Proposed Modifications January 2016

Object

Representation ID: 69942

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Cerda Planning

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Proposed Modification 6 sets out a total of 17,577 homes which provides a buffer 4.5% (801 dwellings more) than the housing target of 16,776 set out at Modification 4.

- The 4.5 % buffer would only be sufficient to deal with very minor changes to the demand or. Accordingly, the Plan is not considered sound in so far as there is insufficient flexibility to cater for either i) sites not coming forward for development or ii) greater than anticipated levels of demand.

Object

Representation ID: 69943

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Cerda Planning

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Modification 5 sets the OAHN at 600 dwellings per annum for Warwick District,
with an additional 332 dwellings per annum to meet the unmet housing demand from Coventry. This does not however account for the historic undersupply that must be dealt with in the first 5 years of the plan period or the 20% buffer, nor does it appear to account for the inevitable unmet housing demand for Birmingham.

Object

Representation ID: 69944

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Cerda Planning

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Modification 17 notes that there would be a full or partial review of the Plan if changing circumstances could not be accommodated within the existing strategy.

Accordingly, the Plan is not considered sound in so far as there is insufficient flexibility to cater for either i) sites not coming forward for development or ii) greater than anticipated
levels of demand

Object

Representation ID: 69945

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Cerda Planning

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Land which immediately adjoins Allocation H48, south of Westham Lane, Barford is considered an excellent candidate for further allocation to meet need.

Combined with Allocations H48 and H22, residential development on this site would form an entirely logical and natural conclusion to the western side of the settlement

Object

Representation ID: 69952

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: RPS Planning

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

OMISSION site: -
- site south of Southam Road within a sustainable primary service village
- close to local facilities, services and amenities
- Radford Semele well-placed to accommodate additional housing growth
- no significant landscape concerns or technical reasons not to bring site forward

Support

Representation ID: 69953

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: RPS Planning

Support is provided for site allocations to be provided on the edge of built-up areas as opposed to urban area.

Support

Representation ID: 70037

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Barton Willmore

Provision over and above the housing requirement is supported and adds to the soundness of the Plan by providing flexibility. the inclusion of safeguarded land is also important.

this will assist n demonstrating that the plan is aspirational and realistic; with the slight overprovision allowing for any slippages in the delivery of the strategic sites within the District - which may be particularly helpful given the proximity of a number of allocations to the south of Warwick/Leamington Spa - and maximising the chance of a five year housing land supply being demonstrable over the Plan period.

Object

Representation ID: 70038

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Barton Willmore

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Agree with the justification for releasing sites from the Green Belt to meet the needs of the Housing Market Area. However, propose an amendment to para 2.38 as set out below

Object

Representation ID: 70040

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Barton Willmore

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Agree in principle with the proposed allocation of Site H28 for approximately 120 dwellings given it offers a sustainable and logical extension to the settlement of Hatton Park.
However, there is a strip of land to the east of the proposed allocation which is within the control of Taylor Wimpey adjacent to Ugly Bridge Road. In our view, extending the allocated area to cover the entirety of the land in Taylor Wimpey's control would form a more logical extension to Hatton Park. Moreover, the omission of this strip of land will render it redundant from any viable continued use as an agricultural landholding. Should the Council be seeking to enhance landscaping on the eastern edge of the proposed residential development, then we consider that this would be better achieved by including the land within the allocated area.

Object

Representation ID: 70042

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Barton Willmore

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

fers a sustainable and logical extension to the settlement of Hatton Park.
However, there is a strip of land to the east of the proposed allocation which is within the control of Taylor Wimpey adjacent to Ugly Bridge Road. In our view, extending the allocated area to cover the entirety of the land in Taylor Wimpey's control would form a more logical extension to Hatton Park. Moreover, the omission of this strip of land will render it redundant from any viable continued use as an agricultural landholding. Should the Council be seeking to enhance landscaping on the eastern edge of the proposed residential development, then we consider that this would be better achieved by including the land within the allocated area.