Yes

Representation ID: 100895

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Rowington Landowner Consortium

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

The SWLP proposes a spatial growth strategy prioritising urban brownfield sites, strategic greenfield locations, and potential new settlements to meet housing and employment needs sustainably. While this approach aligns with sustainable development principles, further clarity is needed regarding how the SWLP will address unmet housing demands from neighbouring areas, such as Greater Birmingham and the Black Country, to ensure a comprehensive strategy that accommodates both local and regional growth requirements.

Other

Representation ID: 100947

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough Commercial

Agent: Delta Planning

Richborough Commercial supports the principle of the Priority Areas for Growth, Strategic Growth Options and the identified strategic employment land need, subject to SG08 being expanded to include Land NW of Junction 15 M40 and the strategic employment need being a minimum of 125 ha. Please refer to our complete response for full details.

Other

Representation ID: 100954

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: AC Lloyd

Agent: Delta Planning

AC Lloyd supports the objective of prioritising development within the most sustainable locations.

The plan should be clear that existing commitments will be carried forwards into the new Local Plan. AC Lloyd’s particular interest is allocation H03 (Land East of Whitnash/south of Sydenham). Phase 1 (185 dwellings) has been granted full planning permission (References: W/20/0617 Outline and W/23/1766 Reserved Matters) and is anticipated to start on site during 2025. Phase 2 will follow in due course. The site falls with Priority Area 1 and remains a highly suitable and sustainable location for housing growth.
See full response.

Yes

Representation ID: 100982

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Old Milverton and Blackdown Parish Council

The land at SG06 represents some of the ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land in the area. We are pleased that this consultation recognises the plans outlined in A Green Future and argue that, as part of this, the land at SG06 should be preserved as agricultural land.
In addition we draw attention to a year-long study that we commissioned from Worcestershire Wildlife Trust which identified the wide range of wildlife in SG06. Further information on the area’s biodiversity can be found at www.ombparish.org.uk/the-green-belt

Other

Representation ID: 101089

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: AC Lloyd - Sites 64 and 301

Agent: Delta Planning

AC Lloyd supports the objective of prioritising development within the most sustainable locations.
AC Lloyd supports the general approach to identifying Spatial Growth Options in principle. It is noted that the AC Lloyd sites at Southam which include land north of Leamington Road (Site 64) being promoted for residential use and land south of Leamington Road (Site 301) being promoted for employment use fall within the Strategic Growth Option SG12 and this is fully supported as detailed in our response to the proposed Strategic Growth Options.
See full response.

Other

Representation ID: 101091

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr guy evans

Brownfield land Should be used throughout the district. New settlements are a bad idea

Yes

Representation ID: 101141

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land Management Limited

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

The Councils will be well aware of the difficulties in relying on new settlements to deliver significant growth from the experiences at Long Marston. There is a need for robust infrastructure and delivery strategies that can demonstrate the Plan is sound. In the absence of any evidence, it is difficult at this stage to conclude that a new settlement should be part of the Plan. The most reliable short to medium-term growth locations are those that are sustainably located adjacent to existing settlements, such as Southam.

Other

Representation ID: 101222

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Adrian Summers on behalf of the Summers Family

Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

There is a need to focus on:

• the level of growth required - housing and employment
• how this should be accommodated, urban/ rural, small, medium and strategic level growth
• a single rather than 2-part plan
• identify and carry out settlement boundary reviews or to establish them where appropriate
• embrace the December 2024 NPPF update especially with regard to Green Belt and the development of Grey Belt sites such as site 517 at Claybank Farm
• embrace infrastructure ‘in the round’
• deploy development to help achieve 20-minute neighbourhoods in urban and rural areas alike

Other

Representation ID: 101269

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ettington Estate Ltd

Agent: Origin3

We have concerns that the Spatial Growth Strategy does not set out a clear picture of how development will be directed to locations across SW effectively, or that the strategy set out will provide a land supply that will meet the need for new homes. We make suggestions as to how the Reg 19 Local Plan could set out a more effective approach.

No

Representation ID: 101278

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Bart Slob

I do not support the proposals in the Meeting South Warwickshire’s Sustainable Development Requirements chapter. The plan fails to guarantee a brownfield-first approach, risking unjustified Green Belt release, particularly at SG04 (South of Kenilworth), which threatens historic landscapes. Exceptional circumstances have not been demonstrated for Green Belt loss. Additionally, there are no clear commitments to delivering infrastructure—schools, healthcare, and transport—before development proceeds, risking further strain on local services. Sustainable development requires stronger guarantees, prioritising brownfield land first, protecting the Green Belt, and ensuring infrastructure is in place before large-scale housing growth is approved.

Other

Representation ID: 101379

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Webb Family

Agent: Delta Planning

The Webb family supports the principles of the Priority Areas, but note that the current part-allocation of Site 180 should be carried forward to the new SWLP and that the remainder of the site should also be allocated. Please refer to our complete response for full details.

Other

Representation ID: 101434

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: AC Lloyd - Site 165

Agent: Delta Planning

AC Lloyd supports the objective of prioritising development within the most sustainable locations. AC Lloyd supports the general approach to identifying Spatial Growth Options in principle. SG06 includes AC Lloyd sites at land off Bamburgh Grove (reference no. 165). As the new Standard Method is in place this must now be applied and the plan must accommodate the higher housing figure (54,450 dwellings) for the plan period. In addition, any housing needs that cannot be met within neighbouring planning authority areas should also be taken into account in establishing the amount of housing to be planned for. See full response.

No

Representation ID: 101536

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the area

Other

Representation ID: 101898

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Grevayne Properties Limited

Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

There is a need to focus on:

• the level of growth - housing and employment
• how this should be accommodated, urban/ rural, small, medium and strategic level growth
• a single rather than 2-part plan
• identify and carry out settlement boundary reviews
• embrace the December 2024 NPPF update especially with regard to Green Belt and the development of Grey Belt sites such as site Ref: 490 at Baddesley Clinton.
• embrace infrastructure ‘in the round’
• deploy development to help achieve 20-minute neighbourhoods in urban and rural areas, such as Baddesley Clinton and Harbury.

No

Representation ID: 101954

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

The 2022 Sustainability Appraisal’s (SA) references to Bishop’s Tachbrook contains significant errors, including failure to identify the Country Park, ancient woodland and the village’s Conservation Area. Coalescence impact is underestimated, and the village is incorrectly placed outside a secondary school catchment despite Oakley School. The methodology for landscape sensitivity assessment is flawed, relying only on Appendix 7 of the Warwick District Council study, which does not cover Bishop’s Tachbrook. The full report should be used for reassessment. These errors must be corrected in revised documentation before the Regulation 19 plan is published to ensure accuracy and soundness.

No

Representation ID: 102101

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Alton

The Council has not taken on board the wishes of residents in drawing up its draft proposals. Residents are universally opposed to them on grounds of destruction of environment, inconvenience, strains on infrastructure and the transport system in particular. The Council has wrongly applied planning criteria in preparing the proposals. It sees green belt as a challenge to be overcome and the receipt of CILS payments as a driver for development. It is a mattter which is potentially the basis for a judicial review together with referrals to the Local Government Ombudsman.

Other

Representation ID: 102119

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: IM Land 1 Limited

Agent: Turley

55. IM Land broadly supports the proposals subject to the amendments to Draft Policy Directions 1, 4, 5,7 and 8 and consideration of our comments on the HELAA results.

Yes

Representation ID: 102130

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: BDW Trading Limited

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

The SWLP proposes a spatial growth strategy prioritising urban brownfield sites, strategic greenfield locations, and potential new settlements to meet housing and employment needs sustainably. While this approach aligns with sustainable development principles, further clarity is needed regarding how the SWLP will address unmet housing demands from neighbouring areas, such as Greater Birmingham and the Black Country, to ensure a comprehensive strategy that accommodates both local and regional growth requirements.

Other

Representation ID: 102247

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey Strategic Land

Agent: Turley

Further detail is required within the next iteration of the SWLP in order to fully support the proposals in ‘Meeting South Warwickshire’s Sustainable Development Requirements’ chapter. However, at this stage Taylor Wimpey are able to broadly support the direction of travel and request that Warwick District Council engage with interested parties over the next 12 months to enable them to provide the additional level of detail and evidence to support the regulation 19 version of the SWLP.

No

Representation ID: 102562

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Carl Barthorpe

No I dont agree, sustainable and similar words are thrown around as lip service, builders are given permission to destroy an unnecessary number of trees, hedrows, fill in ponds turn brooks into drainage.

Need to protect the wildlife not pay lip service to it.

Other

Representation ID: 102565

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Deeley Homes Dean Weldon

General support with additional flexibility for development to come forward in other sustainable locations across the district if a need can be identified.

Yes

Representation ID: 102582

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Jaguar Land Rover

Agent: Marrons

JLR broadly support the proposals, and in particular the Spatial Growth Strategy Priority Areas.

Land at Honiley Road, Fen End is identified within Priority Area 1. This is welcomed and supported by JLR. Fen End is strategically important to the business, and is currently used for Vehicle testing, research and development and retailer network training.

In moving forward, JLR need to have more certainty around what it can and cannot do at Fen End from a planning policy perspective in order to inform its business decisions on where and when to invest.

Other

Representation ID: 102726

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Deeley Homes Dean Weldon

A need for additional flexibility to be built into the delivery of new housing.

Other

Representation ID: 102828

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Summers Holdings Ltd

Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

The planning process seems to have run into various cul-de-sacs. There is a need to focus on:

• the level of growth required - housing and employment
• how this should be accommodated, urban/ rural, small, medium and strategic level growth including a possible new settlement(s)
• a single rather than 2-part plan
• settlement boundary reviews or establish where appropriate
• embrace updated NPPF especially with regard to Green Belt and Grey Belt
• embrace infrastructure ‘in the round’
• deploy development to help achieve 20-minute neighbourhoods in all areas.

Other

Representation ID: 102951

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Deeley Homes

Agent: Delta Planning

Deeley Homes supports the objective of developing in the most sustainable locations however considers that Long Itchington has been omitted, for the reasons set out within the full response, and should be considered as a Priority Area.

Deeley Homes are promoting Land North of Leamington Road, Long Itchington (Ref. 437) for residential uses which represents a sustainable location and can come forward in isolation or as part of a wider scheme (with Site Refs. 446 and 462).

The SWLP should use the new Standard Method housing figure as a minimum.

Please refer to full response for further details.

Other

Representation ID: 102963

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Deeley Homes Dean Weldon

Deeley Homes supports South Warwickshire’s objective of developing in the most sustainable locations. The identification of Priority Areas for Growth, in principle, provides a good mechanism for identifying sites that are within suitable distance to settlements and have sufficient sustainable/public transport connections. However, Deeley Homes strongly objects to the implication that development would not be supported in other smaller settlements across the district. An element of flexibility should be incorporated into the policy to allow development sites to come forward in areas not specifically identified for growth, on occasions where specific local or district-wide needs can be identified.
Deeley Homes are promoting Land East of Kineton Road, Pillerton Priors (Site Ref 820) which has been included within the draft Site Allocations Plan (SAP) as a Reserve Housing Allocation. This confirms the acceptance in principle of this location for development, and it should therefore be included either as an Area for Growth or as a Small Site allocation.

No

Representation ID: 103013

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Howard Easton

The maps don't show HS2! The proposals destroy prime agricultural land, which the country needs to feed itself! The impact in the environment will catastrophic! The West Midlands and Warwickshire currently have the most congested roads nationally. The environmental damage will effect all human and wildlife. Finally, this plan is for 50 years. WDC, WCC won't be here in less than 3 years!!!! As I say, this is madness. Protect England's "green and pleasant" land. Don't cover it with concrete.

No

Representation ID: 103213

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Chesterton and Kingston Parish Meeting

As stated brownfield Urban land in Coventry and West Midlands should be the focus and not South Warwickshire

Other

Representation ID: 103230

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Salford Road, Bidford-on-Avon

Agent: 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

Representation ID: 103233

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Gaydon Road, Bishop's Itchington

Agent: 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.