Comment

Representation ID: 65605

Received: 05/05/2014

Respondent: andrew russell-wilks

Alternative sites

Para 15 of the PPTS allows a Local Planning Authority 'to make an exceptional limited alteration to the defined Green Belt boundary which might be to accommodate a site inset within the Green Belt to meet a specific identified need for a traveller site.

It should do only through the plan making process and not in response to a planning application. If land is removed from the Green Belt in this way it should be specifically allocated in the Development Plan as a traveller site only.'

WDC are currently preparing their Development Plan and thus have an opportunity for a full review of the Green Belt throughout the whole district. Section 9 of the NPPF about protecting Green Belt land also makes it clear that the Local Plan is an opportunity to review the boundaries of the Green Belt.

It is clear that the opportunity exists for WDC to extend its area of search for suitable sites in sustainable locations by redefining and tweaking the Green Belt boundaries in the north of the district- some 80% of the total district area.

WDC have quite rightly used a site selection process that prefers sites close to existing larger settlements and their facilities. GT12 being close to Barford scores relatively highly in these respects.

This leads us not to the conclusion that GT12 is a suitable site but to the conclusion that Warwick District Council's search for sites is flawed.

The search area should have included other sustainable locations within the district including those within the Green Belt.

These locations should have included the primary service villages of Bishops Tachbrook, Cubbington, Hampton Magna, Kingswood (Lapworth), Radford Semele and the secondary service villages, Baginton, Burton Green, Hatton Park and Leek Wootton.


WDC propose a major residential site at Thickthorn on the south eastern edge of Kenilworth. Currently the site is Green Belt and indicates that the local authority is willing and able to adjust the Green Belt boundaries to accommodate new development. Clearly the same could apply for a new traveller site.

Most importantly the primary area of search should include incorporating the proposed traveller site within one or more of the major development sites on the edge of the urban areas of Leamington, Warwick or Kenilworth.

WDC is currently preparing their Local Plan. This is relevant to identifying potential sites for travellers. A key issue in the Local Plan will be identifying sites and areas for residential development throughout the district.

Some of the new traveller sites would be best be located within the major new development areas around Kenilworth, Warwick and Leamington.

The opportunity exists to include a requirement for a new gypsy and traveller site or sites within the SPD development briefs for each of those major development areas. By comprehensive masterplanning there is an ideal opportunity to fully integrate the new facilities properly within the urban extensions. These are
all in sustainable locations close to existing and proposed community facilities such as shops, schools, bus routes etc.

All urban extension sites must be deliverable, available and viable otherwise the council would not have put them forward. The landowners and developers may prefer the traveller sites to go elsewhere but their schemes are easily large enough to take the new site(s). The consultation booklet on page 12 refers to discussions with developers and yet no site is allowed for in the consultation exercise.

WDC should review their site selection strategy and concentrate on sites that would fulfil the following main criteria:

* Are genuinely deliverable and available now. I.e. a willing land owner wishes to promote the site. Candidate Sites should be tested for viability.

* Sites not on best and most versatile agricultural land

* Sites that would be safe and offer good living conditions for the new residents . In doing so the council should be less opaque about the form and uses of the final developments proposed

* From a cursory review of the Council's information it would seem that the current sites that may meet the relevant criteria would be: GT04, GT15, GT19, GTalt01, GT11 and GTalt3. However as well as these sites the Council should consider its options under a green Belt Review and most importantly including a requirement that space be set aside in the proposed sustainable urban extensions.