Publication Draft

Object

Representation ID: 66505

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

numbers as they are clearly linked to proposed policy DS6.
We still believe that the average housing densities on new development sites can be increased significantly without a reduction in design quality. Paragraph 47 of the NPPF clearly says 'local planning authorities should... set their own approach to housing density to reflect local circumstances'. In our view, Warwick District Council has not yet explained their 'approach to housing density'.

Object

Representation ID: 66506

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Object to Southcrest Farm, Kenilworth.
Very concerned about this proposal which has been introduced for the first time in this late stage of the Local Plan consultation process.
Any relocation of the School to the edge of the town is likely to have serious negative sustainability effects.

The Site Selection Methodology states 'No additional traffic impacts if school moves to Southcrest Farm.' And 'Location at edge of urban (area) means alternative transport modes are possible.' We believe this is factually inaccurate.

If the school is moved further away from the centre of the town fewer pupils are likely to walk or cycle from their homes to the school and more car journeys are likely to take place. The Southcrest Farm site is not currently served by public transport and therefore 'alternative transport modes' are not currently available. If the school is relocated to Southcrest Farm additional bus services will be required.

It is also particularly relevant and important that the Southcrest Farm site has already been assessed and rejected when 'considered against strict Green Belt criteria' (see also below). If it is not acceptable for housing purposes, it is equally unacceptable for a new school development.

Support

Representation ID: 66507

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

With regards to infrastructure requirements for shops/ local centres / community facilities, conditions on any planning consent should ensure this provision is constructed and open at an early stage of any development.

Support

Representation ID: 66508

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

With regards to infrastructure requirements for shops/ local centres / community facilities, conditions on any planning consent should ensure this provision is constructed and open at an early stage of any development.

Object

Representation ID: 66509

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We feel that there should also be a strategic landscape corridor along the route of Europa Way as this will a) to some extent mitigate the loss of green fields in this area, b) secure a wildlife corridor linking the Tach Brook with the River Leam and Grand Union Canal, and c) provide an attractive route into Leamington from the south - a route which will most likely serve as the main road entry point into the town for the foreseeable future.

Support

Representation ID: 66510

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Support

Support

Representation ID: 66511

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Support

Support

Representation ID: 66512

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Support

Support

Representation ID: 66513

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Support

Object

Representation ID: 66524

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Friends of the Earth

Number of people: 4

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We object to the proposals in this policy to remove land from the Green Belt at Southcrest Farm, Kenilworth, and in the vicinity of Coventry Airport.

Warwick District Council does still need to determine 'robust criteria' for each site it proposes to remove from the Green Belt.

We note that in Appendix 9 -Green Belt Critical Review, the reviewer stresses that the 'fundamental aim and five purposes of Green Belt' are still important (page 19) and 'robust criteria' in the form of 'Sustainable Development Constraints' will need to be established ' to ensure that any land proposed for release from Green Belt status for potential development can be achieved in a way that:
* does not damage land with important landscape or nature conservation value;
* does not damage land which performs an important floodplain function; and
* is readily accessible to and from existing, or easily extended, facilities or services'.
Also, the reviewer states (on page 23 )'There should not be a 'call for sites' exercise, as this could imply that the Assessment is 'developer-led', rather than being an appropriate assessment considered against strict Green Belt criteria and based on proportionate evidence.' This is particularly relevant in the case of the Kings Hill site which has been suggested again recently by Coventry City Council. This site was considered early on in the Local Plan review process and rejected when 'considered against strict Green Belt criteria'. It is also relevant to the proposed relocation of Kenilworth School at Southcrest Farm - the proposed site has already been rejected when 'considered against strict Green Belt criteria'.