Publication Draft

Object

Representation ID: 65534

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Sharba Homes Group

Agent: PJPlanning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The garden at Barford House does not represent a logical local list entry as it does not conform to either the currently surviving asset or its former extent.

With regard to the surviving asset, which would be the logical extent of the Local List entry, this would encompass the current landholding of Barford House, comprising its immediate extant gardens and grounds. The short-lived parkland-like character that the land to the north and north-east of Barford House had has now been entirely lost. The areas to the east and north of the house, never had a parkland character and are devoid of features and remains worthy of inclusion.

If the list entry were to be based on the former extent of the estate, on that basis, it should logically also include land to the west of Wellesbourne Road. there are also other illogical omissions from the proposed boundary.

Object

Representation ID: 66418

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Sharba Homes Group

Agent: PJPlanning

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

It is our belief that consultation responses to the plan, and other supporting reports to inform it have not been fully considered; in particular there has been no detailed response made to our, or most of other party's comments to the VHO, or previous versions of the Local Plan.

In light of this, we submit that the plan cannot be declared positively prepared until such consultation is shown to have directly informed plan making, with detailed responses to consultations having been published.

Object

Representation ID: 66419

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Sharba Homes Group

Agent: PJPlanning

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The document is based on an estimated requirement for 12,300 dwellings over the plan period. The latest SHMA puts the assessed requirement at 14,400, meaning that the residual need is 8,722 rather than 6,622. the plan does not therefore meet the full and objectively assessed need.

The Council appear to have made assumptions and assertions about where they feel it is appropriate to locate housing within the district, as well as the level of housing to be provided, before carrying out the relevant assessments with an open mind to reach such a conclusion. Thus, the process has begun from entirely the wrong premise and is based on evidence that is partial, inaccurate and subjective.

Object

Representation ID: 66420

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Sharba Homes Group

Agent: PJPlanning

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The Council appear to have made assumptions and assertions about where they feel it is appropriate to locate housing within the district, as well as the level of housing to be provided, before carrying out the relevant assessments with an open mind to reach such a conclusion. Thus, the process has begun from entirely the wrong premise and is based on evidence that is partial, inaccurate and subjective. It also shows little regard for the evidence base for the new Local Plan. Following the cessation of work on the 2010 Core Strategy the Council did not start the process anew, and instead merely attempted to rehash pre-determined strategies and development patterns.

The green belt allocations are not sufficiently justified as there are suitable sites outside the green belt. Exceptional circumstances pertaining to the 'need' for land are not proven. See reps relatibg to policies DS11 and DS19 as well.

A number of sites proposed in the Plan have previously been refused planning permission and cannot therefore be considered deliverable. Further the significant amount of development in one location on land to the south of Leamington Spa, will mean there is not enough choice to provide the level of competition required. The plan is not considered sufficiently robust to adapt to market conditionsdue to under-allocation of sites and little overall headroom.