The level of housing growth set out in Policy DS6 is 12,860 dwellings over the period 2011-2029, or 714 dwellings per annum. This purports to be based on the objectively assessed need identified in the Coventry & Warwickshire Joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 2013. However the objectively assessed need set out in Table 97 of the SHMA was in fact a slightly higher figure of 720 dwellings per annum - an additional 108 dwellings over the plan period. This is a small difference but it should be provided for in order for the plan to be robust.

Of greater concern is the fact that the plan does not provide for any of the housing need that is very likely to arise from neighbouring districts that cannot meet their own need. The report to Council on 23rd April 2014 included Appendix 5 concerning the Coventry and Warwickshire Duty to Cooperate. This report stated that a 'significant risk' to the delivery of the Housing Market Area's (HMA) Objectively Assessed Need (OAN) is whether each of the Councils within the HMA have sufficient site capacity within the boundaries to deliver their identified OAN. In particular there is a significant risk that Coventry City Council will not be able accommodate 23,600 dwellings (1,180 dwellings per annum) within the City boundary. In addition, there is a risk that authorities within the Coventry and Warwickshire HMA will be asked to accommodate a growth resulting from a shortfall of housing capacity in Birmingham.

Birmingham City Council's Proposed Submission Draft of its Local Development Plan identifies an initial shortfall in meeting its OAN by around 29,000 dwellings. Coventry City Council's Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 2012 set out a capacity of 14,667 dwellings between 2011-2028, whereas the OAN for Coventry between 2011-2031 is 23,600. It therefore seems very clear at this stage that a large amount of housing provision will need to be allocated to neighbouring districts to Coventry and Birmingham under the Duty to Cooperate. The Publication Local Plan makes very little provision for accommodating housing requirements from neighbouring districts under the Duty to Cooperate - this will be discussed further in representations under Policy DS20.

The Publication Plan does not provide for an adequate time horizon. Paragraph 157 of the National Planning Policy Framework says that local plans should be "drawn up over an appropriate time scale, preferably a 15-year time horizon, take account of longer term requirements, and be kept up to date". The plan period is to end in 2029, which at this point provides a time horizon of just under 15 years. However at the likely point of adoption of the Local Plan - April 2015 - it will only have a time horizon of 14 years. The SHMA set out the assessment of OAN to 2031. In order for the Local Plan to provide for the OAN the plan period should be consistent with that used in the SHMA. Rugby Borough Council is currently consulting on a Local Plan Development Strategy which would extend their plan period to 2031, consistent with the SHMA assessment period. It is considered that Warwick District Council should also take the opportunity now to ensure that their plan has a sound time horizon, consistent with guidance in the NPPF.

The explanation to this policy suggests that the housing provision has provided for an element of flexibility, planning for 6,900 new homes, whereas only 6,746 are required. Representations made in respect of Policy DS6 have explained that the housing provision is at least 108 dwellings short of meeting the district's Objectively Assessed Need to 2029. It is considered that some flexibility is required in the event that some sites fail to come forward or are delivered with reduced capacities than that allowed for in the plan. The supporting explanation to Policy DS7 states that such flexibility is required. As such the housing provision should be increased to allow for such flexibility.

As set out in representations to Policy DS6, it is considered that the Publication Local Plan is unsound and it does not fulfil the Duty to Cooperate since it does not provide flexibility to meet any of the housing needs that are very likely to arise from neighbouring authorities.

Policy DS20 sets out that, should a need be identified, the Council would review the Local Plan in order to provide for sites to be allocated where they can appropriately meet this need. The National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) says that local plans "may be found sound conditional upon a review in whole or in part within five years of the date of adoption". However Policy DS20 does not commit to when a review would take place. Nor is any commitment made in the Local Development Scheme to a review of the Local Plan.

A recent High Court judgement - Grand Union Investments Limited v Dacorum Borough Council [2014] EWHC 1894 (Admin) - established that a Development Plan could be considered sound, even if its housing requirement did not meet the Objectively Assessed Need (OAN) for the area, if it included a commitment to an early review. However, crucially in this case the Council had already embarked upon a review; it was committed to carry out that review within 5 years within the Development Plan and Local Development Scheme; and, due to an oversupply of housing early on in the plan period, a housing shortfall would not emerge until late in the plan period. Therefore the planned review would be able to anticipate and accommodate any potential shortfall.

The only information regarding a likely timetable for review of the Warwick Local Plan is in Appendix 5 to a report to Council on 23rd April 2014. This sets out that the review would commence in 2017/18 with adoption in 2019/20. However this is not written in to a Development Plan Document or Local Development Scheme and therefore it cannot be relied upon.

The Council's own assessment of 5 year housing land supply sets out that only 2.7 years of supply can currently be demonstrated. However the illustrative housing trajectory under Policy DS7 of the Publication Local Plan shows a sudden increase in housing completions, leaping from 262 dwellings to 1,037 dwellings within the space of 2 years. This is an unrealistic trajectory, which assumes that site allocations will start to deliver housing from 2015/16, in the first year after the plan has been adopted. This overly optimistic trajectory cannot be relied upon as a basis for delaying the necessary review of the Local Plan. It is highly likely that a review of the Local Plan would not be able to anticipate and accommodate an additional requirement for housing before a shortfall had emerged. Therefore the plan would not significantly boost the supply of housing, as required by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). It is therefore inappropriate to rely on review of the plan to meet needs arising from outside the district.

Policy DS20 also states that the existence of unmet housing need arising outside the District will not render the Plan out of date. In essence the Council is trying to justify continuing to use the Local Plan as a basis for decision making even though it might not be making provision for housing to meet the OAN for the Housing Market Area (HMA). Paragraph 47 of the NPPF says that local authorities should "[use] their evidence base to ensure that their Local Plan meets the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the housing market area, as far as is consistent with the policies set out in this Framework". Paragraph 47 also says that authorities must "identify and keep up to date every year a supply of sites sufficient to provide five years worth of housing against their housing requirements". It is clear that the five year supply should be assessed against the OAN for the HMA, including meeting needs from other local authorities. There is no justification for ignoring the OAN required to be accommodated from other districts when making decisions on planning applications. Policy DS20 is therefore unsound and the Local Plan is very likely to be rendered out of date early in the plan period.

In view of our other representations in respect of Policies DS6, DS7 and DS20, it is considered that the Local Plan needs to make provision for more housing and further land will need to be removed from the Green Belt.

Policy DS19 should therefore make provision for further land to be released from the Green Belt and for the Green Belt to be reviewed through the review of the Local Plan.

It has been submitted in representations under Policies DS6, DS7, DS19 and DS20 that further land is required to be allocated for housing. Nurton Developments and the Forrester Family wish to highlight the availability and suitability for development of land at Loes Farm, Warwick. This is a site measuring approximately 27.3ha, as shown in the attached plan.

Approximately 10ha of this site was allocated as a 'preferred option' for development of 180 dwellings in the May 2012 iteration of the draft Local Plan. However the site allocation was not pursued by the Council in the subsequent iteration of the draft Local Plan - the Revised Development Strategy (June 2013). The reasons given were that (1) updated landscape and transport evidence suggested that there is scope to locate development outside the Green Belt, therefore exceptional circumstances do not exist to release the land from the Green Belt; and (2) the potential impact upon heritage assets would be difficult to mitigate.

Given the additional need for housing, both to meet the district's Objectively Assessed Need over an appropriate plan period and the likely significant additional need to be accommodated from other districts, it is considered that exceptional circumstances do exist to justify removing further land from the Green Belt. Furthermore, as has been previously submitted in response to earlier consultation, the land at Loes Farm is suitable for the provision of housing, subject to an appropriate strategy to mitigate impact upon heritage assets.

The Council's own evidence in the Considerations for Sustainable Landscape Planning (2012) report set out a strategy to develop the site whilst having regard to heritage assets. This report considered the potential for a different and larger part of the 27.3ha site to be developed for housing. Therefore at various stages the Council has considered the potential for most of the land to be developed.

In response to previous consultation on the Revised Development Strategy (2013), Barlow Associates submitted a report on behalf of the Forrester Family, prepared by Pleydell Smithyman, which considered the Landscape, Visual and Heritage setting of the site further and put forward a conceptual diagram illustrating how the development of the whole site could be pursued with appropriate landscape mitigation and enhancement. Nurton Developments and the Forrester Family intend to commission further evidence to demonstrate that the site could be developed without significant harm to heritage assets; indeed there is an opportunity to enhance the setting of heritage assets.

The Council's Joint Green Belt Review (2009) also identified the site at Loes Farm as one of the few 'least constrained' parcels of Green Belt land in the district. This lends support for the site to be considered as a high priority for development to meet the increased OAN. It is considered that the site should be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for residential development, or at the very least the site should be safeguarded to make provision for housing in response to a review of the Local Plan.