Progress Of the TiA NDP Housing Group so far July 2015 presented by Mike Sanders

1. Housing Group Presentation
An Update of where we are Now

2. Changes to the Housing Stock Between 1991 and 2011
 The number of houses increased by about 80 to a total of 1290. [ In addition
there are 60 mobile homes ]
 The number of 4 plus bedroom houses increased from 515 to 750
 The number of smaller houses fell by 160 to 480

3.  Since 1999 Planning permissions have been granted for:
• 55 new houses ( 23 were conversions of existing buildings – mainly farm
buildings); and
• 40 new houses replacing existing homes; and
• 100-120 significant extensions to existing houses
 Of the 55 new houses 20 were outside the main settlements

5. The survey threw up some interesting results about the Sort of Houses that
should be built !
There were Positive views about
 Family homes
 Small/Starter homes
 Retirement housing
There were Negative views about
 Flats
 Affordable housing (including social housing)
 Large houses
There were also comments about the need for more affordable homes

6.  Residents want to retain facilities such as shops and post offices, but these are
at risk with an ageing and static population (Only 20% of the population in the
age group 20-45, compared to 37% for the District)
 The Green Belt means development must be constrained to limited infilling,
brownfield sites and meeting local needs. So, the number of new homes that
could be built is likely to be small.
 We can’t do anything about high house prices, other than encourage affordable
housing

7.  Subject to green Belt policies, and where appropriate, new
homes should be smaller making it easier for
a) Younger families to stay, or to move in.
b) For older residents to down size and stay.
 Chaddesley Corbett NDP, also in the Green Belt has such a
policy for similar reasons
 What does this look like in each of the three LSVs?

8.  Planning permissions already for 21 houses (Cank Farm and Doctors Close) .
 The new homes at Cank Farm should be more modest in size and include some
affordable homes
 Little scope elsewhere for infilling
 So, fits with broad approach

9.  Different from Tanworth and Earlswood. The community is almost wholly large
houses with large gardens and any new development would need to fi in with
that.
 The only scope for development is infilling the odd gap in road frontages (and
these will be large houses) – unless backland development is acceptable
 One exception, where smaller housing might be appropriate, is the site behind
the pub and bounded by the railway and Wood End Lane. This needs further
examination

10.  The village is mostly two long lines of ribbon development separated by the
lakes and open land east of Springbrook Lane.
 Only one significant possibility for limited infilling is a site towards the southern
end of The Common. It is however Trust Land owned by the Parish council)
 There has been some backland development behind Malthouse Lane and the
NDP will need to have a view about further such development

11.  Replacing smaller homes with new larger homes is likely to continue and the
NDP could have policies about the scale of increases in the size of houses – to
minimize further losses of smaller homes. This needs to be looked at further .
 The Environment group are mapping the key elements of the existing character
of the Parish which can form the basis of design policies to apply to new
buildings
 These can be extended to cover any future proposals for the conversion of farm
buildings and brown field sites

12.  Identify the pros and cons of defining built up area boundaries
 Review the site in Wood end
 Formulate a policy on backland development
 Review the site in The Common
 Discuss with the District Council and the Warwickshire Rural Community council
their views on whether there is a local need for affordable housing bearing in
mind that Cank farm may have to include some
 Policy on redevelopment of farm buildings