Q-C3.1: Do you think we should develop a carbon offsetting approach to new developments where it is demonstrated that it is not possible to achieve net carbon zero requirements on site?
No
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
- None at present.
- Q-C3.1: No because such matters are best left to national policy. - Q-C3.3: No further specific comment. Deeley Group as a business is fully committed to helping to reduce its carbon footprint and developing in sustainable locations. We do however consider that such policy should come from the national level to ensure consistency.
No answer given
Q-C3.1 suggests an expectation that at least some developers will say that net zero is not possible and that they will offer to do carbon offsetting instead. However the situation should not be an either / or. While it may be very difficult to achieve net zero, there are certain things that can be specified by planning authorities which are known to make a positive contribution to net zero, from the building materials used to the energy systems installed. It would be better to take a more nuanced approach to the issue which requires that all building companies sign up to a set of principles which minimise carbon release. After that, if offsetting is necessary it should be to latest standards and with a verified programme.
No answer given
Let us simply get on and build these generation sites with an urgency in keeping with an Emergency (that our authorities have declared). Let us move away from allowing aesthetic objections to the sites (big roads are excriciatingly ugly - but that never stops them getting built).
Although we expect means of energy efficicency within the build eg solar panels on roofs, heat recovery systems, then offset payments should be used towards installation of solar panels or any other appropiate installations on public buildings, retail parks, car parks.
There is a possible potential of further employment hubs, so ensure that planning applications include renewable energy schemes within the plans.
None at present.
We support a carbon offsetting approach to new developments where it is not possible to achieve net carbon zero requirements on site, provided that any such approach is consistent with national policy. AC Lloyd as a business is fully committed to helping to reduce its carbon footprint by developing in sustainable locations and increasingly more energy efficient buildings together with renewable energy technologies at the heart of our current product development.
No answer given
Carbon sequestration is just a method of greenwashing - hard standards need applying!
No comment / Dont know
No comment
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
Ideally building regulations would be changed to compel new developments, whether domestic dwellings or vast warehouses and factories, to have solar panels sited upon them. Given that this is currently not happening then Local Authorities such as Stratford and Warwick should have policies within their own local plans that require all new developments to have solar panels, and refuse to grant planning permission if they are not included. Further solar capacity should also be provided by requiring car parks to have solar panels over the parking areas, thereby keeping agricultural land for food production, helping to ensure the UK's food security.
No answer given
I do not think we should use greenbelt land for solar farms -
No answer given
Care must be taken to avoid developers simply making offsite scarbon offsetting costs rather than addressing issues on site. Not all land is suitable for arable reversion and careful assessment should be made on a case by case basis before decisons are made eg a fragile historic landscape may have been preserved through use as pasture but could be destroyed by modern arable and forestry methods. Re-forestation proposals should be clearly linked to the Biodiversity objectives and policies.
No answer given
Would large scale developments for energy generation be needed if solar panels were located on every suitable domestic and commercial roof? There should be a policy to encourage this. Large scale developments should not be permitted when there is a solution which has less impact on wildlife and visual amenity. The concept of "environmental net gain" in so far it embraces offsetting new development can be misleading. Habitats which have survived for many years cannot in fact be replaced overnight. Offsetting can be easily manipulated and can constitute greenwashing. Yes "environment gain" should be a primary objective but offsetting should be a genuinely last resort.
No answer given
3.38 Climate change adaptation and climate change mitigation are core threads of the NPPF via the delivery of sustainable development. 3.39 In this context, the five overarching principles of the SWLP are welcomed and supported, in particular those that relate to climate resilience, net zero, biodiversity and environmental resilience in South Warwickshire. 3.40 Taylor Wimpey published its Environment Strategy (Appendix 2) in 2021 which established objectives and targets for climate change, nature, resource consumption and waste generation up to 2030 on new developments. 3.41 The Environmental Strategy aligns with the emerging vision, objectives and principles for the SWLP and in summary Taylor Wimpey is committed to the following targets: (i) Reduce operational carbon emissions intensity by 36% by 2025 from a 2019 baseline. (ii) Reduce carbon emissions intensity from its supply chain and customer homes by 24% by 2030 from a 2019 baseline. (iii) Increase natural habitat by 10% on new sites from 2023 and include priority wildlife enhancements from 2021. (iv) Cut waste intensity by 15% by 2025 and use more recycled materials. 3.42 Taylor Wimpey has formed several partnerships with nature organisations including Hedgehog Street and Buglife to protect and enhance natural habitats in new neighbourhoods. 3.43 It is recommended that the site selection process is informed by those strategic sites which can provide climate change adaptation and climate change mitigation as 11 referred to in National Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) [Paragraph 003 Reference ID: 6-003-20140612 and Paragraph 007 Reference ID: 6-007-20140306].
No answer given
Q-C1.1: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire Option C1.1c: None - Policy should ensure roof space is utilised for renewable energy Q-C3.1 Do you think we should develop a carbon offsetting approach to new developments where it is demonstrated that it is not possible to achieve net carbon zero requirements on site? No – Leave the natural environment which has developed over decades, instead of planting regimented rows of unnatural trees. Q C4.1 Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire How can high standards to achieve net zero carbon developments be set, when there is no externally set and proper scientific standard measure?
No answer given
Carbon offsetting policies will be very important, especially to ensure that they are not abused by developers. There is no definition of offsetting in the glossary and this must be addressed.
Don’t Know – Entirely depends on the nature of the offsetting scheme. Is this just green washing such as planting trees in the wrong site which will then not be looked after and not flourish or is this an offsetting scheme which actually makes a true beneficial impact?
Q-C1.1: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire Option C1.1c: None of these Policy should ensure roof space is allocated for renewable energy production. Large warehouses have huge unused roof spaces for example which, with government led policy, could be utilised for green energy. This would mean space which could be allocated to agriculture/green belt/housing can be used for such rather than large solar/wind farms. Where land/space is in demand we need to utilise our roof and air space more effectively.
No answer given
Issue C3: Carbon Sequestration: Carbon offsetting policies will be very important, especially to ensure that they are not abused by developers. There is no definition of offsetting in the glossary and this must be addressed.
No answer given
3.56 Climate change adaptation and climate change mitigation are core threads of the NPPF via the delivery of sustainable development. 3.57 In this context, the five overarching principles of the SWLP are welcomed and supported, in particular those that relate to climate resilience, net zero, biodiversity and environmental resilience in South Warwickshire. 3.58 Taylor Wimpey published its Sustainability Supplement and ESG Addendum (2021) ‘Building Momentum’1 which established objectives and targets for climate change, nature, resource consumption and waste generation up to 2030 on new developments. 3.59 The Environmental Strategy aligns with the emerging vision, objectives and principles for the SWLP and in summary Taylor Wimpey is committed to the following targets: (i) Reduce operational carbon emissions intensity by 36% by 2025 from a 2019 baseline. (ii) Reduce carbon emissions intensity from its supply chain and customer homes by 24% by 2030 from a 2019 baseline. (iii) Increase natural habitat by 10% on new sites from 2023 and include priority wildlife enhancements from 2021. (iv) Cut waste intensity by 15% by 2025 and use more recycled materials. 3.60 Taylor Wimpey has formed several partnerships with nature organisations including Hedgehog Street and Buglife to protect and enhance natural habitats in new neighbourhoods. 3.61 It is recommended that the site selection process is informed by those strategic sites which can provide climate change adaptation and climate change mitigation as referred to in National Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) [Paragraph 003 Reference ID: 6-003-20140612 and Paragraph 007 Reference ID: 6-007-20140306]. 1 Taylor Wimpey Sustainability Supplement and ESG Addendum 2021 F.pdf
It would be appropriate to include a policy which enables developers and businesses to deliver offsetting in an alternative way, where it is demonstrated that it is not possible to achieve net carbon requirements on site. It is positive to see that the Councils are taking a pragmatic approach to carbon offsetting which recognises that it is not always possible to achieve offsetting on-site. A specific threshold for developments to be considered should be applied to ensure that an unfair and unrealistic burden is not placed on smaller sites or developers. For larger schemes, an approach which enables flexibility in delivery will also encourage innovation in how to deliver offsetting, which could have benefits across the region and further afield.
Q-C2 Response: It is positive that the Councils are seeking to ensure that the most efficient energy systems are incorporated within new development. However, including a policy requiring decentralised energy systems where viable could have the unintended consequence of stifling ambition and innovation. The Plan period covers a long timeframe and it is possible that over the lifetime of the Local Plan new technologies or concepts are developed which are superior to the current systems. In this context, Option C2b would be the most appropriate option to take forward. It encourages decentralised heating systems to be used, where possible, whilst providing flexibility for better or alternative options to be used, as and when these are pioneered.
No answer given
Issue C1: Solar and wind power: Consideration should be given to communities benefiting in terms of a reduction to their cost of electricity for the time that the development is in place, as should giving the public the opportunity to buy shares in any wind farm and get a return in electricity cost reduction. The rooves of schools, warehouses, public buildings should be equipped with solar panels, and there should be a policy that all new buildings are equipped with appropriate levels of solar panels. Carbon Sequestration: Carbon offsetting policies will be very important, especially to ensure that they are not abused by developers. There is no definition of offsetting in the glossary and this must be addressed.
No answer given
Issue C3: Carbon Sequestration: Carbon offsetting policies will be very important, especially to ensure that they are not abused by developers. There is no definition of offsetting in the glossary and this must be addressed.
No answer given
C1: Solar and wind power: Consideration should be given to communities benefiting in terms of a reduction to their cost of electricity for the time that the development is in place, as should giving the public the opportunity to buy shares in any wind farm and get a return in electricity cost reduction. The rooves of schools, warehouses, public buildings should be equipped with solar panels, and there should be a policy that all new buildings are equipped with appropriate levels of solar panels. C3: Carbon Sequestration: Carbon offsetting policies will be very important, especially to ensure that they are not abused by developers. There is no definition of offsetting in the glossary and this must be addressed.
No answer given
Issue C3: Carbon Sequestration: Carbon offsetting policies will be very important, especially to ensure that they are not abused by developers. There is no definition of offsetting in the glossary and this must be addressed.
No answer given
Issue C1: Solar and wind power: Consideration should be given to communities benefiting in terms of a reduction to their cost of electricity for the time that the development is in place, as should giving the public the opportunity to buy shares in any wind farm and get a return in electricity cost reduction. The rooves of schools, warehouses, public buildings should be equipped with solar panels, and there should be a policy that all new buildings are equipped with appropriate levels of solar panels.
No answer given
Carbon offsetting policies will be very important, especially to ensure that they are not abused by developers. There is no definition of offsetting in the glossary and this must be addressed.
No answer given
Issue C1: Solar and wind power: Consideration should be given to communities benefiting in terms of a reduction to their cost of electricity for the time that the development is in place, as should giving the public the opportunity to buy shares in any wind farm and get a return in electricity cost reduction. The rooves of schools, warehouses, public buildings should be equipped with solar panels, and there should be a policy that all new buildings are equipped with appropriate levels of solar panels.