Mod 10 - Policy DS11
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69830
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The land south of Warwick. Leamington and Whitnash has provided 5,415 sites to the total needed for the Warwick OAN of 10,800 already, and
given the acceptance in various parts of the modified local plan proposals that housing needed by Coventry residents should be located adjacent to the city or as close as possible, and
there is overprovision in the plan of between 3646 and 1288 sites whilst still meeting the FOAN of the HMA there is no case to support the loss of further rural/countryside, south of Harbury Lane/Gallows Hill.
The following sites should be removed in both the draft local plan and modification additions as they are not necessary, environmentally sustainable nor consistent with NPPF protection and enhancement of valued landscapes.
1. H02(part) Former sewage works, south of Harbury Lane..
1. the site is immediately adjacent to the proposed country park, and the country Park was reduced in size in January last year from the original proposals; and
2. the retention of this site in the housing programme is no longer needed as the required housing has or is being provided elsewhere,
The best use for this site is to add it to the country park.
2. H13 Soans site, Sydenham Drive.
Note that the planning application granted was for 143 dwellings not 147.
3. H02(part) Land south of Harbury Lane (Excluding former sewage works)
Described as 620 (plus 985 included in commitments). This description is out of date as the commitments are - Lower Heathcote 785, Grove Farm 1 for 200 and Grove Farm 2 for 520 giving a total of 1505. The proposal is for 1605, increasing the housing by 100. It appears that this is to be added to Lower Heathcote, not Grove Farm by omitting the playing field area and building 100 houses on the land. However, these are no longer needed.
4. H46A Gallows Hill
This is allocated for 630 dwellings. The appeal allowed by the Secretary of State was for 450 dwellings, but it seems the District Council is not prepared to set a plan that limits development to that which is needed. The plan does not show the line of the site that has been allowed on the map. The Asps development was careful to keep away from Banbury Road by retaining fields as part of the special entrance to the Historic Town of Warwick. The same philosophy should apply here.
H49 Bishops Tachbrook Seven Acre Close.
5.1 This site has been allocated for 30 dwellings without any reference to the Parish council or cognisance for the draft Neighbourhood Plan that has gone through the consultation processes and is now to go to the examiner.
5.2 The District Council approved the Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundary Consultation report in November 2013. This site was considered in the sites review for Bishop's Tachbrook but was discounted in favour of H23, which could be enlarged from 75 to 150. The Neighbourhood Plan Team found that the village had a deficit in recreational land and this site should be considered for recreational community space.
The community would expect that these matters would be given considerable weight given the progress now achieved with the Neighbourhood Plan.
5.3 An outline application for 125 dwellings on Land south of Mallory Road was refused by the District Council on 26/02/2014 and a subsequent appeal was dismissed by the planning Inspector.
6. These 4 sites are to provide 525 dwellings. As has been shown in the table in Mod 6, there is overprovision for combined Warwick/Coventry if the Hearn update report is adopted and more if Coventry can produce more within its boundary. The omission of these 4 sites from the plan would not jeopardise the soundness of the plan but would mean that sites are provided in the right place to meet identified needs.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69849
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs J Mackenzie
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Allocations contrary to NPPF requirement to maintain separation, prevent coalescence
Numbers based on Coventry requirements not approved in local plan, revised before 2017?
No critical examination of claims that land unavailable -areas of Coventry green belt could be developed with less impact
Provision of land to meet Coventry's overspill contrary to NPPF - require sub-regional SA to be valid
How do proposals fit with neighbouring development
No consultation undertaken with parish councils before decisions made
MoU providing additional housing for Combined Authority circumvents democratic process, NPPF
Impact of proposals at Thickthorn and Kings Hill next to over-capacity A46 not considered
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69906
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Hatton Estate
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OMISSION site
Allocate the land at Hatton Station for 1310 dwellings, which would be in a sustainable location. The alternative to this, would be reserve site status. In the case of Hatton Station there is a case for including safeguarded land within a new Green Belt boundary.
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69908
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: A C Lloyd Homes Ltd
Agent: Delta Planning
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
allocation at Seven Acres Close, Bishop Tachbrook (H49) should be increased to 50 dwellings from 30
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69926
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Jarrett
Agent: McLoughlin Planning
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OMISSION site:
Land at the Valley should be allocated for housing development for up to 40 units
Site is deliverable and available for development
Provides an opportunity to reduce uncertainty around windfalls
Site is accessible
Site is of low ecological value / flood risk
Infill site surrounded on three sides by development
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69936
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: The Rosconn Group
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OMISSION site:
Object to proposal: -
- allocation would extend housing development beyond a reasonable level of accessibility to public transport - choice is not realistically achievable for site off Spring Lane
- Other opportunities are available to meet housing requirements, which would promote choice of public transport.
- Site subject of a live outline planning application for up to 25 dwellings (W/15/1761) - has recommendation of approval
- Land has been incorrectly discounted in the Village Profile and Allocations Report that forms part of the evidence base for these main modifications.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69945
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Cerda Planning
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Land which immediately adjoins Allocation H48, south of Westham Lane, Barford is considered an excellent candidate for further allocation to meet need.
Combined with Allocations H48 and H22, residential development on this site would form an entirely logical and natural conclusion to the western side of the settlement
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69946
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Oaklands Farm and AC Lloyd Homes
Agent: Delta Planning
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OMISSION site: -
Number of additional sites allocated for housing through the Proposed Modifications document to meet increased housing requirement.
Local Plan should allocate greater number and range of sites to provide choice and greater flexibility to meet OAN over plan period.
Overall number of dwellings to be delivered insufficient to ensure that Local Plan has flexibility to accommodate change, should site delivery be delayed. Local Plan not effective as it risks not delivering full OAN.
Additional sites should be allocated to ensure that the Local Plan meets housing requirements and provides for a reasonable degree of flexbility and choice.
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69950
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Hallam Land Management & William Davies Ltd
Agent: Marrons Planning
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to the proposed number of dwellings for the site
No of dwellings for H46A Gallows Hill should be increased from 630 to 700 dwellings in total
A footnote should be attached to explain that the total comprises 450 for Gallows Hill East and 250 for Gallows Hill West.
The proposed capacity fails to optimise the potential of the site and achieve sustainable development
It would reduce the need for the release of further Green belt land
Using a density of 35dph would yield 240 dwellings
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69952
Received: 21/04/2016
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: RPS Planning
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OMISSION site: -
- site south of Southam Road within a sustainable primary service village
- close to local facilities, services and amenities
- Radford Semele well-placed to accommodate additional housing growth
- no significant landscape concerns or technical reasons not to bring site forward
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69969
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Sharba Homes
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
RADFORD SEMELE
OMISSION site: -
- Site south of Offchurch Lane could be sufficiently allocated as part of a more comprehensive allocation in conjunction with Site H38.
- subject to current (May 2016) planning application for up to 150 dwellings
- reason for non-allocation was concern over capacity of village school by County Council - no objection raised by County council to planning application subject to s106
- incorrect to say that there are no suitable sites outside of the Green Belt
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69978
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Grevayne Properties Ltd
Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
ADDITIONAL SITE
The allocation of additional sites such as at Rising Lane, Baddesley Clinton for housing would provide additional dwellings to contribute towards meeting the increased housing target and is small enough to make a contribution to the immediate housing supply such as to deal with the historic undersupply. The development of this site would effectively infill a vacant area of land that is well related to the adjacent existing development. As a consequence it is not considered that the development of the site would prevent the Green Belt from serving the five purposes identified in the NPPF. Further there would be any significant visual impacts. Baddesley Clinton is sustainably located with some facilities including a bus route. Smaller settlements such as Bedddesley Clinton will need to take a share to accommodate the level of housing growth required.
See attached
Support
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69980
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Grevayne Properties Ltd
Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd
Grevayne Properties Ltd are fully supportive of modifications 10 and 11 relating to Appendix B which collectively seeks to allocate additional housing land.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 69983
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: The Kler Group
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The site at the Peeping Tom Public House, Burton Green is available, and suitable to provide additional housing in Burton Green. The village is affected by HS2. One of the consequences of this is that the allocated site at Burrow Hill Nursery is unlikely to come forward before HS2 is complete. The plan therefore provides no flexibility for the delivery of housing in the village. Further, the Plan does not take account the loss and abandonment of homes as a result of HS2 is we have estimated at around 55 dwellings or 20.91% of the housing stock in the village. Further land therefore needs to be allocated. The site at Cromwell Lane would be a suitable Green Belt release and is isolated from HS2. Evidence has previously been submitted - centrally located, close to public transport and employment opportunities. Vehicular access can be achieved and work has been undertaken to demonstrate landscape and visual impacts are acceptable. Further the site can delivered in 5 years. A similar site to the north is proposed for allocation in Coventry's Local Plan.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70012
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Sharba Homes
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
BISHOPS TACHBROOK
OMISSION SITE
The site has an 'unfettered' planning history; has a suitable point of access; does not serve to exacerbate an existing problem of a decreasing gap between the village edge and south Warwick; does not form part of a proposed 'Area of Coalescence Protection; is in an area where the landscape impact has already been considered acceptable by the Parish Council, District Council and planning committee in granting the adjacent site; and importantly is of sufficient size to deliver some form of real community benefit to the village alongside a proportion of residential development.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70026
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mr J Crocker
Agent: Framptons
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OMISSION site: -
- land south of Old Warwick Road, Kingswood can be accessed and serviced from Old Warwick Road using existing access as a separate development site. Existing access serves the Tan House.
- can be fully built out within 5 years, would be released for development immediately upon exclusion from Green Belt through development plan process.
- enclosed by established boundaries, relates well to existing pattern of built development. New housing would not extend into open land
- minimal green belt encroachment
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70040
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Agree in principle with the proposed allocation of Site H28 for approximately 120 dwellings given it offers a sustainable and logical extension to the settlement of Hatton Park.
However, there is a strip of land to the east of the proposed allocation which is within the control of Taylor Wimpey adjacent to Ugly Bridge Road. In our view, extending the allocated area to cover the entirety of the land in Taylor Wimpey's control would form a more logical extension to Hatton Park. Moreover, the omission of this strip of land will render it redundant from any viable continued use as an agricultural landholding. Should the Council be seeking to enhance landscaping on the eastern edge of the proposed residential development, then we consider that this would be better achieved by including the land within the allocated area.
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70078
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Warwickshire County Council [Archaeological Information and Advice]
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
There are inconsistencies with regard to text relating to schools provision throughout the plan , Kings Hill should identify a secondary school, and primary schools as required(see suggested alterations below).
The Proposed Modifications of the new Warwick Local Plan will provide for increased new housing in order to meet an identified unmet need in Coventry.
The new Local Plan will now provide for 17,577 homes between 2011 and 2029. The District Council's approach to identifying land for housing as set out in the Spatial Strategy and SHLAA work is supported and these additional comments relate to the proposed modifications.
The County Council has had extensive involvement in assessment of new Local Plan and transport impacts and identification of transport infrastructure mitigation requirements through the life development of the Plan. We assume that the Draft Infrastructure Plan will be modified to reflect these changes
Transport matters
The transport evidence base developed by the County to support the WDC Local Plan comprises a series of Strategic Transport Assessments (STA) and accompanying technical notes. The latest phase of this work, based on the Local Plan Modifications, forms the basis for this consultation response. The most recent STA was submitted to Warwick District Council on 3rd March 2016.
On the basis of the STA work and additional analysis to assess modifications to the allocation options, we would support the inclusion of the proposed modifications to the allocations in principle.
In response to the Inspectors comments, the Duty to Co-operate and Secretary of State appeal decisions, the modifications identify a need to accommodate substantially more housing within the District. The changes to planned housing allocations (12,860 increasing to 17,577 dwellings) will have an impact on the transport network and mitigation requirements. The following sections provide an overview of the transport work by area.
South Warwick and Leamington
Approximately 6,000 houses are now proposed to be allocated in south Warwick and Leamington. The addition of 1,350 houses to be delivered at the Asps and Gallows Hill Development sites has focussed further development in this area.
The STA results reveal that a number of corridor/area strategies are required to mitigate the impacts of development, these are summarised in the latest revision of the STA. A key focus of these strategies is the A452 Europa Way corridor area, where significant infrastructure requirements are required including the upgrade to a dual carriageway. The modification to the allocations in this area has also triggered the need for further improvements on Gallows Hill.
In the majority of instances the scheme proposals lie within one or more of the areas identified within the Transport Corridor Strategy which is documented within the draft IDP. It is recommended that the new and revised schemes are incorporated within the Transport Corridor Strategy document at an appropriate time and should align with the Warwick and Leamington Spa Transport Strategy which focuses on how targeted sustainable transport measures, when incorporated within the corridor strategies, can reduce the impact of travel on the network. The STA notes that, post adoption of the Plan, further detailed work to enable a more thorough strategy to be determined which maximises opportunities for sustainable transport measures and reduced car based trips across all corridors and town centres will be required.
It is considered pertinent to highlight the critical role, of strategic and local importance that the A46 and M40 play in accommodating traffic flows. Further investigation of scheme proposals along both the A46 and the M40 will be critical to ensuring the overall resilience of the transport network is maintained. The latest STA section 4.53 notes that "There could, justification for seeking to improve the operational capacity of the SRN in Warwick and Stratford districts sooner than the modelling indicates, on the basis that the current modelling does not account for events such as incidents and other operational issues that occur outside of the issues induced by general traffic growth".
Sites East of Kenilworth
Local Plan modifications include additional housing allocations east of Kenilworth equating to 740 dwellings, this is approximately 50% increase in the housing allocation for the town.
The addition of these sites, combined with the cumulative impact of proposed allocations and proposed modifications, triggers the need for additional mitigation in the area.
Improvements at A452/A46 Thickthorn Roundabout and associated dualling to A452 Bericote roundabout will now become an essential element of the mitigation strategy and the IDP should be updated to reflect this. Additional mitigation is also identified within the town.
Sites at Kings Hill and Westwood Heath
Modifications to the Plan include development at Kings Hill (1,800 dwellings) and Westwood Heath (425 dwellings), south of Coventry. Analysis of the impact of development of this scale, in this location, has been considered within the latest STA. Previous STAs did not cover this area, as such alternative methodologies had to be adopted to analyse the impact of development.
The STA revealed that a cap should be placed on development at Westwood Heath of approximately 425 dwellings, based on link capacity assessments on Gibbet Hill and Crackley Lane. If a wider mitigation strategy which improves links to the A46 is identified, the cap on development in this area can be reconsidered.
In addition to the allocated housing at Westwood Heath it is also understood that there are emerging plans for the University of Warwick and Westwood Business Park to grow whilst other employment sites may also come forward within the area. The area has also been identified in the Coventry Local Plan highlighting the existing constraints posed by the A45, particularly in the area of the Kenilworth Road junction.
The impact of 1,800 dwellings at Kings Hill, and the cumulative impact of Local Plan growth and general traffic growth trigger the need for a major junction improvement at A46/Stoneleigh Rd and Stoneleigh Rd/Dalehouse Lane.
It is recommended that the junction proposals for the Stoneleigh Road/A46 junction be seen as the starting point for delivering a wider strategy for improving connectivity between the A46, North Kenilworth, Warwick University and the Tile Hill/Westwood Heath housing areas south of Coventry. This could be in the form of capacity enhancements applied to the existing road network or, alternatively and longer term, provision of additional capacity in the form of a new link road which can connect some or all of the areas identified earlier.
It should be noted that the STA has established a need for a number of new mitigation strategies and has altered mitigation previously identified; these changes should now be reflected in an update to the IDP. Additionally, in some cases the status of the requirement for these schemes has altered to "essential" as a result of the increase in demands on the network.
The STA work does not identify, at this stage, smaller, localised impacts that are not identifiable either due to the strategic focus of the work to date or the coverage of the models. These impacts and the site specific mitigation details will be agreed at application stage or through the development of the strategic schemes by WCC and funded through pooled S106 contributions and CIL.
For further details on the highway impact and mitigation strategies associated with the Local Plan, reference should be made to the transport evidence base located at http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/info/20416/evidence_base and the latest STA submission.
The County Councils Sustainable transport policies are contained in the Warwickshire Local Transport Plan (https://apps.warwickshire.gov.uk/api/documents/WCCC-630-116).
Education provision and growth
We refer to our recent discussions about provision for schools and we request that the following changes to be made. For ease these suggested changes are highlighted in blue.
Amend Policy DS12 to read:
DS12 Allocation of Land for Education
Planning Policy DS12 Allocation of Land for Education
Land at Southcrest Farm, Kenilworth (ED2) and land at Myton (ED1), as shown on
the Policies Map, is allocated for educational uses and other compatible uses (see
policy HS5). This includes, on each site, the provision of a secondary school, 6th form
centre and, if deemed the most appropriate location, a primary school.
In the case of Southcrest Farm the whole area of the site is unlikely to be required
for educational purposes. Any land within this site that is surplus to the educational
requirement is therefore allocated for housing (see Policy DS11)
Amend para 2.56 Kenilworth Secondary School and 6th Form: the existing school sites are allocated for housing within Policy DS11. The school is seeking to locate all its facilities onto a single site. Further, the additional housing proposed in the Kenilworth priority area means that the town needs additional school places. If the current secondary school is to continue to offer the educational choice it currently provides and providing the educational needs of the Town and surrounding area. For these reasons, a new site for a secondary
school in Kenilworth is preferred. In addition, the additional housing allocated in the Kenilworth area requires the provision of a new primary school. Over and above the educational land requirement, the site has capacity for housing, as set out in Policy DS11. The land at Southcrest Farm, as shown on the Policies Map, is therefore allocated primarily for educational purposes and other compatible uses as defined by policy HS5, and for housing where there is surplus land over and above the educational requirement.
Amend para 2.56 as to follows:
2.56 Kenilworth Secondary School and 6th Form: Kenilworth School is not capable of being expanded on its current sites to meet the likely demand for school places generated by additional housing within the Kenilworth area. The school is therefore seeking to relocate all of its facilities on to a single new site.
A new site for secondary school provision in Kenilworth Town is therefore preferred
Land at Southcrest Farm (ED2), as shown on the Policies Map, has been allocated (DS12) primarily for educational purposes and other compatible uses as defined by policy HS5 and for housing where there is surplus land over and above the educational requirement.
The existing Kenilworth school sites are allocated for housing within Policy DS11.
In addition, new primary Schools will be required to meet demand in the Kenilworth area.
(Explanation: the school cannot be expanded to meet demand; the school must relocate if the demand is to be met; the plan anticipates the relocation of the school by allocating the existing school sites for housing; Southcrest Farm is allocated for secondary school provision in policy DS12; any surplus land at Southcrest farm will be available for housing)
There are some inconsistent descriptions and references to schools provision and we ask you to make these changes for clarification. The Inconsistencies are noted below and we would ask that you amend these paragraphs to include provision of a new secondary school and primary schools to serve the development.
Policy DS15 (p 9 &10)
Land at Kings Hill Potential for some employment land; potentially land for secondary school provision; new primary schools (plural) local centre and community facilities; health centre; new rail station (no secondary school)
Mod 21 (p 22)
New para 1.8 At Kings Hill an area of c269ha has been identified for a residential‐led,
mixed‐use development (see Policy map). The site has an overall capacity of c. 4,000 dwellings, with c. 1,800 dwellings being deliverable by the end of the current plan period. The mixed use development will also include the potential to provide employment land. Land will need to be provided for open space, leisure and amenity uses and will form part of a green infrastructure network linking to the wider countryside and north to the conurbation. A local centre will be provided at an appropriate scale, incorporating a range of local community facilities and services including meeting space / community buildings, emergency services infrastructure, youth facilities / play areas and local retail provision for convenience shopping. A new primary school (singular) will be required to serve the development, which may need to be expanded as the site develops over time. (no reference to a secondary school stated)
P33 refers
H43 Kings Hill Lane** 1800
(Total capacity up to 4000 with the balance to come forward beyond the end of the plan period). Potential for some employment land; potentially land for secondary school provision; (not in previous paragraphs) new primary schools; (plural) local centre and community facilities; health centre; new rail station
Greenfield sites para 2.55 p37 refers
2.55 At Kings Hill an area of 269ha has been identified for a residential‐led, mixed‐use development. The site has an overall capacity of c. 4,000 dwellings, with c. 1,800 dwellings being deliverable by the end of the current plan period. The mixed use development will also deliver opportunities for employment provision. Land will be made available for open space, leisure and amenity uses and a green infrastructure network will link to the wider countryside and north to the conurbation. A local centre will be provided at an appropriate scale, incorporating a range of local community facilities and services including meeting space / community buildings, emergency services infrastructure, youth facilities / play areas and local retail provision for convenience shopping. A new primary school (singular) Will be required to serve the development, which may need to be expanded as the site develops over time. (no reference to secondary school stated)
We request that any reference to schools should also identify the need for land for an additional secondary school and primary schools.
We will continue to work with you to the progress of the new Local Plan and should you wish to discuss any of the above matters further please contact
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70098
Received: 21/04/2016
Respondent: The Burman Family
Agent: Nigel Gough Associates Ltd
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Agree in principle with allocation of H28 for c120 dwellings.
Object to retention of strip of green belt land along eastern and northern edges of site.
No logical or defensible boundary as required by NPPF.
Should use field boundary.
No benefit in farming terms for keeping strips of land.
No justification in maintaining a landscape strip / buffer
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70123
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Deeley Group Ltd.
Agent: Delta Planning
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
WDC has allocated a additional sites for housing through the Proposed Modifications to meet increased housing requirement including a number of Green Belt sites.
Mod6 states that in total 9,369 dwellings are to be delivered on sites allocated in the Plan bringing the total provision to 17,577 dwellings.
Whilst the identified housing land supply (17,577 dwellings) is above the agreed objectively
assessed housing need(16,776 dwellings) and therefore allows for some flexibility if allocated sites fail to come forward/are delivered with reduced capacity, the proposed housing land supply does not provide sufficient flexibility to significantly boost supply of housing in the District.
The proposed supply is only 801 dwellings above the identified requirement, representing less than 5% of the
overall need and is not sufficiently flexible to ensure that the LP can readily adapt to changing circumstances.
The LP is not effective as it risks not delivering the full objectively assessed housing requirements unless additional sites are allocated to provide for greater choice.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70128
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Deeley Group Ltd.
Agent: Delta Planning
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OMISSION sites: -
Land off Home Farm in Leek Wootton and land off Friends Close in Baginton:
Home Farm:
- in sustainable location close to village services and amenities, adjacent to allocated Police Headquarters
- Readily available, deliverable, could help to meet housing requirements in short term supplementing Police Headquarters site
Land off Friends Close, Baginton:
- well-contained by development to north /east, substantial landscaping to south /west
- option for sensitively-designed housing scheme complemented by landscaping along site boundaries
- Development of site together with adjoining Meeting Rooms and Free School would result in long-term defensible Green Belt boundary.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70138
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Barton Willmore
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
OLD MILVERTON
We agree in principle with the proposed allocation of Site H44 for residential development. However, given it offers a sustainable and logical extension to the north of Leamington Spa we consider that a larger allocation could be delivered on the proposed safeguarded area of the Site within the Plan period - with the whole Site being under the control of Taylor Wimpey.
see attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70152
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Graham Romer
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Appendix B Ref: H44 (App 5 and SHLAA L03/L07
Density of housing proposal too high to make any significant improvement in biodiversity, habitat etc.
Replacing intensive agriculture with concrete and tarmac will not assist with climate change or biodiversity problems. Proximity to R Avon offers substantial environmental and habitat opportunities
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70161
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Commercial Estates Group
Agent: Nexus Planning
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Support allocation of Westwood Heath.
No compelling policy justification for identifying H42 in preference to S1 and indeed there is an acknowledgement from the Council that residential development can be accommodated on S1 without any adverse impact on amenity.
Important to secure delivery of community infrastructure in early phases of development to ensure sustainable development patterns can be established and new residents get access to facilities quickly.
First phase of residential development should be planned and delivered in a way that would facilitate delivery of "Community Hub".
Seeking combined H42 / S1 allocation that could be comprehensively planned and phased.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70226
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mr. Michael James Edwards
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
object to proposal: -
- other more suitable green belt sites available
- should explore compulsory purchase orders
- more suitable areas available closer to Coventry
- should look at Bubbenhall as more suitable location
- site at Hampton Road (43 acres) was available for sale at time of SHLAA - was not considered
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70274
Received: 21/04/2016
Respondent: Joanna Illingworth
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Modification does not take account of the lack of infrastructure in Crewe Lane/Glasshouse Lane. The road is barely adequate before new houses and school are built.
Area is close to HS2 route taking up more green belt land. Modification doesn't seem to take account of this.
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70280
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Dr. & Mrs. P. & D. Thornton & Vernon et al.
Number of people: 2
Agent: Mrl Alasdair, Jones
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The proposed site at Burrow Hill nursery is not sufficiently well justified. The site being promoted by my clients to r/o Cromwell Lane and Hodgetts Lane is more appropriate and sustainable. See also reps to Mod 8 which argue the plan is unsound due to the approach it takes to accommodating the needs of the City. As a result the site r/o Cromwell Lane and Hodgetts Lane should be allocated and shown on the policies map 6.
The Burrow Hill Nursery site is not as well located for buses, the railway stationat Tile Hill, new facilities at Westwood Heath. IOt is also likely to experience noise problems due to location adjacent to HS2 tunnel portal. Further a high pressure pipeline runs through part of the site and is on an aquifer with medium/high vulnerability. Finally development here would have an impact on landscape.
None of these constraints apply to the land r/o Cromwell Lane and Hodgetts Lane. The access to this site is now resolved, the site is in an area of lower landscape value and development is achievable subject to landscaping. This site is therefore more appropriate and its delivery is less constrained by HS2
See attached
Object
Proposed Modifications January 2016
Representation ID: 70297
Received: 23/04/2016
Respondent: Hazel and Robin Fryer
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Coventry claim that they do not have any alternative housing sites and need to build in Warwickshire has not been critically examined by WDC. The Coventry 2016 draft Local Plan shows large areas of Coventry Greenbelt that can be developed which would have far less damage than WDC's proposals and would not contravene the aims of the NPPF.
see attached