BASE HEADER
2 - DS11 (H01)
Gwrthwynebu
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67204
Derbyniwyd: 12/12/2014
Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Lamb
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Nac Ydi
WDC is ignoring the revised downward requirement in housing numbers resulting from the updated ONS projections and the lack of any need to allocate housing provision for Coventry, since this has not been requested. This is a serious omission and this Consultation provides an opportunity for the plan to be revised to reflect realistic (much lower) housing numbers in all land parcels being considered. There seems, therefore, to be no requirement to increase the housing numbers in this particular area - rather, they need to be reduced or removed altogether.
Gwrthwynebu
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67231
Derbyniwyd: 01/12/2014
Ymatebydd: Mr Stuart Oldham
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Nac Ydi
A) Insufficient evidence in policy of compliance with Duty to Co-operate with neighbouring authorities as part of a sub-regional approach to needs assessment and proposed land use allocations relating to:
1) Sites for employment & housing
2) Sites for gypsies & travellers
Gwrthwynebu
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67252
Derbyniwyd: 11/12/2014
Ymatebydd: Leamington Society
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The Draft Plan allocates housing to site H01 and, with the removal of the employment allocation, increases that from 1190 to 1300 dwellings.
We argue elsewhere (3. Updated evidence) that WDC has over-provided in total housing provision within its Draft Plan. However if sites in this area are to be allocated to housing it is perverse to remove the specific community hub element from such large new settlements. (The added NB that these uses "will still be required" smacks of a hasty afterthought to cover a dubious fix).
To replace it with a football stadium will introduce disturbance of extra traffic, noise and lights on match days. To badge it with the contrived title "Community stadium" is absolutely no substitute for vital community facilities and services in daily use as listed in the original Draft Plan.
The future residents of these houses will not be given the chance to object to this large independent structure in the middle of their suburb or to the absence of local retail, community and medical facilities, which will not be built unless planned for in advance.
Gwrthwynebu
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67274
Derbyniwyd: 12/12/2014
Ymatebydd: graham leeke
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The proposed siting of the stadium is not viable. It will not contribute to a strong competitive economy. There is no business plan and it assumed that a developers will build it which will divert funds from important community infrastructure. There is already an adequate stadium so the facility is not needed.
The existing ground can be upgraded at a much lower cost and impact and could be done in a way that brings economic benefits. This would be more consistent with the NPPF.
The proposed location of the stadium will exacerbate congestion and will encourage intense periods of additional traffic flow which could be a problem if these overlap with activity at the Technology Park. This could be a particular problem with other commercial activities proposed for the site. Combined with air pollution impacts, the proposal is contrary to Policy TR2
Gwrthwynebu
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67308
Derbyniwyd: 12/12/2014
Ymatebydd: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The number of dwellings stated of 1,300 does not reflect the capacity of the site released. If 8ha of employment land is released and a community stadium is located on 3 ha then 5 ha is available for additional housing. The local retail, medical and community facilities, including 4 football pitches and a running track that is available for community use, are already allocated at the southern end of the recently approved 735 dwelling proposal. Hence working on 35 dw/ha, 5 x 35 = 175 to add to the declared 1,190. Hence 1,365 dwellings could be expected. 35 dwellings per ha is the density accepted for market homes. However, 40% of the site should be affordable homes. To be affordable a density of 50 dwellings / ha can provide a perfectly spacious layout for affordable homes particularly where one and two bed dwellings provide a reasonable part of the mix, as is shown in countless examples around the country. The affordable and market homes should be mixed, giving a better distribution of open space.
If 1,190 homes are built at 35 dw/ha As the current frat of the Local Plan, they will occupy 34 ha. If 5ha. are added to that, then 39ha are available. If market homes are built at 35 dw/ha and affordable homes at 50 dw/ha, then the capacity of the whole site west of Europa Way is 1,550 dwellings. (60% of 1,550 = 930, at 35dw/ha requires 26.572ha and 40% of 1,550 = 620, at 50 dw/ha requires 12.4 ha. Total land requirement = 39 ha.)
Proposed "Community Stadium and associated uses". This is described elsewhere as a 5,000 seat stadium with conference and other facilities to make it financially viable together with associated parking and other external facilities. Bishop's Tachbrook parish council OBJECT to the location of such a development as inappropriate for this area west of Europa Way which is designated for over 1500 houses. It is out of scale with new garden suburb residential development and the massing of a stadium of this nature will be an unacceptable intrusion. A stadium designed for and occupied by a professional football club conflicts with
* the interests of families growing up in this new residential area and
* the traffic implications when match days coincide with normal peak times would be totally unacceptable on Gallows Hill and the roads around Warwick, Leamington and down to the Motorway which are already overloaded before any new housing is built
* light and noise pollution from evening and night time games that would be disruptive to the residents;
* problems of pedestrian and vehicular movements within the housing complex as crowds seek to get to the stadium.
Current trends are to move stadia away from residential areas, not to put them close to new garden town suburbs.
The proposal appears to be uncosted and the costs will be high in
* land costs (even if county land, it must be accounted for at alternative use value that could go to the County if released for housing) and
* construction costs for the stadium, pitch(es) facilities (Stadium ground not normally used for training so additional training area is likely to be necessary), parking
* running costs that are unlikely to be met by gate income even if there are conference and other facilities attached.
These decisions should not be made without a well costed business plan without which the club could get into serious financial difficulties and the District Council would not be able to bail them out. The Ricoh Arena in Coventry is an example of what can happen.
d) If the stadium is moved to this location, it will take land that could be used for housing, moving the housing further out towards the valued landscape of the Tachbrook Valley. The net car travel miles from housing and pitch activity will increase. This does not comply with the NPPF either for protection of the natural environment, protection of best & most versatile agricultural land and unnecessary increased car miles, so it is not a sustainable development.
e) If the land is used for housing instead, then the capacity of the land west of Europa Way increases to 1,670. (60% of 1,670 = 1002, at 35dw/ha requires 28.64ha and 40% of 1,670 = 668, at 50 dw/ha requires 13.36 ha. Total land requirement = 42 ha.)
The Opus site gives a further 100 dwellings. That is a total of 1,770 dwellings compared with the existing allocation in DS11 of 1,190 which is an additional 580 dwellings. Thus, any further encroachment into the Tach Brook Valley on either Grove Farm or Lower Heathcote Farm is not justified to meet the objectively assessed housing need.
f) The proposal does not comply with strategic policies DS3 (a), (d), (e), and policies Be1 (a), (f), (m), Be2 (d), (h), Be3 & TR2
Cefnogi
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67321
Derbyniwyd: 28/11/2014
Ymatebydd: Royal Leamington Spa Town Council
Supportive subject to sufficient improvements to the highways infrastructure.
Gwrthwynebu
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67322
Derbyniwyd: 27/11/2014
Ymatebydd: Historic England
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Heb nodi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
English Heritage acknowledges the potential for development to the north of Gallows Hill /west of Europa Way, but the implications of a stadium on Castle Park and the intermediate historic landscape must be appreciated, as should the consequences of accommodating additional traffic through the town. I will avoid repeating again the reasons why evidence to inform the principle and form of allocations is required. Needless to say I consider further work is necessary.
Gwrthwynebu
Publication Draft Local Plan: Focused Consultation
ID sylw: 67461
Derbyniwyd: 12/12/2014
Ymatebydd: Warwickshire County Council [Physical Assets Business Unit]
Asiant : Savills
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Ydi
Supports proposal to increase the quantum of housing within the 'Land West of Europa Way' greenfield site allocation (H01), to reflect the removal of employment allocation E1. However the proposed increase in the housing capacity of the allocation from 1,190 dwellings to only 1,300 dwellings is not considered to be properly justified. No land area figures are quoted for the increase in the education land allocation or for the size of the sports stadium allocation. However, on the basis of the boundaries drawn on the amended Policies Map 2, we estimate there to be an overall net gain in residential land at H01 of c.6.5ha. This in itself would be expected to deliver an increase of c.160-180 dwellings. Therefore a housing allocation for H01 of at least 1,350 dwellings is considered to be more appropriate. Supports deletion of employment land and considers that the allocation of land at Stratford Road for employment uses would represent a more appropriate alternative, which is positively prepared, justified, effective. Acknowledges the potential for accommodating a community stadium however it is not currently supported by a sufficient evidence base to assess whether there are alternative locations for accommodating the stadium, or to demonstrate that the proposals are technically feasible within the demarked area on amended Policies Map 2, or whether sufficient funding is available to viably deliver the facility, or even whether Leamington Town FC (who will have responsibility for the stadium) is fully supportive of the relocation site. On this basis the proposed community stadium element of the allocation is not currently considered to be justified or positively-prepared and therefore not sound. WCC understands that work is underway to address these concerns and WCC accordingly wishes to reserve the right to comment further as and when the various outcomes become available. As an additional minor point, WDC needs to adopt consistent terminology within the Local Plan. PMA2 refers to "Community Stadium and other uses", PMA3 refers to "Community Stadium and associated uses" and PMA7 refers to "Sports stadium and associated facilities". Without consistency in referencing and without clarity being expressed as to what WDC is seeking and how this can be applied in practice, then the Local Plan is not considered to be effective in this regard.