Warwick District Council Local Plan Consultation - Response 30 March 2017
Ref DS11 Housing Allocation Sites
Objection to the late inclusion of site H48

I object to the inclusion of site H48 on the following grounds:
On review of the various published assessments of the suitability to the inclusion of this proposed site I believe that the suitability of this site has not been assessed thoroughly enough. An early assessment of this site identified that there were access issues and that these would need to be mitigated for the benefit of the Bremridge Close residents. Later assessments did not comment on access and the significant challenges and issues that this site presents. The issue appears to have completely 'dropped off the radar' and one can only assume that this was due to the urgent need to identify additional sites for the Local Plan in response to the inspectors' comments.
The site is next to site H22 which is itself a small extension to the Bremridge Close development. The inclusion of site H48 in this late consultation process has already led to a planning application which merges together site H22 and H48 and the submission is for a 63 dwelling development. Access to this merged site is currently only through a small opening ( a little larger than a farmers' gate and plans suggest this opening is 4.5m) towards the end of Bremridge Close. There is no scope to enlarge this opening as it is bounded left and right by private land, private roads, verges and hedgerows. All construction and residential traffic needs to come through Bremridge Close and through the small opening of site H22 in order to access site H48. ' Queues' at the opening would also hamper the use of the existing turning circle which is directly in front of the opening.

Warwick District Council is well aware of the existing access issues of Bremridge Close. These being that of minimum standards being applied to the sizes of the garages (no longer allowed) which means if residents park their cars in the garage they actually can't get in or out of their vehicle due to the limited size and this in turn has led to high volumes of on street parking meaning that passing is very difficult on the existing Close. There are also issues with the junction of Bremridge Close and Wellesbourne Road. Approximately five years ago fire services were not able to access two properties on fire in the Close due to parked cars blocking the access for the fire tender. This incident led to the addition of yellow line at the entrance to Bremridge Close and Wellesbourne Road. The congestion at this junction is due in the main as it is used as over spill car parking from Barford Exchange offices for which vehicle parking spaces do not appear to meet the needs of the office development coupled with visitors to the car dealership. Both these issues have also led to cars being parked on the verges and junction of Wellesbourne Road and the A429 which is also known as a difficult junction to navigate safely.
Whilst the inclusion of H22 is well understood and makes a good and proportionate contribution to future housing needs the additional inclusion of site H48 increases the existing housing of Bremridge Close by 120% which already has significant access issues as outlined above.
To summarise I do not consider that WDC has assessed the suitability of the site sufficiently and thoroughly enough which has probably been in part due the urgency to identify further sites. Access to site H48 has been severely restricted by the design and development weaknesses of Bremridge Close which were not envisaged during construction but have now been exposed and are well understood.
I also object on the following grounds:
The notes in the plan 2.53 state
Large sites of over 50 dwellings will be brought forward in phases (see Policy H10) so that the growth of the village can take place more slowly and in proportion to the size of the settlement. This will provide a greater opportunity for new communities to integrate in to the life of the village and for housing to meet local needs which will change over the lifetime of the Plan.
It is obvious that the addition of H48 next door to H22 presents an attractive commercial opportunity to developers who plan to merge these sites and create a large site that is over 50 dwellings. The policies of WDC clearly sate (H10) that these large developments should be phased in. Adjacent to H48 is a further development of over 60 dwellings which is still being constructed (Canon Price Road) so those new residents are not yet integrated this also applies to the residents of the construction by the Barford Bridge and other building sites around Barford which I estimate to be at least a further 60 homes.
The inclusion of site H48 does not comply with this policy and it is not included in the Barford Neighborhood Development Plan (BNDP) either. In fact, the BNDP clearly states that development such as Bremridge Close should not occur again and the inclusion of H48 is actually promoting an increase in the size and existing and increasing access issues of Bremridge Close. Therefore, the inclusion of H48 is also explicitly against the wishes of Barford residents.

Maxine Mayer
38 Bremridge Close
Barford
Warwickshire
CV35 8DG
Email: mmayer@live.co.uk
Tel: 01926 620121

1-This is not included in the neighbourhood plan. Inclusion in this plan period would be direct affront to the local community
2- I urge the Inspector to consider relevant consultation relating to the extant planning application w/17/0440 for the site some of which go to the heart of the principle and quantum of development. Presumably it is Taylor Wimpeys best shot at design and it simply doesnt work.
3 - the access arrangements for this site are woefully inadequate. It would result in a cul de sac serving over 100 dwellings and only a 3m wide emergency access with a 90deg bend onto a narrow country lane. The proposals cannot meet warwickshire county guidance for roads in development 2001. The represent an unacceptable compromise on safety and quality of life and do not represent good design in terms of the NPPF.
The site is undeliverable without significant compromise to safety, quality of life or the demolition of a property on wellesbourne road with a new access formed.

H43 - Kings Hil, is stated as housing up to 4000 whereas in MM17 the figure is stated as 4500. What is the planned figure?

H43 - Kings Hil, is stated as housing up to 4000 whereas in MM17 the figure is stated as 4500. What is the planned figure?

We continue to strongly object the development of housing on H28 - Hatton and the proposed increase of 80 to 150 houses. This is preposterous given the previous objections. WDC have not adequately addressed concerns related to drainage, flood risk, increased traffic and impact on wildlife. There seems to be a blatant lack of respect for previous representations with the failure to produce rigorous analysis through robust and transparent methodology. We are very concerned about the likely damage additional housing would have on the hedge separating the two fields in H28. This is extremely old and contains established wildlife.

Allocated Sites H42 and H43 are being allocated (in accordance with policy DSNEW1) although it is considered that the overall "soundness" would be improved by the early allocation of further land in this defined Area of Growth for development South of Gibbet Hill Road/North of Cryfield Lane.

Together with H42 and H43, the sustainability of the new development would be greatly enhanced AND would facilitate the Link Road across the southern edge of Coventry and through the land between Coventry and HS2 i.e. in and serving the newly defined Area of Growth (DS NEW1).

I object to the inclusion of the Greenfield site H41 east of Warwick Road as a site for 100 houses. Building on this site will extend the boundary of Kenilworth Housing beyond a natural break, Kenilworth Cricket Club. I think many Kenilworth residents are unaware of this proposed development, it has not been well reported in the local media. There is no street lighting, or appropriate concessions to deal with the increased traffic.

H43 Kings Hill . This is unsound 2.52b Land should not be taken out of green belt in anticipation of future unproven requirements. The current housing numbers used are inaccurate and based on out of date information. The text assumes 4000 dwellings however this figure cannot be justified as there has not been shown that there is currently a need for more than 1800 .

Vehicle access to H48 (land off Bremridge Close), both during construction and subsequently, as currently planned is unsafe. The Highways Dept of Warwick County Council has objected to the plans for the combined H22 and H48 on safety of access grounds and also the detail of the proposed internal road layout.

See attached