Historic Environment
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65630
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Cllr Elizabeth Higgins
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
There is no specific planning policy about conserving and enhancing the Leper Hospital, Warwick. Despite revised planning guidance and measures introduced trhough the Enterprise and Regulatory Refordm Act 2013 provide to address this.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66415
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Warwickshire Gardens Trust
We are pleased to see the references to the importance of the historic character of Warwick and the place of tourism in the economy. It is unfortunate that so much of the preceding text, while nodding to the responsibility for the protection of heritage, actually then places it in a secondary position, particularly with regard to the blighting impact of additional traffic and the measures proposed to mitigate it.
See attached
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66550
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Friends of the Earth
Number of people: 4
We support these proposals.
see attached
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66560
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Friends of the Earth
Number of people: 4
We support these proposals.
We also suggest that some of the supporting paragraphs in this section could be omitted or transferred to supplementary planning guidance as much of the information is already available elsewhere.
The lists of conservation areas and listed gardens could be omitted as the information is available elsewhere and the lists may become out of date during the lifetime of the plan.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66684
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Save Warwick
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66846
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Patricia Hollis
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66908
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Colin Sharp
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66916
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Ms Alison Cox
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66924
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Alison Kelly
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66932
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Andrew Cliffe
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66940
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Angelo Cugini
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66948
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Barbara Groves
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66956
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Professor Bob Ireland
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66964
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Christopher Paden
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66972
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Elizabeth Cliffe
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66980
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Mrs Kay Cugini
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66988
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Mr David Ramsbottom
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66996
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Mr David Drinkhall
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67004
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Ian Frost
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67012
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Mr Geoff Reynolds
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67020
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: John Griffiths
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67028
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Justin Richards
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67036
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Louise Kalus
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67044
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Paul Kalus
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67052
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Mr Bernard Hollis
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67060
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Mr R Komarasinha
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67068
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Caroline Komarasinha
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67076
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Matthew Drinkhall
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67084
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Oliver Lane
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 67092
Received: 03/07/2014
Respondent: Ms Helen Maclagan
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Plan would be seriously damaging to our environmental and heritage assets. The Plan gives insufficient attention to our heritage and is potentially damaging to it (in contravention to the provisions of the NPPF).
The Plan is considered unsound for the following reasons:-
The Local Plan identifies the valuable heritage assets of the District and the processes required to obtain planning consent for developments within conservation areas and affecting historic buildings. Save Warwick support these policies.
The plan correctly identifies the importance of the historic environment of the district's principal towns and that this historic legacy has been carefully guarded, however it fails to mention its contribution to Warwick as the quality of the heritage assets/ historic environment are a driving force behind the visitor economy that supports so many local businesses and is therefore a major source of employment.
Save Warwick state that over many years there has been a growing appreciation of the impact of traffic on our heritage assets and on our historic towns. The general response to this has been a wish to remove the bulk of traffic from the vicinity of conservation areas and return the streets to the people, in doing so this protects the historic buildings from the impact of traffic.
The Local Plan does not address the need to protect our town centre conservation areas (especially Warwick) from the impact of the developments proposed in the plan itself.
There is little or no evidence that the plan has addressed the impacts of traffic created by new allocations (especially those in the south of Warwick) on the character, attractiveness, user-friendliness and fabric of our heritage. The Transport Assessments that form part of the plan predict significant increases in the levels of traffic flowing through Warwick Town Centre as a consequence of the new development areas intended to the south of Warwick. The phase 3 Transport Assessment identifies accepts that this extra traffic can be accommodated on the existing road network with junction improvements and other 'blunt instrument' traffic management measures being proposed to alleviate the effects of traffic in such a way that is inappropriate and damaging to a top quality conservation area crammed with historic buildings.
Despite the intended 'mitigation, measures, the assessments admit that congestion and queuing will increase significantly, this will be damaging to the streetscape of what remains substantially a mediaeval town.
Increased traffic / congestion levels will compound the levels of pollution and increase pollutants (NO2), particulates and vibration that will all damage health and cause the degradation of our historic buildings and the attractiveness of the very things that so many people come to see. The centre of Warwick (Jury/High and Swan streets) is all part of a designated AQMA where the Local Authority is obliged to take action to reduce levels of pollution.
Save Warwick is aware of correspondence between English Heritage and Warwick District Council in the course of the Local Plan consultation in response to planning applications on land adjoining Gallows Hill and Banbury Road where concerns have been raised about the impacts of development on Warwick Castle, Castle Park , the conservation area and the Listed Buildings located there.
A copy of key extracts of the aforementioned letter is attached to the original Save Warwick response. As a consequence Warwick District Council has deleted Strawberry Fields and another area south of Gallows Hill from its intended allocations and this is welcomed by Save Warwick.
The plan still does not address the issues faced by the historic buildings and core of Warwick Town centre by the extra traffic to be generated by all the other developments proposed south of Warwick.
To conclude / summarise
The Plan does not conform to the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning Practice Guidance and neglects to protect our conservation areas, historic buildings and their settings from the harmful consequences of the proposed plan.
See attached