The modification is supported in principle albeit that it is considered that more emphasis should be put on new development directly adjacent to the existing conurbation boundary with its sustainability advantages. This is particularly relevant in relation to "where greenfield sites are required for housing, they should generally be located on the edge of urban built-up areas in sustainable locations".

It is not proposed to add to the debate on the detail of this matter although the principle of now providing for substantially more new homes in the plan period is supported.

It is not proposed to add to the debate on the detail of this matter although the principle of now providing for substantially more new homes in the plan period is supported.

Whilst it is supported that "Greenfield sites on the edge of Coventry" are necessary to meet the housing need, in order to produce a "sound" plan, greater provision on such land would be preferable to other Greenfield sites proposed on the edge of other towns.

This being for a combination of reasons relating to sustainability, existence of existing services, close to centres of employment, close to Warwick University and, that large areas of land are already identified for possible development between Coventry and the HS2 line and specifically referred to in MM17 Policy DSNEW 1.

Allocated Sites H42 and H43 are being allocated (in accordance with policy DSNEW1) although it is considered that the overall "soundness" would be improved by the early allocation of further land in this defined Area of Growth for development South of Gibbet Hill Road/North of Cryfield Lane.

Together with H42 and H43, the sustainability of the new development would be greatly enhanced AND would facilitate the Link Road across the southern edge of Coventry and through the land between Coventry and HS2 i.e. in and serving the newly defined Area of Growth (DS NEW1).

We suggest that this Modification should be further amended so that the list of land in 2.81 includes.....
* land South of Gibbet Hill Road/North of Cryfield Lane

This modification is supported in principle as it recognises the inevitability of expansion being necessary in order to maintain the teaching, research and residential needs.

However, it is considered for the modified Plan to be "sound" the inevitability of expansion, with the need for an early long term Masterplan, should be properly included in the Plan and not undertaken as a separate, isolated exercise (as currently being proposed).

This modification is supported in principle as it recognises the contribution that small scale development in the open countryside can make towards achieving the aims of the Plan.
The overall "soundness" would be improved and therefore confirmed by further land South of Gibbet Hill Road/North of Cryfield Lane in addition to H42 and H43, to enhance the sustainability AND provide a major opportunity to facilitate the Link Road across the whole of the southern edge of Coventry and running right through the land between Coventry and HS2 i.e. in and serving the Area of Growth (MM17).

The Council has committed to a partial review of the area south of Coventry area within five years of adoption to consider whether additional housing is needed and the availability of infrastructure to deliver it.

This principle is further reinforced (and supported) by
2.83 Policy DS NEW1 which indicates that a partial review of the Local Plan will be undertaken within five years of the adoption of the plan, to address specific circumstances in the area to the south of Coventry.

The likelihood of an early Review is supported but as written, the Plan may be unsound.

Noting the inclusion of:
"n) H42 - Land at Westwood Heath
o) H43 - Kings Hill (including land identified for development beyond the current plan period)
Proposals for all or part of the allocated strategic sites detailed above will be approved where they represent take full account of a comprehensive development scheme for the whole site."
The principle of this modification is supported although it is considered to be far more achievable and sustainable (and therefore "sound") if additional land on the edge of Coventry were to be included. This would then comply with the suggestion that a comprehensive Masterplan is needed if these areas are to be developed with maximum effect and minimum impact i.e as per 2.66 which states that "development on these sites comes forward within the context of an appropriate and comprehensive development scheme...."

For instance, large parts of H43 Kings Hill were considered by many at the Examination sessions to be flawed in comparison to Westwood Heath and the Safeguarded Area in particular. It is suggested that a greater emphasis on Westwood Heath (Safeguarded Area) AND the suggested land South of Gibbet Hill Road/North of Cryfield Lane would not only be more sustainable but would provide a major opportunity to address the one major stumbling block referred to at the Examination - the facilitation of the Link Road across the whole of the southern edge of Coventry and running right through the land between Coventry and HS2 i.e. the Area of Growth as defined in MM17 Policy DS NEW1.

We therefore support the further text and sentiment in 2.66 which should be extended to include the geographically equivalent land South of Gibbet Hill Road/North of Cryfield Lane. 2.66 states "To ensure the most sustainable and deliverable form of development is achieved on these significant sites, landowners are strongly encouraged to work together closely to produce the most appropriate overall scheme for the site. This might for example be achieved through the setting up of consortia or other formal means of co-ordinated joint working (including the local planning authority as a full partner)."

This is further reinforced by 2.67 which states "Without a comprehensive development scheme, the delivery of infrastructure and services (such as schools, open space, roads, transport facilities, community facilities and local centres) cannot be guaranteed or properly integrated into the area. Further, incremental proposals which do not take sufficient account of proposals for the whole site are less likely to deliver a high quality, integrated development which can build a strong sense of place and sustainable neighbourhoods."

We consider that in order to ensure the effectiveness of these policies (as intended) and ensure that the Plan is "sound", the proposed Modifications should be amended to include the suggested land South of Gibbet Hill Road/North of Cryfield Lane.