Issue and Options 2023

selected

selected

selected

Question C9.1: Option C9.1a is the most appropriate option for South Warwickshire and is in accordance with paragraphs 177d and 182b of the NPPF which seek to secure biodiversity net gain via plan-making. 3.54 However, any planning policy requiring new development to incorporate measures to increase biodiversity should be flexible and adhere to the PPG [Paragraph 022 Reference ID: 8-022-20190721] which states, “biodiversity net gain can be achieved onsite, off-site or through a combination of on-site and off-site measures”. 3.55 It is recommended WDC and SOADC work with Warwickshire County Council (WCC) to identify ‘habitat banks’ i.e. areas of enhanced or created habitats which generate biodiversity credits. This will support strategic sites that are unable to deliver net gain wholly on site.

selected

selected

selected

selected

selected

Yes

Question D3: Option D3d is the most appropriate option for South Warwickshire to ensure an effective and efficient use of land in meeting the need for homes in accordance with paragraphs 119 and 124 of the NPPF. 3.57 Specifically, paragraph 125 of the NPPF is clear that it is “especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities”. It also states the following (underlining for emphasis): “a) plans should contain policies to optimise the use of land in their area and meet as much of the identified need for housing as possible. This will be tested robustly at examination, and should include the use of minimum density standards for city and town centres and other locations that are well served by public transport. These standards should seek a significant uplift in the average density of residential development within these areas, unless it can be shown that there are strong reasons why this would be inappropriate; b) the use of minimum density standards should also be considered for other parts of the plan area. It may be appropriate to set out a range of densities that reflect the accessibility and potential of different areas, rather than one broad density range; and” 3.58 For example, Hampton Magna is well served by Warwick Parkway railway station which offers frequent train services to Birmingham, Coventry and London – all key economic hubs for commuters from South Warwickshire. 3.59 Furthermore, paragraph 154 of the NPPF relating to climate change adaptation and mitigation (a key overarching principle of the SWLP) sets out new development should reduce greenhouse gas emissions via its location. This can be made possible by increasing densities around Warwick Parkway railway station which is an efficient, safe and accessible means of transport with a low impact on the environment. Q-D5: Should we continue with the approach to include a high-level strategic policy within the Part 1 plan and to utilise heritage assessments to inform the growth strategy, and delay detailed policies to Part 2? 3.60 The SWLP should continue with the approach to include a high-level strategic policy on protecting and enhancing heritage assets. Heritage assessments should be used to inform the spatial pattern of housing growth in South Warwickshire. The Issues & Options consultation is supported by a Heritage and Settlement Sensitivity Assessment dated September 2022. It currently omits mitigation included in proposed strategic sites. The assessment will need to be updated to thoroughly assess which strategic sites can feasibly avoid and/or mitigate harm from new development. 3.62 In the context of Taylor Wimpey’s interests north and east of Hampton Magna, as detailed in the development framework in the Vision Document (Appendix 1), the following is concluded in heritage terms: (i) Owing to the distance and intervening landscaping and highways network, it is considered development on the site will not result in a harmful impact on the significant of the Warwick Conservation Area. (ii) If any harm were to be concluded on the potential impact on the Grade II listed St Michaels Church and the Grand Union Canal Conservation Area, it is likely to be at the lower end of the spectrum of less than substantial harm. 3.63 An independent review of the Heritage and Settlement Sensitivity Assessment can be found at Appendix 2 and will inform a proportionate review of the development framework.

As explained in the Issues & Options, it is agreed that public open space is not a strategic priority to address in the SWLP Part 1. 3.65 Taylor Wimpey welcome further engagement on the “further evidence” to be collated to determine the level of public open space need in South Warwickshire. 3.66 Finally, it is agreed that public open space requirements will change over time and it is important for any non-strategic policy to be flexible to reflect any such changes to need.

selected

selected

selected

No answer given

Question T1: Taylor Wimpey is generally supportive of the inclusion of guidance in respect of 20- minute neighbourhood principles in the SWLP. Such principles will guide proposals for a new neighbourhood at Hampton Magna. However, this should not be a policy requirement as the composition and functionality of a neighbourhood is in constant flux. 3.68 Taylor Wimpey therefore support Option T1b, but these must refer to and reflect the principles are already established in the NPPF, PPG, the National Design Guide, which should inform and guide the SWLP. 3.69 Whilst the NPPF does not refer directly to 20-minute neighbourhoods, the SWLP will need to be consistent with national policy to enable the delivery of sustainable development – therefore by virtue of the test of soundness, the SWLP will embed the principles of 20-minute neighbourhoods in its strategic and non-strategic policies.