Policy DS11 proposes the development of 43 dwellings at Kingswood (Lapworth), however the evidence supporting the Local Plan suggests that the settlement should accommodate more growth than this. The level of growth proposed at Kingswood (Lapworth) is considered unlikely to achieve the objectives set out in the Local Plan in terms of re-balancing the local housing market to provide much needed affordable housing and market homes for local residents and helping support and sustain local services, facilities and businesses.

The Villages Settlement Hierarchy report (2013) set out a robust appraisal of the sustainability of Kingswood (Lapworth) as a location for growth. It ranked the village as a 'Growth Village' and set out a strategy that 20% growth to the village would be sought. Since the village contains 381 dwellings (Census 2011), 20% growth would amount to 76 dwellings. The Village Settlement Hierarchy report set out that housing would be apportioned to villages taking in to account physical and policy constraints, land availability, the role and character of the settlement and the appetite of Parish Councils for increased growth to encourage growth in local services.

Aligned to the Villages Settlement Hierarchy report, the Council's Preferred Options Local Plan consultation in June 2013 consulted on a proposal for growth of 100-150 dwellings to Kingswood (Lapworth).

The Village Housing Apportionment (Revised May 2014) shows how proposals for growth at Kingswood (Lapworth) have been eroded over a series of consultations to stand at the current proposal for 43 dwellings, which is only 11% growth to the village. This erosion in the housing target seems to be due to a lack of available and suitable land for significant growth at Kingswood (Lapworth) and pressure from local residents and organisations to limit the amount of growth to the village. However the evidence remains that the village is a highly sustainable location for growth.

The current proposal for 43 dwellings would deliver in the region of 17 affordable dwellings to Kingswood (Lapworth). This is unlikely mark a change in terms of re-balancing the housing market. The delivery of 100-150 dwellings at the settlement has the potential to deliver between 40-60 affordable dwellings. This would provide a much greater contribution to the village and is much more likely to effect the change that Policy DS11 seeks to make.

The development of 100-150 dwellings at Kingswood (Lapworth) would provide substantial support to the local services and facilities in the village and this level of growth could stimulate growth in those facilities. This would build upon the substantial sustainability credentials of the settlement to bring about positive change to the village.

In previous work on the Local Plan, the lack of available and suitable land stood in the way of achieving growth of 100-150 dwellings. However Nurton Developments now have an interest in a significant area of land at Kingswood - 8.2ha of land north of Rising Lane, as shown in the attached plan.

The site has not been fully assessed previously in the preparation of the Local Plan as it was not being promoted as a location for growth. However 2 small parcels of land on Rising Lane were assessed in the Local Plan evidence base (KW9*0 and KW10*0) and discounted due to 'frequent localised flooding'. This appears to be the only physical constraint that stood in the way of the sites being considered further for removal from the Green Belt.

Nurton Developments are now committed to promoting the site for development and are working with the landowner to highlight the availability and suitability of the land for development.

The flood risk constraint to the site has been investigated further and is summarised in the attached appraisal by BWB Consulting. Although the site is partly affected by flooding, the majority of the land is free of flood risk and could accommodate in the region of 100 dwellings. Furthermore, the potential will be explored for the flood-constrained part of the site to be used as public open space, enhancing this canalside location.

The land is free of significant physical constraints and is considered to form a well defined parcel, contained by the adjacent railway line, canal and other landscape features, such that its removal from the Green Belt would not harm the purposes of including land within the Green Belt. Nurton Developments will be working to provide further detail in the near future as to how the site can be suitably developed.

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.

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.

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.