Q-B9: Should the plan include a policy requiring the safeguarding of sites of national importance, sites of local importance, and other non-designated sites known to make a positive contribution to biodiversity or geodiversity; unless the benefits of the
South Warwickshire is famous for its countryside, its historical towns and its villages. It provides a vital green barrier between the West Midland conurbations and the expanding London/M25/M40/M4 development areas. It needs to be treated as sympathetically and carefully as possible in order to preserve the heritage, the biodiversity and the overall environment of the whole area.
No answer given
The biodiversity of the English countryside is a function of traditional land management strategies of the last 1000 years. Changes in the last 100 year's have eroded biodiversity and if it is to stand a chance of recovery, the importance of brown field first as a policy adoption is self evident. If green fields are developed , they will never again make a positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity. This is one of the core functions green belt as a concept, to prevent urban sprawl.
The biodiversity of the english countryside is a function of traditional land management over the past 1000 years. Changes in the last 100 years have eroded biodiversity and if it is to stand a chance of recovery, the importance of brown field first as a policy adoption is self evident. If green fields are developed, they will never again ,make a positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity. This is the whole aim of green belt, to prevent urban sprawl.
No answer given
No answer given
Biodiversity can only be maintained through the retention of green spaces, particularly those used for farming utilising traditional methods which enable biodiversity. If we are to have any chance to slow or reverse our loss of biodiversity these spaces must be retained
The biodiversity of the English countryside is a function of traditional land management strategies of the last thousand years. Changes in the last 100 years have eroded biodiversity and if it is to stand a chance of recovery, the importance of brownfield first as a policy adoption is self-evident. If green fields are developed, they will never again make a positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity. This is one of the core functions of Green Belt as a concept, to prevent urban sprawl.
there must be a consistent approach to all areas
Fields across Kenilworth South include ancient Oak trees, orchards and hedgerows which support the multitude of birds and wildlife in the area. Local residents who use the multitude of footpaths report regular sightings of an array of wildlife on a daily basis. o Birds such as fieldfares, redwings, woodpeckers, blue tits, great tits, goldfinches, greenfinches, yellowhammers, lapwings, cuckoos, swifts, house martins, owls, song thrushes, sparrowhawks, buzzards, kestrels, robins, sparrows, wrens, chaffinches. There are numerous ponds and other wetlands supporting ducks, moorhens and herons (among other water birds) o Animals such as foxes, badgers, hedgehogs, rabbits, hares (boxing in the fields around mating time), muntjac deer, bats of different types and various other species. o Numerous ancient tree species, an apple orchard (on the south side of Rouncil Lane), and a large bee population in numerous hives along Rouncil Lane. • Removing their habitats would create a devastating impact on the biodiversity of Kenilworth South. Indeed, releasing areas of greenbelt at all over extensions to villages and brownfield sites seems a complete contradiction to mitigating against climate harm.
No answer given
The biodiversity of the English countryside arises from a thousand years of Land Management. Biodiversity has been seriously eroded by changes over the last 100 years and if it is to stand any chance of recovery the policy of Brownfield First is an essential ingredient of an overall environmentally friendly development policy. Once greenfields are developed their positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity is lost forever. This is one of the core functions of green belt, as a concept to prevent urban sprawl and reuse brownfield land.
This policy rings a little hollow when the smashing through of Crackley Woods for HS2 is reflected on
The introduction to this chapter includes powerful aspirations (Strengthening green and blue infrastructure and achieving a net increase in biodiversity) but the challenge will be to incorporate these into the plan. It is important to understand that enhancing biodiversity is not a bolt-on extra after everything else has been decided, but should be hard-wired into the plan from the start. The plan should seek to consolidate criteria for the four specially designated areas (Areas of Restraint, Vale of Evesham Control Zone, Special Landscape Areas and Cotswold AONB) and bring these together with the consideration of the greenbelt. The aim should be to develop a consistent plan-wide approach with policies that can be unambiguously implemented by planners to protect special landscapes and enhance biodiversity. The areas of restraint are an important component of the current SDC plan, but do not feature in the current Warwick Plan. They should be retained in the new plan, whilst extending these principles into appropriate areas in Warwick District. There is also a need for a consistent approach to designating these areas within the framework of the nationally mandated greenbelt. The current greenbelt designation concerns issues of openness, inappropriate development and traffic generation. The new plan should extend these policies (possibly through definitions in the Areas of Restraint) to include biodiversity enhancement. Any development in the greenbelt / area of restraint should only be permitted (in addition to the other conditions) if there is a measurable increase in biodiversity. The Vale of Evesham Control Zone applies currently only to the specified area in Stratford District. This should be retained in the new plan, whether or not neighbouring authorities decide to retain the same conditions in their review of their plans. Furthermore a review should be undertaken to determine whether similar areas may be identified within Warwick District with particular consideration of the river catchment areas with a view to developing blue corridors and enhancing water quality. While special landscape areas are ‘not encouraged’ in national policy they have clearly been important in Stratford District and should be retained. Furthermore, the plan should consider the designation of similar areas in Warwick District in consultation with Warwickshire Wildlife Trust, the National Trust and other relevant landowners. Committing to a Biodiversity net gain not only on all new developments but across the whole of the Local Plan area. This goes beyond tree planting and must include a multivariate approach with appropriate environmental stewardship in agriculture and properly planned open spaces to provide for recreation and community use. The concept of Environmental Net Gain should be preferred to Biodiversity Net Gain as it includes air quality and water quality as well as biodiversity. However, carbon offsetting is still a very contested policy, with some arguing that some forms of offsetting allow developers to avoid their obligations to the areas they are developing while blighting other areas where the offset is applied - for example planting non-native trees on high-grade agricultural land, sometimes many miles from the development site. Other types of offsetting, for example committing to retrofitting existing houses, make more sense. Definitions of offsetting need to be tightly drawn in the plan to prevent ‘greenwashing’. ‘Natural Capital’ is another concept of concern, as it tends to reduce the natural world to monetary values. If a value is assigned to, say, a woodland, there is a danger that a road that destroys the woodland may be ascribed a higher value, and therefore the woodland goes. Only if natural assets are ascribed a non-negotiably high value can areas rich in biodiversity be preserved. The plan should reference the lessons of the Economic Review of Biodiversity: the Dasgupta review (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/957292/Dasgupta_Review_-_Abridged_Version.pdf) before settling the policy in this area. Wildbelt designations should be introduced and prioritised. Advice should be sought from Warwickshire Wildlife Trust and other conservation organisations (like Plantlife) in order to identify appropriate areas for action. These should include but not be limited to current WWT reserves and also crucially focus on blue and green corridors to connect existing and planned reserves. These should be mapped out before any new roads or other transport routes are agreed. The Minerals Plan is the responsibility of the County Council and therefore outside the scope of the SWLP. The policy in the current WDC plan to prevent sterilisation of resources should be retained. In addition there is need for a policy to require developers extracting minerals (e.g. through quarrying) to restore and rewild areas within a specific time-frame where extraction has been completed. The current policies safeguarding sites of national importance in both the Stratford District Council Core Strategy (CS.6) and Warwick District Local Plan (NE2) should be reviewed for consistency, revised as necessary and retained. As far as possible the current EU directives such as the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive should be retained, even if the legislation supporting them is abolished by Parliament. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to restore nature and enhance biodiversity in South Warwickshire. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to make the changes which are essential to meet the ecological and climate crises.
The biodiversity of the English countryside arises from a thousand years of Land Management. Biodiversity has been seriously eroded by changes over the last 100 years and if it is to stand any chance of recovery the policy of Brownfield First is an essential ingredient of an overall environmentally friendly development policy. Once greenfields are developed their positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity is lost forever. This is one of the core functions of green belt, as a concept to prevent urban sprawl and reuse brownfield land.
We need to ensure that we maintain a biodiversity and that our communities are still connected to the land
The biodiversity of the English countryside is a function of traditional land management strategies of the last thousand years. Changes in the last 100 years have eroded biodiversity and if it is to stand a chance of recovery, the importance of brownfield first as a policy adoption is self-evident. If green fields are developed, they will never again make a positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity. This is one of the core functions of Green Belt as a concept, to prevent urban sprawl.
The biodiversity of the English countryside is a function of traditional land management strategies of the last thousand years. Changes in the last 100 years have eroded biodiversity and if it is to stand a chance of recovery, the importance of Brownfield first as a policy adoption is self-evident. If green fields are developed, they will never again make a positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity. This is one of the core functions of Green Belt as a concept, to prevent urban sprawl.
The biodiversity of the English countryside is a function of traditional land management strategies of the last thousand years. Changes in the last 100 years have eroded biodiversity and if it is to stand a chance of recovery, the importance of brownfield first as a policy adoption is self-evident. If green fields are developed, they will never again make a positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity. This is one of the core functions of Green Belt as a concept, to prevent urban sprawl.
In order to meet national requirements and targets set out in the 25 year Environment Plan, COP15 biodiversity framework targets, and the Government's commitment to have 30% more land In nature recovery by 2030, and Council's NERC duties there clearly needs to be a specific policy protecting biodiversity and importantly other non-designated sites such as Potential Local Wildlife Sites, Nature Reserves and Ecosites. It is also very important to include a policy on enhancing these sites, the words ‘unless clearly outweighs..’ should be removed as this waters down the requirement, and will greatly affect the Councils ability to achieve the Government and COP targets.
The biodiversity of the English countryside is a function of traditional land management strategies of the last thousand years. Changes in the last 100 years have eroded biodiversity and if it is to stand a chance of recovery, the importance of brownfield first as a policy adoption is self-evident. If green fields are developed, they will never again make a positive contribution to the true return of biodiversity. This is one of the core functions of Green Belt as a concept, to prevent urban sprawl.
No answer given
One of the important benefits of the protection of Green Belt is to protect biodiversity and keep open farmland, and not cover with concrete, sealing even more soil. This is particularly the case for the North Leamington Green Belt where wonderful nature, e.g., between Leamington and Old Milverton would be lost by development. Brownfield site development needs to be considered.
‘Natural Capital’ is a concept of concern, as it tends to reduce the natural world to monetary values. If a value is assigned to, say, a woodland, there is a danger that a road that destroys the woodland may be ascribed a higher value, and therefore the woodland goes. Only if natural assets are ascribed a non-negotiably high value can areas rich in biodiversity be preserved. The plan should reference the lessons of the Economic Review of Biodiversity: the Dasgupta review (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/957292/Dasgupta_Review_-_Abridged_Version.pdf) before settling the policy in this area. Wildbelt designations should bThe introduction to this chapter includes powerful aspirations (Strengthening green and blue infrastructure and achieving a net increase in biodiversity) but the challenge will be to incorporate these into the plan. It is important to understand that enhancing biodiversity is not a bolt-on extra after everything else has been decided, but should be hard-wired into the plan from the start. The plan should seek to consolidate criteria for the four specially designated areas (Areas of Restraint, Vale of Evesham Control Zone, Special Landscape Areas and Cotswold AONB) and bring these together with the consideration of the greenbelt. The aim should be to develop a consistent plan-wide approach with policies that can be unambiguously implemented by planners to protect special landscapes and enhance biodiversity. The areas of restraint are an important component of the current SDC plan, but do not feature in the current Warwick Plan. They should be retained in the new plan, whilst extending these principles into appropriate areas in Warwick District. There is also a need for a consistent approach to designating these areas within the framework of the nationally mandated greenbelt. The current greenbelt designation concerns issues of openness, inappropriate development and traffic generation. The new plan should extend these policies (possibly through definitions in the Areas of Restraint) to include biodiversity enhancement. Any development in the greenbelt / area of restraint should only be permitted (in addition to the other conditions) if there is a measurable increase in biodiversity. The Vale of Evesham Control Zone applies currently only to the specified area in Stratford District. This should be retained in the new plan, whether or not neighbouring authorities decide to retain the same conditions in their review of their plans. Furthermore a review should be undertaken to determine whether similar areas may be identified within Warwick District with particular consideration of the river catchment areas with a view to developing blue corridors and enhancing water quality. While special landscape areas are ‘not encouraged’ in national policy they have clearly been important in Stratford District and should be retained. Furthermore, the plan should consider the designation of similar areas in Warwick District in consultation with Warwickshire Wildlife Trust, the National Trust and other relevant landowners. Committing to a Biodiversity net gain not only on all new developments but across the whole of the Local Plan area. This goes beyond tree planting and must include a multivariate approach with appropriate environmental stewardship in agriculture and properly planned open spaces to provide for recreation and community use. The concept of Environmental Net Gain should be preferred to Biodiversity Net Gain as it includes air quality and water quality as well as biodiversity. However, carbon offsetting is still a very contested policy, with some arguing that some forms of offsetting allow developers to avoid their obligations to the areas they are developing while blighting other areas where the offset is applied - for example planting non-native trees on high-grade agricultural land, sometimes many miles from the development site. Other types of offsetting, for example committing to retrofitting existing houses, make more sense. Definitions of offsetting need to be tightly drawn in the plan to e introduced and prioritised. Advice should be sought from Warwickshire Wildlife Trust and other conservation organisations (like Plantlife) in order to identify appropriate areas for action. These should include but not be limited to current WWT reserves and also crucially focus on blue and green corridors to connect existing and planned reserves. These should be mapped out before any new roads or other transport routes are agreed. The Minerals Plan is the responsibility of the County Council and therefore outside the scope of the SWLP. The policy in the current WDC plan to prevent sterilisation of resources should be retained. In addition there is need for a policy to require developers extracting minerals (e.g. through quarrying) to restore and rewild areas within a specific time-frame where extraction has been completed. The current policies safeguarding sites of national importance in both the Stratford District Council Core Strategy (CS.6) and Warwick District Local Plan (NE2) should be reviewed for consistency, revised as necessary and retained. As far as possible the current EU directives such as the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive should be retained, even if the legislation supporting them is abolished by Parliament. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to restore nature and enhance biodiversity in South Warwickshire. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to make the changes which are essential to meet the ecological and climate crises.
No answer given
Developers only care about profit and do the minimum to satisfy local councils. As such, the development of greenbelt land should be a last resort even if developers claim they will consider green issues in their development it's usually an afterthought.
Biodiversity Net Gain legislation is a fantastic opportunity to put biodiversity centre stage in the planning and execution of developments. Through my own practical experience of land management I have proof of how biodiversity can drastically improve. Create the habitat and I guarantee wildlife will come. The great news is that it isn't even difficult or expensive, for example, there are gains to be made just by changing management regimes of grass and hedge cutting.
We should have a simple policy of protecting existing green spaces as these always encourage biodiversity and by definition are examples of geodiversity. These spaces are very hard to restore once gone as such development should be on Brownfield sites and discussion of development for greenbelt and agricultural land should only be considered once all brownfield options are utterly exhausted, which they are not.
No answer given
Q-B.1: Areas of Restraint - In the context of planning for major urban extensions, the Councils may wish to consider whether the areas it considers should remain open should be designated as Green Belt in accordance with paragraph 139 of the Framework.