BE2 Developing Strategic Housing Sites
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65052
Received: 21/06/2014
Respondent: Emscote Gardens Residents Association
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The continued loss of greenfield land and open space is unsustainable. The launch of ill thought out plans will be irreversible.
If we accept only 8,100 houses are needed to meet the needs over the next 18 years we can show that this need can be met from the permissions already granted together with the brown field sites identified in the plan. We would maintain also that the greenfield sites are remote from schools, retail and other services and it has not been demonstrated that the proposals for sustainable transport are going to be practicable or effective. Sadly, much of the land allocated for development in the south of Warwick is some of the highest grade agricultural land, the loss of which we cannot afford.
It has been illustrated and documented with other inappropriate policy breaking sequence of events, culminating in the destruction of the Emscote Gardens Flood Defence (CV344QB), mostly a WDC asset, if there is the less than courageous capability for that, then there is a great capacity for the most spectacular of blunders.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65539
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Keith Wellsted
Positive idea - enforce them! I doubt you will in your rush to build
Positive idea - enforce them! I doubt you will in your rush to build
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66046
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
This policy includes a reference to a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). This SPD has not been through a statutory process and therefore has a lesser status than the Local Plan. By referring to this SPD in the Local Plan policy a greater weighting of significance is implied which is inappropriate. This reference should be removed and only if necessary placed in the supporting text.
See attachment
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66078
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Historic England
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
To ensure developed briefs are prepared having due regard and consideration of the historic environmenr an additional criterion is recommended.
See attachment.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66473
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Gladman Developments
Agent: Stansgate Planning
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Development sites of over 200 dwellings, or sites which form part of a wider development area which exceeds 200 dwellings, or other developments which have a significant impact on the character and appearance of an area, will be expected to comply with a development brief. Policy outlines specific requirements that should be contained within such development briefs, which includes densities - that should not be lower than 30 dwellings per hectare average.
Policy Analysis
Whilst recognising need for developments on larger sites to come forward in coordinated manner, query whether it will always be necessary to prepare development brief for this purpose and whether objectives of policy cannot be better achieved through preparation of site masterplan/development framework. In relation to site densities, submit it would be more appropriate to determine site densities at a level consistent with site's character/location, rather than setting a minimum target.
Conclusions on Soundness
Submit that in its current form the provisions of Policy BE2 are too prescriptive. In some instances it would be more appropriate to prepare a site masterplan or development framework for proposals, as opposed to a site development brief. Opposed to setting minimum site densities.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66538
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Friends of the Earth
Number of people: 4
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
the wording in BE2 (d) (and 5.13) which says 'design principles, taking account of the Garden Towns, Villages and Suburbs Prospectus and Buildings for Life 12;' should instead read ' design principles, taking account of any supplementary planning guidance produced by the District Council'
see attached
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66539
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Friends of the Earth
Number of people: 4
We support paragraph 5.18 which acknowledges that high density housing may be appropriate for town centre or similar sites.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66712
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Gleeson Developments
Agent: Savills (L&P) Ltd
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Policy BE2 refers to "Strategic Housing Sites", which is justified as being sites allocated for over 200 dwellings. The term Strategic should be deleted from the policy as it can be confused with the larger allocated sites set out in Policy DS11.
See attachment.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66803
Received: 26/06/2014
Respondent: Gallagher Estates
Agent: Pegasus Group
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Policy BE2 is similar in intent and drafting to Policy DS15 in requiring the preparation of development briefs for the proposed strategic sites. It is therefore repetitious. Notwithstanding this, as set out in response to Policy DS15, it is considered that the need for development briefs introduces an additional layer of unnecessary development plan making. We propose Policy BE2 be deleted.
see attached.