Revised Development Strategy

Object

Representation ID: 55280

Received: 29/07/2013

Respondent: University of Warwick

Agent: Turley

Previously made representations on behalf of the University of Warwick to the Preferred Options consultation of May 2012 setting out the exceptional circumstances supporting removal of the University's Central Campus West from the Green Belt.

Subsequently met with officers, and gave a presentation to Kenilworth Town Council in February 2013, which resulted in local councillors broadly supporting the principle of the University coming out of the Green Belt.

Notes that paragraph 1.4 of the RDS states that it does not cover "the full range of topics that will be included in the Local Plan" but the University hopes that this [proposal] will still be considered as part of the Submission version Local Plan.

Expresses concern that the justification to Policy RDS8 (Sub Regional Employment Site) states that the site should remain in the Green Belt until fully developed, suggesting that it might come out of the Green Belt at some point in the future.

Para 5.5.8 of the RDS states that it is not intended that this Local Plan amends Green Belt boundaries in this area, and Para 5.5.10 goes on to say that any proposal would be required to minimise the impact of new buildings on the openness of the Green Belt wherever possible, and to provide appropriate landscaping and planting to screen new development from the countryside.

The RDS wording therefore appears to seek to avoid removing land from the Green Belt to meet future development needs on the premise that allowing development in the Green Belt is meeting the same economic objective.

The University is concerned that a similar stance may be taken - i.e. because outline planning permission has been granted for further expansion of the campus within the Green Belt, this renders its removal from the Green Belt unnecessary.

This is inconsistent with Government policy as set out in the NPPF. Para 83 states that when Local Plans are being reviewed, authorities should consider Green Belt boundaries "having regard to their intended permanence in the long term" and "take account of the need to promote sustainable patterns of development" (para 84) such as those identified through the Local Plan itself.

When defining boundaries, para 85 states that LPAs should "ensure consistency with the Local Plan strategy for meeting identified requirements for sustainable development" and "not include land which it is unnecessary to keep permanently open" and "satisfy themselves that Green Belt boundaries will not need to be altered at the end of the development plan period".

The University is concerned that the approach to Policy RDS8 is inconsistent with the NPPF in terms of the need to ensure long term permanence of Green belt Boundaries, the need to promote sustainable patterns of development, and not to include land in Green Belts which is unnecessary to keep permanently open (Para 83,84 and 85)

Should a similar approach be taken towards the on-going and future development of the University of Warwick, it would also be inconsistent with Government policy. The University's desire is to remove its main campus from the Green Belt in a way consistent with national policy.