Other

Representation ID: 98354

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Catesby Estates

Agent: Mr Will Whitelock

Catesby Estates agree that a strategic policy to protect and enhance heritage assets should be included in the Part 1 plan, while detailed policies can wait for Part 2. The promotion site lacks any listed buildings or conservation areas and has undergone a Heritage Appraisal to assess development deliverability. The Long Itchington Conservation Area is nearby, but its historical features are largely masked by the landscape. The only visible structure, the Church of the Holy Trinity, does not have its setting affected by the Site, and development would not harm any designated heritage assets.

Other

Representation ID: 98476

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: E Booth

The heritage and identity of Old Milverton village is at risk from the SG06 development. As a village, it would be destroyed. The identity of the Milverton area of Leamington would also be damaged.

Yes

Representation ID: 98603

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alice Hibbert

Historical and heritage sites and the landscape surrounding them should be safeguarded and protected.

Yes

Representation ID: 98644

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: X2 New Settlement Consortium

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

Draft Policy Direction 27, which remains largely unchanged from previous policies in the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy and the Warwick District Council Local Plan, is supported and aligns well with the NPPF.

Other

Representation ID: 98688

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Catesby Estates

Agent: Mr Will Whitelock

Catesby Estates agree that a strategic policy to protect and enhance heritage assets should be included in the Part 1 plan, with detailed policies deferred to Part 2. The promotion site is not near designated heritage assets, but a Heritage Appraisal has been conducted. It indicates that residential development in the northern area will not adversely affect the Grade II* Listed Church of St Nicholas. The appraisal also notes potential archaeological remains, including burials from the Grunthill Roman cemetery, which will be managed through an appropriate archaeological programme.

No

Representation ID: 99372

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Tania White

We need to conserve those villages that are in conservation areas with listed buildings. Part of the charm of these areas are that they reflect our past. Continually developing the landscape around it will slowly erode the character of what was designed to protect these areas.

Other

Representation ID: 99650

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Anthony Cocker

I broadly agree with the approach set out. However the following sentence is too weak from a climate perspective: "Support sustainability initiatives for heritage assets to the extent practicable without undermining the significance of the heritage asset". The word "support" should be replaced by "strongly encourage".

No

Representation ID: 99951

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Welford on Avon Parish Council

"Support sustainability initiatives for heritage assets to the extent REASONABLY practicable without undermining the significance of the heritage asset. Sustainability measures within heritage assets will consider the provisions of the 'Reducing Energy Consumption in Existing Buildings policy."
This statment should include the word 'reasonably' as shown in capitals.

This policy should also inlcude the protection of Green Spaces and Commons embedded in conservation areas and villages more generally.

Yes

Representation ID: 100228

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Loades

I completely agree with preserving and protecting Heritage Assets and Historic Environment. It's extremely important these are not disturbed. Please seriously take into consideration the effect a huge increase in footfall will have on these. Whilst it can be seen that these proposed developments will increase interest, and potentially the local economy, it can also have a considerable negative impact. Specific areas such as Oakley Wood, Charlecote Park, and local churches should be heavily considered. An increase people can cause damage to the security and the physical environment of these areas.

Yes

Representation ID: 100389

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

The Clopton Quarter area of SG18 borders on the grade II listed Clopton House estate with the open spaces provided by the Clopton Hill area enhancing the setting of this historic estate.

Yes

Representation ID: 100465

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Aimee Carter

fully supported and should be be given priority when assessing developments - especially SG04 Kenilworth for proximity to the Castle, and also Forest of Arden proposed development impact on the original castle hunting grounds.

No

Representation ID: 100639

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Ray

support a well designed warwickshire. this plan is not well designed

Yes

Representation ID: 101025

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Rowington Landowner Consortium

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

The approach in Draft Policy Direction 27, which prioritises the preservation and enhancement of South Warwickshire's historic environment, aligns with the NPPF’s recognition of heritage assets as irreplaceable resources. Given the presence of listed buildings within new settlement C1 and nearby assets such as the Grade I Listed Baddesley Clinton, development proposals will be carefully designed to minimise harm in consideration of local and national heritage policies.

Yes

Representation ID: 101190

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land Management Limited

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

Draft Policy Direction 27, which remains largely unchanged from previous policies in the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy and the Warwick District Council Local Plan, is supported and aligns well with the Framework.

Yes

Representation ID: 101409

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land / Ashberry Strategic Land

Agent: Marrons

Draft Policy Direction 27, which remains largely unchanged from previous policies in the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy and the Warwick District Council Local Plan, is supported and aligns well with the Framework.

Yes

Representation ID: 101470

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land

Agent: Marrons

Draft Policy Direction 27, which remains largely unchanged from previous policies in the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy and the Warwick District Council Local Plan, is supported and aligns well with the Framework.

Yes

Representation ID: 101485

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Alderley Holdings Trust

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

Draft Policy Direction 27, which remains largely unchanged from previous policies in the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy and the Warwick District Council Local Plan, is supported and aligns well with the NPPF.

Yes

Representation ID: 101581

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Bart Slob

Yes, I agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-27 Protecting and Enhancing Heritage Assets/ the Historic Environment. The policy provides a robust framework for preserving South Warwickshire's rich heritage, including iconic sites such as Kenilworth Castle. Protecting heritage assets like Kenilworth Castle, along with other key sites like those in SG04, ensures that the local character and cultural identity are maintained. The policy's emphasis on preventing substantial harm to these assets, while supporting sustainable and appropriate uses, aligns well with the need to preserve significant historical and architectural landmarks for future generations.

No

Representation ID: 101694

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the y

Yes

Representation ID: 101894

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jon Redhead

Kenilworth Castle and its surrounding areas, including SG04, that are also focal points, must be protected for future generations to enjoy.

Yes

Representation ID: 101901

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms jenny handscombe

The Warwickshire Gardens Trust (WGT) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the SWLP wrt Registered Parks and Gardens (RPGs) within NPPF guidance.
Historic Parks & Gardens have a role in growing the economy, meeting the challenges of climate change, supporting social cohesion by helping build communities and offering places to exercise and enjoy fresh air. The Gardens Trust, the statutory referee to planning applications affecting RPGs is shortly due to publish a report into the value of historic parks and gardens in a changing society and the role they can play. A copy will be forwarded to you presently.

Yes

Representation ID: 101918

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Walkden

Essential for all localities and in particular Stratford and Warwick

Yes

Representation ID: 101928

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

Agree

Yes

Representation ID: 102027

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Anne Page

Strongly agree that paticular attention should be paid to the setting of such important historic buildings as Kenilworth Castle and the surrounding area.

No

Representation ID: 102043

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Barwood Land

Agent: Savills (UK) Ltd

This draft policy sets out requirements for development proposals that affect heritage assets. We strongly object to the wording of this draft policy owing to its inconsistency with the Framework.
The draft policy relating to significance of heritage assets and justification of harm is inconsistent with paragraphs 205 – 214 of the Framework which contain a much more nuanced approach, reflecting the magnitude of harm and setting out appropriate justification in each case. The inconsistency with the Framework not only renders the draft policy unsound but would, if adopted in its current form, present challenges for accurate and consistent decision making.
The Framework states that ‘Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use’. In so doing it recognises that harm can be outweighed.
The first bullet point of DPD27 however states that ‘a strategic historic environment policy will … preserve and enhance the historic environment (including its setting) for its inherent value, and for the enjoyment of residents and visitors’.‘Preserve and enhance’ is a binary test where any harm would be render the application proposals in conflict with the policy. The Framework, however, seeks to balance harm against public benefits, even in circumstances where substantial harm will occur. For this reason, the current wording of draft DPD27 is unsound and must be revised in line with national policy.

Yes

Representation ID: 102092

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Crump

When considering the relevant factors in relation to the future development of both Meon Vale and Long Marston Airfield, regard should be given to the proximity of Meon Hill which is an Iron Age Hillfort for which AONB status was accorded in 1990. It is therefore a designated heritage asset. Views to and from Meon Hill are significant factors to be considered in relation to its setting, and I would suggest that the greater the proposed developments for the two above locations, the more harm will be caused to the setting.

Yes

Representation ID: 102268

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr George Taylor

A housing estate on the areas near to Kenilworth Castle, which is a major tourist attraction for the town, should not be allowed. The development would be on top of Rounds Hill and would be clearly visible from the Castle, significantly impacting the setting of the Castle by destroying the view and its setting in the countryside. There are extensive groundwork remains (e.g. the Pleasance, earthwalls surrounding the old deer park) and any housing development would destroy these and any other historical remains in the area.

Yes

Representation ID: 102302

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: BDW Trading Limited

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

Draft Policy Direction 27 prioritises the protection of heritage assets, ensuring development conserves their significance. SG18 is a stronger option than SG19 as it has fewer direct or indirect heritage impacts, while SG19 will trigger significant infrastructure upgrades, including modifications to Clopton Bridge which would risk its historic integrity.

Yes

Representation ID: 102357

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough

Agent: Marrons

Draft Policy Direction 27, which remains largely unchanged from previous policies in the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy and the Warwick District Council Local Plan, is supported and aligns well with the NPPF.

Other

Representation ID: 102386

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey Strategic Land

Agent: Turley

Taylor Wimpey broadly supports the objectives set out in the Plan in relation to the historic environment.

We have concerns about elements of the Plan which do not align with the statutory duties, under S16(2), S66(1) and S72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 or the Chapter 16 of the NPPF.