Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 65343

Received: 25/06/2014

Respondent: Martin Teodorczyk

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Despite WDC's use of the 'Objectively Assessed' buzzword, the proposed growth of 12,860 homes is based on highly subjective analysis. Equally competent studies show a need of 5,500 homes, which is in line with public opinion. Why are site allocations being made on the 'highest-case' basis?

WDC's work to co-operate with neighbouring local authorities is surely not
complete. Why therefore again are site allocations being made based on
the maximum 12,860? For example Coventry and Nuneaton are rumoured to be encouraging more growth and WDC admits that the status of neighbouring councils' housing plans are not established.

Full text:

Despite WDC's use of the 'Objectively Assessed' buzzword, the proposed growth of 12,860 homes is based on highly subjective analysis. Equally competent studies show a need of 5,500 homes, which is in line with public opinion. Why are site allocations being made on the 'highest-case' basis?

WDC's work to co-operate with neighbouring local authorities is surely not
complete. Why therefore again are site allocations being made based on
the maximum 12,860? For example Coventry and Nuneaton are rumoured to be encouraging more growth and WDC admits that the status of neighbouring councils' housing plans are not established.