BASE HEADER
Preferred Options 2025
Chwilio sylwadau
Canlyniadau chwilio Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Chwilio o’r newyddOther
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: 102909
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
References to unmet housing needs and request for further detail
Other
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: 103021
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
The policy should be updated to remove any reference to the HEDNA and instead solely focus on the 2024 standard method as a starting point. Additional adjustments to be made in relation to economic growth and affordability.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
Do you have any comments on a specific site proposal or the HELAA results?
ID sylw: 103082
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
Additional information in relation to site REFID 232
Other
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: 103113
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
There needs to be more clarification throughout the SWLP about what a ‘Strategic Allocation’ is and what a ‘small-scale development’ is.
Richborough encourage the SWLP authorities to consider the sites put forward through the Call-for-Sites and how these align with the ‘Spatial Growth Strategy Priority Areas 1 to 3’ and provide sufficient information within the SWLP to allow these sites to be delivered.
Other
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: 103153
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
The SWLP authorities should accommodate an appropriate proportion of the emerging Greater Birmingham and Black Country Housing Market Area (GBBCHMA) and Coventry and Warwickshire Housing Market Area (CWHMA) housing shortfall to 2050 – once this is established through the publication of a joint evidence base. The SWLP authorities should ensure that the next iteration of the Plan provides a positive and flexible approach to ensure this can happen.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 5- Infrastructure Requirements and Delivery?
ID sylw: 103209
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
Richborough generally support development being consistent with and contributing to the transport strategies referred to within Draft Policy Direction 5. However at this stage the IDP has not been progressed to a point to be able to fully understand the details of the specific transport strategies. In addition to the implementation of the transport strategies, any site specific infrastructure and other requirements in any forthcoming allocation policies will need to be proportionate to the scale of development proposed, based on up-to-date evidence of need and subject to viability (which should be explicitly referenced in the policy wording). These requirements will also need to be justified through the evolving IDP.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-8- Density?
ID sylw: 103226
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
Richborough has no objection to the emerging policy direction and agrees that density should be considered in accordance with different types of locations of development.
With regard to the reference to Design Codes, it is recommended that the future policy text for Draft Policy Direction 8 should cross refer to Draft Policy Direction 26 ‘Design Codes’ and the supporting text. Richborough have provided more detailed comments in relation to Design Codes within their response to Draft Policy Direction 26.
Other
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: 103245
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
Richborough generally support the overall approach to the Meeting South Warwickshire’s Sustainable Development Requirements chapter, however in order to fully respond and therefore fully support the proposals, a significant amount of additional detail is required.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 10- Providing the Right Tenure and Type of Homes?
ID sylw: 103280
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
Any future policy must reflect the most up to date evidence. The policy wording should also be flexible and be able to respond to changes to national policies and updated evidence throughout the lifetime of the Plan.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy- A- Providing the Right Size of Homes?
ID sylw: 103300
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington
Asiant : Turley
Any future policy wording should reflect and meet the standards set out in national policy and guidance, including Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS) and Building Regulations. The policy should be flexible to adapt to future updates to national policy and guidance.
Richborough consider that the SWLP should not go beyond the national standards as this could place onerous requirements on developments which could lead to delays in the delivery of much needed new homes.
