Mod PM36 - Policies Map

Showing comments and forms 1 to 9 of 9

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 68586

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs Susan Malone

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Kingshill development.....You have not considered the following:
Greenbelt, additional traffic generated, infrastructure, drainage, flooding, bats, crested newts, badgers, protected trees, destruction of local communities. Are you seriously considering this project, given the other possible developments in the area (HS2, JLR)? You will swamp the local villages with traffic and pollution. We are at breaking point and you are not listening to the electorate!

Full text:

Kingshill development.....You have not considered the following:
Greenbelt, additional traffic generated, infrastructure, drainage, flooding, bats, crested newts, badgers, protected trees, destruction of local communities. Are you seriously considering this project, given the other possible developments in the area (HS2, JLR)? You will swamp the local villages with traffic and pollution. We are at breaking point and you are not listening to the electorate!

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 68830

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Duncan Gowing

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to allocation: -
- poorly considered response to issues of unsoundness raised by inspector
- can't justify creating high density housing in Kings Hill when other areas are lower density e.g. Nuneaton and Bedworth and could contain higher density development
- loss of green space and impact on / loss of green belt
- flood risk exacerbated from Finham Brook
- adverse impact on drinking water
- lack of capacity at sewage works
- loss of farmland
- poor accessibility to site
- loss of protected trees, hedgerows and habitats
- adverse impact on wildlife, ecology and historic environment

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Support

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 69172

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Lioncourt Strategic Land - Andy Faizey

Agent: Savills

Representation Summary:

SUPPORT the allocation of additional land for housing at Kings Hill and associated amendment to the Urban Area Boundary (Site Ref: H43, Policies Map 36). SUPPORT the removal of land from the Green Belt at Kings Hill.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 69232

Received: 22/05/2016

Respondent: Severn Trent Water (Supply Team)

Agent: GL Hearn

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Omission Site:
Allocate land at Finham Sewage Treatment Works as additional employment provision associated with Kings Hill, to allow for additional housing development to be provided at Kings Hill.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 69295

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Parklands Consortium Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to proposals:
- contrary to NPPF
- area previously preserved
- proposal to remove site capable of containing 4,000 houses to provide for 1,800 houses unjustified
- no exceptional circumstances demonstrated
- no landscape analysis of whole of SMA that justifies removal of site from green belt

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 69563

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. David Edwards

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

-The greenbelt should be preserved and developments on brownfield sites preferred.
-The proposed plan will destroy fields, wildlife and reduce light on our property.
-It will also increase pollution, noise and traffic.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 69706

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Woodland Trust

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

We are pleased to see Wainbody Wood excluded from development in new paragraph 1.09 of modification 21 and protected from associated impacts and would like to see this cross referenced to modifications 16 and PM36.

Full text:

See attached
Appendix 1

Ancient Woodland

As the UK's leading woodland conservation charity, the Trust aims to protect native woods, trees and their wildlife for the future. Through the restoration and improvement of woodland biodiversity and increased awareness and understanding of important woodland, these aims can be achieved. We own over 1,250 sites across the UK, covering around 23,000 hectares (57,000 acres) and we have 500,000 members and supporters.

Ancient woodland is defined as an irreplaceable natural resource that has remained constantly wooded since AD1600. The length at which ancient woodland takes to develop and evolve (centuries, even millennia), coupled with the vital links it creates between plants, animals and soils accentuate its irreplaceable status. The varied and unique habitats ancient woodland sites provide for many of the UK's most important and threatened fauna and flora species cannot be re-created and cannot afford to be lost. As such, the Woodland Trust aims to prevent the damage, fragmentation and loss of these finite irreplaceable sites from any form of disruptive development.

The Trust is concerned about a number of site allocations included in the Warwickshire Local Plan as they could lead to the damage and loss of ancient woodland.

Planning policy

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 118 states that "planning permission should be refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats, including ancient woodland and the loss of aged or veteran trees found outside ancient woodland, unless the need for, and benefits of, the development in that location clearly outweigh the loss."
Emerging national policy is increasingly supportive of absolute protection of ancient woodland and ancient trees. The Communities and Local Government (CLG) Select Committee published its report following its June 2014 inquiry into the 'Operation of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)', in which it has specifically recognised the need for better protection for ancient woodland (Tues 16th Dec 2014). The CLG Select Committee report states: 'We agree that ancient woodland should be protected by the planning system. Woodland that is over 400 years old cannot be replaced and should be awarded the same level of protection as our built heritage. We recommend that the Government amend paragraph 118 of the NPPF to state that any loss of ancient woodland should be "wholly exceptional". We further recommend that the Government initiate work with Natural England and the Woodland Trust to establish whether more ancient woodland could be designated as sites of special scientific interest and to consider what the barriers to designation might be.' http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmcomloc/190/190.pdf.
This shows a clear direction of travel, recognising that the NPPF does not currently provide sufficient protection for ancient woodland. Until the NPPF is amended there is a clear role for Local Plans and associated documents to provide this improved level of protection and to ensure that irreplaceable habitats get the same level of protection as heritage assets enjoy under the NPPF.
This recommendation should also be considered in conjunction with other - stronger - national policies on ancient woodland and ancient trees-
* The Government's policy document 'Keepers of Time - A statement of Policy for England's Ancient & Native Woodland' (Defra/Forestry Commission, 2005, p.10) states: 'The existing area of ancient woodland should be maintained and there should be a net increase in the area of native woodland'. 'Keepers of Time' (Defra, 2005) - now re-affirmed in the Government's Forestry Policy Statement - also requires that: 'Ancient and native woodland and trees should make an increasing contribution to our quality of life....Take steps to avoid losses of ancient woodland and of ancient and veteran trees' (P.10/11).
* The Government's Independent Panel on Forestry states: 'Government should reconfirm the policy approach set out in the Open Habitats Policy and Ancient Woodland Policy (Keepers of Time - A statement of policy for England's ancient and native woodland).....Reflect the value of ancient woodlands, trees of special interest, for example veteran trees, and other priority habitats in Local Plans, and refuse planning permission for developments that would have an adverse impact on them.' (Defra, Final Report, July 2012). This has been endorsed by the response in the Government Forestry Policy Statement (Defra Jan 2013): 'We recognise the value of our native and ancient woodland and the importance of restoring open habitats as well as the need to restore plantations on ancient woodland sites. We, therefore, confirm our commitment to the policies set out in both the Open Habitats Policy and Keepers of Time, our statement of policy for England's ancient and native woodland'.
* The Government's Natural Environment White Paper - The Natural Choice: securing the value of nature (HM Government, July 2011, para 2.56) states that: 'The Government is committed to providing appropriate protection to ancient woodlands....'.

* The Biodiversity Strategy for England (Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England's Wildlife & Ecosystem Services, Defra 2011, see 'Forestry' para 2.16) states that - 'We are committed to providing appropriate protection to ancient woodlands and to more restoration of plantations on ancient woodland site'.
There is increasing evidence of other local authorities supporting absolute protection of ancient woodland in their LDF planning documents -

North Somerset Council Core Strategy Adopted April 2012 -
'Policy CS4: Nature conservation
North Somerset contains outstanding wildlife habitats and species. These include limestone grasslands, traditional orchards, wetlands, rhynes, commons, hedgerows, ancient woodlands and the Severn Estuary. Key species include rare horseshoe bats, otters, wildfowl and wading birds, slow-worms and water voles.
The biodiversity of North Somerset will be maintained and enhanced by:...
3) seeking to protect, connect and enhance important habitats, particularly designated sites, ancient woodlands and veteran trees'.
South Ribble Borough Council Local Plan 2012 - 2026 (Adopted July 2015)
Policy G13-Trees, Woodlands and Development
a) Planning permission will not be permitted where the proposal adversely affects trees, woodlands and hedgerows which are:
i Protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO);
ii Ancient Woodlands including individual ancient and veteran trees and those defined in Natural England's inventory of ancient woodlands;
ii In a Conservation Area; or
iv Within a recognised Nature Conservation Site.
10.73 Ancient Woodlands (woodlands which have been continuously wooded since 1600AD) are particularly important for their flora, fauna and their undisturbed soil and drainage patterns. It is essential that Ancient Woodlands are protected from the adverse effects of development since they are an irreplaceable asset.
10.74 Trees in Conservation Areas also make a special contribution and enhance the environmental quality of these areas. Such trees are protected under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Six weeks prior written notice must be given to the local planning authority of any intended works to the trees. This will enable the Council to make a Tree Preservation Order if the proposed works are unacceptable and detrimental to the character of the Conservation Area. The Council wishes to encourage the planting of native tree and hedgerow species, where trees are characteristic of the landscape and are beneficial to wildlife
The Bristol City Council - Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (Adopted July 2014) [part of Local Plan) states that
Policy DM17: Development Involving Existing Green Infrastructure
"Trees
All new development should integrate important existing trees. Development which would result in the loss of Ancient Woodland, Aged trees or Veteran trees will not be permitted".
Torbay Local Plan (adopted December 2015) Policy C4 - Trees, hedgerows and natural landscape features
"Development will not be permitted when it would seriously harm, either directly or indirectly, protected or veteran trees, hedgerows, ancient woodlands or other natural features of significant landscape, historic or nature conservation value".


In addition Policy NE2 Protecting Designated Biodiversity and Geodiversity Assets of the Warwick DC Local Plan Submission version (sub para a) also provides protection for ancient woodland and veteran trees.


Natural England's standing advice for Ancient Woodland and Veteran Trees (published April 2014), paragraph 4.8.1 states: 'Ancient woodland is of prime ecological and landscape importance, providing a vital part of a rich and diverse countryside. In particular, ancient woodland:

* is exceptionally rich in wildlife, and supports many rare and threatened species;
* may contain surviving descendants and features from the original natural forests;
* acts as reservoirs from which wildlife can spread into new woodlands;
* has valuable soils due to their undisturbed nature;
* is an integral part of England's historic landscapes and the biological and visual functioning of a landscape;
* contains a wealth of features of historical and archaeological importance little altered by modern cultivation or disturbance;
* contributes to people's sense of place and imagination.'

Impacts on ancient woodland

Approximately one quarter of priority UK BAP species are associated with woodland habitats. Forests, woods, and trees make a significant contribution to biodiversity, and ancient sites are recognised as being of particular value. Due to their longevity, ancient woodlands are more species rich, and are often refuges for specialist woodland species that struggle to colonise new areas.

Woodland wildlife populations are exposed to damaging external impacts from outside the woodland site. Intensity of land use adjacent to ancient woodland results in an increase in these external impacts, otherwise known as 'edge effects'. Detrimental edge effects have been shown to penetrate woodland causing changes in ancient woodland characteristics that extend up to three times the canopy height in from the forest edges.

Creation of new areas of woodland or buffer zones around semi-natural habitats, and more particularly ancient woodland, will help to reduce and ameliorate the impact of damaging edge effects, serving to improve their sustainability. The size of the buffer is dependent on the intensity of land use in the intervening matrix between ancient woods.

Natural England's standing advice for Ancient Woodland and Veteran Trees, paragraph 6.4, highlights the importance of keeping development away from ancient woodland and buffering it where necessary:

"Development must be kept as far as possible from ancient woodland, with a buffer area maintained between the ancient woodland and any development boundary. An appropriate buffer area will depend on the local circumstances and the type of development. In a planning case in West Sussex the Secretary of State supported the arguments for a 15m buffer around the affected ancient woodland, but larger buffers may be required."

The size of a number of the site allocations suggests that large scale development could potentially take place. The minimum 15m buffer recommendation to all development is not effective in ensuring that ancient woodland within and/or adjacent to site allocations is not affected by potential future development. Buffers should be constructed on a case-by-case basis rather than a 'one size fits all' approach.

The Woodland Trust is particularly concerned about the following:

* Disturbance by noise, light, trampling and other human activity;
* Fragmentation as a result of the destruction of adjacent semi-natural habitats;
* Development providing a source of non-native plants and aiding their colonisation;
* Where the wood edge overhangs gardens, branches and even whole trees can be indiscriminately lopped/felled, causing reduction of the woodland canopy;
* There will inevitably be safety issues in respect of trees adjoining public areas and buildings, which will be threatening to the longer-term retention of such trees;
* There can be changes to the hydrology altering ground water and surface water quantities. Also the introduction of water run offs from urban development will result in changes to the characteristics and quality of the surface water as a result of pollution/contamination etc.

The close proximity of a large development to ancient woodland and ancient trees could have numerous adverse impacts on the health of the site.

In order to protect the site's fauna and flora from exposure to edge effects it is necessary to implement a buffer zone. A buffer is a landscape feature used to protect sensitive areas from the impacts of development (or other harmful neighbouring land use). The buffer could be planted with trees or shrubs or it could be an area of land which the development is not allowed to encroach upon (e.g. a grassy strip).

Buffers should be designed on a case by case basis, and depend on a variety of factors, such as number of houses, alternative areas of green space available, layout of the development, etc. The Trust recommends that a buffer of at least 15m is implemented between the proposed development and ancient woodland. This buffer should consist of 50% planting of semi-natural vegetation.

The implementation of a buffer consisting of hawthorn would help to prevent edge effects and garden-related problems from arising by preventing encroachment on to our site. Alternatively a grassy strip would also serve an important purpose as it will help to separate the woodland from development and encourage a phased habitat to the woodland edge.

It should be noted that gardens of adjacent housing must not be included within buffer zones as there is limited control over how they may be used, or developed in the future; for example, they might be paved or decked without the need for planning permission or they may include inappropriate species which could integrate themselves into our site. Further to this the Trust recommends that gardens of houses are not backed on to our site as they result in the increase of garden-related problems for adjacent wooded areas, i.e. waste tipping, littering, spreading of invasive and non-native plants species, disturbance, pet intrusion, etc.

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 70087

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Jennifer Instone

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The level of development proposed in this area is too much. More brownfield sites should be developed and utilised for flats.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Object

Proposed Modifications January 2016

Representation ID: 70249

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Andrew Instone

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Coventry map - development too crowded in the area

Full text:

See attached

Attachments: