Preferred Options 2025

No

Representation ID: 107764

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land to the west of Southam Road, Long Itchington

Agent: Savills

This policy proposes that development provides space for growth through allotments, orchards and gardens however the policy does not set a threshold for what type and size of development should seek to provide this space, it is also not clear how much space will be required. We consider that the policy should be amended to provided more flexibility as not all development will be able to provide onsite allotments, orchards and/or community gardens and consideration on the impact on site capacity and viability is necessary.

No

Representation ID: 107765

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land to the west of Southam Road, Long Itchington

Agent: Savills

We object to draft Policy Direction 45 as it is not supported by sufficient evidence to designate Areas of Restraint. We also note that further evidence is being produced to inform the landscape character of sites and is expected to be published with the Regulation 19. It is unclear whether new areas of restraint are being proposed in Warwick District and where these will be located. Therefore, the draft policy is not considered to be justified, as required in NPPF paragraph 36.

No

Representation ID: 107766

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land to the west of Southam Road, Long Itchington

Agent: Savills

We object to draft Policy Direction 47 as it is not supported by sufficient evidence to designate Special Landscape Areas (SLAs). We also note that further evidence is being produced to inform the landscape character of sites and is expected to be published with the Regulation 19. It is unclear whether new SLAs are being proposed and where these will be located. Therefore, the draft policy is not considered to be justified, as required in NPPF paragraph 36.

Other

Representation ID: 107767

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land to the west of Southam Road, Long Itchington

Agent: Savills

We note that further evidence is being produced to inform the landscape character of sites and is expected to be published with the Regulation 19 SWLP. We withhold comment until this evidence has been made available. The policy should be clear that it is not just ‘local need’ but District wide need which would outweigh landscape harm.

Other

Representation ID: 107768

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land to the west of Southam Road, Long Itchington

Agent: Savills

Long Itchington is a sustainable settlement suitable for accommodating housing growth within the plan period. We consider that additional areas / sites outside of Strategic Growth Locations should be allocated for development that can come forward in the short to medium term.
Across all sites assessed in Part B, the median score was 45. We note a lower score is considered better and therefore the site ID 334 score reflects the most positive assessment of the three sites. In comparison to sites assessed in and around Long Itchington, Site 334 (north) is the joint lowest scoring parcel which we consider reflects that it is one of the most suitable locations for housing growth adjacent to Long Itchington.
In the ‘Settlement Design Analysis’ (January 2023), Site IDs 334 and 335 are category ‘B’ out of 9 categories and Site ID 336 is category C, ‘A’ being the best connectivity to a settlement. Therefore, the HELAA recognises the sites, particularly 224 and 335, are in a sustainable location.
The only potential concern raised in the HELAA relates to potential heritage impact. The Sites are within an area assessed as ‘Red’ in the HELAA and Heritage and Settlement Sensitivity Assessment (2022). CSA Heritage has produced a Heritage Note (February 2025) which is submitted with this response. CSA consider that the assessment is not consistent with the heritage sensitivity of the Site due to the incorrect assessment of the Site’s relationship with the Long Itchington Conservation Area. The ‘Red’ score does not take into account the presence of woodland between the Sites and the Conservation Area which differentiates it from land assessed further west. We therefore consider that the assessment of the Site, and subsequent score applied in the HELAA, should be amended.

Other

Representation ID: 107769

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land to the west of Southam Road, Long Itchington

Agent: Savills

The SWLP is seeking to allocate strategic sites. Bellway has no objection to this approach but considers that the SWLP needs to be clear that additional sites which are not in these strategic locations but adjacent to other sustainable settlements in the Districts will be supported and may be allocated in the Part 2 plan.
Long Itchington is identified as a Category 1 (most sustainable) village for sustainability in the adopted Stratford on Avon Core Strategy. Long Itchington is sustainable and, although it may not be an appropriate location for strategic scaled growth, it will be able to accommodate major housing development. Settlements which are not currently proposed to be the subject of ‘strategic’ growth in the SWLP should not be dismissed as unsuitable for any level of growth across the plan period. The SWLP should be planning for all scales of growth.
The Sustainability Appraisal (SA Preferred Options) only assesses the Strategic Growth Locations but we consider that all sustainable settlements, such as Long Itchington, should be assessed for their potential to accommodate growth.

Other

Representation ID: 107791

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land to the west of Southam Road, Long Itchington

Agent: Savills

Bellway supports the reduction of water demand through water efficiency measures. The requirements for enhanced water efficiency requirements beyond the requirements of the Building Regulations need to be appropriately evidenced.
Achieving a water use target of 100l/p/d for homes is considered achievable, as is the provider of rain harvesting water butts. However, the provision of greywater recycling systems needs to adequately consider the technical feasibility and viability of this type of system. This is only likely to be suitable for larger, commercial development and will not be suitable for residential development due to constraints over space required for storage, treatment requirements and cost.
Achieving 4 BREEAM credits for non-residential development is also likely to pose technical and viability issues.
Achieving 4 credits requires water demand to be reduce by 50% and would require the use of rainwater harvesting and greywater use.
While very large development may have the scale to overcome the technical issues noted above, smaller development will likely have similar issues around the need for greywater use, i.e. space, treatment and cost.
While broadly supportive, it is recommended the Council give further consideration to the technical feasibility and costs of this Policy as part of the next stage of Plan preparation to ensure any proposals are feasible and viable.