consider that the lower figure proposed is appropriate or justifiable. The Core Strategy must be prepared

1. The current policy context for the Core Strategy has been determined through a mixture of deliberate compliance and non-compliance with Regional Planning Guidance/emerging RSS Policy. In particular the reduction in housing numbers is predicated on the basis that RSS had been revoked. It is understood that Government messages have signalled this approach, however, the CALA Homes High Court Judgement has clarified that the RSS remains part of the Development Plan until such time as it is revok

2.0 SETTLEMENT STRATEGY Housing 2.0 We generally agree with the scale of growth planned for and welcome the Council's identification that the assessed lower level of growth (13,600) is inappropriate. Providing a level of growth that is based on past building rates would have a negative effect on the district in terms of social and economic aspects as it would simply be ignoring the ONS household projection rates which are a robust part of the evidence base that should determine the appropriate