No

Representation ID: 97300

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs June Holley

NA

Other

Representation ID: 97397

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Godwin Developments

Godwin Developments acknowledge the approach being suggested in Draft Policy Direction – 26- regarding Design Codes. It is important that the there is a District Wide
Design Code but within this there needs to be consideration given to the varying design approaches across the South Warwickshire area. It is important to note that whilst a
design approach in Leamington Spa might be considered appropriate however that same approach may not be relevant to development in Hockley Heath.

With regards to Godwin Developments land interests at Aylesbury Road, the accompanying Vision Document includes details on design principles which have helped to shape the concept masterplan.

No

Representation ID: 97478

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Spitfire Bespoke Homes

Agent: Harris Lamb

Preparation of design codes have the potential to delay determination of planning applications which could impact on the supply of housing.

Other

Representation ID: 97622

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Martin Winter

If this policy if local area design codes is adopted it should be an open process that incorporates the views of local residents and businesses. This means advertising that it is taking place to get that input.

Yes

Representation ID: 98112

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: William Davis Limited

Agent: Marrons

Draft Policy Direction 26 aligns with the NPPF, which encourages the use of design codes to provide clarity about design expectations. The policy’s commitment to a wide range of design codes, including area-wide, site-specific and densification design codes is strongly supported as it will help to deliver context-sensitive and locally appropriate design solutions.

While the policy correctly references the National Design Guide, it should also directly reference the National Model Design Code, which provides a framework for preparing local design codes. Including both will ensure the policy fully aligns with NPPF Paragraph 133 and national best practice.

Other

Representation ID: 98350

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Catesby Estates

Agent: Mr Will Whitelock

Yes, this approach is consistent with Paragraph 133 of the Framework. However, it is considered that the policy needs to response to the particular individual circumstances of a site and not be overly prescriptive. There must be flexibility within the Design Codes and Local Plan policy to allow developments to come forward in circumstances where they are not strictly in accordance with all design criteria, particularly when balancing environmental or technical considerations.

Yes

Representation ID: 98652

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: X2 New Settlement Consortium

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

Draft Policy Direction 26 aligns with the NPPF, which encourages the use of design codes to provide clarity about design expectations. The policy’s commitment to a wide range of design codes, including area-wide, site-specific and densification design codes is strongly supported as it will help to deliver context-sensitive and locally appropriate design solutions.

The Consortium is eager to work with the South Warwickshire Council’s to develop a vision and design principles for the X2 New Settlement.

Other

Representation ID: 98686

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Catesby Estates

Agent: Mr Will Whitelock

It is considered that the policy needs to respond to the particular individual circumstances of a site and not be overly prescriptive. There must be flexibility within the Design Codes and Local Plan policy to allow developments to come forward in circumstances where they are not strictly in accordance with all design criteria, particularly when balancing environmental or technical considerations.

No

Representation ID: 99209

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

Whilst we have no specific objection to the preparation of Design Codes they must be prepared in conjunction with site promoters. This is essential for the Design Code to be effective. In addition, the Design Codes must be flexible given the length of plan period. The Design Codes should not act as an obstacle to sustainable and suitable development on allocated sites

No

Representation ID: 99323

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Vistry Strategic Land - Wellesbourne

Design Codes should be developed in conjunction with the developers of the new settlements and strategic allocations.

Other

Representation ID: 99620

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Anthony Cocker

Design codes will need to be changed very substantially in order to meet the requirement of the previous sections on zero carbon and climate resilient buildings. Current design codes can be interpreted in ways which would thwart the ambition in those sections.

Yes

Representation ID: 100379

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

NA

No

Representation ID: 100528

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Burgess

Sterile design codes enforced by junior and inexperienced planning officers do nothing more than stifle any form of creativity and reduce all construction to tick box exercises designed to meet the codes at the lowest possible cost.

The evidence provided from the developments of the past 10 or 15 years suggest that there needs to be a fundamental change in the way that planning departments are run and staffed. The policy of producing ever more guidelines that are then enforced irrespective of circumstances has clearly failed.

No

Representation ID: 100703

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Catesby Estates

Agent: Mr Will Whitelock

It is considered that the policy needs to respond to the particular individual circumstances of a site and not be overly prescriptive. There must be flexibility within the Design Codes and Local Plan policy to allow developments to come forward in circumstances where they are not strictly in accordance with all design criteria, particularly when balancing environmental or technical considerations.

No

Representation ID: 100907

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Vistry Strategic Land - Wellesbourne

Design codes should be developed in conjunction with the developers of the new settlements and strategic allocations, but their preparation should not delay the preparation and submission of planning applications.

No

Representation ID: 101019

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Rowington Landowner Consortium

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

The draft policy proposes four types of design codes: area-wide and densification codes are intended for adoption alongside the SWLP, while the site-specific and settlement-specific codes will be developed during the plan period. Introducing a separate densification code could add complexity and potentially conflict with other considerations, such as environmental and heritage impacts. Focusing on site-specific codes may provide the required flexibility, ensuring that density decisions align with the unique context of each development. Additionally, developing multiple codes simultaneously could strain resources and delay planning applications, whereby interim guidelines during the preparation of comprehensive codes may help mitigate potential delays.

No

Representation ID: 101130

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mac Mic Group

Agent: Marrons

Mic Mac Group offers its support for design codes generally. Site specific design codes for smaller sites are however not at this point necessary.

Yes

Representation ID: 101186

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land Management Limited

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

Draft Policy Direction 26 aligns with the NPPF, which encourages the use of design codes to provide clarity about design expectations. The policy’s commitment to a wide range of design codes, including area-wide, site-specific and densification design codes is strongly supported as it will help to deliver context-sensitive and locally appropriate design solutions.

While the policy correctly references the National Design Guide, it should also directly reference the National Model Design Code, which provides a framework for preparing local design codes. Including both will ensure the policy fully aligns with NPPF Paragraph 133 and national best practice.

Other

Representation ID: 101408

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: caroline owen

While Cala are generally supportive of the intention of preparation of design codes for geographical areas, it is stressed that these need to be prepared in consultation with key stakeholders, including those with an interest in delivering the developments.

No

Representation ID: 101410

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land / Ashberry Strategic Land

Agent: Marrons

The policy’s commitment to a wide range of design codes, including area-wide, site-specific and densification design codes is strongly supported as it will help to deliver context-sensitive and locally appropriate design solutions.

While the policy correctly references the National Design Guide, it should also directly reference the National Model Design Code, which provides a framework for preparing local design codes. Including both will ensure the policy fully aligns with NPPF Paragraph 133 and national best practice. In addition, the production of design codes should be done in collaboration with developers, landowners, and promotors.

Yes

Representation ID: 101465

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land

Agent: Marrons

b. Draft Policy Direction 26 aligns with the NPPF, which encourages the use of design codes to provide clarity about design expectations. The policy’s commitment to a wide range of design codes, including area-wide, site-specific and densification design codes is strongly supported as it will help to deliver context-sensitive and locally appropriate design solutions.

While the policy correctly references the National Design Guide, it should also directly reference the National Model Design Code, which provides a framework for preparing local design codes. Including both will ensure the policy fully aligns with NPPF Paragraph 133 and national best practice.

Yes

Representation ID: 101533

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Alderley Holdings Trust

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

Draft Policy Direction 26 aligns with the NPPF, which encourages the use of design codes to provide clarity about design expectations. The policy’s commitment to a wide range of design codes, including area-wide, site-specific and densification design codes is strongly supported as it will help to deliver context-sensitive and locally appropriate design solutions.

While the policy correctly references the National Design Guide, it should also directly reference the National Model Design Code, which provides a framework for preparing local design codes. Including both will ensure the policy fully aligns with NPPF Paragraph 133 and national best practice.

No

Representation ID: 101692

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the area

Yes

Representation ID: 101929

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

Agree

Design codes to be approved by local Design Panel. The Design Panel will be permanent

Other

Representation ID: 102203

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: IM Land 1 Limited

Agent: Turley

75. IM Land supports Draft Policy Direction 26 so long as it accords with national guidance, including the National Design Guide and the National Model Design Code.

No

Representation ID: 102299

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: BDW Trading Limited

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

The draft policy proposes four types of design codes: area-wide and densification codes are intended for adoption alongside the SWLP, while the site-specific and settlement-specific codes will be developed during the plan period. Introducing a separate densification code could add complexity and potentially conflict with other considerations, such as environmental and heritage impacts. Focusing on site-specific codes may provide the required flexibility, ensuring that density decisions align with the unique context of each development. Additionally, developing multiple codes simultaneously could strain resources and delay planning applications, whereby interim guidelines during the preparation of comprehensive codes may help mitigate potential delays.

Yes

Representation ID: 102356

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough

Agent: Marrons

Draft Policy Direction 26 aligns with the NPPF, which encourages the use of design codes to provide clarity about design expectations. The policy’s commitment to a wide range of design codes, including area-wide, site-specific and densification design codes is strongly supported as it will help to deliver context-sensitive and locally appropriate design solutions.

While the policy correctly references the National Design Guide, it should also directly reference the National Model Design Code, which provides a framework for preparing local design codes. Including both will ensure the policy fully aligns with NPPF Paragraph 133 and national best practice.

Other

Representation ID: 102368

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey Strategic Land

Agent: Turley

Taylor Wimpey supports the Draft Policy Direction in principle and emphasises the opportunity presented by the Site at land at north Leamington as demonstrated by the Vision Document. Further detail in respect of the Site is submitted via the Call for Sites exercise being undertaken in parallel with the Regulation 18 consultation.

Yes

Representation ID: 102435

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hill Residential

Agent: Turley

Hill Residential has no objection to this policy. It is likely that a site of ‘Hatton Villages’ scale will require its own, focused design code.

Yes

Representation ID: 102604

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Sally Jones

Whilst design codes are a good idea in that they can help the development to enhance the local area and reflect the local historic environment, green infrastructure also plays an important part in enhancing areas and contributing to carbon reduction.
Poor design tends to be present in places with an already poor environment (eg Bidford on Avon) whereas quality design tends to be present in places with good quality environments (eg Conservation Areas). Let’s have it throughout the area.