BASE HEADER
Preferred Options 2025
Chwilio sylwadau
Canlyniadau chwilio Mac Mic Group
Chwilio o’r newyddNo
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Vision and Strategic Objectives: South Warwickshire 2050 chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 98401
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
The Vision should recognise that there are unmet development needs outside of South Warwickshire that may need to be met within South Warwickshire. A Strategic Objective should also be to meet any unmet housing needs from communities elsewhere that cannot meet their needs, where it is practical and consistent with achieving sustainable development. This would align the strategic objective with the ‘positively prepared’ test of soundness.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you broadly support the proposals in the Vision and Strategic Objectives: South Warwickshire 2050 chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
ID sylw: 98407
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
The Vision should recognise that there are unmet development needs outside of South Warwickshire that may need to be met within South Warwickshire. A Strategic Objective should also be to meet any unmet housing needs from communities elsewhere that cannot meet their needs, where it is practical and consistent with achieving sustainable development. This would align the strategic objective with the ‘positively prepared’ test of soundness.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 1 - Meeting South Warwickshire's Sustainable Development Requirements?
ID sylw: 99412
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
The South Warwickshire Councils must continually review the Local Housing Need up to adoption, they must consider an increased higher housing need, implement a 5% lapse rate to account for unimplemented commitments, and reassess the existing commitments and windfall allowance as outlined.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you have any comments on a specific site proposal or the HELAA results?
ID sylw: 100945
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
Mac Mic Group call into question the utility and methodology of the HELAA results, as set out below. This Representation provides a qualitative context of the site [Land East of Station Lane (Site 169)] which is considered should accompany the findings of the HELAA.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 3- Small Scale Development, Settlement Boundaries and Infill Development?
ID sylw: 100972
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
Land East of Station Lane, Kingswood (Site 169) should be included in the SWLP as a small allocation to bolster the 5-year Housing Land Supply. The Site is the most accessible side of the village to the rail station (unlike 53 and 761), is well contained without long distances views (unlike 514 & 649) and does not make a contribution to Green Belt purposes (unlike 88 & 205), does extend the village envelope north beyond Rising Lane (unlike 235).
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 4- Accommodating Growth Needs Arising from Outside South Warwickshire?
ID sylw: 100984
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
It is imperative that the SWLP adequately considers accommodating unmet housing needs arising from outside of South Warwickshire. There are significant unmet needs arising from the GBBCHMA which require attention, and potential unmet needs arising from Coventry which should be taken account of accordingly. There is also potential for unmet needs arising from Cotswold District, Redditch Borough and Solihull Metropolitan Borough which should be considered. Failure to do so would render the SWLP not positively prepared nor effective and thus unsound in line with Paragraph 36 a) and c) of the NPPF.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 5- Infrastructure Requirements and Delivery?
ID sylw: 100991
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
Mac Mic Group agree that development proposals should endeavour to deliver the infrastructure set out in the transport strategies outlined, where justified, but the SWCs must acknowledge the ability and need for strategic scale sites to deliver infrastructure that is considered important to a local community but not formally identified within an IDP or other transport strategy.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 7- Green Belt?
ID sylw: 100999
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
Mac Mic Group agree there are exceptional circumstances to warrant the release of Green Belt land, including significant housing need that can not reasonably bet met all in sustainable locations outside of the Green Belt. The NPPF is now crystal clear that exceptional circumstances include instances where the homes needed cannot be met through other means (para. 146)..
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-8- Density?
ID sylw: 101005
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
The principle of Draft Policy Direction 8 is acceptable. The SWLP should ensure that policies regarding density align with Paragraphs 129 and 130 of the Framework, particularly local market conditions and viability (Paragraph 129b). Any density policy within the SWLP should acknowledge the impact that evidence-based housing needs.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 9 - Using Brownfield Land for Development?
ID sylw: 101009
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
Mic Mac Group offers no response to Draft Policy Direction 9
