There is no justification for WDC's proposed growth of 12,300 homes, which is highly subjective and against consultation responses to date. As admitted by WDC as an "interim" figure, why are site allocations being made on the 'highest-case' basis?

WDC's work to co-operate with neighbouring local authorities is still not complete. Why therefore again are site allocations being made based on 12,300? For example Coventry and Nuneaton are rumoured to be encouraging more growth.

A sequential test focussing on brownfield and in-town sites has not been completed.

Specifically for Hatton Park, the subjective analysis JUST puts it into the 'Growth Village' category so 70-90 homes is excessive. WDC's own preamble confirms that Hatton Park is responsible for local population growth of 48% since 2001 (even higher for younger people) and that there is a wide range of housing types. Therefore WDC's justification for improving housing stock and encouraging population growth in the younger demographic DOES NOT APPLY for Hatton Park. So, why is Hatton Park earmarked for 70-90 homes?

Services around Hatton Park are already stretched, for example the Ferncumbe School is at full capacity.

WDC's previous assumptions have been contested by Hatton Parish Council.

All in all the housing outputs and site allocations are being made based on criteria that has not been tested and WDC faces a tough challenge when its Local Plan goes to the Inquiry.