Object

Representation ID: 55482

Received: 24/07/2013

Respondent: Roxhill Developments Ltd

Agent: Oxalis Planning

Notes that an adopted housing requirement of 12,300 homes between 2011 and 2029 is an interim policy position and welcomes the recognition that this may change following the ongoing evidence gathering, and cooperation with neighbouring authorities.

However would also support the retention of the current methodology applied by Warwick District to informing and establishing housing requirements.

It appears the approach has been based around a desire to directly translate local economic aspirations and ambitions into a housing and development strategy (RDS, Section 4.1, pages 10 - 13).

This includes explicit recognition of the economic and job creation opportunities presented by the 'Coventry Gateway' employment development, including a technology park, recently positively considered by both Warwick District and Coventry City Councils.

The employment land policy approach proposed with regard to this sub regionally significant employment site is also supported (Policy RDS8).

Warwick District clearly forms part of a wider housing market with neighbouring authorities, reflected in the fact that various shared evidence and technical work has historically been undertaken jointly between Warwick District, Coventry City, and Nuneaton & Bedworth Councils.

Supports such an approach which is in accordance with NPPF, (para 17).

The Warwick District SHMA of March 2012 appears to have been undertaken in isolation of any consideration of the wider housing market. It was also published in advance of the publication of the final National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Therefore welcome the references to a joint SHMA now being undertaken by Coventry City, Warwick District, Rugby Borough, and Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Councils which understand will report late summer 2013.

That work was specifically required by the Inspector during the examination of Coventry City's Core Strategy as a response to the significant deficiencies and weaknesses identified in the approach taken by Coventry City.

In the absence of the joint approach now being taken to understanding the housing market, it seems likely that Warwick District's Local Plan would too have faced similar criticisms and questions by an Inspector at examination.

It will also be essential if the Council is to demonstrate that it has met the requirements of the Duty to Cooperate.