Yes

Representation ID: 98987

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Cotswold District Council

Support

Yes

Representation ID: 99144

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr James Kennedy

In principle I support but clearly more research and evidence is needed before this policy direction can be finalised.

Yes

Representation ID: 99669

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Gillian Padgham

yes

No

Representation ID: 99751

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Stone -Johnston

While promoting carbon sequestration is crucial, relying on policies like the Greening Factor for mitigation may oversimplify complex environmental processes. Carbon sequestration is highly context-dependent, and the effectiveness of greening interventions may be limited by local conditions. Simply requiring net gains in carbon sequestration may encourage symbolic measures rather than meaningful long-term solutions. Additionally, relying on land conversion without addressing underlying drivers of carbon emissions, such as unsustainable development and intensive agriculture, could result in short-term gains without addressing the systemic causes of carbon emissions. A more holistic approach that integrates stricter emissions reductions is necessary for genuine climate impact.

Yes

Representation ID: 99992

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Steven Coulsting

I believe Draft Carbon Sinks and Sequestration to be an extremely important factor in mitigating climate change

Yes

Representation ID: 100429

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Parsons

I agree with the approach laid out

Yes

Representation ID: 100485

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

Areas of biodiversity in the district must be protected.

Yes

Representation ID: 101127

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Rowington Landowner Consortium

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

Implementing this policy could involve measures such as afforestation, wetland restoration, and sustainable land management practices. These actions not only enhance carbon sequestration but also provide co-benefits like biodiversity conservation, improved water quality, and recreational spaces for communities. Whilst this, inclusive of enhancements to Green Infrastructure, is welcomed, additional evidence is required to ascertain any potential requirements.

Notwithstanding this, detailed policy wording should be set out positively to encourage measures relating to carbon sinks and sequestration rather than a requirement-based approach.

Yes

Representation ID: 101248

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: H Crook

needs to be incorporated

No

Representation ID: 101393

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land / Ashberry Strategic Land

Agent: Marrons

This policy needs to be based on further technical evidence and should not be taken forward until this is publicly available.

Yes

Representation ID: 101620

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Zoe Leventhal

Support

No

Representation ID: 101735

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the area

No

Representation ID: 101905

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

Policy not well enough described to comment at present

Other

Representation ID: 102444

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey Strategic Land

Agent: Turley

Recommendation for further works to be considered carefully as this will have impacts on the land available for development and viability of development.

Yes

Representation ID: 103012

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Bailey

I agree.

Other

Representation ID: 103086

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Andrew Close

Figure 19 is unclear (fuzzy) and can’t be used to define this policy. This may impact on the plan’s soundness?

Other

Representation ID: 103718

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Salford Road, Bidford-on-Avon

Agent: Turley

Richborough consider, that in the context of page 164 of the SWLP, a specific Carbon Sinks and Sequestration policy is not required. There are sufficient proposed policies within the SWLP to protect nature sites. There is legislation to require 10% BNG is provided. At present, it is difficult to see how such a policy would add anything further to the SWLP.

Other

Representation ID: 103719

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Gaydon Road, Bishop's Itchington

Agent: Turley

Richborough consider, that in the context of page 164 of the SWLP, a specific Carbon Sinks and Sequestration policy is not required. There are sufficient proposed policies within the SWLP to protect nature sites. There is legislation to require 10% BNG is provided. At present, it is difficult to see how such a policy would add anything further to the SWLP.

Other

Representation ID: 103720

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Lighthorne Road, Kineton

Agent: Turley

Richborough consider, that in the context of page 164 of the SWLP, a specific Carbon Sinks and Sequestration policy is not required. There are sufficient proposed policies within the SWLP to protect nature sites. There is legislation to require 10% BNG is provided. At present, it is difficult to see how such a policy would add anything further to the SWLP.

Other

Representation ID: 103721

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Sycamore Close, Stockton

Agent: Turley

Richborough consider, that in the context of page 164 of the SWLP, a specific Carbon Sinks and Sequestration policy is not required. There are sufficient proposed policies within the SWLP to protect nature sites. There is legislation to require 10% BNG is provided. At present, it is difficult to see how such a policy would add anything further to the SWLP.

Other

Representation ID: 103723

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Kineton Road, Wellesbourne

Agent: Turley

Richborough consider, that in the context of page 164 of the SWLP, a specific Carbon Sinks and Sequestration policy is not required. There are sufficient proposed policies within the SWLP to protect nature sites. There is legislation to require 10% BNG is provided. At present, it is difficult to see how such a policy would add anything further to the SWLP.

Other

Representation ID: 103725

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Wellesbourne Road, Wellesbourne

Agent: Turley

Richborough consider, that in the context of page 164 of the SWLP, a specific Carbon Sinks and Sequestration policy is not required. There are sufficient proposed policies within the SWLP to protect nature sites. There is legislation to require 10% BNG is provided. At present, it is difficult to see how such a policy would add anything further to the SWLP.

Other

Representation ID: 103727

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough - Plough Lane, Bishop's Itchington

Agent: Turley

Richborough consider, that in the context of page 164 of the SWLP, a specific Carbon Sinks and Sequestration policy is not required. There are sufficient proposed policies within the SWLP to protect nature sites. There is legislation to require 10% BNG is provided. At present, it is difficult to see how such a policy would add anything further to the SWLP.

Yes

Representation ID: 104278

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Norrie

This policy direction is obviously underdeveloped, but a policy along these lines would be good.

However, it should just be taken for granted that housing development should not be permitted where it involved chopping down woods, as has happened at Mappleborough Green. Saplings do not have the sequestration rates, or the survivability, of established trees.

Yes

Representation ID: 104464

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: South Warwickshire Foundation trust

We agree and support this approach

Yes

Representation ID: 104695

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neal Appleton

A scheme similar to that in use for deciding development in flood zones could work.

Yes

Representation ID: 105037

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Fern Arnold

I agree with protecting existing carbon sinks

No

Representation ID: 106667

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Agent: Framptons

Whilst we acknowledge that integrating carbon sinks and sequestration into planning policy can be beneficial for mitigating climate change, it also presents several challenges. For example, accurately measuring and verifying the amount of carbon sequestered can be complex and resource-intensive, which can lead to uncertainties and inconsistencies in reporting. Furthermore, ensuring that carbon sinks, such as forests and wetlands, are maintained and managed effectively over the long term can also be challenging, especially when climate change can affect their ability to sequester carbon. We therefore consider that this policy requirement should not, at this time be taken forward in the SWLP.
If, however, the Councils do decide to pursue Draft Policy Direction-41, before any requirement is introduced that requires a net gain in carbon sequestration, the viability of doing so should be undertaken taking into account and factored into the Viability Assessment produced with the Pre-Submission SWLP.

No

Representation ID: 106983

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land-Land off Mallory Road, Bishop's Tachbrook

Agent: Savills

The policy seeks to protect and enhance carbon sinks. Reference is made to a supporting plan but these plans are unclear. More detail needs to be provided to demonstrate how much of the district is considered to be a ‘carbon sink’ and the Council’s justification for this identification.

Yes

Representation ID: 107086

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Cotswolds National Landscape Board

Yes, the Cotswolds National Landscape (CNL) Board agrees with the approach outlined in Draft Policy Direction 41.
This approach aligns with the approach that is advocated in Policy CC1 (Climate Change - Mitigation) of the CNL Management Plan83 and in the Board’s Climate Change Strategy84.
78 HM