Testun llawn:
Warwick Gates Employment Land. Under Policy PO4 it is proposed that the committed employment site at Warwick Gates (9.77 hectares, SHLAA) is developed for housing (200 dwellings), and that this site is brought forward in Phase 1 of the plan. In the 'Economy' section we are informed at Para 8.29 that the Council believes that the employment site is in the wrong location and that a compensatory provision of employment land located in the vicinity of WTP would have a number of advantages. However we have not seen any evidence to back the advantages claimed and wish to contest each here:
o Support the clustering of industries and expansion of knowledge based sectors.
It is our considered view that the Warwick Gates employment site is, in terms of its proximity to WTP, well located to encourage both the clustering of industries and expansion of the knowledge based sector. This view was shared by the Inspector at the last District Local Plan Inquiry who, in his response to proposals for additional employment land opposite WTP, stated in his Report that "In terms of synergy with the adjacent Warwick Technology Park and the HTC [High Technology Corridor], I am satisfied that sufficient committed sites [Warwick Gates/Gallagher Park] are available nearby of such a quality as to accommodate those needs without expansion into the adjacent rural area" (para 10.3.48). Although our clients' site sits adjacent to WTP, there are no existing pedestrian or vehicular links between the two and, given existing development on WTP and local topography (WTP sits in a 'bowl'), no prospect of any being established in the future. Therefore we strongly disagree with the suggestion that having employment on land north of Gallows Hill/west of Europa Way would better than the existing Warwick Gates site in supporting the clustering of industries and the expansion of the knowledge based sector.
We acknowledge that the Warwick Gates site has sat undeveloped for many years but do not believe that this is because it is in the wrong location to be attractive to the market. The site lies in a prominent position on the main southern route into Leamington and is within easy access of the M40 - a 'premier location' according to the Council's Employment Land Review. The reason why the site has not yet been developed is most likely the result of one or more of the following factors:
* Current economic climate
* Ineffective marketing
At the time of the last District Local Plan Inquiry the Inspector remarked in his report (para 10.3.46) that he believed that the Warwick Gates employment site was not being marketed aggressively. In the Council's Employment Land Review - Final Report (April 2009) the authors of the report state that the site is "possibly being held back for future residential use" (para 2.90).
* Existing planning permission
The existing planning permission on the site is for a mix of businesses uses; B1, B2 and B8. For this site to attract the kind of companies which are now found on WTP, then the site should be reallocated for employment under Use Class B1a and B1b. Doing so should help provide confidence to the market that investment in the site would not be undermined by incompatible neighbouring industrial uses.
o increase opportunities to utilise existing infrastructure
It is unclear what the Council's is referring to here. The Warwick Gates site is clearly already well placed to take advantage of /utilise existing infrastructure, and that it would be the case that providing an 'alternative proportion of land' would in fact require new infrastructure to open up and service the site.
o support the development of new infrastructure to serve the needs of businesses such as a Park and Ride.
While we see some possible benefits of providing a Park and Ride facility to the south of the urban area, including less congestion and reduced CO2 emissions, we do not support proposals for such a facility in the area depicted on Map 5 in the Preferred Options. The term "Park & Ride" (P&R) refers to remotely located car parking linked by an attractive public transport service with the key urban or other high demand centre(s) it is designed for. Therefore we cannot see how a P&R located adjacent to or actually part of an employment development within the urban area can serve the needs of business in the area (nor potential users of the service generally). To have any chance of being effective, a P&R needs to be located either on the very periphery of the urban area/ or beyond it to capture 'customers' before they are caught in the very traffic they wish to avoid (please also refer to separate comments on P&R proposals under Policy PO14: Transport)
Whilst we object outright to the proposed allocation of housing development on the Warwick Gates Employment Land site, we also object to the allocation being identified for 'release' in Phase 1. Having regards to its location, the site would be poorly served by community infrastructure and given its size would not provide the critical mass to support service on site. With specific regard to secondary education, the development would fall within the catchment of Myton School and the likely take up of places at that school as a result of the new development may have negative consequences for how much development could be brought forward at the same time on the Myton Garden Suburb site in Phase 1 if there are insufficient secondary school places available locally.