Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Whilst the Council acknowledge that the 12,300 homes for the District between 2011 and 2029 is an interim figure and refer to the Coventry & Warwickshire joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), the significance of this emerging evidence cannot be understated. The SHMA has already been published though regrettably not reported to Warwick DC Executive Committee ahead of the close of this consultation. It has found that the housing need in all of the authority areas, including Warwick District, is likely to be higher than that currently planned for, i.e. 720 dwellings per annum, as opposed to the planned for 683 dwellings per annum.

This is a significant increase and could have considerable bearing on the number and/or density of sites required. We appreciate that this is only part of the evidence base feeding into the emerging Development Strategy which is yet to be tested and consulted upon, however, it gives a strong indication of how the housing requirement is likely to evolve. Furthermore, the NPPF states at paragraph 158 that Local Plans should be based on adequate, up-to-date and relevant evidence. Therefore, any objections received to specific site allocations should be considered in light of the fact that those sites currently proposed are likely to be the minimum that the District will have to allocate in order to meet the full objectively assessed need and boost significantly the supply of housing as required by paragraph 47 of the NPPF.

The Council plan to allocate the vast majority of development to non-Green Belt sites which is in accordance with section 9 of the NPPF which seeks to protect Green Belt land. However, we welcome the acknowledgement that options in Green Belt villages must be considered in order to meet the full needs of a growing population. This is particularly pertinent in light of the recent publication of the Coventry & Warwickshire joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) that the District housing need is likely to be in excess of that planned for in the current consultation.

Whilst the NPPF seeks to protect Green Belt, it states that the appropriate mechanism for altering Green Belt boundaries is via the preparation of a Local Plan. Of particular importance is the reference at paragraph 83 that in considering boundaries, permanence and endurance of the boundary are key. The growing population and increased need as demonstrated by the joint SHMA is likely to put pressure on Green Belt boundaries in the future. It is therefore important that the Council plan for sufficient land to be released from the Green Belt now, in order to avoid pressure and defend boundary amendments in the future.

The Coventry & Warwickshire joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) clearly identifies housing need per authority area. Whilst under the Duty to Co-operate neighbouring authorities have a duty to accommodate unmet need in adjoining districts, this is only relevant where redistribution would still actually meet the need. Directing development to an alternative location will not necessarily meet the need of Warwick District. Furthermore, it is more common that unmet needs form large urban areas which are physically constrained to be redistributed into adjacent rural authorities, than the reverse. In this instance, the pressure is for unmet need which cannot physically be provided within the limits to Coventry is redistributed to the adjoining authorities, as was originally proposed in the West Midlands RSS Revision Phase 2.

We appreciate that the detailed site assessment work has resulted in a decrease in the total number of village housing due to environmental and access restrictions, against the backdrop of a likely increase in the district housing requirement as evidenced by the recently published Coventry & Warwickshire joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), the council should approach this reduction with caution.

Sites must be deliverable therefore access restrictions are important considerations and can be an absolute bar to development, environmental constraints are more objective and must be balanced against the requirement to meet the full needs of a growing population.

Baginton was identified as a Primary Service Village with services and facilities suitable to accommodate 70-90 dwellings under the Draft Settlement Hierarchy Report in May 2013 this has been reduced to only 35 dwellings. This is due to contamination, flooding and historical constraints which has eliminated four alternative option sites; not due to the village not being appropriate. However, the density proposed on the preferred site is also below the full capacity as a result of the need for a high level of environmental screening. Whilst this may be necessary to make development of the site acceptable, it should be considered in light of the likely increase in the District housing requirement as demonstrated by the emerging evidence base.

We support the intention to inset from the Green Belt those villages identified as appropriate for growth as it will significantly improve the deliverability of allocated sites.

We support the preferred option of land north of Rosswood Farm for the development of 35 dwellings. The consultation document refers to this parcel as "Land north of Rosewood Farm" however, this should actually be "Land north of Rosswood Farm", in accordance with the supporting evidence base and site plans.

Of all of the potential development sites in Baginton, this site has been identified to have the least negative impact with good connectivity with the settlement with suitable access and provides opportunities to enhance the visual appearance of this part of the village, clearly defining an entrance to the village from the south. The site would form a logical boundary to this end of the village with development extending no further south than the pub and fronting the highway.

Green Belt:

As set out in section 3.7 of this consultation document, in order to meet the full objectively assessed housing needs of the Districts growing population, development options in the District's more sustainable villages must be considered. Release of this small part of Green Belt land will not result in an unacceptable impact on the Green Belt.

The site was included as parcel BAG4 under the Green Belt and Green Field Review November 2013. Whilst the parcel received a high sensitivity rating this referred to the land parcel as a whole which stretched from the A46 and sewage works, across to Coventry Road and Stoneleigh Road, as far south as Stoneleigh and Gantry Heath Wood and includes the castle. The results are therefore broad brush and not indicative of the entire parcel which was then assessed separately as a sub-parcel.

The sub‐parcel was considered to be "one which could accommodate a village extension as part of a sustainable pattern of development within the proposed village inset, with a modest impact on the fundamental aim and purposes of the Green Belt."

Furthermore, all of the land parcels at Baginton were considered to have between medium and high landscape value, save for land parcel BAG6 which is the very small parcel adjacent to the A46.

Notwithstanding this, in order to better inform how this site can be sensitively masterplanned to accommodate the proposed level of development with least impact on the Green Belt, the site owners have sought specialist advice from landscape architects. The findings of this further detailed landscape work is anticipated to be submitted to the Council in support of this site in early 2014.

Access:

There is currently an existing access into the site on Church Road opposite the bus stop. The advice regarding highways and transportation is that the site has excellent access to public transport with a pavement which provides safe access for pedestrians into the village centre. There are likely to be major positive effects on access to public transport which will outweigh any negative effects of the increase in traffic through allocation of this site which are likely to be minor.

Flooding:

The effects on flooding are considered to be neutral for this site which lies outside of a flood risk zone and any development approved would be designed in accordance with SUDs and the NPPF requirement that development would not increase flood risk elsewhere.

Environmental Health:

Whilst the site could be subject to noise, odour, light and air quality due to the proximity of the airport and sewage works, all the sites assessed in Baginton were within proximity of the sewage works so this constrain affects all sites equally. With regard to the airport, this can be mitigated by appropriate masterplanning and noise attenuation measures.

Connectivity/Sustainability:

Whilst the site lies on the southern tip of the village it would be well connected to the existing village services, meaning development would not be peripheral or detached. The village does not have a defined "centre" with the main services (village hall, post office and pub) being spread throughout the village. The post office and village hall are to the north of the preferred site option with the pub in very close proximity to the south.

With the bus stop opposite the site and a pavement to all of the services it has excellent walking and public transport links. The pub lies directly opposite the site with open space (Millenium Field) directly adjacent. The village shop and post office is less than 500 metres from the site, an acceptable walking distance with the village hall just in excess of 500 metres from the site. The Manual for Streets (Paragraph 4.4.1) states "walkable neighbourhoods are typically characterised by having a range of facilities within 10 minutes' (up to about 800 m) walking distance of residential areas which residents may access comfortably on foot".

Whilst there are no healthcare or education facilities in Baginton, proximity of the village to Coventry means that it is reliant upon Coventry for such services.

Landscape:

The Landscape Sensitivity and Ecological & Geological Study has identified the site as having a high-medium sensitivity to housing development. To put this in context, of the 13 sites assessed in Baginton, 9 have been assessed to have a high sensitivity to housing development. Three were considered medium-high (including the preferred development site) and one assessed to have medium sensitivity. The medium site lies within the airport area and disconnected from the village.

The Landscape Sensitivity and Ecological & Geological Study recommends that development should be restricted to roadside only, with a landscape buffer of native tree planting to the west with development not being extended further south than the pub. These visual impact mitigation measures are all entirely achievable on this site. It also identifies that the visual appearance of the area has already been slightly degraded due to the lack of hedgerows which have been replaced by post and wire / tape fences and that Coventry Airport is very visible beyond the zone to the east. It identifies the potential for landscape enhancement as a result of development through replacing native hedgerows and the planting of a landscape buffer of native woodland around the new development.

The preferred site option has been demonstrated by the Landscape Sensitivity and Ecological & Geological Study and the Green Belt Review to be the most appropriate site in Baginton for development in visual landscape terms.

Notwithstanding this, in order to better inform how this site can be sensitively masterplanned to accommodate the proposed level of development with least visual impact, the site owners have sought specialist advice from landscape architects. The findings of this further detailed landscape work is anticipated to be submitted to the Council in support of this site in early 2014.

Sustainability Appraisal:

The Warwick District Council Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal of Potential Village Site Allocations is critical of development of any of the Baginton sites, identifying negative effects including loss of Green Belt and effects of pollution. However, this is not unique to Baginton; the SA identifies significant constraints in all settlements and without considering development options in the District's more sustainable villages (which includes Baginton), the district will be unable to meet the full objectively assessed housing needs of the Districts growing population. The SA identifies that all potential allocations are likely to lead to major positive long-term effects on housing needs.

We support the intention to inset from the Green Belt those villages identified as appropriate for growth as it will significantly improve the deliverability of allocated sites.

We agree that Baginton is an appropriately sustainable settlement to accommodate some of the district's housing needs. Baginton has been justifiably identified as a Key Growth Village as it has services and facilities suitable to accommodate 70-90 dwellings. The preferred site is proposed for only 35 dwellings.

We are supportive of the decision to exclude the alternative sites and agree with the findings of the site assessment matrix contained at appendix 6 in relation to these discounted sites.

Development of Site 2 would be inappropriate due to contamination and potential environmental buffer designation. Site 3 is unsuitable due to quarry / geological importance, potential contamination and landscape impact. Site 4 is justifiably discounted due to flood risk and current viable commercial use. Discounted option 5 has high landscape value as well as potential impact on impact on the conservation area and scheduled ancient monument.