Consultation

Object

Representation ID: 66993

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Mr David Drinkhall

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67001

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Ian Frost

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67009

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Mr Geoff Reynolds

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67017

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: John Griffiths

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67025

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Justin Richards

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67033

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Louise Kalus

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67041

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Paul Kalus

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67049

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Mr Bernard Hollis

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67057

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Mr R Komarasinha

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67065

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Caroline Komarasinha

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67073

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Matthew Drinkhall

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67081

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Oliver Lane

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67089

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Ms Helen Maclagan

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67097

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Mr and Mrs J Pennington

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67105

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Mr Peter Lamb

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67113

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Sarah Hunt

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67121

Received: 03/07/2014

Respondent: Mr Ben Orme

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There have been serious shortcomings in the processes the Council has used in the development of the Plan. The Council has not properly considered the representations on the Local Plan submitted by residents and the community.

*The Plan does not comply in terms of the letter and spirit of the NPPF and the Council's own Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
*The Council's approach to "pre-determination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption.

*It is the view of Save Warwick that the processes undertaken in the course of the preparation of the local plan by the District Council denied the public, councillors and other consultees genuine participation in the plan making process by:-
-Ignoring representations and / or delaying the council's responses to the representations until the plan had moved on irrevocably. In particular (by omission or neglect) the council's elected Members were not given the opportunity to give proper and timely consideration of the representations made to the council by residents and other interested parties in response to the consultation which took place in July 2013. Councillors did not see anything other than summaries until March 2014 at the same meeting they were being asked to approve the local plan. Since it is the role of officers to advise and members to decide this seems inadequate / unsatisfactory. With such a process it is impossible for those who made representations to have confidence that due consideration was given to their concerns.

-Using the delay of consideration of representations as a tool to enable pre-empting of the local plan by enabling developers and landowners to submit applications for development of the southern areas to which numerous and serious objections and representations had been lodged and not resolved. Officers were afforded the ability to press on with master planning for the areas south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash in face of the objections.

-The consideration of new ONS statistics on population growth was delayed which has led to more land and housing being allocated than what is actually required. This will require the loss of more precious agricultural land than is really necessary).
Operating a regime where the threat of "pre-determination" was used in contravention of the spirit of the Localism Act as a means of (unintentionally or not) of quelling proper debate in council, and councillor involvement in community debate on planning issues. A culture was established which prevented the healthy debate of planning matters (in contravention of the provisions set out in the plain English Guide to the Localism Act 2011). The approach adopted by the Council to "predetermination" has inhibited the full and proper debate of the plan and the consultations involved in its adoption. By doing so it is doubtful that it has complied with the letter of Section 25 of the Localities Act.
*In summary the Council has not followed the correct processes and has not properly engaged with its consultees and its community. It is Save Warwick's opinion that the Council has been reluctant to accept the role of community in the formulation of planning strategy, and in doing so may have opened itself to the possibility of legal challenge about the process it has followed.

Object

Representation ID: 67141

Received: 24/06/2014

Respondent: Mr Ray Steele

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

There was no involvement with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses and there has been no meaningful co-operation by WDC following approaches by these groups. In summary there have been no changes to the intention to build an exaggerated number of houses in inappropriate areas in the south of the district. There was never an alternative plan despite many requests to consider such. WDC planners have resisted every attempt to negotiate on the number of houses and allocated sites.
Objectors to the Local Plan have attempted to make retrospective engagement that should have taken place at an early stage. Despite a massive amount of work by a responsible committee of Councillors Group Leaders and representatives of the public, WDC senior officers will not cooperate