Other

Representation ID: 86004

Received: 11/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kate Harris

I don't disagree with the policy statement I just haven't seen evidence of it in practice in my local area (Wootton Wawen); development has been predominantly high value owner occupied properties (small scale in fill sites) which is what the developers have wanted to build.

Yes

Representation ID: 86064

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 86133

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Clive Corrie

This is a sensible approach, housing need surveys need to be carried out on a local basis to determine the number ant types of housing required.

No

Representation ID: 86206

Received: 15/01/2025

Respondent: Professor Paul Bywaters

This response gives me no confidence that the need for affordable homes will be given sufficient priority. A much more specific and detailed commitment to this priority should be given.

No

Representation ID: 86253

Received: 17/01/2025

Respondent: Michelle McHugh

Homes should be more affordable, building more homes won't mean they are affordable. House builders will profit.

Other

Representation ID: 86319

Received: 21/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Daniel Chandler

While affordable housing is absolutely required, developers and property investors will purchase significant swathes of new housing for rentals. Rather than hitting a target, this is the problem that needs addressing. If the council and Government are serious about allowing affordable housing then restrictions on renting need to be implemented. A much more value oriented approach than simply building more.

Yes

Representation ID: 86333

Received: 21/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Noel Davis

It obvious that developers want to maximise their profits. However they achieve this by building large exopensive houses. The real need is for starter homes and 2/3 bed family homes

Yes

Representation ID: 86374

Received: 22/01/2025

Respondent: Laura Benson

Affordable housing must be at different scales. It is no good only providing small 1-2 bedroom homes that are affordable. 3-4 bedroom family homes also need to be accessible to people on lower-medium incomes.

Yes

Representation ID: 86375

Received: 22/01/2025

Respondent: Laura Benson

It is vital that new developments are fully adopted by councils to prevent profiteering by organisations such as Centrick and FirstPort who charge astronomical service charges/ground rent.

No

Representation ID: 86592

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

This Draft Policy Direct is far too weak and vague.
The problem with a housing crisis is not lack of building, it bis lack of building the type and size of homes that are needed.

Developers will always try to avoid or water down an affordable housing options because they make less money that way. The housing need is not to further enrich developers, it is to provide affordable housing.

The councils should prioritise affordable and denser housing in all cases. If there is a potential to develop a site with more sustainable and affordable housing it MUST be taken.

Yes

Representation ID: 86606

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Darrell Muffitt

Although I agree with the proposed policy close attention should be given to its implementation especially when considering the existing provision that may be available in adjacent areas that may be considered to be in a "cluster."

No

Representation ID: 86612

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Rachel Smith

The needs of the current residents of Shipston on Stour are not even being met with no hospital beds and an insufficient sewerage system that Severn Trent is regularly being called out to deal with. The issues have not been resolved and any more developments in this area will increase existing problems

No

Representation ID: 86905

Received: 31/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Arthur Hogan-Fleming

The government has not dealt with the existing fleecehold problem re almost all new estates where a management company is set up and put in the control of spivs who then charge the freeholders pretty much what they like without any freeholder say/annual meetings. No more development increasing flood risk. Need proper immigration control.

No

Representation ID: 87011

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: S Gardner

It also needs to include the views of local communities in the determination of housing type and quality.

Other

Representation ID: 87054

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Judith Corless

There should be a mixture of affordable housing. they should not have to pay additional costs such as paying for the upkeep of amenity land or extra expenses to be paid to the council should they decide to sell the part pf the house they might own.

No

Representation ID: 87267

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Julie Parry

You need more affordable houses for young people, and more affordable bungalows for older people, all with access to local transport and services.

No

Representation ID: 87313

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent:

Numbers of dwellings intended for Warwick Leam Spa seem disproportionately high relative to size of population growth and 90,000 current inhabitants.

Yes

Representation ID: 87383

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

None

Yes

Representation ID: 87566

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

I agree

No

Representation ID: 87662

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Enness

Too vauge

No

Representation ID: 87784

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Katarzyna Wielis

Often new build estates in the area are big and expensive homes and seem to ignore any sort of 'right sizing '. For example Kenilworth gates where the cheapest house was over £450k

No

Representation ID: 87809

Received: 11/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Emily Godson

While delivering new homes is important, this plan fails to prioritize accessibility to essential facilities, adequate parking, and genuinely affordable housing. Simply increasing housing numbers without ensuring residents can access shops, healthcare, schools, and employment will worsen congestion and strain local services. The plan does not define affordability in relation to local wages, meaning many will still be priced out. Existing residents, already struggling with congestion and overstretched services, see no clear benefits or commitments. Sustainable development must prioritize infrastructure, affordability, and transport solutions over just meeting housing targets. Without this, new developments risk being disconnected and unsustainable.

No

Representation ID: 88105

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: J Hall

Complete and absolute overdevelopment around Warwick for new homes. Infrastructure does not have the jobs or roads to accomodate.

No

Representation ID: 88231

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Baxter

Any develoments with public open spaces should be fully adopted by the local authority and not handed over to a third party management company who will then levy a fee on top of the council tax to maintain the land. This is grossly unfair and discriminates against the less well off who will be occupying the affordable housing stock.

No

Representation ID: 88234

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Vining

Warwick/Bearley
This site is greenbelt. It is not a new settlement but would fuse two settlements which flies in the face of the original intent of greenbelt. It is very near to SuA and as shown the gap comprises an area which was described as ‘weak greenbelt’ that is likely to be filled in due course thus ultimately fusing this settlement with SuA. The Bishopton site is therefore a better prospect, sitting astride a much more competent road (A46) and SuA Parkway. Its selection has no logic unless it was simply land put forward by landowners and entered unchecked.

No

Representation ID: 88236

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Vining

Bearley / Wilmcote Infrastructure.
Meon Vale already has consented housing which can’t be serviced properly by infrastructure because of overload of the roads on the west side of SuA. The Western relief road funding was pulled. Until funding of infrastructure is addressed as a priority a site like BW should be excluded. The Birmingham Road is undersized, with bottle necks entering town from this direction and also into and from Henley. A new settlement at any point along this route is ridiculous. The A46 has many more surrounding fields along it which could receive a new settlement more easily.

No

Representation ID: 88238

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Vining

Bearley / Wilmcote Infrastructure
Sewerage and community facilities such as doctors, shops etc would all be needed to avoid having to go to SuA which, as above, is already congested. It is well known that developers provide this last in any expansion and are not held to book for not doing so.

No

Representation ID: 88239

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Vining

How was site determined in first place when clearly unsuitable
Prone to flooding
Road Network Substandard
Poor Urban planning leading to fusing of new settlement to SuA.
Wanton approach to delivering on Greenbelt
Impact on Heritage and a conservation zone
Failure of SDC and PC to engage and consult properly and Predetermination

No

Representation ID: 88254

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Vining

Bearley/Wilmcote
The flood map shows the railway valley flooding. The low permeability of surrounding higher land is the land proposed for housing. Heavy rainstorms mean water flows across the Birmingham Road as overloaded fields shed water towards the railway, not soaking up water. Housing means the flooding will expand massively, affecting Newnham, Aston Cantlow and the already poor surrounding lowlands. The railway cutting through Wilmcote will be deluged and unusable periodically. The canal is not designed as an outlet and C&RT would not allow it. BW is in the worst position possible - uphill from many sensitive assets.

No

Representation ID: 88259

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Vining

Bearley/Wilmcote Mary Arden’s Farm.
With respect to other villages Wilmcote does hold a valuable status for Heritage and to expand the village in such a blunt manner would be disastrous and strip it of the charm which attracts tourism. Our MP is addressing the opening of MAF. With regard to flooding mentioned elsewhere, and the increased traffic coming through the village, this would leave Mary Arden's Farm vulnerable.