Q-T4: Please provide suggestions for how smart cities technologies could be supported in South Warwickshire
No answer given
Q-T1: ‘20 minute neighbourhoods’ or the ’15 minute city’ relate to the creation of compact connected places where people can meet their everyday needs within a short walk or a cycle. The TCPA note that the re are multiple benefits to this approach to development, such as improved mental and physical health, reduction in traffic and improvement in air quality, as well as helping local businesses. We would support inclusion of a policy referencing the principles of a 20 minute neighbourhood or other similar approach; however we would caution against being too prescriptive.
No answer given
Q T1: Option T1b; Include reference to the principles of a 20-minute neighbourhood or other similar design approach (e.g. Building for a Healthy Life) within a broader overarching policy. IM Land are generally supportive of the inclusion of guidance in respect of 20-minute neighbourhood principles in the SWLP. Indeed this is reflected in their proposals for land off Rumbush Lane, Earlswood. However, this should not be a policy requirement as the composition and functionality of a neighbourhood is in constant flux. IM land therefore support Option T1b, but these must refer to and reflect the principles are already established in the NPPF, PPG, the National Design Guide, which should inform and guide the SWLP. Whilst the NPPF does not refer directly to 20-minute neighbourhoods, the SWLP will need to be consistent with national policy to enable the delivery of sustainable development – therefore by virtue of the test of soundness, the SWLP will embed the principles of 20-minute neighbourhoods in its strategic and non-strategic policies.
No answer given
Q-T1: ‘20 minute neighbourhoods’ or the ’15 minute city’ relate to the creation of compact connected places where people can meet their everyday needs within a short walk or a cycle. The TCPA note that there are multiple benefits to this approach to development, such as improved mental and physical health, reduction in traffic and improvement in air quality, as well as helping local businesses. We would support inclusion of a policy referencing the principles of a 20 minute neighbourhood or other similar approach; however we would caution against being too prescriptive in the policy wording.
No answer given
Q-T1: South Warwickshire is predominantly rural in character and as identified within the SWLP, the predominant form of transport is the private car. It would therefore be unrealistic to expect that all development will function as 20 minute neighbourhoods, as is more commonly seen in urban areas within other parts of the UK which benefit from significant public transport infrastructure. As recognised within the SWLP, in rural areas, a network of villages could collectively provide for the day-to-day needs of its residents, rather than a 20- minute neighbourhood approach. The SWLP should seek to identify sites for housing across the Plan area including in the rural areas, such as the site to the north of Tailor’s Lane in Upper Quinton. Policies should be developed which support new development in these areas which also enhance pedestrian and cycle connectivity and the provision of electric vehicle charging, to encourage more sustainable modes of travel. The proposed development at Tailor’s Lane would provide improved access to the PRoW network within Quinton, through new footpath connections within the site and connected to the public footpath to the north/ north-east. ‘Fast-charge’ electric vehicle charging points would also be provided to all new homes as standard, to promote more sustainable alternatives for private travel, to access facilities within the local villages to serve the daily needs of residents.
No answer given
Issue – T3: Support Option T3a: Include a policy encouraging more sustainable road-based transport for businesses. The problems with the strategic road network in the sub-region are long standing and well known. All the authorities must collaborate to address these issues. Duty to cooperate response: The transport network in the sub-region is highly connected and development on one part of the network can have major implications for other authorities further along the network. All authorities will need to work together to ensure improvements to the network and development along the network are to the benefit of all. Depending on what is proposed in the South Warwickshire Local Plan there may be cross boundary impacts that need to be considered.
No answer given
Q-T1: Terra believe that Option T1b would be most appropriate for the Local Plan, particularly if the Councils opt to introduce new settlements through the Plan. Terra agree with the principle of exploring the ‘20-minute neighbourhood’, particularly in light of the Councils’ climate emergencies. This will be most appropriate when applied to new settlements as they provide the opportunity to capitalise on the existing surrounds as well as incorporate new principles such as the 20 minute neighbourhood. Whereas, for existing settlements, it may provide more difficult to “retro-fit” the 20-minute neighbourhood principles.
No answer given
Issue T1: 20-minute neighbourhoods: Clear design or master planning of major developments is vital to maximise connectivity and minimise walking distances for residents to key infrastructure such as shops, schools and doctors, right from the early design drawings. Sadly, previous haphazard developments have not done this.
No answer given
Issue T1: 20-minute neighbourhoods: Clear design or master planning of major developments is vital to maximise connectivity and minimise walking distances for residents to key infrastructure such as shops, schools and doctors, right from the early design drawings. Sadly, previous haphazard developments have not done this.
No answer given
Issue T1: 20-minute neighbourhoods Q-T1: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire In an ideal world all those people who want to, should be able to access a range of local services and facilities – a shop, a pub, a school, a bus or train and employment opportunities – within 10 minutes. In reality very few people in the South Warwickshire Area can do this, and there is little which can be done to improve the situation. At present some 45% of the population in Stratford upon Avon District live in the rural south and east (Inspectors InterimReport, March 2015). Almost all of these live more than 10 minutes from local facilities. A large number of those living in the Main Rural Centres also live more than 10 minutes walk from key services because settlements have not grown out evenly from an obvious ‘centre’, and no longer benefit from local shops in residential areas. In Warwick District the same is true, although it is less pronounced as more people live in the urban areas.In other responses to this Paper Rosconn Strategic Land clients have supported a dispersed approach to the distribution of development, with market and affordable housing directed towards a wide range of settlements to support both the housing needs arising from those settlements and also to support the settlements themselves. Just because the 20 minute neighbourhood cannot be achieved does not mean these areas are not suitable for development. It is unrealistic to seek development in accordance with the 20 minute neighbourhoods in rural south Warwickshire and as such Rosconn Strategic Land clients would support Option T1a: Include no policy on the principles of the 20-minute neighbourhood for new development.
No answer given
Issue T1:20-minute neighbourhoods Option T1b: We consider that there should not be a specific blanket approach to a policy on the principles of the 20-minute neighbourhood for new development. We fully acknowledge the benefits of achieving a 20-minute neighbourhood but if applied stringently, this requirement could effectively rule out many sites, which otherwise could come forward to assist the council in meeting its housing requirement. Option b therefore is considered the most appropriate option to allow flexibility of the approach and to allow site specifics to be taken into account. Issue T2: Sustainable transport accessibility across South Warwickshire Q-T2a. We consider that a policy which takes a hierarchical approach in terms of prioritizing transport infrastructure should be taken. This would include lowering of car parking standards for areas where there are good/active public transport links and include opportunities to use existing green and blue infrastructure as potential active travel options. This approach would be consistent with chapter 9 of the Framework which encourages the planning system to actively manage patterns of growth to support the objectives of promoting walking, cycling and public transport and assisting with environmental gain.
No answer given
Q-T1: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire Paragraph 110 of the Framework advises that in assessing sites that may be allocated for development in plans, it should be ensured that appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes can be taken up, and that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved from all users. Therefore, it is considered that Option T1b would be most appropriate. It is considered that the new homes at land at Warwick Road, Kenilworth will comply with the 20-minute neighbourhood concept. The Vision Document sets out that the Site benefits from the existing footway provision that runs along the western side of Warwick Road adjacent to the Site. This connects to the wider footway networks that provide journeys to Kenilworth and Leek Wootton to the south. The adjacent neighbourhood to the north (known as ‘Castle End’) includes essential local services, including a post office and St John’s Primary School within a 15-minute walk. National Cycle Route 52 passes through Kenilworth and runs from Warwick to the south to Loughborough to the north. The cycle networks can be accessed via Rouncil Lane, which is a 4 minute cycle ride north of the Site along Warwick Road. The whole of Kenilworth is accessible by a 5km or around a 20-minute cycle distance. The Site is also located within 500m (or 8-minute walk) of bus stops located on Warwick Road. Services from these stops connect to Hatton, Kenilworth and Warwick. In addition, here are further bus stops located at the Kenilworth Gyratory, approximately 700m (or 12-minute walk) from the site. Services from these stops connect the site to Coventry (including University of Warwick and Coventry Railway Station) and Royal Leamington Spa. Q-T2: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire L&Q Estates are supportive of Option T2a as a hierarchical approach in terms of prioritising transport infrastructure for those living in rural areas and urban areas would be most appropriate. In particular, we are supportive of exploring opportunities to use existing green and blue infrastructure as potential active travel options. This approach is consistent with Paragraph 110 of the Framework, which advises that in assessing sites that may be allocated for development in plans, it should be ensured that appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes can be taken up, and that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved from all users. Warwick Road to the east of the Site is the solely adopted highway frontage with the Site, and hence all points of access for both non-motorised and motorised users should be taken from this highway. The majority of facilities and services (including public transport services) are located to the north of the Site in Kenilworth. Therefore, pedestrian and cycle access is proposed to be provided to the north of the site. The access will have footpaths on either side of the road, linking into the existing and improved footpath network beyond the Site to ensure good and convenient pedestrian links to facilities and bus stops to the north.
No answer given
Q-T1: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire 2.55 Ellis Machinery would support Option T1a. This option is more appropriate to reflect the context of specific locations and places. ISSUE T2: Sustainable transport accessibility across South Warwickshire Q-T2: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire 2.56 Ellis Machinery is supportive of Option T2a as a hierarchical approach in terms of prioritising transport infrastructure for those living in rural areas and urban areas would be most appropriate.
No answer given
Issue T1: 20-minute neighbourhoods: Clear design or master planning of major developments is vital to maximise connectivity and minimise walking distances for residents to key infrastructure such as shops, schools and doctors, right from the early design drawings. Sadly, previous haphazard developments have not done this.
No answer given
Issue T1: 20-minute neighbourhoods: Clear design or master planning of major developments is vital to maximise connectivity and minimise walking distances for residents to key infrastructure such as shops, schools and doctors, right from the early design drawings. Sadly, previous haphazard developments have not done this.
No answer given
The carbon emission reduction targets of both councils mean having a spatial strategy along existing sustainable transport infrastructure (e.g. railways). To make new developments less car-dependent they need to be spatially placed where existing infrastructure is already available and where it has the potential to be extended. This infrastructure must be sustainable. • Support development that facilitates the use of sustainable modes of transport. • An integrated public transport system must be developed, including regular subsidised buses which all residents, including those on low income, can afford, and rail shuttles and/or very light rail transport, and safe cycling connectivity designed into the new settlements. • Active travel infrastructure: cycle-racks and cycle storage should be allocated to the proposed houses, schools, commercial and community hubs, etc. and throughout the development and the inclusion of e-cargo bikes which can be used by residents should be also considered. • Green footways/footpaths should be provided away from highway roads and inside the development to connect and give a sense of community and place.
No answer given
Issue T1: 20-minute neighbourhoods: Clear design or master planning of major developments is vital to maximise connectivity and minimise walking distances for residents to key infrastructure such as shops, schools and doctors, right from the early design drawings. Sadly, previous haphazard developments have not done this.
No answer given
Q-T1: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire: Response: The Consultation Document sets out the principles of ’20-minute neighbourhoods’ – ie the concept that opportunities for people to meet their day to day needs within a 20 minute journey from home (10 minutes there and 10 minutes back) using walking and cycling as a realistic alternative to the private car. Issue T1 looks at how the SWLP could use this concept in policy to create sustainable patterns of development. As discussed above, the concept has merit when looking at the creation of sustainable neighbourhoods and sustainable rural networks of villages and smaller settlements. It is a useful aspiration and guide that can inform the design of new communities and new neighbourhoods and the use of 20-minute neighbourhoods to guide development design is supported. However, we would have reservations about a policy approach which required the principles of 20-minute neighbourhoods to be delivered in all development proposals. We would therefore support option T1b, which referenced the principles in a broader policy setting out picking up the sustainable characteristics of new development. Clearly, we would reserve a position to be able to comment on the detail of such a policy in a draft SWLP.
No answer given
Option T2b: Wellesbourne Matters does not support a transport policy which takes a hierarchical approach. All transport modes (including air transport) are equally valid when a user’s prevailing circumstances are taken into account. A user might elect to take a half-hour journey by electric aircraft between Wellesbourne and Gloucester rather than using bus and train for the same journey. With regard to question Q-T3: Option T3a: Wellesbourne Matters not only supports a policy encouraging more sustainable road-based transport for businesses, it also strongly supports a policy to encourage more sustainable air-transport. There is an emerging concept of the ‘Middle(Air) Mile’ whereby electric cargo aircraft can take an ever-increasing volume of trunked freight off the roads entirely. This however will not be possible without a network of suitable hard-surface runways strategically located near every major town and city. With regard to question Q-T5: Wellesbourne Matters supports the desire to have a well-connected South Warwickshire. It is an old, but still pertinent observation that “A mile of road or rail takes you a mile away, a mile of runway can take you everywhere in the world!” A hard-surface runway at Wellesbourne guarantees that it will be extremely well-connected, both to national as well as international networks.
No answer given
QT1 Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire Claverdon considers that the transport section should be the single biggest criterion in choosing preferred options should have had a significant larger part of the consultation. This should be treated as an infrastructure issue There should be a much more significant discussion about the rail and bus services to the subregion including an assessment of the quality of the services and how improvements in those services can be realigned. QT3 As per comments for QT1
No answer given
Q-T1: National policy does not currently require all developments in all locations to achieve Building for a Healthy Life accreditation or endorse the principles of a 20 minute neighborhood. The connectivity and context of developments can be determined on a site by site basis.
Long term policy should aim towards the introduction of new DRT options in coming years. For example, cycle hire and electric scooter schemes in town centres, digital travel assistants providing live travel information, digital bus stops with live information, e-cargo bikes, incread EV charging and more. This approach will furtureproof for transport developments that are already being used in the region and should be extended into these ditsrict in the near future.
Q-T1: A combination of T1b & T1c. I would like to see recognition and acknowledgement of the desire for a 20 min neighbourhood, but it may not always be the right option to action Q-T2: The partnership is concerned that the current WCC transport plan is very high level and reccomend that localised plans willcome forwards to priortise connected travel options Q-T5: Policy should aligh with already consulted strategy documents at both District and County Level, such as LTP4 to further support the delivered of already priorities schemes in Stratford Upon Avon Town. These policies should also provide clairty on how Distrcit and County authorities plan to work toegther to deliver well connected places. Any hierarchical policy should de priorities car use and work towards buisness models for the Distrct Council that are less reliant on car parking income.
No answer given
2.27 20-minute neighbourhoods (T1) 2.27.1 The concept of 20-minute neighbourhoods is supported but policies relating to this should recognise the importance of choosing the right location in the first place and making existing settlements more self-contained, i.e. those with high quality public transport (rail and high frequency bus corridors), leisure, education services and for access to higher order services and employment. The concept should also be applied across all suitable settlements, rather than being restricted to areas of new development. The Local Plan should explore the potential for encouraging 20-minute neighbourhoods across the plan area. This means greater granularity in relation to the spatial strategy will also be required. 2.27.2 Option T1b, which includes reference to the principles of a 20-minute neighbourhood within a broader overarching policy, is supported. 2.27.3 It is noted that reference is also made to ‘similar’ design approaches, e.g. Building for a Healthy Life, such approaches would be complimentary to the 20-minute neighbourhood approach but would only relate to new development. The 20-minute neighbourhood concept has potential to be applied at the settlement level (through a top-down approach) – including the retrofitting of facilities and services to address any existing shortfalls. Building for Healthy Life is primarily concerned with how new development can be integrated into existing settlements (bottom-up approach). The London Borough of Newham provides an example of where a strategic approach is being taken to the application of the 20-minute neighbourhood concept across the plan area. 2.28 Sustainable Transport (T2 and T5) 2.28.1 Two options are presented T2a envisages changes to parking standards – with less provision in those areas with good active/public transport links, such as the main urban centres. T2b appears to encourage the take up of more sustainable forms of transport, without associated restrictions on car parking. Given the rural nature of much of the plan area it is suggested that car parking restrictions are not appropriate for much of the area. The approach under T2b is therefore considered appropriate. 2.28.2 T5 asks for any additional comments about a well-connected South Warwickshire. Directing development to locations that have access to a range of services and facilities and public transport that are close to the main urban centres and planned employment growth will help achieve the desired outcome. It is considered that Harbury represents such a location.
No answer given
Q-T1: In an ideal world all those people who want to, should be able to access a range of local services and facilities – a shop, a pub, a school, a bus or train and employment opportunities – within 10 minutes. In reality very few people in the South Warwickshire Area can do this, and there is little which can be done to improve the situation. At present some 45% of the population in Stratford upon Avon District live in the rural south and east (Inspectors Interim Report, March 2015). Almost all of these live more than 10 minutes from local facilities. A large number of those living in the Main Rural Centres also live more than 10 minutes walk from key services because settlements have not grown out evenly from an obvious ‘centre’, and no longer benefit from local shops in residential areas. In Warwick District the same is true, although it is less pronounced as more people live in the urban areas. In other responses to this Paper Stansgate clients have supported a dispersed approach to the distribution of development, with market and affordable housing directed towards a wide range of settlements to support both the housing needs arising from those settlements and also to support the settlements themselves. Just because the 20 minute neighbourhood cannot be achieved does not mean these areas are not suitable for development. It is unrealistic to seek development in accordance with the 20 minute neighbourhoods in rural south Warwickshire and as such Stansgate clients would support Option T1a: Include no policy on the principles of the 20-minute neighbourhood for new development.
No answer given
Q-T1 55. As a point of clarification for paragraph 4.2.1(d), and although reference is made to the TCPA’s Guide to 20 Minute Neighbourhoods, there needs to be clarity that the 20-minute time period is for a single journey and not a return journey. The only specific example of a 10-minute journey both out and back equating to 20 minutes is in Melbourne. 56. Other than for new communities, it is difficult to achieve a 20-minute neighbourhood for extensions to Main Settlements or Smaller Settlement Locations because the day-to-day facilities are not always available with the immediate area. A typical example of this is a secondary school which are not a high frequency type of facility. The critical point is that there is good access to a range of day-to-day facilities on foot and cycle and, if appropriate, higher order facilities by public transport. Q-T2 57. Richborough Estates is supportive of policies that support sustainable and active travel options. A hierarchical approach would, however, include the increasing role of mobility through technology and different modes of travel. For example, the role of the internet in meaning people do not actually need to travel to work or shops should be fully considered alongside e-scooters and e-bikes as reducing the effort needed for people to use active travel options, which more people are more willing to travel a longer distance compared to mechanical scooters and bikes.
No answer given
Q-T1 57. As a point of clarification for paragraph 4.2.1(d), and although reference is made to the TCPA’s Guide to 20 Minute Neighbourhoods, there needs to be clarity that the 20-minute time period is for a single journey and not a return journey. The only specific example of a 10-minute journey both out and back equating to 20 minutes is in Melbourne. 58. Other than for new communities, it is difficult to achieve a 20-minute neighbourhood for extensions to Main Settlements or Smaller Settlement Locations because the day-to-day facilities are not always available with the immediate area. A typical example of this is a secondary school which are not a high frequency type of facility. The critical point is that there is good access to a range of day-to-day facilities on foot and cycle and, if appropriate, higher order facilities by public transport. Q-T2 59. Richborough Estates is supportive of policies that support sustainable and active travel options. A hierarchical approach would, however, include the increasing role of mobility through technology and different modes of travel. For example, the role of the internet in meaning people do not actually need to travel to work or shops should be fully considered alongside e-scooters and e-bikes as reducing the effort needed for people to use active travel options, which more people are more willing to travel a longer distance compared to mechanical scooters and bikes.
No answer given
Q-T1 57. As a point of clarification for paragraph 4.2.1(d), and although reference is made to the TCPA’s Guide to 20 Minute Neighbourhoods, there needs to be clarity that the 20-minute time period is for a single journey and not a return journey. The only specific example of a 10-minute journey both out and back equating to 20 minutes is in Melbourne. 58. Other than for new communities, it is difficult to achieve a 20-minute neighbourhood for extensions to Main Settlements or Smaller Settlement Locations because the day-to-day facilities are not always available with the immediate area. A typical example of this is a secondary school which are not a high frequency type of facility. The critical point is that there is good access to a range of day-to-day facilities on foot and cycle and, if appropriate, higher order facilities by public transport. Q-T2 59. Richborough Estates is supportive of policies that support sustainable and active travel options. A hierarchical approach would, however, include the increasing role of mobility through technology and different modes of travel. For example, the role of the internet in meaning people do not actually need to travel to work or shops should be fully considered alongside e-scooters and e-bikes as reducing the effort needed for people to use active travel options, which more people are more willing to travel a longer distance compared to mechanical scooters and bikes.
No answer given
Q-T1 54. As a point of clarification for paragraph 4.2.1(d), and although reference is made to the TCPA’s Guide to 20 Minute Neighbourhoods, there needs to be clarity that the 20-minute time period is for a single journey and not a return journey. The only specific example of a 10-minute journey both out and back equating to 20 minutes is in Melbourne. 55. Other than for new communities, it is difficult to achieve a 20-minute neighbourhood for extensions to Main Settlements or Smaller Settlement Locations because the day-to-day facilities are not always available with the immediate area. A typical example of this is a secondary school which are not a high frequency type of facility. The critical point is that there is good access to a range of day-to-day facilities on foot and cycle and, if appropriate, higher order facilities by public transport. Q-T2 56. Richborough Estates is supportive of policies that support sustainable and active travel options. A hierarchical approach would, however, include the increasing role of mobility through technology and different modes of travel. For example, the role of the internet in meaning people do not actually need to travel to work or shops should be fully considered alongside e-scooters and e-bikes as reducing the effort needed for people to use active travel options, which more people are more willing to travel a longer distance compared to mechanical scooters and bikes.
No answer given
Q-T1 55. As a point of clarification for paragraph 4.2.1(d), and although reference is made to the TCPA’s Guide to 20 Minute Neighbourhoods, there needs to be clarity that the 20-minute time period is for a single journey and not a return journey. The only specific example of a 10-minute journey both out and back equating to 20 minutes is in Melbourne. 56. Other than for new communities, it is difficult to achieve a 20-minute neighbourhood for extensions to Main Settlements or Smaller Settlement Locations because the day-to-day facilities are not always available with the immediate area. A typical example of this is a secondary school which are not a high frequency type of facility. The critical point is that there is good access to a range of day-to-day facilities on foot and cycle and, if appropriate, higher order facilities by public transport. Q-T2 57. Richborough Estates is supportive of policies that support sustainable and active travel options. A hierarchical approach would, however, include the increasing role of mobility through technology and different modes of travel. For example, the role of the internet in meaning people do not actually need to travel to work or shops should be fully considered alongside e-scooters and e-bikes as reducing the effort needed for people to use active travel options, which more people are more willing to travel a longer distance compared to mechanical scooters and bikes.
No answer given
The JPC supports the items highlighted but is extremely concerned about the status of this section. The JPC considers that the transport section as the single biggest criterion in choosing preferred options should have had a significant larger part of the consultation. It seems to be buried among the later sections which have less immediate impact on local communities .This should be treated as an infrastructure issue There should be a much more significant discussion about the rail and bus services to the subregion including an assessment of the quality of the services and how improvements in those services can be realigned. As mentioned above there are no road proposals affecting Henley in Arden in the document and there are no discussions about the improvements to the rail and bus services to the town.
No answer given
Q-T1a-c. The Chamber supports the ambitions to create highly sustainable communities and minimize travel. However, the promotion of 20-minute neighborhoods and introduction of restrictions on movement as outlined here could be incompatible with the requirements and needs of industry. There is a lack of detail presented here in terms of developing these local neighborhoods. Until more information and evidence is available the Chamber cannot support such initiatives .If there is evidence that local economies can function effectively then the Chamber would be pleased to alter this negative reaction. Issue T2-Sustainable Transport accessibility. Options T2a&b The Chamber does not favour a hierarchical and selective application of measures that might hold back some areas at the expense of others. A general application of policy would seem fairer to both urban and rural based business across the Plan area. The Chamber has noted in comments set out above, that it would favour separate policy initiatives to cover warehousing and distribution that is served by rail and by road . There appears to be good potential in the plan area and surrounding areas to further develop and expand rail freight transport. This would have the added benefit of reducing pressures on the road transport network. Issue T3 a&b : Road travel,employment and freight. The Chamber endorses the analysis and the key issues highlighted here. The text highlights the need to shift road transport to electric vehicles .The current deficiencies associated with the “roll –out “ of electric vehicles are well documented. There is a key role here for local authorities to make more resources available to support the shift. However, simply seeking to discourage and prohibit current “carbon “based road transport is too crude a policy response and will only damage the local economy across the plan area .There is a limit to what land use planning can achieve regarding these ambitions. The development plan will need to tread a fine line here to maintain local economic growth and buoyancy.