Issue and Options 2023
Search form responses
Results for Rosconn Strategic Land search
New searchYes, growth of existing settlements in South Warwickshire is imperative to deliver the overall growth targets, and achieve the Vision and overarching principles. The need for housing, affordable and specialist housing, green infrastructure, improved facilities and infrastructure is within the towns and villages. Those needs are best met sustainably adjacent to the settlements. The following comments are made in respect of Rosconn Strategic Land Site east of Marton Road, Long Itchington (site 469) which forms part of Area 10. In respect of Connectivity, the Area has been assessed as ‘D’. This is defined as having significant barriers that would be difficult to overcome. The commentary states that access would be via loop / cul-de-sac. Only access to brown route is at far end of this area, furthest from village centre. However, the accompanying Development Framework Plan illustrates how a suitable access can be provided to this site from Cox Crescent off Marton Road. Access directly onto Marton Road to the north would not be necessary for this small part of the Area. Connectivity should therefore be re-assessed as ‘B’ in the next iteration of the Analysis. In the analysis of landform, there are no constraints, unlike the majority of the western side of Long Itchington which is covered by a flood plain. Therefore growth to the north of the village is supported in flood risk policy terms, with the area being sequentially preferable. In respect of local facilities within 800m, Area 10 scores very well with the site scoring 4 out of 5, only marked down for healthcare due to no facilities within the village at present. Areas 14 and 15 have been scored as 5 out of 5, however these sites appear to have been incorrectly scored as they are not within 800m of healthcare facilities either. The analysis should therefore be updated to reflect this. Area 10 is therefore considered a suitable location to accommodate development as there are no barriers to connectivity to the village, and the site is within 800m of a good range of local facilities. It should also be highlighted that Stratford-on-Avon District Council scored the site (LONG.01) positively within the SHLAA 2021 update. The assessment concluded that as the site was adjacent to a recent housing scheme (Lilac View) that the site could be delivered through the existing access. A landscape appraisal has been undertaken for land east of Marton Road (FPCR, October 2020) which concludes that development of the site could be accommodated whilst respecting the adjacent settlement form and would be in keeping with the adjacent residential development. It is considered that the site is capable of accommodating an appropriately designed residential development set within a robust GI framework as presented in the accompanying Development Framework Plan. Stratford-on-Avon District Council have also previously allocated the site as a reserve within Long Itchington (Ref: LONG.A) within the Preferred Options 2020 Site Allocations Plan (October 2020). Paragraph 141 of the NPPF states that before changes are made to Green Belt boundaries, the LPA will need to demonstrate that they have considered all other reasonable options for meeting its identified need for development. LPA’s must therefore demonstrate that they have made use of suitable and underutilised land before Green Belt land is released. Land east of Marton Road, Long Itchington, should therefore be given priority as this land is outside of the Green Belt and is considered to be a deliverable site to help deliver homes within the plan period.
Yes, growth of existing settlements in South Warwickshire is imperative to deliver the overall growth targets, and achieve the Vision and overarching principles. The need for housing, affordable and specialist housing, green infrastructure, improved facilities and infrastructure is within the towns and villages. Those needs are best met sustainably adjacent to the settlements. The village of Lower Quinton has not been included within the Settlement Analysis evidence supporting the South Warwickshire Local Plan. In the absence of any analysis, the following comments are therefore made in support of growth at Lower Quinton. In terms of context, the site north of Main Road, Lower Quinton (Site 508) is located on the northern edge of Lower Quinton with agricultural land to the north and west. To the east, there are playing fields associated with Lower Quinton Village Hall. The southern boundary is mostly defined by the rear gardens of residential properties on Magdalen Close, Millfield Close, Ayleston Close, St. Swithin’s Drive and by the grounds of Quinton House (currently used as a nursing home). Quinton is defined as a Category 1 Local Service Village within the Settlement Hierarchy in the adopted Core Strategy. The village has a number of community services and facilities, including Convenience Store and Post Office, Takeaway, Village Hall and Playing Field, Public House / Inn, Primary School, Medical Centre and Church. In view of Quinton’s sustainability credentials as outlined above, Quinton should be assessed as a Small Settlement Location (SSL) within the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) informing the South Warwickshire Local Plan. Rosconn Strategic Land therefore request that Quinton is assessed as a growth location and a SSL in the next iteration of the SA as it is a highly sustainable location, with an excellent range of facilities available within the village, therefore aligning with the 20 minute neighbourhood ideal. There are bus stops on Main Road providing a regular service to Stratford upon Avon and services to Moreton-in-Marsh, and Chipping Campden. North of the village, beyond Campden Road, a new garden village of around 3,500 homes and associated uses has started construction at the former Long Marston Airfield. The site lies within Flood Zone 1, which is the lowest possible risk of flooding and is suitable for development, therefore are therefore no constraints in terms of flood risk. The site does not lie within or adjacent to a Conservation Area and there would be no impact on the settings of any listed buildings. The nearest listed buildings are circa 360m to the east, within the historic core of the village. A Desk Based Heritage Assessment has not identified any designed archaeological remains within the site. There are no special landscape designations affecting the site, which is separated from the Cotswolds AONB to the south by existing built development. The site is located in the ‘Avon Valley’ Regional Landscape Character Area and within the ‘Vale Farmlands Landscape Character Type’. This indicates that there is scope for development if appropriate access and advanced planting can be secured. The site is located immediately adjacent to the northern edge of the existing settlement, and avoids areas of greater sensitivity to the south and east and constraints to the west. The Call for Sites submission for the site highlights that significant benefits to the local community can be delivered through a sensitively designed development. These include a dedicated pupil drop off/pick up area and land to expand the existing Primary School, extension of existing playing fields and significant areas of public open space, due to the site immediately adjoining these existing facilities. Access would be taken through the completed Cameron Homes development (Lilac Avenue connection with Main Road). The proposal would also ensure that traffic generated by the development would not need to pass through the village centre along Main Road, and the centre of the village. When taking account of the information above, land north of Main Road is considered a suitable location to accommodate modest development at the village of Lower Quinton commensurate with the scale of settlement. Paragraph 141 of the NPPF states that before changes are made to Green Belt boundaries, the LPA will need to demonstrate that they have considered all other reasonable options for meeting its identified need for development. LPA’s must therefore demonstrate that they have made use of suitable and underutilised land before Green Belt land is released. Land north of Main Road, Lower Quinton should therefore be given priority as this land is outside of the Green Belt and is considered to be a deliverable site to help deliver homes within the plan period.
The following comments are made in respect of the SA for Wellesbourne. The Small Settlement Location (SSLs) around Wellesbourne excludes the land east of Warwick Road promoted by Rosconn Strategic Land. As the land falls between the SSL and the settlement boundary, this anomaly should be rectified in the next iteration of the SA. The SSL for Wellesbourne (as with other settlements) covers a large area of land around all sides of the edge of the village. Some edges of the settlement will have more adverse impacts than others due to their different characteristics. For example, land to the west is constrained by the Airfield, and land to the south by the proximity to the Ancient Woodland ‘Wellesbourne Wood’. Assessing the settlement edge as a whole does not allow for any distinction to be made between different areas for growth. It is difficult therefore to draw conclusions as to the appropriateness of the settlement to accommodate growth from this exercise alone. However, it is clear from Table 5.1 that the only major adverse impacts identified relate to landscape sensitivity and agricultural land classification. Landscape sensitivity will of course vary between areas, and can be mitigated by sensitive design. Agricultural land classification will of course be a factor that needs to be taken into consideration, but is not an overriding constraint upon development of a site. The SA demonstrates therefore that there are no in principle impediments to growth at Wellesbourne, and this is a suitable location for growth. The Councils will also be mindful that this is only one piece of evidence at a strategic level, and the HELAA and other evidence will need to inform the selection of allocations in due course
Yes, growth of existing settlements in South Warwickshire is imperative to deliver the overall growth targets, and achieve the Vision and overarching principles. The need for housing, affordable and specialist housing, jobs, green infrastructure, improved facilities and infrastructure is within the towns and villages. Those needs are best met sustainably adjacent to the settlements. The following comments are made in respect of Rosconn Strategic Land site east of Warwick Road, which is referenced as Area 2 within the Wellesbourne area. In respect of Connectivity, the site has been assessed as ‘D’. This is defined as having significant barriers that would be difficult to overcome. The commentary in the Settlement Analysis states that the access is currently used as parking area and entrance to footpath. However, a suitable access can be provided to this site from the public highway, and this was accepted by the Neighbourhood Plan when allocating this site for housing. As Warwick Road is capable of accommodating all modes of transport, there are no barriers to connectivity to the settlement and this should be rectified in the next iteration of the Analysis to a score of (A). Reference is also made in the Settlement Analysis to the land being unlikely to be suitable as almost completely in the flood plain. That is not correct, as parts of the site are outside of Flood Risk Zones 2 and 3 and are therefore appropriate for development. Additionally, the Wellesbourne and Walton Neighbourhood Plan (WWNP) states at page 63 that the actual extent of the floodplain was assessed by detailed hydraulic modelling to inform the allocation of Area 1 (Land at Warwick Road) in the Neighbourhood Plan and in order to determine the extent of the developable area outside Flood Zones 2 and 3. Rosconn Strategic Land are currently undertaking updated hydraulic modelling to ensure that the modelling data remains accurate set against more recent flood risk guidance. In respect of Landforms, Flood Zones 2 and 3 are noted and would be retained. It should be noted that a particular aspiration of the Neighbourhood Plan is to secure these areas for open space to address a deficit in this area. In respect of local facilities within 800m, it is noted that the report highlights the absence of Healthcare for Area 2. However, Hastings House Medical Centre is within 800m of the site and therefore this should be rectified in the next iteration of the Analysis. When taking account of the evidence above, Area 2 is a suitable location to accommodate development as there are no barriers to connectivity to the village and all facilities are available within 800m. Paragraph 141 of the NPPF states that before changes are made to Green Belt boundaries, the LPA will need to demonstrate that they have considered all other reasonable options for meeting its identified need for development. LPA’s must therefore demonstrate that they have made use of suitable and underutilised land before Green Belt land is released. Land at Warwick Road, Wellesbourne should therefore be given priority as this land is outside of the Green Belt and is considered to be a deliverable site to help deliver homes within the plan period.
Yes, Rosconn Strategic Land support the allocation of other sites as necessary for short-term development. These sites should include those already allocated as reserve sites within the Development Plan, such as the land east of Warwick Road, Wellesbourne (Area 1 within Policy WW7 of the Neighbourhood Plan). This site has been allocated as a reserve site for 25 dwellings and community open space. Its suitability, availability and deliverability has therefore been assessed, and found to be acceptable. Policy WW7 states the site is to be released for development when required by the District Council. The requirement to allocate sites through the South Warwickshire Local Plan should be the trigger to release the reserve sites within the Neighbourhood Plan, and this should be confirmed within the South Warwickshire Local Plan Part 1 Document.
Yes, growth of existing settlements in South Warwickshire is imperative to deliver the overall growth targets, and achieve the Vision and overarching principles. The need for housing, affordable and specialist housing, green infrastructure, improved facilities and infrastructure is within the towns and villages. Those needs are best met sustainably adjacent to the settlements.
We generally support the approach of the November 2022 Sustainability Appraisal (SA) in its identification of a range of alternative growth options from broad distribution scenarios down to small settlement growth locations [E5]. In shaping the reasonable alternative options the councils have been guided by the 20-minute neighbourhood concept which aims to minimise carbon emissions by guiding development to locations where there is sustainable access to every day services and facilities as well as travel options other than the private car [section 3.1]. We consider this to be a sound basis for framing the alternatives explored. In terms of the Broad Locations (BLs) identified at Alcester, we would agree with the conclusions that the BLs identified for this settlement are logical as they avoid strategic constraints whilst being favourably located in respect of established services and facilities. We would broadly agree with the assertions in section 4.3, which cumulatively point to Alcester Northeast being the best performing option out of the three alternative assessed for the town. The identified Small Settlement Locations (SSLs) include a wide range of settlements with very different attributes and sustainability credentials. Unlike the BLs which are a shortlist of logical future growth directions based on the 20-minute neighbourhood concept amongst other considerations, the SSLs have been sorted and assessed purely at the entire settlement level, with weighting applied equally across the sustainability objectives. We are not sure how helpful this approach is because every settlement will have its constraints and opportunities, but the wider SWLP is clear that sustainable access is the priority and the “golden-thread” running through this plan-making exercise. The SA has identified BLs on this basis at the main settlements, so we would suggest the same approach is applied SSLs. We would note that some SSLs such as Kingswood have been identified as potential new settlement locations on the basis of their railway services or potential to provide railway services. If large-scale strategic growth might be apportioned on the basis of access to rail travel, then all locations which offer similar attributes should be considered not necessarily for strategic-level growth, but for smaller scale development in locations that can offer residents a genuine choice of travel options. In this respect, we consider that the availability of such locations should drive the selection of reasonable alternatives within the SSLs just as they have when looking at new settlements and Broad Location options, to refine the alternatives available on the basis of a finer-grained identification of growth directions within SSLs.
