Publication Draft

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.

Support

Representation ID: 66291

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

We support the aim set out at part i) which is to support opportunities for regeneration.

Support

Representation ID: 66292

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

We support the aim of providing in full for the District's housing need. However, as discussed above, the proposed housing requirement is based on unreliable 2011 Interim Projections and thus is not sound. In addition, these figures do not appear to include an allowance for housing need to be met from other Local Authorities in the HMA, or other neighbouring HMA areas. Accordingly, the requirement proposed is not the objectively assessed housing need and thus does not comply with national policy; nor is it positively prepared.

Object

Representation ID: 66293

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We support the Council's intention to provide affordable homes.
However, we object to a blanket requirement of 40%: this is too prescriptive. It is not justified or effective and the policy is therefore unsound. The policy should make it clear that the amount of affordable housing will be determined on a site by site basis with an overall aim of achieving 40% where possible and viable, in order to be sound.

Object

Representation ID: 66294

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We support the Council's overall aims regarding sustainable communities as summarised in this policy.
However, the policy requires additional flexibility for these requirements to be assessed on a site by site basis at the application stage (or in a masterplan or development brief).

Support

Representation ID: 66295

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

We support the overall aims for the design of new development.

Support

Representation ID: 66296

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

We support these transport policies, provided that they are flexibly used in the determination of planning applications.

Support

Representation ID: 66297

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

We support these transport policies, provided that they are flexibly used in the determination of planning applications.

Object

Representation ID: 66298

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We object to this policy as drafted. It is unsound as it is not positively prepared, nor justified. To make the policy sound, these transport improvements should only be required where they are necessary and viable, and where they are in accordance with other policies in the Local Plan and / or a CIL charging schedule.

Support

Representation ID: 66299

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Mr H E Johnson

Agent: Bond Dickinson

We support the Council's aims to create healthy, safe and inclusive communities.