Justification for Preferred Option for the Location of New Housing
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46355
Received: 10/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Ian Clarke
The justification presented is totally at odds with outcome of the similar exercise undertaken by WDC to inform the Core Strategy. This stated "development will be generally directed towards the south of the urban area in order to minimise journeys through the historic town centres to the main employment areas and transport connections in the south, and to avoid incursion into the West Midlands Green Belt to the north, east and west of the urban area to maintain separation between towns and villages".
This is still valid; nothing has changed.
The Council has not justified why its view has changed dramatically.
The justification presented is totally at odds with outcome of the similar exercise undertaken by WDC to inform the Core Strategy. This stated "development will be generally directed towards the south of the urban area in order to minimise journeys through the historic town centres to the main employment areas and transport connections in the south, and to avoid incursion into the West Midlands Green Belt to the north, east and west of the urban area to maintain separation between towns and villages".
This is still valid; nothing has changed.
The Council has not justified why its view has changed dramatically.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46489
Received: 15/07/2012
Respondent: Mr K Craven
There doesn't appear to be any policy of encouraging, safeguarding, or extended much needed agricultural land.
Where will our food supply come from if we insist on building on open fields?
There doesn't appear to be any policy of encouraging, safeguarding, or extended much needed agricultural land.
Where will our food supply come from if we insist on building on open fields?
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46542
Received: 17/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Chris Bull
Exceptional circumstance do not exist for building on Green Belt Land.
This local plan ignores NPPF guidance and uses subjective arguments for doing so, whilst denying factual evidence from the SHLAA that sufficient land exists for the necessary developments, without the need to build on Green Belt land.
In justifying the preferred option for location of new housing in the local plan the proposal fails to demonstrate 'exceptional circumstances' such as 'insufficient suitable and available sites outside of the Green Belt' are available.
Indeed it highlights sites are available (in paragraph 7.29) where it states that 'the SHLAA identified a capacity of 7,200 dwellings' outside the Green Belt. These sites are concentrated in the area around Europa Way, Gallows Hill and Harbury Lane as well as to the south and east of Whitnash'
It then goes on to provide subjective arguments in 7.30 and 7.31 for ignoring this information, and no evidence to justify ignoring the NPPF advise on the exceptional circumstances needed to justify Green Belt development
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46543
Received: 17/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Chris Bull
In paragraph 7.27 it states 'it is necessary to assess Green Belt land in terms of its contribution towards the five "purposes" of including land in the Green Belt'.
From the NPPF these are:-
● to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
● to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
● to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
● to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
● to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict
and other urban land.
In the case of the land to the North of Leamington all 5 'purposes' apply to my mind.
In paragraph 7.27 it states 'it is necessary to assess Green Belt land in terms of its contribution towards the five "purposes" of including land in the Green Belt'.
From the NPPF these are:-
● to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
● to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
● to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
● to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
● to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict
and other urban land.
In the case of the land to the North of Leamington all 5 'purposes' apply to my mind.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46544
Received: 17/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Chris Bull
Paragraph 7.29 provides factual evidence from SHLAA that sufficient land exists to the south of leamington for the necessary developments outside the green belt.
7.30 and 7.31 provide subjective opinion for ignoring these facts
Paragraph 7.29 provides factual evidence from SHLAA that sufficient land exists to the south of leamington for the necessary developments outside the green belt.
7.30 and 7.31 provide subjective opinion for ignoring these facts
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46546
Received: 17/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Chris Bull
In Paragraph 7.30 one argument advanced for ignoring available land and building on Green Belt land instead is the 'The lack of choice of location of new housing and uncertainty about the ability of the markets to deliver this level of development in the locality within the plan period'
It is well known that Green belt land to the North of Leamington Spa is in the land-banks of house developers.
What evidence or who has indicated there is 'uncertainty about the markets to deliver this level of development' - or is it external parties with vested interests influencing public figures?
In Paragraph 7.30 one argument advanced for ignoring available land and building on Green Belt land instead is the 'The lack of choice of location of new housing and uncertainty about the ability of the markets to deliver this level of development in the locality within the plan period'
It is well known that Green belt land to the North of Leamington Spa is in the land-banks of house developers.
What evidence or who has indicated there is 'uncertainty about the markets to deliver this level of development' - or is it external parties with vested interests influencing public figures?
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46567
Received: 18/07/2012
Respondent: Roger Mills
Re: Paragraphs 7.29 and 7.30
The area around Europa Way, Gallows Hill and Harbury Lane would seem to be an eminently sensible place to build 6,000+ dwellings (if that number is really needed!).
I don't understand the Council's concerns. Most employment opportunities are in the south, this area has good access to the M40, and the development would be large enough to fund whatever infrastructure improvements were needed. There is no reason why the markets could not deliver the required level of development here, as opposed to anywhere else.
Re: Paragraphs 7.29 and 7.30
The area around Europa Way, Gallows Hill and Harbury Lane would seem to be an eminently sensible place to build 6,000+ dwellings (if that number is really needed!).
I don't understand the Council's concerns. Most employment opportunities are in the south, this area has good access to the M40, and the development would be large enough to fund whatever infrastructure improvements were needed. There is no reason why the markets could not deliver the required level of development here, as opposed to anywhere else.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46568
Received: 18/07/2012
Respondent: Roger Mills
Re: Paragraph 7.34
As stated in comments on other sections, the definition of Category 1 takes no account of infrastructure limitations. Villages such as Hampton Magna already have roads, sewers and a school which are full to capacity, plus a restricted bus service (no evening or Sunday buses) - and cannot automatically sustain further development simply because they have a shop, a school and a community centre!
Re: Paragraph 7.34
As stated in comments on other sections, the definition of Category 1 takes no account of infrastructure limitations. Villages such as Hampton Magna already have roads, sewers and a school which are full to capacity, plus a restricted bus service (no evening or Sunday buses) - and cannot automatically sustain further development simply because they have a shop, a school and a community centre!
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46704
Received: 23/07/2012
Respondent: Joanna Illingworth
I agree with objector Roger Mills regarding 7.29 and 7.30. As he says the area around Europa Way, Gallows Hill and Harbury Lane would be a good location for a major housing development, being near employment sites and having excellent access to the motorway network.
What evidence is there for saying that there is uncertainty about the ability of the markets to deliver this level of development in the locality within the plan period?
Alternative sites will have greater problems regarding transport, hence the proposal to build a north Leamington relief road and new bridge over the Avon.
I agree with objector Roger Mills regarding 7.29 and 7.30. As he says the area around Europa Way, Gallows Hill and Harbury Lane would be a good location for a major housing development, being near employment sites and having excellent access to the motorway network.
What evidence is there for saying that there is uncertainty about the ability of the markets to deliver this level of development in the locality within the plan period?
Alternative sites will have greater problems regarding transport, hence the proposal to build a north Leamington relief road and new bridge over the Avon.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46873
Received: 24/07/2012
Respondent: Dr Barry Meatyard
If there is a limited supply of land for development we should start to ask the question 'What does sustainability mean in the context of Warwick'. Clearly there are limits to growth, and as indicated above I am not convinced that the model used to calculate growth is a valid one. There are both theoretical and practical limits to growth, which if exceeded will fundamentally change the character of Warwick as a historic county town. It is in danger of becoming a castle surrounded by a housing estate.
If there is a limited supply of land for development we should start to ask the question 'What does sustainability mean in the context of Warwick'. Clearly there are limits to growth, and as indicated above I am not convinced that the model used to calculate growth is a valid one. There are both theoretical and practical limits to growth, which if exceeded will fundamentally change the character of Warwick as a historic county town. It is in danger of becoming a castle surrounded by a housing estate.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 46952
Received: 26/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Julie Tidd
WDC have previously stated that "development will be generally directed towards the south of the urban area in order to minimise journeys through the historic town centres to the main employment areas and transport connections in the south, and to avoid incursion into the West Midlands Green Belt to the north, east and west of the urban area to maintain separation between towns and villages".
This is still valid; nothing has changed.
The Council has not justified why its view has changed dramatically
WDC have previously stated that "development will be generally directed towards the south of the urban area in order to minimise journeys through the historic town centres to the main employment areas and transport connections in the south, and to avoid incursion into the West Midlands Green Belt to the north, east and west of the urban area to maintain separation between towns and villages".
This is still valid; nothing has changed.
The Council has not justified why its view has changed dramatically
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 47093
Received: 26/07/2012
Respondent: Ms Lisa Abba
where is the evidence that people would not want to buy in south leamington?
why build a relief road for a new development in north leamington that would not be required if the development was built in the south where infrastructure exists already
where is the evidence that people would not want to buy in south leamington?
why build a relief road for a new development in north leamington that would not be required if the development was built in the south where infrastructure exists already
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 47190
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Neil Brown
7.35 The category 2 villages have fewer services but a limited amount of development may help to support existing services or even encourage new services as well as provide a greater choice of housing.
The key word here is may - the likelihood is actually that development would occur with no increase in services and simply an increased stress on the limited services available.
7.35 The category 2 villages have fewer services but a limited amount of development may help to support existing services or even encourage new services as well as provide a greater choice of housing.
The key word here is may - the likelihood is actually that development would occur with no increase in services and simply an increased stress on the limited services available.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 47279
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Dr GUy Barker
the plans seem to contradict the overall objectives. Simply select sites because this offers a greater choice is not the reason behind the plan.
the plans seem to contradict the overall objectives. Simply select sites because this offers a greater choice is not the reason behind the plan.
Support
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 47469
Received: 03/08/2012
Respondent: The Europa Way Consortium and Warwickshire County Council (Physical Assets-Resources)
Agent: AMEC
We broadly support the Council rationale for 'balancing' the housing needs of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash around the urban area. However, we object to the reduced number of houses allocated for land north of Gallows Hill/west of Europa Way which we consider should be increased from 1,100 to 1,250 dwellings.
COMMENT
We broadly support the Council rationale for 'balancing' the housing needs of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash around the urban area as outlined under para 7.30. However, we do not believe that the reasons presented here justify a reduction in the overall quantum of housing which is now allocated on sites to the south of the urban area, compared to what was previously presented in the Preferred Options version of the Core Strategy. In particular, we object to the reduced number of houses allocated for land north of Gallows Hill/west of Europa Way and request that under Policy PO4 the number of dwellings allocated on this site is increased from 1,100 to 1,250 dwellings.
Para 7.31 presents what the Council sees as the advantages of locating some development to the north of Leamington Spa and Warwick. Whilst we broadly agree with the first two stated advantages, we consider that with regards the third stated advantage the Plan should acknowledge that the initial transport evidence presented to date does not suggest that the construction of a northern relief is definitely required or that it would be cost to do so.
Support
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 47551
Received: 03/08/2012
Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)
Agent: AMEC
The King Henry VIII Endowed Trust would be willing to consider releasing its landholding west of Warwick for development if either required and/or favoured over current alternatives to ensure the new Local Plan is found "sound" at Examination.
COMMENT
In developing the Preferred Option, the Council states (para 7.8) that it has had regard to a number of documents including the findings of the latest Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA, May 2012). Having reviewed the SHLAA we note that land located on the western edge of Warwick, and under the ownership of the King Henry VIII Endowed Trust, has been put forward by the District Council and assessed as a "potentially suitable" site for housing "subject to a willing landowner and relocation of the racecourse track" (Site Ref W35). Whilst we did not put the site forward for consideration under the SHLAA, the Trustees recognise the difficulties faced by the Council in identifying suitable sites for meeting the District's development needs over the Plan period, in particular sites which lie outside of the Green Belt and/or are in sustainable locations. For these reasons the Trustees would be willing to consider releasing its landholding west of Warwick for development if either required and/or favoured over current alternatives to ensure the new Local Plan is found "sound" at Examination. The Trustees similarly would also be happy to discuss this matter further with the Council and other key stakeholders (e.g. owners of Warwick Racecourse and WTC) if that would be helpful.
The site measures approximately 36.5 hectares, is located outside the Green Belt and considered well located to Warwick town centre and to existing and proposed social and community infrastructure, including facilities at South West Warwick.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49980
Received: 03/08/2012
Respondent: Gallagher Estates
Agent: Pegasus Group
No exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated for releasing land in the Green Belt for development.
Development of the site North of Milverton will lead to a narrowing of the gap between Kenilworth and Leamington. The site at Blackdown was not considered suitable in the Joint Green Belt Study. There is no evidence to support the statements in paragraph 7.30 about the impact of concentrating 6,000 new homes to the south of Warwick. Disagrees with statement in paragraph 7.31 about the advantages of locating more employment development to the north of Leamington Spa and Warwick. Development to the north will not necessarily cut cross-town traffic flows and there is no evidence that a northern relief road is desirable, would have an acceptable impact or would lead to improvements in traffic flows. Paragraph 7.39 fails to state that the traffic modelling exercise showed that the Development Option which included land at Lower Heathcote Farm had least impact prior to mitigation and demonstarted the greatest improvements when mitigation was applied.
The scoring of sites and options in the Sustainability Appraisal is at odds with the chosen Preferred Option but no explanation is given for this.
See attached documents
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 51283
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Hatton Parish Council
We would like clarification of the village sites indicated. We have studied the Strategic Land Availability Assessment, anf there are seven potential sites indicated as being in Hatton. Four are adjacent to Hatton Station, which is in Shrewley Parish, and closer to Shrewley Common than Hatton Green and one is in Shrewley Parish and closer to Hatton Park. Tow are in Hatton Parish: one (land adjoining Starmer Place) is deemed unsuitable, and the constraints identified for the other (Hatton Green) makes no reference to its location oppostite The Ferncumbe Primary School where parking is already critical (and has been the subject of a Community Policing Priority for the last six months). The information concerning all these sites contains numerous other inaccuracies.
See attached representations.