No

Ni roddwyd ateb

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

Don't know

Ni roddwyd ateb

Don't know

Ni roddwyd ateb

No

Broadly agree, but there are some exceptions as noted earlier in the document.

No

It would appear that necessary policies have been included, but is not clear where the policies on ensuring provision of services and infrastructure pertaining to specifics such as agreements with local authorities for provision of healthcare, schooling, roads and transport and utilities such as sewage centres. The plan presented does not appear to give specifics about cost models that will be applied to the developments nor is there an indication of time or phases to development and reassessment points over what is a 30 year period. There appears to be no policy on how cost appropriate social housing will be achieved.

No

I believe that FW2, Sustainable Drainage, should be included in Part 1. Sustainable drainage is best addressed at the initial design phase of any development to be most effective. By only including this in Part 2, it does not encourage developers to give this the priority that it requires. I consider that this IS a strategic issue.

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

Don't know

For detailed comments see Barton Willmore, now Stantec, letter dated 6 March 2023 and email dated 6 March 2023 with enclosures. Additional comments as follows: We support the intention to review Core Strategy AS.11 Large Rural Brownfield Site in Part 1 of the SWLP and would welcome engagement with Officers on the approach to be taken to Former Southam Cement Works.

Don't know

For detailed comments see Barton Willmore, now Stantec, letter dated 6 March 2023 and email dated 6 March 2023 with enclosures. Additional comments as follows: As noted above in our view there is a need for the SWLP to consider housing land supply and what the approach of preparing a Part 1 and Part 2 plans means for the housing trajectory. In our view Part 2 should be prepared in tandem, or there should be the allocation of smaller ‘non strategic’ sites or a policy approach that facilitates early delivery to maintain supply. A review of settlement boundaries as part of Part 1 could form part of that approach.

No

-As per our response to the Scoping Consultation we maintain that the Site Allocations should be included in Part 1 of the Plan as this aspect of the Plan is of the most interest to the general public. By splitting the Allocations out from the Development Strategy, it will most likely lead to disengagement amongst most people and would not provide any clarity to communities and landowners. This strategy would in fact prolong uncertainty for these groups. -Furthermore, splitting the Allocations from the Strategy will also result in more speculative, unplanned development coming forward given that both Stratford District Council’s Core Strategy and Warwick District Council’s Local Plan are both over 5 years old. The outcome of the proposed approach will result in a repeat of what occurred in Stratford in the period of 2012 – 2016 whereby substantial unplanned development came forward in the District, particularly in the villages, whilst the Core Strategy was being prepared. This did not lead to a positive outcome for communities. There is a concern that the proposed two-part plan approach will result in further unplanned development, particularly as the timescales for the Part 2 plan has not yet been confirmed.

No

- As per our response to the Scoping Consultation we disagree with the approach of a two-part SWLP, starting with a high-level, strategic part 1 Local Plan. While such an approach may be deemed desirable in terms of speeding up the adoption process of a part 1 Plan, such an approach will result in an absence of important policies that are needed to deliver the vision, objectives and priorities in the area whether they are in Plan 1 or not. A single Plan with a comprehensive set of policies that were all prepared at the same time, will in our opinion lead to a more robust, deliverable and successful plan. - By splitting the Allocations out from the Development Strategy, it will most likely lead to disengagement amongst most people and would not provide any clarity to communities and landowners. - Furthermore, splitting the Allocations from the Strategy will also result in more speculative, unplanned development coming forward given that both Stratford District Council’s Core Strategy and Warwick District Council’s Local Plan are both over 5 years old.

Yes

No comment

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

No

Feeling this is just lip service. The so called councillors will do as they please.

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

Don't know

Ni roddwyd ateb

No

I do not agree with the proposal to review green belt land boundaries (Issue S6) (see earlier comments)

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

It would appear that necessary policies have been included, but is not clear where the policies on ensuring provision of services and infrastructure pertaining to specifics such as agreements with local authorities for provision of healthcare, schooling, roads and transport and utilities such as sewage centres. The plan presented does not appear to give specifics about cost models that will be applied to the developments nor is there an indication of time or phases to development and reassessment points over what is a 30 year period. There appears to be no policy on how cost appropriate social housing will be achieved.

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

It would appear that necessary policies have been included, but is not clear where the policies on ensuring provision of services and infrastructure pertaining to specifics such as agreements with local authorities for provision of healthcare, schooling, roads and transport and utilities such as sewage centres. The plan presented does not appear to give specifics about cost models that will be applied to the developments nor is there an indication of time or phases to development and reassessment points over what is a 30 year period. There appears to be no policy on how cost appropriate social housing will be achieved.

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

It would appear that necessary policies have been included, but is not clear where the policies on ensuring provision of services and infrastructure pertaining to specifics such as agreements with local authorities for provision of healthcare, schooling, roads and transport and utilities such as sewage centres. The plan presented does not appear to give specifics about cost models that will be applied to the developments nor is there an indication of time or phases to development and reassessment points over what is a 30 year period. There appears to be no policy on how cost appropriate social housing will be achieved.

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

There is no objection to the proposed list of policies as set out in the Issues and Options consultation. However, in developing a robust and justified evidence base the Plan should not rule out identifying sites for development that are not ‘strategic’ in the Local Plan Part 1. This could assist in facilitating the delivery of sites in advance of the Local Plan Part 2 and would also come out of the settlement boundary review that these representations suggest is required to inform the Local Plan Part 1.

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

We note that Part 1of the SWLP will set out the strategic vision, objectives and growth strategy for South Warwickshire and that Part 2 will set out detailed policies for specific areas, including site allocations and area action plans. Therefore, we note that St Mary’s Land (including Warwick Racecourse) Masterplan/Allocation will be addressed in Part 2 of the SWLP.

Yes

Ni roddwyd ateb

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

As noted above in our view there is a need for the SWLP to consider housing land supply and what the approach of preparing a Part 1 and Part 2 plans means for the housing trajectory. In our view Part 2 should be prepared in tandem, or there should be the allocation of smaller ‘non strategic’ sites or a policy approach that facilitates early delivery to maintain supply. A review of settlement boundaries as part of Part 1 could form part of that approach.

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

We support the intention to review Core Strategy AS.11 Large Rural Brownfield Site in Part 1 of the SWLP and would welcome engagement with Officers on the approach to be taken to Former Southam Cement Works.

Dim byd wedi’i ddewis

8.1. There is no in principle objection to the proposed list of policies as set out in the Issues and Options consultation. However, in developing a robust and justified evidence base the Plan should not rule out identifying sites for development that are not ‘strategic’ in the Local Plan Part 1. This could assist in facilitating the delivery of sites in advance of the Local Plan Part 2 and would also come out of the settlement boundary review that these representations suggest is required to inform the Local Plan Part 1. This would clearly fall within the remit of allocation of other sites as necessary for short-term development. 8.2. There is a degree of overlap between the proposed content for the Part 1 and Part 2 Plans, particularly regarding strategic allocations and smaller and non-strategic site allocations which effectively appear in both. The Plan will need to be clear which sites are being proposed for allocation now, what is being left for Part 2, why this has been done and the justification for this approach.