Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation

Object

Representation ID: 67228

Received: 12/12/2014

Respondent: Mallory Court Hotel

Agent: Marrons Shakespeares

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Whilst the Focussed Changes appear narrow in terms of revised allocations, the implications of those proposed changes are wider and encompass matters of relevance to gypsy and traveller provision, by virtue of the inclusion of the Community Stadium in DS14 which may facilitate the release of the current Leamington Football Club ground for a gypsy and traveller site and release of additional employment land together with a new gypsy site at Stratford Road.

We have significant concerns with the following aspects of the emerging Local Plan:

1.4.1 Soundness of inclusion of Community Stadium within draft Policy DS11 Site: H01 and amendment to "Allocation of Land for a Community Stadium and associated uses" for draft Policy DS14;

1.4.2 Compliance with the Duty to Co-operate in the context of Gypsies and travellers Accommodation Needs (draft Policy H7 and supporting paragraphs);

1.4.3 Consistency with National Policy in relation to Gypsies and Travellers (draft Policy H7 and supporting paragraphs); and

1.4.4 Soundness of provisions relating to Gypsies and Travellers (draft Policy H7 and supporting paragraphs).


The revised allocation to include a Community Stadium within draft Policy D14 is considered unsound as it is not based on any evidence to suggest a Community Stadium is required and there appears to be no consideration as to whether, if a Community Stadium was considered to be needed, alternative sites have been considered and discounted.


It is surprising that the emerging Local Plan deems it necessary to make provision for a Community Stadium at such a late stage in its progress. There appears to have been no reference to a Community Stadium within the early draft of the Local Plan and there appears to be no evidence base to suggest any need or requirement for a Community Stadium. Whilst previous paragraph 2.63 referenced a "small stadium", this is clearly significantly different to a "Community Stadium" (hence the need for the draft allocation to be amended). In such circumstances, there appears to be no evidence whatsoever which identifies whether a requirement for a Community Stadium has been explored or to suggest its impacts have been properly assessed.

It is very difficult to understand the basis and justification for this significant amendment at a late stage in the process, especially given the lack of evidence base which indicates any need or requirement for a community stadium. Any justification arising from a desire to relocate Leamington FC to enable the release of its current ground for draft allocation GT04 in the emerging Sites for Gypsies and Travellers Plan, is considered wholly unsound and outside of the matters that should properly be taken into account in including a new allocation in an emerging plan. In this regard, we attach a copy of a recent leaflet circulated by the football club to its members which sets out some concerning "agreements" between the Council and the football club such as:
3
"The proposed site is being offered free of charge and will be leased to Leaming/on Football Club for a period of not less than 150 years.
A peppercorn rent (very small payment) will be paid for the duration of the lease.
A community stadium of not less than 5000 capacity with mandated requirements will be erected upon the site.
Leamington Football Club will have sole ownership and responsibility for the site, stadium and facilities.
All revenue for the stadium will go to Leamington Football Club.
All administrative and financial management will be the responsibility of Leamington Football Club"

It would appear that the Stadium is proposed to be erected and then that both the Stadium and the site is long leased to the football for no cost other than a peppercorn rent. Once the football club have received the stadium, the club receive all revenue for the stadium and undertaken all administrative and financial management. Those "agreements" between the Football Club and the Council are considered, at best, inappropriate and potentially unlawful as they appear to indicate that the Community Stadium allocation has derived from some form of "deal", unrelated to planning, and which clearly favours a private organisation. The inclusion of a proposed allocation to facilitate such "agreements" cannot be appropriate or sound.

The simple fact that the amended allocation is unsupported by any objective analysis as to a requirement for a community stadium indicates that the emerging Local Plan has not been positively prepared or that the Local Plan is justified in this regard.

The removal of any requirement to provide local retail facilities, a community meeting place and a medical centre is also of significant concern. Such uses provide clear community benefits which would patently not be met by a Community Stadium. The loss of these facilities would be detrimental to the surround housing (including proposed allocations) and would be contrary to sustainable development principles unless accommodated at an alternative appropriate site which could be readily accessed by potential occupiers of the residential development within the vicinity. The loss of these facilities would therefore be contrary to national policy, especially those relating to sustainable modes of transport (including NPPF paragraphs 29, 32, 35 and 17) and promoting health communities (NPPF section 8).

In our view the Council has failed to comply with the duty to co-operate in relation to assessing gypsy and traveller accommodation needs and how best to meet those needs pursuant to the emerging Local Plan.

It is clear from the emerging Local Plan that there has been extremely limited, if any, appropriate co-operation between the authorities of the wider area or the South Housing Market Area of the West Midlands Region in relation to identification of the accommodation needs of gypsies and travellers within the area and how that need could be best met.


It is also considered that the GTAA cannot be relied on as a robust assessment of the gypsy and traveller accommodate needs. This clearly has substantial implications for the draft Local Plan which wholly relies on the conclusions of the GT AA to quantify its gypsy and traveller accommodation needs.

It is also considered that the GTAA cannot be relied on as a robust assessment of the gypsy and traveller accommodate needs. This clearly has substantial implications for the draft Local Plan which wholly relies on the conclusions of the GT AA to quantify its gypsy and traveller accommodation needs.

Detailed concerns raise serious doubts on the robustness and adequacy of the GTAA. As the emerging Local Plan's identified need is wholly informed and reliant on the GTAA this must raise serious concerns with the soundness of the Local Plan and its ability to have proper regard to national policy requirements in the context of it being informed by an adequate, up-to-date and relevant evidence base.