Preferred Options 2025

Other

Representation ID: 95254

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

this policy should also included registered Village Greens

Yes

Representation ID: 95255

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

no further comment

Other

Representation ID: 95259

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

The ability for a developer to claim reason to not include MUGA or other play areas should be set as a very high bar. Paying an “off-site sum” merely shifts the obligation onto someone else to find the necessary space when such space is unlikely to be available near to the point of need or at a cost which the off-site sum will cover

Other

Representation ID: 95272

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

Broadly support BUT, with specific reference to allotments, any consideration of “off-site commuted sums” should consider LOCAL (there is little value in an allotment beyond easy reach of residents) land availability and the value of the land which might need to be acquired by the alternative allotment providers (eg Parish Councils). The availability of areas of such local land is shrinking rapidly. The danger of this policy and similar policies is that it enables the developer to abrogate responsibility for providing necessary facilities onto bodies with less purchasing and negotiating power.

No

Representation ID: 95284

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

as drafted the policy is appallingly weak. Wording lacks clarity.
“adequate alternative provision is available to meet the needs of the area” -Define adequate.
“secured on or off site that are equally accessible to the community” - Define equally accessible. How? By public transport? How far away?
"Where strategic residential development is proposed the provision of new facilities will be sought." This will enable a developer to offer new facilities at a cost or accessibility out of reach to the users of the existing facilities

Other

Representation ID: 95297

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

"Some developers felt that the areas could be captured in landscape and historic policies." They would, wouldn’t they!

The suggestion that existing areas of constraint are to be reviewed is deeply concerning. If they are within the current SoA Core Strategy they should remain protected.

"Projects which enhance the character and visual amenity of Areas of Restraint will be encouraged" We disagree because it will invite developers to bring forward schemes which negate the original justification for the restraint.

We support the promotion of beneficial uses such as public access, nature conservation and food production.

Yes

Representation ID: 95301

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

no further comment

Yes

Representation ID: 95304

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

no further comment

Yes

Representation ID: 95310

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

no further comment

Yes

Representation ID: 95313

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

No further comment