Object

Representation ID: 67255

Received: 11/12/2014

Respondent: Joanna Illingworth

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The Coventry & Warwickshire Strategic Employment Land Study Final Report (October 2014) does not justify the designation of land near Coventry Airport as an employment site.
In the first place it ignores the site's status as green belt land, even though paragraph 5.22 of the report states that "The most obvious constraint is the Green Belt, which the Government has made clear remains a priority to protect against from built development. This affects a large part of the sub region and places as a premium on those areas or sites that are not protected."
The Report gives excessive weight to the demands of the Coventry and Warwickshire Enterprise Partnership. The CWEP does not have the authority to determine the allocation of employment sites in Warwick District. It is merely one body, along with county and neighbouring authorities, with whom the local planning authority has to work regarding business needs. (NPPF Paragraph 160.) It should be noted that certain members of the CWEP, e.g. Coventry City Council and the previous Chairman, are also owners of the Gateway site.
The Strategic Employment Land Study Final Report says that the Gateway "demonstrates a high degree of strategic policy fit". This ignores national and local restrictions on developments in the green belt. The first Warwick District Draft Local Plan, i.e. the Draft that went out to public consultation, specifically stated that the Gateway site retain its green belt status. Without proper consultation the 2014 Revised Draft Local Plan removed the site from the green belt. The only reason for this breach of due process is the local planning authority's wish to justify an application that is currently being considered by the Planning Inspectorate. In a circular argument the Report also uses the existence of a planning application as a reason for supporting the Gateway as a strategic employment site, as when it says that "Extensive work has already taken place in terms of the planning for the development of the site".
The logic of the Report, and of this section of the Revised Draft Local Plan, is that planning policies are being shaped to meet the needs of the Gateway site and its owner. It ought to be the other way round.