BASE HEADER
Preferred Options 2025
Chwilio sylwadau
Canlyniadau chwilio Lockley Homes
Chwilio o’r newyddNo
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Introduction? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 105265
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
We strongly oppose the Councils' proposed approach to the Local Plan, which involves producing a separate Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the SWLP. This will lead to confusion and significant delays in delivering the Local Plan across South Warwickshire, especially as local communities face a severe housing shortage and post-COVID-19 economic challenges. We also object to the exclusion of small and medium-sized housing sites from Stage 1, as they are crucial for addressing the housing crisis. Instead, the Council should produce a single version of the SWLP Local Plan, as we noted in our Issues & Options consultation response.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Delivering Homes that Meet the Needs of all our communities chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 105268
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
Paragraph 73 of the Revised NPPF emphasises the importance of small and medium-sized sites in addressing housing requirements and supporting local housebuilders. Land at the northern edge of Broom in Stratford-on-Avon District should be allocated for new housing in the SWLP Review, as it is a sustainable location. This development would enhance housing supply and support the village's vitality, aligning with paragraph 83 of the Revised NPPF. We object to proposals to delay allocation of small and medium sites until Stage 2 of the SWLP as such sites have a critical role in addressing South Warwickshire's chronic housing shortage.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 7- Green Belt?
ID sylw: 105269
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
We are concerned that designated Green Belt locations are being prioritised for new housing developments, while more sustainable options outside the Green Belt, such as the Lockley Homes site, are being ignored. This approach contradicts the Revised NPPF (December 2024) guidelines, which emphasise the importance of using brownfield and underutilised land first. Lockley Homes presents a sustainable site that should be prioritised for development. The Councils' refusal to adopt more sustainable development patterns undermines the soundness and legal compliance of the emerging Local Plan Review, jeopardising its effectiveness in future examinations.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the A Climate Resilient and Net Zero Carbon South Warwickshire chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 105270
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
The SWLP does not integrate climate change resilience into its spatial development policies. It is prioritising less sustainable sites in isolated Green Belt areas over more sustainable options near established villages. This contradicts national planning guidance on sustainability. In order to comply with the Revised NPPF the SWLP must consider the sustainable expansion needs of existing rural village settlements. Paragraph 83 provides strong policy support for the Lockley Homes site.
The 'one-size' approach reflects a lack of sufficient in-house technical expertise within the two Councils which places excessive demands on developers, particularly given the current adverse economic circumstances.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Meeting South Warwickshire's Sustainable Development Requirements chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 105271
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
We object to the poor quality of the evidence base used for preparing this document. We previously raised extensive concerns about overreliance on out-of-date, not fit-for-purpose and insufficiently robust supporting background technical evidence in our response to the Issues and Options consultation. The emerging Sustainability Appraisal continues still does not promote sustainable patterns of housing development in the South Warwickshire region. Additionally, the technical evidence does not acknowledge the significant economic recession impacting the area. This is not compliant with the approach expected in paragraphs 16, 32, and 36 of the Revised NPPF.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-22- Net Zero Carbon Buildings?
ID sylw: 105272
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
Highly onerous Climate Change Net Zero policies are being taken forward within the emerging SWLP which will place a financially damaging burden on new housing development proposals, at a time when the construction industry is operating within a climate of stubbornly high interest rates, high inflationary pressures, during a severe economic recession, and at a time when the industry is facing a huge spike in the financial costs of building materials, and significant increases in skilled construction labour costs.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Delivering Homes that Meet the Needs of all our communities chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 105273
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
The Councils are proposing an inflexible affordable housing policy and an excessively burdensome regime of CIL and planning obligations. These policies are based on outdated assumptions and economic data and contradict the Revised NPPF (2024). CIL is an unfair tax that adversely affects the private housing development sector. It makes many schemes financially unviable and hinders overall housing delivery in the UK. This is a particular issue in South Warwickshire. The SWLP also needs to resolve the onerous, unfair and unreasonable demands which are placed on applications under 50 dwellings by Development Management evidence requirements and planning conditions.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the How to Have Your Say chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 105274
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
The public consultation webpage for the South Warwickshire Local Plan (SWLP) is unclear and unfit for purpose. The Preferred Options document is hard to locate, particularly in a PDF format, and it is too long. The policies are too lengthy and detailed. They would not prove effective for Development Management when making decisions. The Opus Consult platform makes the document harder to view and is a waste of taxpayer money. The consultation approach has been unfair and inadequate, resulting in substantial prejudice.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-11- Meeting the Accommodation Needs of Gypsies, Travellers, Travelling Showpeople and Boat Dwellers?
ID sylw: 105275
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Lockley Homes
Asiant : Goldfinch Town Planning Services (West Midlands)
Unsustainable levels of pitch numbers are being proposed which will promote inappropriate, damaging and unsustainable patterns of development within the local area, and cause significant residential amenity conflicts with the existing settled community, as well as damage sensitive rural landscapes. There has also been a substantial planning policy failure to properly consider and assess the future expansion needs of the proposed allocated new gypsy sites.