BT1 Conserving and Enhancing BT's Landscape Character

Comment

Representation ID: 71935

Received: 27/06/2020

Respondent: Barwood Strategic Land II Limited

Agent: Pegasus Group

Figure 7 is imprecise as to the nature of the views being protected, how they are assessed and what elements of the views are of value or need protecting. The elongated view towards the Asps reaches Europa Way, but it is unclear whether views beyond this are proposed to be considered.

It should be noted that the landscape and visual impact of the Asps has already been considered as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment of the outline permission. Therefore, any future Reserved Matters application would not be subject to carrying out a LVIA.

Additionally, the Asps is subject to an approved Design Code under Condition 9 of the planning permission. Figure 7 should be amended to reflect the existence of the Code and remove any reference to protected views across the Asps site; which is already subject of planning permission, and where a detailed development structure and framework exists as consented through the Condition 9 Design Code.

Object

Representation ID: 71947

Received: 10/08/2020

Respondent: Mr Brian Lewis

Agent: Pegasus Group

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Figure 7 is imprecise as to the nature of the views that are being protected, the public 'viewpoint' itself is not identified and there is no identification of what elements of the views are of value or need protecting. Whilst unclear, figure 7 as drafted also suggests thing protected are toward land on which residential development has been granted permission and where development is underway, such as at Harbury Lane for example. Text supporting the policy also fails to have regard to developments which have changed the context of the landscape in which Bishop's Tachbrook is located.

Policy BT.1, and Figure 7, as drafted are not sufficiently detailed to allow a proper consideration of landscape context.

Comment

Representation ID: 71958

Received: 27/07/2020

Respondent: Northern Trust

Agent: Pegasus Group

The majority of the protected views look towards the H02 (Harbury Lane) allocation. The wording of Policy BT1 does not take into account the allocation nor the scale of development which is coming forward and still to come forward in this area. The revised policy wording in this draft does little to resolve this issue by suggesting that the quality and integrity of these views should be retained and where necessary an LVIA should be carried out to identify any impact and seek to incorporate measures which minimise these impacts.

Whilst the intention of the policy has been made slightly clearer with the amendments, the failure to provide any justification for the protection of these views remains a key issue for the policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 71967

Received: 07/08/2020

Respondent: Sharba Homes

Agent: Sharba Homes

This Policy lists 8 points of mitigation that should be covered in any proposals, but does not set out that any required development should be accommodated by assessing the relative merits of landscape impact for all options for village expansion to ensure that the least harm is incurred – it is not clear that the BTNDP is supportive of development in this regard, rather than obstructive.

Map 6 replicates the Districts latest Landscape sensitivity appraisal from 2011. It should be reviewed, landscapes re-assessed in light of recent development and updated accordingly.