Yes

ID sylw: 103117

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: The Ragley Estate

Asiant : Stansgate Planning

The Estate supports inclusion of SG21, specifically site 640.

The score for minerals safeguarding should be zero. Historic seismic testing on various parts of the Estate has not suggested minerals of any significant value. As recognised in HELAA B this is a theoretical rather than actual constraint.

The site should receive zero points for having been assessed under the Employment Land Study. Assessment for another purpose does not make the site unsuitable for residential or mixed-use development.

The site should receive zero points for ground-mounted solar power. The Council has not approached the Estate about this use. The Estate has 5,640 acres of land. If future technical evidence confirmed need in this area the Estate would be willing to explore delivery elsewhere.

The Flood Zone and surface water flooding scores should be zero. The scheme can be designed to use land in flood zone 2/3 or subject to surface water flooding for amenity and open space. As such, a sequential test is not required (NPPF Paragraph 175). Trees and hedgerow planting will help manage water on the site. Ecosystems could be preserved and enhanced, with potential to connect together existing green spaces. These benefits should be recognized. The weighting of surface water flooding is excessive and it produces a skewed result for the remaining 76% of the site.

The presence of a small number of listed buildings within or close to a site is not an obstacle to allocation or development. The 500m buffers do not take account of topography and other site-specific circumstances. Given the heritage of South Warwickshire most sites will have potential to impact the setting of listed buildings. The Estate has experience in managing, preserving and enhancing heritage assets. They will not promote proposals that harm these assets. The same applies to the Conservation Area, Registered Parks and Gardens and Scheduled Monuments. The site has been incorrectly given a constraint score for Registered Parks and Gardens despite 0% of the site intersecting with an RPG or 25m buffer.

The score for Location should be zero as the northern part of the site is within 50m of the existing settlement boundary. The southern part of the site is a little further from the existing boundary but has direct connections across the A345.

The presence of a Local Wildlife Site within 25m of 9% of the site is not an obstacle to allocation or development. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal is being undertaken to inform the Illustrative Masterplan. The weighted score and “amber” designation should be re-considered when this is submitted. The score should also be zero for Potential Local Wildlife Sites as 0% of the site is within 25m of a pLWS. The current score appears to be a mistake. The weighted score and amber designation for Baseline Habitat value should also be reconsidered when the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal is submitted.

All land within the site is Grade 3 agricultural land. The score should be zero. A land classification report will be submitted later to confirm this.