Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Support

Representation ID: 61315

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

It is the Trust's considered view that new development should be concentrated within, and on the edge of, the existing urban areas (i.e. Leamington, Warwick and Kenilworth). However, as part of a balanced and sustainable spatial growth strategy for the District, the Trust also considers it is appropriate for some of the larger villages to accommodate new development and that, where necessary, Green Belt boundaries should be altered to facilitate this, including at Hampton Magna.

Support

Representation ID: 63538

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

The District Council's decision to review Green Belt boundaries is consistent with national planning policy guidance:
-The NPPF at paragraphs 83-84 states that, once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in 'exceptional circumstances', through the preparation or review of the Local Plan. At that time, authorities should consider the Green boundaries having regard to their intended permanence in the long term, so that they should be capable of enduring beyond the plan period. Further, when reviewing Green Belt boundaries local planning authorities should take account of the need to promote sustainable patterns of development.
-To boost significantly the supply of housing, the NPPF (Paragraph 47) requires local authorities, in preparing their local plans, to ensure that the full objectively assessed needs for housing are met as far is consistent with policies set out in the Framework. Seeking to meet such needs is part of the soundness test of development plans being positively prepared (Para.182). According to the Warwick District Council, the full objectively assessed housing needs for the District is 12,300 dwellings1; a scale of development for which WDC considers there is insufficient suitable and available sites outside of the Green Belt to meet. Then lack of suitable and available sites to meet objectively assessed housing needs provides the exceptional circumstances for a review of Green Belt boundaries.

Support

Representation ID: 63539

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

Having regard to the aforementioned guidance in the NPPF, and the latest evidence base on District's housing need and housing land supply, AMEC welcomes the Council's decision to undertake a Green Belt review and of its approach to identifying suitable land to be released from the Green Belt.

Support

Representation ID: 63540

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

Based on the evidence presented, AMEC supports the Council's recognition in Chapter 2
(and Chapter 4, s4.6) that to help 're-balance' the population profile of rural areas and villages in the District, this will require the supply of new sites for housing, which will not only help address indigenous local housing requirements (including affordable homes) but also support the wider housing growth demands for the district. This approach to the distribution of housing is also consistent with the NPPF's support for local authorities promoting sustainable development in rural areas through their local plans (Paragraphs 28 and 55).

Support

Representation ID: 63541

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

Based on AMEC's experience of undertaking similar work on behalf of landowners and local authorities, we consider that the site selection process and methodology, which has been has been developed by WDC for appraising village site options, is appropriate, suitably thorough and robust. Similarly, based on our own experience of undertaking objective Green
Belt appraisal work for other local authorities, we consider the approach adopted in the Green Belt study to be sound and the key findings robust. AMEC also supports the District Council's decision to limit options for growth, notably in and around the villages of Barford, Bishop's Tachbrook and Radford Semele, based on the research findings relating to the 'environmental limits' of developing in non-Green Belt areas.

Support

Representation ID: 63542

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

AMEC supports the Council's proposal (Chapter 6, s6.6) to remove the identified villages from the Green Belt and establish village boundaries or inset plans. It is acknowledged and agreed that by insetting a village in the Green Belt, this provides a slightly less restrictive planning policy environment and, importantly, will support opportunities to develop the identified preferred option sites.

Support

Representation ID: 63543

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

AMEC supports both the rationale and logic presented in the report for identifying indicative village boundaries for non-Green Belt villages (Chapter 6, s6.9).

Support

Representation ID: 63544

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

AMEC on behalf of King Henry VIII Endowed trust welcomes the inclusion of the site as a preferred option for development within Hampton Magna. AMEC concurs with the broad findings of the report and supporting technical studies which, amongst other things, state that our client's site "could accommodate a sensitively designed village extension with a modest impact on the fundamental aim, essential characteristic and purposes of the green belt". We also acknowledge and support the conclusion of the site assessment which states a need for careful masterplanning to minimise landscape impact and the scope to link the site to the wider village environment, including local schools and community facilities.

Support

Representation ID: 63545

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: King Henry VIII Endowed Trust (Warwick)

Agent: AMEC

Overall, from our preliminary assessment of Preferred Option site and of potentially competing sites, we consider that our client's site is not only a logical location for new development at Hampton Magna but the best site based on the following factors:
-Least impact on the Green Belt
-Least landscape and visual impact
-Physically well connected to the village, with good vehicular access
-Physically well located to the primary school and existing local facilities
-Physically set back from the A46 and the railway line - sources of visual and noise impact
-No known physical or environmental constraints to development
Finally, we can confirm that our client's site is available now, offers a suitable location for development now, and is viable and achievable, with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on site within five years.