Issue and Options 2023

Back to document

Search form responses

Results for Warwick District Green Party search

New search

Form ID: 76659

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Option 1: Rail Corridors

Neutral

Option 2: Sustainable Travel

Neutral

Option 3: Economy

Appropriate strategy

Option 4: Sustainable Travel and Economy

Appropriate strategy

Option 5: Dispersed

Inappropriate strategy

Form ID: 76667

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Option S9a: Save all existing settlement boundaries where these are already defined within the Core Strategy, Local Plan, emerging SAP or an NDP.

selected

Option S9b: Within this Part 1 Plan, review which settlements have boundaries defined and which do not, as well as the extent of any such boundaries.

selected

Form ID: 76856

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Option E2a: Include a policy which encourages businesses to be low carbon

selected

Option E2b: Do not include a policy encouraging businesses to be low carbon

selected

Option E2c: Include a policy which looks to identify sites or development zones which are targeted at businesses wishing to be innovative towards a low carbon economy.

selected

Form ID: 76871

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Q-H1-1: The HEDNA is proposing that we move away from an approach where future household needs are based on the 2014-based household projections towards a trend-based approach. Do you think that the HEDNA evidence provides a reasonable basis for identifying future levels of housing need across South Warwickshire?

Q-H1-2: If your answer to H1-1 is No, what would be a more appropriate approach to calculating future housing needs for this Local Plan?

The basis for the proposed housing numbers is the 341 page report: “Coventry & Warwickshire Housing & Economic Development Needs Assessment (HEDNA)” found at https://www.southwarwickshire.org.uk/doc/211518/name/CW%20HEDNA%20Final%20Report%20171122%20Clean%20.pdf Chapter 5 describes the ‘standard method’ for calculating required housing numbers: 1. Previous rate of building houses. 2. Increase the rate depending on the affordability ratio (median house price divided by median salary) 3. Impose a cap if necessary (not applicable locally), and 4. Increase the rate for large urban centres (applies to Coventry). Therefore, it requires faster and faster housebuilding locally. There are several contentious issues here. The government expects 2014-based Household Projections to be used, whereas the report sensibly indicates that the 2021 census is more accurate and recent. Using the census figures would require higher housebuilding in south Warwickshire but lower building in Coventry and north Warwickshire. However, this doesn’t adjust for the fact that Warwick District’s current local plan already includes 5,976 over-spill homes for Coventry, which the census shows were based on grossly inflated claims regarding population growth in Coventry. Therefore, it could be argued that both the 2014 and census figures are too high for Warwick District. The government’s formula requires exponential increases in housebuilding which are clearly unsustainable both environmentally and socially. The affordability ratio is based on single incomes, whereas many properties are bought by couples who are both working. No adjustment is made for inherited wealth (and the bank of mum & dad), which is increasingly important for house purchases. Thus, the government's bizarre self-reinforcing calculations are not evidence based, do not reflect how people finance house purchases, and make no effort to address regional issues.To tackle the housing crisis, the government needs to reduce the wealth gap in society and regional variations rather than building more houses, particularly in hot spots like south Warwickshire, that are unaffordable for too many. One of the factors of the overheated housing market is investors buying additional properties to rent meaning that there are fewer available for people wanting to own their own home. For these people the properties exist, but are unaffordable. The Council should take a stronger line on enforcing higher standards for landlords, so that not only do tenants have good properties, but that other investments will yield a higher return leaving more properties for people aspiring to own their own home. Regarding the number of houses to be built, the government has recently announced “This number should, however, be an advisory starting point, a guide that is not mandatory.” Unfortunately, it is unclear how far a local plan can deviate from this number nor what justifications are required. At the same time, it was announced that it was “ending the so-called ‘duty to co-operate'” which implies that Warwick District will not be required to take any future Coventry over-spill. Given the current chaotic, uncertain and illogical regulatory environment, it is extremely difficult to make rational decisions on housing numbers in the best interests of local residents. If it is assumed that the duty to cooperate has ended and that local plans no longer need to closely follow HEDNA numbers, it would be sensible to decide a number significantly lower than the 2014-based projections for Warwick district. This is because it is unclear of the impact of the enormous house building programme currently underway, particularly south of Leamington/ Warwick and from Kenilworth to Coventry. It may be that this, current economic uncertainty and other factors will reduce the affordability ratio and slow the demand for further housing.

Form ID: 76891

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Option H3a: Do not seek to include minimum space standards in a policy in the SWLP.

selected

Option H3b: Apply Nationally Described Space Standards to developments across South Warwickshire based on locally derived evidence.

selected

Option H3c: Include a requirement to meet optional Building Regulations M4(2)/M4(3) as standard. These are focussed upon ensuring appropriate accessibility standards.

selected

Option H3d: None of these

selected

Form ID: 76897

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Q-H4-1: Do you agree with the approach of contributing to meeting the Birmingham and Black Country HMA shortfall to 2031 on the identified sites in Stratford-on-Avon District?

Q-H4-2: Please add any comments you wish to make about the scale of the shortfall from the Birmingham and Black Country HMA that South Warwickshire should accommodate within the South Warwickshire Local Plan

See response to QH1-2 which included the possible removal of the duty to cooperate.

Q-H4-3: If we are required to meet housing shortfalls from outside of South Warwickshire, how best and where should we accommodate such shortfalls?

No answer given

Form ID: 76906

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Option C1.1a: Identify and allocate land that is considered suitable for wind or solar energy generation schemes

selected

Option C1.1b: Do not allocate land, but have a policy supporting renewable energy generation schemes in principle, subject to criteria on the suitability of the location

selected

Option C1.1c: None of these

selected

Form ID: 76910

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Q-C1.2: Are there any other criteria which should be considered when assessing proposals for large scale renewable energy developments?

This local plan should require all new buildings to be equipped with appropriate levels of PV panels. This should at least provide the electricity to match the Energy Use Intensity (EUI). The document clearly sets out the need for consideration of the impact of landscape and heritage assets, the loss of agricultural land and the sterilisation of mineral reserves. The latter is not quite accurate as solar and wind farms are not permanent fixtures. Community support is also important and consideration should be given to the immediate community to a new facility benefiting in terms of a reduction to their cost of electricity for the time that the development is in place. This may provide a driver for certain communities to ask for solar farms and on shore wind developments. There are a small number of community wind schemes (e.g. Ripple Energy) where the public has the opportunity to buy shares in a wind farm and get a return in electricity cost reduction. There are the significantly large areas of roofs on both residential and non residential buildings that could be equipped with PV. This could include schools, warehouses, public buildings etc.

Form ID: 76912

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Option C2a: Require decentralised energy systems to be utilised for developments over a relevant size threshold, where viable

selected

Option C2b: Have a policy encouraging the consideration of decentralised energy systems

selected

Option C2c: None of these

selected

Form ID: 76918

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

Option C4.1a: Do not have a policy and allow new development to comply with the national building regulation requirements, which may change over time.

selected

Option C4.1b: Set a higher local standard beyond the building regulations requirements to achieve net zero carbon in all new developments.

selected

Option C4.1c: Have a phased approach to net zero carbon, setting a future date by which all new development will need to achieve net zero standards. In the intervening period new development will need to meet building regulation standards.

selected

Option C4.2a: All new development

selected

Option C4.2b: Development over a certain size

selected

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.