Yes

ID sylw: 106675

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Asiant : Framptons

Yes

Other

ID sylw: 106676

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Asiant : Framptons

Yes

Yes

ID sylw: 106677

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Asiant : Framptons

We recognise that buffer zones can function as a useful transitional area between the protected AONB and the surrounding land, helping to mitigate any potential negative effects on the AONB's character and biodiversity. However, we question whether such a policy is required given that with or without a designated buffer area the potential visual impact of proposed development on designated AONBs should be carefully assessed. This includes evaluating how the development will be seen from within the AONB and whether it will detract from the scenic quality of the landscape.

No

ID sylw: 106678

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Asiant : Framptons

Whilst there is logic in maintaining Special Landscape Areas designations within Stratford District, we question their proposed introduction in Warwick District. If Warwick District had areas which warranted being designated as Special Landscape Areas, surely this would have happened in a previous version of their local plan. To simply apply such a policy designation because one exists in Stratford is therefore not supported.
If the policy is taken forward into the pre-submission SWLP any proposed SLAs should be informed and support by a robust evidence base

No

ID sylw: 106681

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Asiant : Framptons

We are informed that the policy will be used to ensure that development avoids detrimental effects on “the landscape setting and on features which make a significant contribution to the character and setting of an asset, settlement or area”. This wording is not considered sufficiently precise and consequently too broad in its scope. Given other proposed policies, such as those aimed at protecting valued landscapes, designated areas of restraint or areas of open space, we believe this policy represents a duplication of effort and is not justified.
The Policy also advises that the Council will “explore” the need for major development applications to require a full Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. Given that a planning application for 10 dwellings would constitute a “major development”, we consider that it would be entirely disproportionate for a full LIVA to be submitted in the majority of cases for schemes of this or a similar size.
The Policy also suggests that where a proposal would result in landscape harm, the general principle is that it should be refused unless there will be an overriding benefit of development, with meeting an evidenced local housing need presented as an example. Given that the majority the housing requirement in the SWLP will be provided on greenfield sites, any development is likely to have a degree of landscape harm as it will result in development taking place in an area where there is currently no built development. This does not, however, mean that the starting point for determination of an application is a presumption it should be refused. Landscape impact is just one of several matters that will need to be considered as part of the determination process. The draft wording of the policy Direction 48 therefore elevates the importance of landscape harm beyond other considerations, which is not an appropriate policy position the Councils should pursue.

Yes

ID sylw: 106682

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Asiant : Framptons

Yes.