Publication Draft

Object

Representation ID: 66139

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Burman Brothers

Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Whilst Warwick has set housing requirement at 12,860 dwellings 2011 - 2029 it has not identified its objectively assessed housing need. Urgent clarification is needed on this point.
The JSHMA apparently assessed housing need for each district, however, must be for an individual authority such as Warwick to assess themselves based on criteria and policies appertaining to their area. This does not appear to have happened or to be in accordance with the NPPF Guidance.
Need for rebasing plan period to 2031
Should be minimum of 2800 to 3300 new dwellings in addition to rebasing element in line with studies of market housing area and Cov and Warks Sub Region.
Additional housing requirement will require reassessment of housing numbers and locations and extend to future growth to meet the higher objectively assessed need.

Object

Representation ID: 66767

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Burman Brothers

Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Not sufficient allocated units as set out in representation to DS6 and would argue that the table is incorrect and should meet the proper objectively assessed need for the Plan period to 2031

Object

Representation ID: 66768

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Burman Brothers

Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

2.81 - release of green belt in Hatton is wrong and should relate to release of land at Hatton Park
It has been necessary for Warwick to consider amendment of Green Belt boundary. Hatton Park is acknowledged sustainable settlement and 'growth village'. Boundary drawn however does not conform to NPPF and guidance and is therefore unacceptable, unsound and irrational. A proper Green Belt boundary runs along a treed and hedged boundary running along length of Clients ownership a short distance from allocation. This is proper GB boundary that exists and should be used and the allocation properly adjusted to take new boundary into account even if it means fewer dwellings.

Object

Representation ID: 66769

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Burman Brothers

Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Evidence place for the plan is not properly and fully up to date, particularly as it uses out of date demographics and without the inclusion of various studies and Warwick's housing requirement us actually an objectively assessed need for market and affordable housing need for market and affordable within the relevant housing market area.

Object

Representation ID: 66770

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Burman Brothers

Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Understand Council's desire to see to provide a requirement on all principle sites of up to 40% affordable housing, this has got to be properly tested for each allocation in terms of tenure/mix

Support

Representation ID: 66771

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Burman Brothers

Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd

Important that this policy reflects requirements of market fully. House builders are in best position to decide on range and mix of housing taking on board Council's desire, where appropriate, of any special Local Housing Need but policy should not be restrictive or unreasonable. Policy as worded is not reasonable and needs further clarification on this point.
Reference to Hatton Park restricts the number of dwellings to be built in phase one to 50 our of 80. This is ridiculous because it seeks to influence the market, the build period and economics of development on the site. No rational planning reason given and is Council interfering with release of sites and almost reverse phasing across H10 allocations contrary to NPPF and provides wholly uneconomic and restrictive policy element that should be deleted.

Object

Representation ID: 66772

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Burman Brothers

Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The influence of the sub regional Cov and Warks sub regional study including the housing figures has not been fully taken on board. Nor has effect of City of Birmingham overspill has been translated into a requirement for Warwick district to assist with. The LEP is carrying out a housing study where the details of this will be known this year, so again this ought to be taken account of by WCDC in amending their Plan. Concerned that economic effects have not been properly and fully translated into the need and requirements for this Plan