Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 65132

Derbyniwyd: 23/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Mr Tony Robinson

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Nac Ydi

The infrastructure contributions have been shown to be inadequate leaving at least a £50million shortfall for the peole of Warwick to pay.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66318

Derbyniwyd: 27/06/2014

Ymatebydd: A C Lloyd Homes Ltd

Asiant : Framptons

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Nac Ydi

The Council has made no significant progress in producing a CIL charging regime and this is causing difficulties in bringing forward strategic development sites where inappropriate requests for S106 contributions are being sought, e.g. for South Warwick Foundation Trust (SWFT).

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66323

Derbyniwyd: 27/06/2014

Ymatebydd: A C Lloyd Homes Ltd and Northern Trust

Asiant : Framptons

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Nac Ydi

The Council has made no significant progress in producing a CIL charging regime and this is causing difficulties in bringing forward strategic development sites where inappropriate requests for S106 contributions are being sought, e.g. for South Warwick Foundation Trust (SWFT).

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66390

Derbyniwyd: 30/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Mr john fletcher

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

Does not take into account education
Unease about increase in air pollution levels inherent in plan
Unacceptable strains on health service at all levels
Increase in traffic from south of Warwick and Leamington through town centres. WCC traffic management plans increase congestion in and around towns

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66501

Derbyniwyd: 27/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Whitnash Town Council

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi

Cadarn? Heb nodi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

Currently a £50 million gap in funding to implement infrastructure
for these developments. How does Warwick District Council plan to meet deficit or will local taxpayers end up paying for this? NPPF focusses unduly on housing and does not address infrastructure issues sufficiently. Why has Warwick District Council not addressed this problem?
Social Infrastructure needs to be addressed. Have adequate provisions been made for health care/education? Will NHS/WCC be able to meet demand for services? Education is major concern. WCC has to make cuts of £92m so where will money come from with 4655 additional dwellings? Schools already oversubscribed.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 66570

Derbyniwyd: 27/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Friends of the Earth

Nifer y bobl: 4

We support the comprehensive proposals in this section, especially the plan review procedure and the preparation of development briefs for the large new sites which are proposed.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66635

Derbyniwyd: 26/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Place Partnership Limited (PPL)

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Ydi

Paragraph 6.3 omits to reference the emergency services as one of the infrastructure types that new development puts pressure on. This has the potential to undermine support for the delivery of required emergency services infrastructure, where this is required to ensure sustainable development.

As explained at length elsewhere in our representations and as recognised in the Council's 'Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan - April 2014', new development can place considerable pressure on the police and emergency services. This point is evidenced by the recent representations we have been submitting to major planning applications for housing development in the District, which are enclosed in Appendices 1-5 of these representations. Further evidence is provided by the letter from our consultants WYG, enclosed in Appendix 6.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66682

Derbyniwyd: 27/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Save Warwick

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Ydi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66720

Derbyniwyd: 26/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Baginton Parish Council

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi

Cadarn? Heb nodi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

BPC are opposed to the proposal not to provide a levy on industrial warehousing and believes developments such as the Gateway should not be exempt should it proceed. There needs to be a consistent levy across the board to reflect the impact on communities. This policy is therefore unsound.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66785

Derbyniwyd: 27/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Ydi

It is an important part of the local plan that the necessary infrastructure required is provided.

The financial contributions will not deliver the level of funding required for infrastructure, meaning the necessary infrastructure is not provided or that it has to come from other source which the current inhabitants will have to meet the cost of. There is no plan in place to deliver infrastructure.

If the housing needed is spread around the district, then some of the existing infrastructure can take up the spare capacity and in some ways that can be a good thing. But large amounts of new housing are concentrated in one place then large amounts of new infrastructure cannot be avoided.

Independent assessment indicates that the costs of the infrastructure required will be between £30m to £50m more than the income that will be received. Further this additional infrastructure will require sites upon which to place the facilities and these had not been selected nor has any land acquisition cost been included.

We find compared with an expenditure of in the region of £230m income that will be recovered to pay for those costs will be about £190m, leaving £50m unfinanced.
If the reduced population now known is taken into the plan then much of the infrastructure listed will cease to be required, because the sites are already known and are well distributed around the district.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 66810

Derbyniwyd: 26/06/2014

Ymatebydd: Gallagher Estates

Asiant : Pegasus Group

Policy DM1 is targeted at delivering necessary infrastructure in association with development. No objection is raised to this approach. Paragraph 157, NPPF is clear that a strategic priority of plan making should be to: "plan positively for the development and infrastructure required in the area to meet the objectives, principles and policies of this Framework". Subject, therefore, to any requests being reasonable related in scale and kind to the development proposed and CIL compliant, the policy is supported as sound.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66844

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Patricia Hollis

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Ydi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66907

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Colin Sharp

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66915

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Ms Alison Cox

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66923

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Alison Kelly

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66931

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Andrew Cliffe

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66939

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Angelo Cugini

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66947

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Barbara Groves

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66955

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Professor Bob Ireland

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66963

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Christopher Paden

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66971

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Elizabeth Cliffe

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66979

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Mrs Kay Cugini

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66987

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Mr David Ramsbottom

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 66995

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Mr David Drinkhall

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 67003

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Ian Frost

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 67011

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Mr Geoff Reynolds

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 67019

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: John Griffiths

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 67027

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Justin Richards

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 67035

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Louise Kalus

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 67043

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2014

Ymatebydd: Paul Kalus

Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi

Cadarn? Nac Ydi

Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi

The plans for the necessary social infrastructure are not ready. Assumptions are made in the Plan that schools, medical centres, hospital beds and other social infrastructure will be provided. We are currently aware that school issues have not been automatically agreed with the County Council. Similarly the successful conclusion of other facilities cannot be assumed.
There is a serious funding gap for necessary infrastructure. Work done by save Warwick indicates that there is a there is a shortfall between the cost of infrastructure and the funding available in the region of 50 million pounds.
-The Council is considered not to have published a meaningful local plan viability assessment at the time the representation was submitted, at the end of January 2014 campaign groups were provided with information on the work done to date by officers which indicated that they were far from being able to show the full costs of the plan at that stage.
-In the absence of this essential evidence Save Warwick have produced their own assessment which is set out in an appendix to their representation. It shows a significant shortfall in receipts over the potential costs.
-Save Warwick Estimate that the infrastructure ' bill' will amount to something over £215 million, and all things considered that there will be a shortfall in required income over costs in the region of £30 million which is going to have to be met by council taxpayers.
-It is estimated that the County Council (as a major provider of roads and services) could be faced with a shortfall of around £85 million.
Save Warwick have forwarded three solutions to the funding shortfall scenario that they believe is inevitable
1 - To economise on infrastructure (which would mean more overcrowded schools and roads) - this is considered unacceptable.
2- Load the additional costs on the taxpayer - an average of an extra £500 or so on the tax bills of every household in Warwick District.
The final alternative is to change the plan - which is what Save Warwick prefers.

The Council should produce and publish their own up to date viability study so that it can be interrogated and provide satisfaction that infrastructure requirements are deliverable. Without this the Local Plan must be assumed to be unsound.

To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the NPPF or Planning Practice Guidance. The Council has not published sufficient detail in its financial viability assessments to justify its claims that the plan is viable. Furthermore, assessments undertaken by others demonstrate that it is highly likely that the shortfall in funding will cost Council tax payers upwards of £30 million.