DS20 Accommodating Housing Need Arising from Outside the District

Object

Representation ID: 64562

Received: 01/06/2014

Respondent: Mr Haydn Rees

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Concerned that any revision to the Local Plan will not be considered and consulted as fully and carefully as the process so far.

Support

Representation ID: 64989

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Solihull MBC

Warwick District has not had a direct approach seeking to accommodate housing shortfall from the Birmingham housing market area, but Policy DS20 and the Duty to Cooperate and Strategic Planning section explain how this would be handled in the event of an approach, including the commitment to review the Warwick District Local Plan if such needs could not be adequately addressed. This should enable any issues relating to the migration flows between Solihull and Warwick District to be addressed.

Object

Representation ID: 65114

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Nurton Developments & the Forrester Family

Agent: Chave Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Policy DS20 is unsound and is not legally compliant because it does not provide any commitment to a timely review of the Local Plan. Furthermore, given the housing land supply in the district, the circumstances are not appropriate to rely upon review of the plan to meet housing needs and it is considered that the existence of unmet housing need arising outside the District will render the Plan out of date.

Object

Representation ID: 65130

Received: 23/06/2014

Respondent: Mr Tony Robinson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

History has shown that 'overspill' developments in the 1960's were a failure as employment and community were inadequate and not sustained long term

Object

Representation ID: 65256

Received: 25/06/2014

Respondent: Lapworth Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

DS20 Lapworth Parish Council is concerned that if additional housing has to be allocated because of the inability of adjacent districts to meet their quota, then the Warwick numbers will be changed potentially without proper consideration and consultation. Although the reasons for collaboration across "artificial" boundaries are sound, and the experience of Warwick DC's processes and decision-making have been so far been very positive, there is no comfort provided that any reopening of the Local Plan will be done well as the one we have at present. We therefore have to "Object"

Object

Representation ID: 65425

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Nurton Developments

Agent: Chave Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Policy DS20 is unsound and is not legally compliant because it does not provide any commitment to a timely review of the Local Plan. Furthermore, given the housing land supply in the district, the circumstances are not appropriate to rely upon review of the plan to meet housing needs and it is considered that the existence of unmet housing need arising outside the District will render the Plan out of date.

Object

Representation ID: 65523

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Sharba Homes Group

Agent: PJPlanning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

This policy does not discharge to the Duty to Cooperate. As the 'duty' has not been discharged, the plan cannot be found to be legally compliant, and cannot be declared sound by an inspector. In this case the inspector must recommend the plan's withdrawal.

The Plan is not therefore legally compliant

Object

Representation ID: 65655

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Lioncourt Strategic Land - Andy Faizey

Agent: Savills

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The plan should provide a proactive approach to support the needs of neighbouring authorities. The housing requirement identified in the GL Hearn Joint Housing Market Area Assessment shows that Coventry will potentially require land outside its' boundary. The release of the Kings Hill area of Green Belt in Warwick District could address the necessary additional housing required in Coventry.

Object

Representation ID: 65880

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Centaur Homes

Agent: McLoughlin Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Centaur Homes object to the wording of the policy. This goes against paragraphs 178 to 182 of the Framework, including the duty to cooperate and the Local Plan being positively prepared. It also does not support paragraphs 47 and 49 of the Framework as any unmet need should form part of the objectively assessed need and if it cannot be demonstrated that enough land is available to meet this need then paragraph 49 applies.

Support

Representation ID: 65980

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Swindells and Star Pubs and Bars Ltd

Agent: Barton Willmore

The approach contained in emerging Policy DS20 is welcomed taking into consideration the Inspector's comments regarding the withdrawn Coventry Core Strategy, where it was concluded that delivery of Coventry's housing requirement was a strategic priority planning issue that crosses local boundaries, an issue which is likely to impact Warwick District and Burton Green in particular given its close relationship to Coventry. It is urged that work is undertaken as soon as possible, to identify sites suitable for accommodating Coventry's housing needs to ensure there is no delay to the housing supply. Furthermore, it is considered that sites adjacent to the boundary shared with Coventry, should be considered first to address this need.

Object

Representation ID: 65990

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Barwood Development Securities Ltd

Agent: HOW Planning LLP

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

National guidance sets out a prescriptive set of requirements in relation to the Duty to Cooperate and it is confirmed that robust evidence is required to demonstrate how this has been complied with.

The Sub-Regional Approach to Delivering the Housing Requirement report identifies that further work is required to ensure the HMA has a robust subregional
evidence base to support collaborative work on a sub-regional spatial strategy.

The Council's approach to the Local Plan's housing spatial strategy is premature given the significant uncertainties which the joint HMA evidence base could deliver.

This approach lacks certainty and is dependent on a number of significant pieces of technical evidence that are not yet complete.There can be no assurance that the Council's assumptions will translate to the HMA's unmet housing requirements being provided for.

Barwood conclude that the legal compliance of the Plan has not been satisfied on the basis that the Duty to Cooperate is not a matter which can be rectified at the Examination stage.

Support

Representation ID: 65995

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: West Midlands HARP Planning Consortium

Agent: Tetlow King Planning Ltd.

We are glad that the Council has recognised the issues surrounding housing need arising from outside of the District; this is supported by the NPPG which requires effective strategic planning or cross border growth "from the outset" of Plan preparation.

It is of course desirable for an authority to have assessed the entire housing need that must be
accommodated in its borders before preparing its Plan. The
Council seems to be taking significant measures to positively front up to this potential need. We would like to see adopted, the inclusion of a proactive timetable defining key events that will trigger a review with regards to cross border need.

Object

Representation ID: 65999

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes;Bloor Homes;Catesby Group;Crest Strategic Projects;Hallam Land Management;Richborough Estates;Taylor Wimpey;William Davis

Agent: Barton Willmore

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

It is unlikely that Coventry City will be able to accommodate all of its objectively assessed housing needs within its own administrative area. However, no specific allowance has been made for this within the Plan's housing target. For the reasons stated above, we consider there to be a number of deficiencies within the Joint SHMA that call into the question the accuracy of the objectively assessed need within the HMA.

We do not consider that part C of Policy DS20 constitutes a 'concrete action or outcome' as the Council are effectively deferring the identification of suitable sites to meet the needs of an adjoining authority.

Whilst we are therefore generally supportive of the sentiment that the Council are expressing in Policy DS20, we do not consider that it goes far enough.

Object

Representation ID: 66043

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The NPPG affirms that a LPA should assess its development needs working with other authorities in the relevant HMA in line with the Duty to Co-operate. Each of the authorities within the sub region is at a different stage in preparing their local plan or core strategy, therefore the capacity of the other districts to deliver their housing requirement is unknown. Policy DS20 states that existence of unmet housing need arising outside outside the District will not render the plan out of date, however the Plan will be reviewed.

There is evidence of a potential shortfall arising from a number of the neighbouring local authorities.Therefore it is not agreed that the existence of an unmet housing need outside the District will not render the Warwick Local Plan out of date.If a LPA preparing a Local Plan provides robust evidence of an unmet housing need identified in a SHMA other LPAs in the HMA will be required to consider the implications including the need to review their housing policies.

In conclusion whilst there remain uncertainties about the meeting of unmet housing need in the LPAs adjoining Warwick District Council and Birmingham it is impossible to determine if the legal requirements of the Duty to Co-operate has or has not been discharged by the Council because the evidence is not available on which to make such a judgement.

Object

Representation ID: 66053

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Lenco Investments

Agent: RPS Planning & Development

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

RPS objects to the fundamental basis of this policy. It is not justified and is unsound. It is incorrectly predicated on unmet need arising from outside of the District and fails to reflect the commitment given by the authority in the Coventry and Warwickshire Local Enterprise Partnership.

A basis for objection is that the Council proposes a review mechanism to address sub-regional housing need.

Warwick is already accomodating sub-regional employment requirements within this current plan without the need for review. However there is no sign of any housing and job balanced agreement on associate levels of housing provision. The justification for this is that the Council does not know the capacity and other needs of other districts and thus a review mechanism is the only approach that it has considered.

There is a concern that no reference is made to the ability of Warwick or neighbouring authorities to accommodate the need within Warwick from the Gateway site.

RPS considers that a review mechanism is not required and that it is Warwick District Council that has a significant unmet need that needs to be addressed by adjoining authorities.

Object

Representation ID: 66090

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Gleeson Developments

Agent: Savills (L&P) Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Policy DS20 picks up on the potential for meeting any un met housing need arising outside of Warwick District. There is a high potential that such a situation will exist, for example to meet the housing needs of Coventry, Stratford-upon-Avon and Birmingham. Indeed, Coventry had previously been considering around 3,500 houses on a strategic site to the north of Warwick District. Having progressed a Core Strategy with significantly reduced housing figures than the RSS figures, the Plan was withdrawn partly due to lack of a joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment. Similarly Stratford-upon-Avon is currently proposing a housing figure around 700 houses short of its objectively assessed need figure. Birmingham City Council has indicated a need for between 80,000 to 105,000 houses over a plan period up to 2031, but with an identified capacity to accommodate only 43,000 houses, with a further 6,000 if a review of Green Belt was undertaken.


The NPPG states at paragraph 12-008-20140306 that "Local planning authorities should also consider whether a plan making activity by other authorities has an impact on planning and the Local Plan in their area. For example, a revised Strategic Housing Market Assessment will affect all authorities in that housing market area and potentially beyond, irrespective of the status or stage of development of particular Local Plans."

Given the above, the first sentence of Policy DS20 "The existence of unmet housing need arising outside of the District will not render this Plan out of date...." conflicts with the advice in the
NPPG.

Object

Representation ID: 66109

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: CALA Homes (mids) Ltd

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

As a result of the significant increases in housing requirements for neighbouring authorities to Warwick District, concern is raised that it will have a significant impact on the spatial strategy for the District and could render the Plan unsound. Further evidence is required in order to satisfactorily discharge the Duty to Cooperate and to ensure that the delivery of housing does not become bogged down in political stalemates.

Object

Representation ID: 66115

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Martin

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Although Policy DS20 builds in a degree of review to the Plan, the policy only aims to accomodate the housing need that arises from neighbouring authorities and does not allow for a review should the market and affordable housing needs of Warwick District increase and housing land supply becomes inadequate.

The impact of Warwick District Council's neighbours needs will be significant, the Duty to Cooperate is ever more important, if the Council do not adequately discharge this duty, their Plan will be found unsound.

Further evidence is required in order to demonstrate that the Council has satisfactorily discharged its Duty to Cooperate.

Support

Representation ID: 66154

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Coventry City Council

Recognises the effort WDC put into discharging their responsibilities in relation to the duty to cooperate. This includes numerous areas of joint working, most notably the work on the Coventry and Warwickshire Gateway proposals and the Joint SHMA. Welcome the inclusion of DS20 and its supporting text. CCC are satisfied that WDC have discharged their duty and put in place a firm commitment to on going cooperation as it will relate to CCCs Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 66183

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Hallam Land Management and William Davis

Agent: Marrons Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Policy DS20 is considered unsound as it is neither justified nor the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives, furthermore it has not been prepared in accordance with the Duty to Co-operate. It is therefore not legally compliant.

It is clear from this approach that if it is shown that significant housing needs arising outside of the Distirct should be met within its administrative area, the Council is relying upon a review of the Local Plan. This will further delay the provision of new homes which it is already apparent will be required. They should be planned for now rather than deferred.

Object

Representation ID: 66242

Received: 24/06/2014

Respondent: Crest Strategic Projects

Agent: d2planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

This objection should be read conjunction with our objections to the 'Duty to Co-operate' . The NPPF requires that the Local Plan be positively prepared and to meet the fully objectively assessed housing needs not only for the District but also any unmet housing need from adjoining Districts. It is apparent that the Council anticipates that it will have to meet unmet housing needs from adjoining Districts (probably Coventry) in the future. In such circumstances, the Local Plan should be planning for this eventuality now and not to delay until a Local Plan review. Such an approach is contrary to the advice in the NPPF which seeks that Local Plans are 'positively prepared ' and ensure that Local Plan ' boost the supply of housing'.

Object

Representation ID: 66290

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

It appears from the joint SHMA that there is a reasonable likelihood that additional housing will be required in Warwick District as a result of needs arising outside the District requiring to be met within the District. Whilst the approach set out in Policy DS20 is in many ways sensible, it is not sound as it is not positively prepared. This additional need can be reasonably foreseen and allowance should be made for it by way of additional site allocations. At the very least, additional land should be safeguarded for this purpose to provide some certainty, in accordance with NPPF paragraph 85.

Object

Representation ID: 66315

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: A C Lloyd Homes Ltd

Agent: Framptons

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The principal concern is the lack of provision to meet future needs arising from the conurbation especially Birmingham. The fact that 10.9 % of Birmingham's migration was directed to Coventry and Warwickshire LIP area in the period 2000/1 - 2010/11 indicates that some of this may be directed towards Warwick District, especially given the excellent rail and road links with the conurbation.

Object

Representation ID: 66320

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: A C Lloyd Homes Ltd and Northern Trust

Agent: Framptons

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The principal concern is the lack of provision to meet future needs arising from the conurbation especially Birmingham. The fact that 10.9 % of Birmingham's migration was directed to Coventry and Warwickshire LIP area in the period 2000/1 - 2010/11 indicates that some of this may be directed towards Warwick District, especially given the excellent rail and road links with the conurbation.

Object

Representation ID: 66389

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Warwick Town Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

WDC should critically examin the popultation figures for Coventry.
Any impact can be shared with other adjoining Councils.
Large houses will have little relevance, for much of Coventry's needs, will be social housing.

Object

Representation ID: 66468

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Agent: Stansgate Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Outlines that unmet needs outside of district will not render Plan out of date, but that the Plan will be reviewed if evidence demonstrates that significant housing needs arising outside the district should be met within the district and cannot be adequately addressed without a review. To establish this, it sets out that Council will work with other local authorities in the Coventry and Warwickshire HMA to prepare joint evidence base on housing need, agree a strategic approach to address any shortfall in land availability to deliver the full objectively assessed need, and where evidence and the Duty to Cooperate clearly indicates unmet needs would be most appropriately met in the district, seek to meet these needs and review the Local Plan.
Policy Analysis
Whilst welcoming the sentiment of Policy DS20 we submit that its provisions are not sufficient to address the unmet housing needs that are already acknowledged to exist outside of the district. There is a clear need for action to be taken to address these needs now, rather than deferring them to future joint working or a review of the Local Plan. We further query the statement in Policy DS20 that unmet needs will not render the Local Plan out-of-date. Once the Local Plan comes into effect the Council is still obliged to work with its neighbouring authorities on an ongoing basis to address unmet housing needs.
Conclusions on Soundness
Whilst welcoming the provisions of Policy DS20, submit that measures it proposes are insufficient to address unmet housing needs that are already acknowledged to exist outside the district. If the Council does not make adequate
provision to assess and address these needs now we submit that Policy DS20 and the Local Plan cannot be considered positively prepared or effective.

Support

Representation ID: 66513

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Support

Object

Representation ID: 66577

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: CPRE WARWICKSHIRE

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Because the Plan assumes substantial continuing in-migration, there is already in effect significant provision for meeting needs originating elsewhere. However Policy DS20 of the Plan is ominous because it envisages even higher housing provision than is currently proposed. It is fundamentally wrong to act simply as a repository for housing development not wanted elsewhere in order to fuel the Council's growth aspirations.
The revised ONS figures for households in Coventry (issued in May 2014) have significant methodological faults. The claimed requirements for the City Council area are not reliable and should not be given weight.

Object

Representation ID: 66611

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Richborough Estates Ltd

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

As drafted it is considered that Policy DS20 is not sound. It fails in our opinion to provide a 'concrete action' or satisfactory outcome as the LPA is effectively deferring the identification of developable sites to meet the needs of an adjoining authority if the need arises. There is concern, following the withdrawal of the Coventry Core Strategy in 2013, that the Council will not be able to meet all of its identified housing need within its administrative boundaries. Accordingly, Coventry City Council will be looking to the adjoining authorities - in particular Warwick District - to make provision for its housing needs. This is highlighted in the Coventry and Warwickshire Duty to Cooperate Statement that forms part of the evidence base underpinning this WDLP.

If it is found that Coventry will not be able to meet its own housing needs then Warwick District should seek to identified a suitable housing implementation strategy now rather than delaying the inevitable. It is submitted that the LPA is not taking a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to resolve these issues.

Object

Representation ID: 66614

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr & Mrs S &D & G Harrison & Rowe

Number of people: 3

Agent: CP Bigwood

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

It is noted that the Council recognises that there is likely to be significant need to provide for housing need arising outside the district. However the Council has focused on Coventry and Warwickshire with less emphasis on potential demand arising from the Greater Birmingham area despite Warwick District physically abutting Solihull.