Yes

Representation ID: 95719

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Bloor Homes Western

Agent: Marrons

It is imperative that the SWLP adequately considers accommodating unmet housing needs arising from outside of South Warwickshire. There are significant unmet needs arising from the GBBCHMA which require attention, and potential unmet needs arising from Coventry which should be taken account of accordingly. There is also potential for unmet needs arising from Cotswold District, Redditch Borough and Solihull Metropolitan Borough which should be considered. Failure to do so would render the SWLP not positively prepared nor effective and thus unsound in line with Paragraph 36 a) and c) of the NPPF.

Other

Representation ID: 95817

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Carter

Given the amount of growth which has been accommodated recently in South Warwickshire the SWLP should provide for the minimum level of out-of-area growth which is feasible.

Other

Representation ID: 95902

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Tesh

The SWLP must ensure that any development to serve the needs outside South Warwickshire must have good transport links to those areas as it is likely that the residents in the new developments will be commuting to work outside South Warwickshire in the areas where there is a shortfall in housing

No

Representation ID: 96059

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Mathers

I do not agree with accommodating growth needs which arise from outside of South Warwickshire.

No

Representation ID: 96144

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Yvonne Joyce

The issue with this policy is that there is inevitably a mis match of employment and skills. The skills used in industries in the black country do not match those of a rural area like Rowington and Warwick. The green belt needs to be protected so why think of providing growth needs from outside south warwickshire here. For those outside south warwickshire to be housed here would mean a need for them to travel back to their work and transport is not available to make this possible in a sensible time frame.

No

Representation ID: 96154

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Baddesley Clinton Parish Council

Any large scale developments, or even moderate scale developments for the benefit of those living outside Warwickshire would result in significant increase in commuting which from an environmental standpoint is unacceptable.

No

Representation ID: 96202

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Tracey Mumford

Hatton is not an overspill of Coventry. The amount of houses they state are required are not simply for Warwickshire residents, they are taking on housing numbers from neighbouring Coventry and Birmingham.

Other

Representation ID: 96293

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Southam Town Council

While we generally support the Policy Direction, in communities like Southam where the average house price is more than ten times the average income there is a concern that this policy could lead to further difficulties for local people being able to afford to live in their home community. Somehow the Plan needs to address this concern. At the same time, in planning for overspill from districts with whom we have a duty to co-operate, it is important to avoid over-provision in the SWLP area.

Other

Representation ID: 96308

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: John Dinnie

The needs of areas outside South Warwickshire should only be accommodated if the needs arising from the resultant population shifts are also addressed. This would include sustainable transport needs, education and health needs as well as GBI, open space, parks and playing fields.

No

Representation ID: 96441

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Julie Springate

By building excess housing to cover the needs of other areas it will reduce the value of Warwickshire housing. Also, the destruction of the open countryside will lead people of higher net worth to move away leaving Warwickshire as a less attractive place to live.

Other

Representation ID: 96533

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Shipston Town Council

The SWLP must ensure that any development to serve the needs outside South Warwickshire must have good transport links to those areas. It is likely that the residents in the new developments will be commuting across to work outside South Warwickshire in the areas where there is a shortfall.

Other

Representation ID: 96678

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Long Itchington Parish Council

There should be a careful and exhaustive exploration of the housing needs of South Warwickshire residents and their families before accommodating residential needs from a wider area.

Other

Representation ID: 96820

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Alcester Town Council

Alcester Town Council, Arrow with Weethley Parish Council, Kinwarton Parish Council, Wixford Parish Council and Great Alne Parish Council (together referred to as Alcester Parishes Group or ‘APG’) notes that this approach is mandatory under the NPPF but would stress the need for proportionality and appropriateness in accommodating growth needs from outside the area. Further detail is required.

No

Representation ID: 96939

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

In the IOC 62% felt that the plan should not contribute to needs outside South Warwickshire

No

Representation ID: 97108

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Tysoe Parish Council

Our understanding is that much of the "overspill" from Coventry and Birmingham is already incorporated in the NSM.

No

Representation ID: 97115

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carol Longford

Housing needs in a specific area are related to the housing needs within that area. Development should be focused in the areas of need, high rise on brownfield if that is necessary.

No

Representation ID: 97144

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Sir Thomas White’s Charity and The King Henry VIII Endowed Trust, Warwick

Agent: Stansgate Planning

The National Planning Policy Framework states, at paragraph 11b), that strategic policies should provide for the objectively assessed needs for housing and other uses, as well as any needs that cannot be met within neighbouring areas. This need for cross boundary provision is reiterated in Framework paragraph 36 a). As drafted, Policy Direction 4 does not go far enough towards meeting the needs of the Greater Birmingham and Coventry areas. Some cross boundary requirements are already acknowledged yet the SWLP does not currently propose to make any allocations to meet those needs from the outset and should be amended to do so, reflecting the latest information available.
That notwithstanding it remains appropriate for the SWLP to allocate additional sites which can be released if there is a shortfall against the Districts’ own requirements or needs arising from adjacent areas. A policy of reserve sites must be clearly set out in the SWLP and not left to a separate document, to be adopted at a later date.

Other

Representation ID: 97177

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Peter and Sheila Lewin

Whilst I support the need to meet people's need for homes, I believe there is a risk here of loosing the advantages of open, green spaces by building up the areas north of Leamington in area SG06.

No

Representation ID: 97225

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Bernard Davis

South Warwickshire is required to accomodate more than enough new housing without taking additional overflow from adjacent urban areas.

Yes

Representation ID: 97232

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Squab Hall Farm

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

It is imperative that the SWLP adequately considers accommodating unmet housing needs arising from outside of South Warwickshire. There are significant unmet needs arising from the GBBCHMA which require attention, and potential unmet needs arising from Coventry which should be taken account of accordingly. There is also potential for unmet needs arising from Cotswold District, Redditch Borough and Solihull Metropolitan Borough which should be considered. Failure to do so would render the SWLP not positively prepared nor effective and thus unsound in line with Paragraph 36 a) and c) of the NPPF.

Other

Representation ID: 97329

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lucy White

N/A

Other

Representation ID: 97367

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Godwin Developments

Godwin Developments are supportive of the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 4. However, Officers need to be mindful that the Solihull Draft Local Plan was withdrawn last year in part due to issues relating to unmet needs from the wider housing market areas. Therefore, it is imperative that officers continue to engage with their counterparts at other Councils to discuss cross boundary issues.

No

Representation ID: 97414

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Daniel Hatcher

As confirmed by the NPPF and PPG, there is a statutory duty to cooperate on strategic matters that cross administrative boundaries, including meeting housing and employment needs. There has been a long-standing problem in fully meeting housing needs within the wider HMA and clear evidence of this continuing. The SWLP must demonstrate an on-going dialogue with its neighbours as it is highly likely that unmet needs will need to be accommodated within South Warwickshire.
Rosconn Group does not agree with the approach of allocating reserved sites if it becomes clear during plan-making that such needs exist.

No

Representation ID: 97454

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Spitfire Bespoke Homes

Agent: Harris Lamb

It needs to be established whether there are unmet needs to be accommodated and then to plan accordingly to meet these.

No

Representation ID: 97583

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Clive Henderson

Our rural character is valued by all current residents . Available non green belt land is sparse. The character must not be put at risk by providing homes for people from other authorities. There is space for them.

No

Representation ID: 97607

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Jenny Byerley

Housing needs for cities and large towns should be accommodated within those towns and cities on their brownfield sites not on rural Greenfield sites - as stated as preferred by your consultation

No

Representation ID: 97613

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Anna Avino

We can't realistically accommodate the 29,000 homes being foisted on the area without taking extras from elsewhere! You won't be happy till the countryside is gone, there is nothing but concrete cities and flooding everywhere because you are destroying the environment!

No

Representation ID: 97661

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Leonard

People's affinity with their local area should be a major consideration so that people care about their community and it's standards relating to the people and their environment.

Yes

Representation ID: 97703

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: William Davis Limited

Agent: Marrons

It is imperative that the SWLP adequately considers accommodating unmet housing needs arising from outside of South Warwickshire. There are significant unmet needs arising from the GBBCHMA which require attention, and potential unmet needs arising from Coventry which should be taken account of accordingly. There is also potential for unmet needs arising from Cotswold District, Redditch Borough and Solihull Metropolitan Borough which should be considered. Failure to do so would render the SWLP not positively prepared nor effective and thus unsound in line with Paragraph 36 a) and c) of the NPPF.

No

Representation ID: 97805

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Jeffery

In the IOC 62% of respondents felt that the plan should not address unmet needs in the GBBC HMI.
The need for contributing has not been assessed