Other

ID sylw: 106960

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bellway Homes

Asiant : Savills

We note that a New Settlement is proposed to be allocated for strategic growth in a sustainable location. Although we do not object to a proposed new settlement, new settlements take a significant amount of time to deliver and it will therefore be important to allocate a sufficient number of sites which can be delivered in the short term, such as Site ID 106/150 within proposed Strategic Growth Location SG10.
The NPPF is clear that where new settlements are proposed in plans, the policies should be set within a vision that looks further ahead, at least 30 years, to take account delivery timescales (paragraph 22). The SWLP will only cover the period of 25 years up to 2050 and should therefore be extended.

Other

ID sylw: 106995

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Wotherspoon

Asiant : Sworders

Whilst we have no objections to New Settlements in principle, we are concerned that over-reliance on large, complex sites will see a shortfall in housing need, particularly in the early years of the plan period. Furthermore, it will deny other areas of the district the benefits that development can bring. The strategy of New Settlements and Strategic Growth Areas should be supported by allocation of small and medium sized sites adjacent to existing settlements.
Some of the Potential New Settlements fall outside the spatial Growth Strategy Priority Areas, being F2, F3 and G1 and do not include any existing settlements or facilities and services, this would contradict the statement in the Preferred Options document that “the majority of the SWLP’s strategic growth needs will be met within priority areas 1-3.” In particular some of these locations are isolated from the main strategic transport network across the SWLP along with local bus routes and train stations which all tend to be concentrated around the northern part of the district and built up areas of Warwick, Leamington and Stratford. Yet the Infrastructure Delivery Plan does not propose any major changes in these isolated areas. Without significant infrastructure and improvements to public transport, New Settlements F2, F3 and G1 would rely heavily on the use of the private car.

Other

ID sylw: 107003

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Davies

Asiant : Sworders

Whilst we have no objections to New Settlements in principle, we are concerned that over-reliance on large, complex sites will see a shortfall in housing need, particularly in the early years of the plan period. Furthermore, it will deny other areas of the district the benefits that development can bring. The strategy of New Settlements and Strategic Growth Areas should be supported by allocation of small and medium sized sites adjacent to existing settlements.
Some of the Potential New Settlements fall outside the spatial Growth Strategy Priority Areas, being F2, F3 and G1 and do not include any existing settlements or facilities and services, this would contradict the statement in the Preferred Options document that “the majority of the SWLP’s strategic growth needs will be met within priority areas 1-3.” In particular some of these locations are isolated from the main strategic transport network across the SWLP along with local bus routes and train stations which all tend to be concentrated around the northern part of the district and built up areas of Warwick, Leamington and Stratford. Yet the Infrastructure Delivery Plan does not propose any major changes in these isolated areas. Without significant infrastructure and improvements to public transport, New Settlements F2, F3 and G1 would rely heavily on the use of the private car.

Other

ID sylw: 107009

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Cherwell District Council

We note the assessment of the 12 new proposals for new settlement locations and we welcome the
acknowledgement that the infrastructure requirements will need to be factored in and we would
suggest that any extensions and new infrastructure is phased into the development at an early stage
to ensure issues are not created for existing infrastructure.
We would welcome in the acknowledgement and assessment of any potential new settlements that
these acknowledge any cross boundary relationships and impacts including any impacts on existing
infrastructure and the need the for extensions to existing infrastructure as well as the provision for
the creation of new infrastructure which is designed in order that it has the potential for further
expansion given the local plan period and the fact that infrastructure providers produce 5 year
business plans. We would like to be kept updated in relation to any new proposed settlements that
may impact Cherwell District.

Other

ID sylw: 107115

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr and Mrs Marvelly

Asiant : Sworders

Whilst we have no objections to New Settlements in principle, we are concerned that over-reliance on large, complex sites will see a shortfall in housing need, particularly in the early years of the plan period. Furthermore, it will deny other areas of the district the benefits that development can bring. The strategy of New Settlements and Strategic Growth Areas should be supported by allocation of small and medium sized sites adjacent to existing settlements.
Some of the Potential New Settlements fall outside the spatial Growth Strategy Priority Areas, being F2, F3 and G1 and do not include any existing settlements or facilities and services, this would contradict the statement in the Preferred Options document that “the majority of the SWLP’s strategic growth needs will be met within priority areas 1-3.” In particular some of these locations are isolated from the main strategic transport network across the SWLP along with local bus routes and train stations which all tend to be concentrated around the northern part of the district and built up areas of Warwick, Leamington and Stratford. Yet the Infrastructure Delivery Plan does not propose any major changes in these isolated areas. Without significant infrastructure and improvements to public transport, New Settlements F2, F3 and G1 would rely heavily on the use of the private car.

Other

ID sylw: 107200

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group

Asiant : McLoughlin Planning

The Respondent does not intrinsically object to the inclusion of new settlements in the overall growth strategy as they can be an effective way, at least in theory, of delivering new housing where there are barriers to the sustainable delivery of sufficient housing elsewhere. However, in reality, the physical implementation of new settlements is often complex and costly, which can significantly hamper their delivery. The Respondent would therefore caution against over reliance on new settlements in the preferred growth strategy as this could render much of the Plan undeliverable and therefore, unsound.
We are of the view that the growth of existing settlements should be prioritised within the overall growth strategy for South Warwickshire, as opposed to the delivery of new settlements.

Other

ID sylw: 107211

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Catesby Estates

Asiant : Mr Will Whitelock

The approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 2 broadly aligns with Paragraph 77 of the Framework.
it has not been adequately demonstrated that the Potential New Settlements will be supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities, including a genuine choice of transport modes. Opportunities for rail links to these Potential New Settlements may be challenging and therefore further information is required to demonstrate how such development can help to meet identified needs in a sustainable way.
The need for significant new infrastructure and facilities to support the Potential New Settlements will mean that these growth locations are unlikely to be delivered until towards the end of the Plan Period to 2050. Clearly, there is a requirement for smaller allocations to meet the identified housing needs in the shorter term, in accordance with Paragraph 72 of the Framework.
It is submitted that Land south of Allimore Lane, Alcester should form part of a mix of sites within the Spatial Growth Strategy to assist in meeting South Warwickshire’s identified housing need. The site is considered to be geographically sustainable and of a scale (c. 128 dwellings) that can be delivered quickly.

Other

ID sylw: 107235

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Oxfordshire County Council

We support the intention, as set out in Policy Direction 2, to choose to allocate one or more new settlements based on which are in the most sustainable location or locations where they can be developed to a suitable minimum size to provide the required infrastructure for substantial internalisation of trips.

No

ID sylw: 107245

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: CEMEX UK Operations Ltd

Asiant : Victoria Bullock

There is an over reliance on new settlements to meet the housing need identified in the Plan.

Other

ID sylw: 107304

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford-on-Avon District Social Inclusion Partnership

We agree in broad terms with the NPPF in respect of new settlements and agree that they can offer the opportunity to start afresh and design a well-planned community with all the attributes of a fulfilling and sustainable place to live.

New settlements need to be of sufficient scale to enable a community to be formed and for it to attract the resources it needs to be sustainable. Therefore a larger new settlement (1000-3000 homes) would be preferred to a series of smaller settlements that cannot afford or justify community facilities, healthcare facilities, pharmacies, nurseries, community builder (community development) roles, etc. etc.

Other

ID sylw: 107378

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Sport England

Sport England note the identification of strategic growth location/proposed new settlements. Some of these sites include sports provisions (indoor and outdoor) which should be protected and enhanced/where possible extended to help meet the sporting demand generated from the new development. Should sites proposed to be lost then replacement provision should be secured and made available for use prior to the loss, this should be a key requirement within any site allocation policies.

Sport England also consider that as site allocations are firmed up that consideration should be had to the allocation of sites for sport. This would help set out a strategic identification of how the needs of community will be met and not defer matters to the planning application stage. This would be aligned with NPPF paragraph 102.

Other

ID sylw: 107379

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr & Mrs - Blackhurst

Asiant : Frampton Town Planning

Policy Direction 2 does not yet identify allocations. Allocations should not be confined to just the growth areas identified and/or new settlements. Sustainable sites, such as land at Arden Lodge, Station Lane, Kingswood, should be considered for allocation

Yes

ID sylw: 107398

Derbyniwyd: 24/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Moreton-in-Marsh Town Council

Noting the idea that a New Settlement needs to accommodate between 6,000 -10,000 dwellings, the agreed approach noted at point 2.1 for assessing suitability as requiring a nuanced and multi-layered approach, is welcomed.

In line with the selected option from the scoping consultation (Sustainable Travel and Economy) outlined in the Spatial Growth Topic Paper (emerging strategy), the development aims and assumptions and in particular reference to the potential for a New Settlement to function as a stand-alone settlement and the acknowledgement that this might result in very different infrastructure requirements based on capacity and location, is welcomed.

The HELAA paper notes 3 constraints: Agricultural Land Quality • Potential Local Wildlife Sites • Surface Water Flooding, these constraints combined with the New Settlement Methodology seem comprehensive, lending themselves to a geospatial approach which in turn makes sense of the Red, amber Green (RAG) assessment criteria when applied against aspects of sustainable development, connectivity, health and inclusivity, biodiversity, climate, Net Zero etc…

The Town Council notes the views expressed in paragraph 3.12 ‘If a new settlement is located too close to an existing settlement, this could limit its ability to grow into a truly self-sustaining settlement, with a risk it functions merely as a dormitory to its neighbour. There is also a risk that a successful new settlement could act as a drag on the existing settlement, jeopardising its retail and employment provision…’ of the Technical Document New Settlements Assessment (As at Preferred Options) South Warwickshire Local Plan November 2024, relating to New Settlement Locations within the existing context particularly in respect of the identified Priority 3 location between the A44 and Great Wolford on the Parish boundary of Moreton in Marsh.

Yes

ID sylw: 107408

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bidford-on-Avon Parish Council

Council broadly supports Potential New Settlements policy.

Yes

ID sylw: 107497

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Worcestershire County Council (WCC)

We support the ‘call for sites’ targeted on sites that fall within or adjacent to one of the 12 proposed New Settlement locations, in preference to dispersed development.

Other

ID sylw: 107529

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Persimmon Homes (South Midlands)

Asiant : Pegasus Group

New settlements can make an important contribution towards meeting South Warwickshire’s housing requirement. Indeed, Paragraph 77 states that the supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for new settlements, thus this approach would be consistent with national policy, and the provision of one or more new settlements is supported in principle. The Councils are reminded that where such large-scale residential development is proposed, Paragraph 22 of the NPPF stipulates that strategic policies should be set within a vision that looks at least 30 years ahead (taking into account the timescales likely to deliver a new settlement). The vision in the SWLP Part 1 is currently restricted to its 25-year plan period, thus, if the Councils were to pursue a new settlement, this would need to be amended/addressed accordingly within the plan.

New settlements have long lead-in times, which means that their contribution towards South Warwickshire’s housing supply would likely be in the latter part of the plan period, and possibly into the next. If too much of the supply depends on a new settlement, and delays arise in its delivery, the Councils risk significantly underdelivering housing. Therefore, it will be critical for the Councils to allocate a range of other sites across the Strategic Growth Locations, and these should form the majority of South Warwickshire’s housing supply, in addition to any new settlement(s).

The Emerging Spatial Growth Strategy Topic Paper recognises that new settlements will have a harmful impact due to the amount of land they would occupy in existing countryside locations. The SA suggests that the Strategic Growth Locations are therefore generally more sustainable, in terms of having lesser adverse impacts on the SA Objectives.

New settlements have long lead-in times, which means that their contribution towards South Warwickshire’s housing supply would likely be in the latter part of the plan period, and possibly into the next. If too much of the supply depends on a new settlement, and delays arise in its delivery, the Councils risk significantly underdelivering housing. Therefore, it will be critical for the Councils to allocate a range of other sites across the Strategic Growth Locations, and these should form the majority of South Warwickshire’s housing supply, in addition to any new settlement(s). This aligns with Paragraph 61 of the NPPF, which states that a variety of land should be brought forward for housing, i.e. sites of different scales, ranging from minor development through to new settlements.

The SA assesses the potential new settlement locations. Whilst they would all make a major positive contribution to housing (SA Objective 9), all options will generally result in minor adverse to major adverse impacts across most of the other SA objectives. The Emerging Spatial Growth Strategy Topic Paper recognises that new settlements will have a harmful impact due to the amount of land they would occupy in existing countryside locations. The SA suggests that the Strategic Growth Locations are therefore generally more sustainable, in terms of having lesser adverse impacts on the SA Objectives. However, it is important to note that this is only a high-level exercise, which has not taken potential mitigation, which could include ecological and landscape enhancements which would give rise to major positive impacts, into account. As with the Strategic Growth Locations, the positive impacts on transport and accessibility (SA Objective 11) and, as a result, Climate Change (SA Objective 1) have also not been recognised.

No

ID sylw: 107534

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

No. Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is extremely concerned regarding the allocation of a whole new settlement of up to 6,000 homes and the potential environmental impacts. Local Wildlife Sites, Potential Wildlife Sites, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, designated Nature Reserves and other important sites are incredibly important for wildlife within our natural landscape. It doesn’t appear that the Councils have considered these at all in the selection of their new settlement locations.
WWT also has issues over scale of the new settlements at 6,000 homes. Which will have Large impacts on wildlife corridors and surroundings by habitats.
Several proposed new settlements in the Local Plan are within existing Green Belt, which hasn’t been fully reviewed, with no option of ‘no green belt; in the Sustainability Apprisal.
If built these would have a negative impact on designated sites and wildlife including protected and declining species at these locations which are transitional buffers for nature and would reduce access to nature for people living in urban areas.
Impacted Local Wildlife Sites are listed below:
A1
LWS Mockley Wood, River Alne, Rams Hall Coppice
pLWS Round Wood and Longwood, Forde Hall Lane Hedges, Little FordHall, Tanworth Hedgerow
Within 50m of the following potential Local Wildlife Sites Bates Green Lane
Greenbelt and 40+ha of woodland.
A2
LWS Park Farm Meadows, Clarksland Coppice, River Alne, Bissells Coppice, Jonathans Coppice
pLWS Browns Green Wood, Shakespeare Line Railway, Malthouse Lane Meadows, Umberslade Park Woods, Spring Brook Pond, Spring Brook Hedgerow
Rural location within Green Belt
B1
LWS Brownley Green Lane, River Avon and Tributaries, River Alne, Hatton Wood, Hatton Locks Meadows, Grand Union Canal West
pLWS Meadows and Ponds Bordering Grand Union Canal, Wood at Hatton Farm, Hatton Rush Pasture, Wood, Railway Embankment, The Wilderness, Barnes Coppice, Hill Kitchen Coppice and Surrounding Woodland, Hatton Hill Fields
Within 50m of the following Local Wildlife Sites Hatton Park Grasslands
Greenbelt and overall contains around 5ha of woodland and around 5ha of medium connectivity grassland as well as the Grand Union Canal.
BW
LWS River Alne, River Avon and Tributaries
pLWS Gospel Oak Lane, Meadow
Within 50m of the following potential Local Wildlife Sites Hardwick Farm Meadows, Bearley Sidings, Wood by Churchill, Arden Hill Farm Meadow, Hardwick Farm Meadows.
Within Green Belt and adjacent to Snitterfield and Bearley Bushes SSSI, important SSSI and LWS.
C1
LWS Turners End Farm (North), Rowington Coppice, Turners End Marsh, The Long Meadow, Grand Union Canal West, Brome Hall Lane, River Alne, Western Hall Farm, Baddesley Clinton Park
pLWS Brome Hall Bridge Marsh, Stratford on Avon Canal, Turners End Farm (North), Harborough Banks
Within 50m of the following potential Local Wildlife Sites Harborough Banks, Turners End Farm north.

Hay Wood Local Wildlife Sites is close by just over 50 metres.
Greenbelt and contains around 10ha wetland and 7ha woodland.


E1
LWS Meon Vale,
pLWS Meon Vale, Marchfont Brook Corridor, Wincot Lands Wood, The Greenway, Dismantled Railway, Lower Gorse and Sheepleys Covert, The Greenway Meadow
Within 50m of the following Local Wildlife Sites River Avon and Tributaries
Contains 30ha of high connectivity grassland.
F1
pLWS Land adjacent to SSSI
Within 0.5km of Harbury Cutting SSSI and cuts into the “Land adjacent to SSSI” pLWS.

F2
pLWS River Itchen, Clear Pool, Deppers Bridge Farm,
Within 50m of the following Local Wildlife Sites Hambridge Road Meadows
Within 50m of the following potential Local Wildlife Sites Disused Railway

Within 0.5km of Harbury Cutting SSSI. Bisected by River Itchen (which is pLWS). Adjacent to Bishops Hill and Bishops Bowl pLWS and contains Clear Pool pLWS. Contains 2 ha of woodland.
F3
pLWS Grange Farm (keep), Watergall Fox Covert, Hill Farm Brook and Meadow, Bush Close Spinney, River Itchen Triburtary, River Itchen, Watergall Bridge Pond
Within 50m of the following potential Local Wildlife Sites Disused Railway

Within 0.75km of River Itchen SSSI. Contains two brooks, 3.6ha woodland and considerable amounts of high connectivity grassland habitats.
G1
LWS Knightcote Bottoms Farm
pLWS Bawcutt's Covert
Within 50m of the following potential Local Wildlife Sites Disused Railway, Green Lane
1.25km of River Itchen SSSI.
X1
LWS River Avon and Tributaries,
pLWS Plestowes Spinney and Hareway Lane Woodland, Wood
Within 50m of the following Local Wildlife Sites Oakley Wood


X2
LWS River Avon and Tributaries, Whitnash Brook
pLWS Highdown Farm & Highdown Hill Plantation, Field at Fosse Farm
Within 50m of the following potential Local Wildlife Sites Mollington Hill, Railway Cutting

Other

ID sylw: 107596

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: National Highways

In addition to the 24 Strategic Growth Locations, we note that potential New Settlement
locations may also contribute to South Warwickshire’s development needs. 12
potential new settlement locations have been identified through the Issues and
Options consultation and further evidence gathering, which have been categorised as
more or less suitable based on the work undertaken to date. As is the case with the
strategic growth locations, based on our review there are a number of new settlement
locations in close proximity to the SRN (and in some cases abut the network) including
sites G1, X1, X2, BW, B1, C1, A1, A2. Out of these sites, B1, X2 and BW are deemed
to be “More Suitable” with other sites categorised as “Less Suitable”.
We note that the Council intend to carry out further work to determine the
appropriateness of the potential new settlements to accommodate significant growth
in a sustainable manner, and this should include the development of a robust transport
evidence base as outlined in response to the question above.

Other

ID sylw: 107620

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford-upon-Avon Town Transport Group

The TTG supports the concept of new settlements as they have the potential to deliver the
majority of the housing needs, with the minimum effect on the environment, and without
detrimental effect on the character of existing settlements, providing the settlement is of
sufficient size to attract investment, and that transport infrastructure is planned and
installed at the outset. They can avoid excessive edge of town development which places
strain on existing infrastructure, and can create isolation.

Experience suggests that the size, purpose, and identity of new settlements and their
location with relationship to existing settlements have significant effect on success. A small
to medium sized new settlement close to a major town without significant purpose and
employment, is likely to become just urban sprawl. Whereas a new major settlement that
has homes, significant and focussed employment; and good transport links for the
commuting and leisure activities, which inevitably cannot all be internalised, is likely to be
the more successful.

The concept of the 20-minute neighbourhood, in terms of providing for residents’ basic local
needs and hence reducing the need to travel and enhancing wellbeing is supported.
However, a 20-minute neighbourhood itself does not provide the level of employment that
would be needed to match the number of homes, therefore major employment is required,
together with options for commuting.

The duration of this plan and the volume of homes and employment opportunities required
gives an exceptional opportunity to plan outside the box, deliver a strategic New Settlement
which should not be constrained by land availability at this stage, and could tick all of the
boxes.

Other

ID sylw: 107652

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Laura Newberry

New towns should be just that, not encroaching and enveloping current villages, many of which appeared in the Domesday Book, and upsetting their infrastructure. Current infrastructure is not developed enough for huge expansions for water, sewage etc. Two examples are Old Budbrooke Road adjacent to Hampton Magna where Severn Trent have frequently been called out to repair leaks in the last couple of years, and Lighthorne where Moreton Morrell Lane has been closed as ST are having to take sewage away from the pumping station in tankers as it cannot cope. This has led to severe deterioration on the road causing closure as it is unsafe for vehicles to use. This would happen if local communities are overrun with new development using existing country lanes, which have been in existence for centuries and cannot cope with modern traffic. Brand new developments would have roads and infrastructure built and suitable for current needs.

Other

ID sylw: 107669

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Cala Homes (Cotswolds)

Asiant : Lichfields (London)

Yes, Cala broadly agrees with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 2.
Cala welcomes the identification of twelve potential new settlement locations and in particular supports the assessment of Location “E1 - Long Marston Airfield” as a “More Suitable” location in its categorisation of suitability of each of the new settlements.
Cala continues to support the delivery of new settlements as this is in line with its continued commitment to the delivery of new homes at Long Marston Airfield Garden Village (LMAGV).
The New Settlements Assessment (November 2024) states that potential new settlement location E1 – Long Marston Airfield has capacity for c.9,850 dwellings and that this comprises numerous, different land ownerships which have been promoted. It would be helpful to identify exactly which promoted sites this includes and the potential number of dwellings which each could deliver. It is important that the potential new settlement carefully considers connectivity with the existing, allocated LMAGV, appropriate mix of uses, infrastructure requirements, and opportunities for complementary design through character areas etc to ensure delivery of a sustainable, well-connected community.

Other

ID sylw: 107696

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Pete Frteeman

One only has to look at the “New Town” policy of the 1950’s and 60’s referring to Harlow, Milton Keynes & Redditch etc to realise that these locations suffer the same issues impacting all other older settlements. They’ve merely added to the problem. Golly – can anyone navigate around the chessboard that is Milton Keynes today? We definitely do not require any more of them?
I also suggest that the “New City” proposals muted by central government of late should be drowned it at birth. In the case of Stratford-on-Avon it would be a proposal that would definitely “Kill the goose that lays the golden egg” . Who would want to come to the Bards “City” and find a LA style sprawl? ……… An absolutely crazy idea, but again characteristic of the dim thinking politicians occupying Whitehall these days.

Other

ID sylw: 107734

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bellway Strategic Land

Asiant : Savills

We note that a New Settlement is proposed to be allocated for strategic growth in a sustainable location. Although we do not object to a proposed new settlement, new settlements take a significant amount of time to deliver and it will therefore be important to allocate a sufficient number of sites which can be delivered in the short term, such as Site ID 334-336.
The NPPF is clear that where new settlements are proposed in plans, the policies should be set within a vision that looks further ahead, at least 30 years, to take account delivery timescales (paragraph 22). The SWLP will only cover the period of 25 years up to 2050 and should therefore be extended.

Other

ID sylw: 107787

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bellway Homes

Asiant : Savills

We note that a New Settlement is proposed to be allocated for strategic growth in a sustainable location. Although we do not object to a proposed new settlement, new settlements take a significant amount of time to deliver and it will therefore be important to allocate a sufficient number of sites which can be delivered in the short term, such as Site ID 334-336.
The NPPF is clear that where new settlements are proposed in plans, the policies should be set within a vision that looks further ahead, at least 30 years, to take account delivery timescales (paragraph 22). The SWLP will only cover the period of 25 years up to 2050 and should therefore be extended.

Other

ID sylw: 107797

Derbyniwyd: 15/06/2025

Ymatebydd: Bellway Homes

Asiant : Savills

We note that a New Settlement is proposed to be allocated for strategic growth in a sustainable location. Although we do not object to a proposed new settlement, new settlements take a significant amount of time to deliver and it will therefore be important to allocate a sufficient number of sites which can be delivered in the short-medium term, such as Site ID 471/466 within proposed Strategic Growth Location SG19. Reference to two site ID’s is included as Bellway’s land has been assessed as the eastern half of site ID 471 (c.4ha) (Land North of Loxley Road, Stratford upon Avon) and the eastern part of a wider parcel, site ID 466 (c.16.73ha) (Land at Knights Lane, Loxley Road and Pimlico Lane, Stratford upon Avon).
The NPPF is clear that where new settlements are proposed in plans, the policies should be set within a vision that looks further ahead, at least 30 years, to take account delivery timescales (paragraph 22). The SWLP will only cover the period of 25 years up to 2050 and should therefore be extended.

Other

ID sylw: 107810

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Catesby Estates Ltd

Asiant : Pegasus Group

Planning for new settlements is supported by Paragraph 77 of the NPPF. However, Paragraph 22 stipulates that the vision in such cases should look at least 30 years ahead. The Plan period would therefore need to be revised if a new settlement is pursued. New settlements have a long lead-in. It is critical for sufficient sites to be allocated across the Strategic Growth Locations, forming most of the housing supply. This aligns with Paragraph 61 of the NPPF.

Yes

ID sylw: 107898

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: TERRA

Asiant : Lichfields (Birmingham)

Yes, Terra considers that it is clear that the step-change in delivery required to meet the
SWA’s SM LHN figures, and any unmet housing needs from the GBBCHMA, will require a
suite of new sites to be allocated throughout the SWLP area – including the potential for
Strategic Growth Areas and New Settlements. Indeed, the NPPF is clear that the supply of
large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for larger-scale
developments (Para 74), such as New Settlements.
2.54 Importantly, however, it is also clear that plans should be prepared positively, in a way that
is aspirational but deliverable (Para 16b) and should set out an appropriate strategy, taking
account of reasonable alternatives, and be based on proportionate evidence (Para 35b). As
such, the SWAs also need to robustly test reasonable alternatives for the spatial distribution
of South Warwickshire’s housing needs through the SA process at an early stage. In
addition to the above, it is also important to note that the NPPF shifts the need to consider
viability to the plan-making stage, requiring authorities to identify a sufficient supply and
mix of sites, taking into account their availability, suitability and likely economic viability
(Para 67).
2.55 The Planning Practice Guidance [PPG] provides further clarity for new settlements, stating
that LPAs should demonstrate that there is a reasonable prospect that large-scale
developments can come forward. In particular, this should include a realistic assessment of
the prospect of sites being developed and should engage with infrastructure providers to
ensure that the infrastructure requirements are not beyond what could reasonably be
considered to be achievable within the planned timescales.1
2.56 In this context, Terra would not object to the option of exploring meeting some of the
SWA’s needs through a New Settlement but wishes to highlight to the SWAs that sufficient
evidence will need to be prepared in support of any future allocation. Terra would note that
such forms of development should not be viewed as the panacea for meeting all of the
SWLP’s needs.
2.57 New Settlements by their very nature require significant upfront commitment to the
delivery of new community, physical and social infrastructure and are often challenged in
terms of viability through the initial phases of development, requiring significant public
sector investment. These types of development can take some years to come onstream and begin delivering, and the SWAs will need a spatial strategy that allocates a supporting
package of ‘suitable, available, and achievable’ sites at different scales throughout the SWLP
area in sustainable locations to ensure that supply can come forward in the earlier parts of
the plan period to meet housing needs in the interim – such as SG14- East of Gaydon.

Other

ID sylw: 107939

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Rainier Developments Ltd

Asiant : Pegasus Group

New settlements can make an important contribution towards meeting South Warwickshire’s housing requirement but they also have long lead-in times and, if too much of the supply depends on a new settlement, and delays arise in its delivery, the Councils risk significantly underdelivering housing. Therefore, it will be critical for the Councils to allocate a range of other sites across the Strategic Growth Locations to ensure the delivery of a range of sites. This aligns with Paragraph 61 of the NPPF, which states that a variety of land should be brought forward for housing, i.e. sites of different scales, ranging from minor development through to new settlements.

Other

ID sylw: 108060

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Seven Homes

Asiant : Pegasus Group

Planning for new settlements is supported by Paragraph 77 of the NPPF. However, Paragraph 22 stipulates that the vision in such cases should look at least 30 years ahead. The Plan period would therefore need to be revised if a new settlement is pursued. New settlements have a long lead-in. It is critical for sufficient sites to be allocated across the Strategic Growth Locations, forming most of the housing supply. This aligns with Paragraph 61 of the NPPF.

The SA assesses the potential new settlement locations. They would all make a major positive contribution to housing (SA Objective 9), All options will generally result in minor adverse to major adverse impacts across most of the other SA objectives. The Emerging Spatial Growth Strategy Topic Paper recognises new settlements will have a harmful impact due to the amount of land they would occupy in existing countryside locations. The SA suggests that the Strategic Growth Locations are generally more sustainable, in terms of having lesser adverse impacts on SA Objectives. However, this is only a high-level exercise which has not taken potential mitigation into account. This could include ecological and landscape enhancements which would give rise to major positive impacts. As with the Strategic Growth Locations, the positive impacts on transport and accessibility (SA Objective 11) and, as a result, Climate Change (SA Objective 1) have not been recognised.

Other

ID sylw: 108110

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: William Davis Homes

Asiant : McLoughlin Planning

We are of the view that the growth of existing settlements should be prioritised within the overall growth strategy for South Warwickshire, as opposed to the delivery of new settlements. This is on the basis that sustainable development at existing settlements has the benefit of being delivered without significant infrastructure investment and within a much shorter timeframe.
In this context, the Respondent’s Site represents a sustainable and logical extension capable of being developed without technical impediment, and which would assist in supporting existing facilities and services within the town. Such matters are discussed further within the site-specific representations at Section 3 of this document.