Issue and Options 2023
Search form responses
Results for Holly Farm Business Park Ltd search
New searchselected
selected
selected
selected
No answer given
Marketing for a minimum of 12 months would seem to be appropriate.
Q-E2: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire We are not convinced such a policy or policies is required. Many of the principles included under Option E2a are likely to be addressed by national policies or other policies in the local plan. The notes as drafted would not, as an example, encourage repatriation of manufacturing. Q-E3: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire Option E3a: Include a policy expanding on SDC’s current existing policy. This approach would be preferable to E3b. It should emphasise the importance of providing a choice of opportunities (in terms of both land or buildings) for all types and size of business available throughout the plan period. Option E3c: Include a policy that secures employment strategies through S106. This approach would be supported in appropriate circumstances. Q-E4.1: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire Option E4.1a: Include a policy supporting diversification This approach would be supported. Q-E4.2: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire Option E4.2a: Include a policy supporting small-scale employment opportunities in rural areas We would support this approach which is conducive to helping entrepreneurs who may reside in the more rural parts of the plan area to establish new businesses and encourage existing small businesses to expand. To do the counter could seriously and negatively impact on the future long-term health of Warwickshire’s economy. Q-E5: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire We would strongly support this approach. Holly Farm Business Park is an example of rural diversification providing a home to many small diverse businesses including startups, some of which are ripe to expand into larger accommodation which could be provided onto adjacent land already in the ownership of the business park. Option E5b: Do not include a policy in Part 1. A failure to provide a policy in Part 1 would represent an ‘opportunity lost’. It is important that the local plan is seen to a plan that supports all types and sizes of business and not biased in favour of big business. It should also be remembered that some of the big businesses of the future will be the small businesses and start-ups of today. It is important that home-grown talent is supported with just as much vigor as large-scale footloose activity. Q-E6: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire Option E6a: Include a policy which protects South Warwickshire’s economic assets. We would generally support this approach although the list also includes assets outside the plan area. Perhaps it should be clear what is within the plan area. Q-E7.1: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire Option E7.1a: Include a policy directing employment to the Core Opportunity Area. This would require greater justification. It would appear to be a policy mechanism to justify large-scale employment sites in otherwise relatively remote areas. As drawn this area would exclude Holly Farm Business Park and the JLR facility at Fen End when, in reality, they are in much closer proximity to the main population centres. If retained, would there be a requirement to balance new employment and housing growth OR would the scope for employment development be restricted in some way. For example, would the land at Gaydon be limited only to JLR and Aston Martin and, if not, why not? Should land which is held in curtilage be treated differently to ensure other business activity and enterprise is not unduly restricted. Option E7.1b: Do not include a policy directing employment to the Core Opportunity Area. Without significantly greater justification it might be this would be a more sensible way forward. Q-E7.2: Please select the option which is most appropriate for South Warwickshire Option E7.2a: Include a policy relating to additional economic growth at the major investment sites. This might be an appropriate approach but as highlighted above it is important the plan is not unduly focused on major sites and inward investment. It is unclear if this means additional land allocations over existing commitments. If so, these would need to be justified and balanced against other alternatives. Option E7.2b: Do not include a policy relating to additional economic growth at the major investment sites. This question appears to highlight the focus of the approach in the plan towards the strategic sites. Why would growing local businesses prefer to locate at a strategic site? The rationale for this is unclear as we believe that smaller hubs are more conducive to business growth and creativity. Q-E8.1: Do you agree that the existing employment allocations, including the revisions to Atherstone Airfield, should be carried over into the SWLP? Yes. Existing allocations should be carried forward, as should recognition that successful employment sites, such as Holly Farm Business Park should be allowed to expand. Q-E10: Do you agree that Tourism should be addressed in Part 2 of the South Warwickshire Local Plan? No. Tourism is an important part of the economy. The plan should allow for development of the necessary supporting infrastructure to support its enhancement.
Yes, but subject to review, in light of expected changes to the planning system.
No answer given
selected
selected
selected
The plan should make best endeavours to meet all housing needs, including those of the elderly. It must also be recognized that many elderly people prefer to remain in their own home for as long as they are able to do so.
selected
selected
selected
selected
Q-H4-1: Yes. The plan should take account of cross-boundary requirements prior to 2031 and beyond. It is unclear why the question specifies either ‘on identified sites’ or Stratford-on-Avon District alone. Q-H4-2: This should preferably be based on agreed outcomes arising from discussions by the authorities concerned. If there is no agreement, then past migration trend should be used as the basis for distributing any cross-boundary requirements.
Q-H4-3: In the past development capacity closer to the origin would have been emphasized. In the light of changing work patterns and a higher propensity to work from home a loosening of that approach might be more appropriate. It is also appropriate to bear in-mind that migration moves are made within the housing stock and not just new-build, so the existing stock can still enable migrants to live close to their point of origin should they wish to do so.
selected
selected
selected
selected
selected
selected
Q-H3: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire Option H3b: Apply Nationally Described Space Standards to developments across South Warwickshire based on locally derived evidence. This should be the starting point although we do not understand what, “based on locally derived evidence means”. Option H3c: Include a requirement to meet optional Building Regulations M4(2)/M4(3) as standard. These are focussed upon ensuring appropriate accessibility standards. This approach would be supported but needs to be applied flexibly because of potential impacts on design and viability. Q-H5: Please select all options which are appropriate for South Warwickshire Option H5c: Rely on a case-by-case approach whereby planning applications for self and custom build homes will be assessed against a range of criteria to determine their suitability. This would seem to be the most appropriate option with support where there is either an identified shortfall across the plan area generally or specifically where a shortfall within a specific locality.
