Proposed Modifications January 2016

Support

Representation ID: 69073

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

The allocation of Land at Gallows Hill is supported. However the wording that accompanies Policy DS15 is overly prescriptive particularly in relation to comprehensivity and the requirement within the policy for either a Development Brief or Layout and Design Statement to be provided to address the criteria set out in Policy BE2 as this ignores the fact that outline planning approval has already been granted. Early delivery of the Gallagher Estates site at Gallows Hill should not be restricted by a requirement to provide a comprehensive development of the whole proposed allocation site part of which does not benefit from planning permission.

Object

Representation ID: 69965

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Outline planning permission has already been granted on the eastern part of the H46A allocation within the control of Gallagher Estates and not on the land to the west. As such it is considered that additional wording should be added to Policy DS15 which acknowledges that planning permission has been secured on part of H46A and which requires the remainder of the site, which does not have the benefit of planning permission, to come forward in line with this outline approval.

Support

Representation ID: 69968

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

We are in support of the spatial strategy advocated within Policy DS4 and the allocation of sites proposed within Policy DS11 including Site H46A. The Table included at Appendix B which forms part of Proposed Modification 10sets out the Infrastructure Requirements for both H46A and H46B. However as these requirements are met within the planning permission for H46B reference under the infrastructure requirements within Appendix B as shown on page 32 to 'see site H46B' should be reworded to clearly specify "To be provided within site H46B".

Object

Representation ID: 69974

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Amendments to Policy DS11, Appendix B, paragraph 2.49 refer to a small section of land to the south of Harbury Lane which does not have planning permission. This land forms part of Lower Heathcote Farm where outline planning approval has been granted for 785 dwellings and is known as the Triangle site. The District Council envisage that this land has capacity for 105 dwellings however it is clear from the initial work undertaken that this site has the capacity for up to 150 dwellings. In light of the above there is scope for site H02 to deliver further sustainable
development in the form of additional housing on the Triangle site at Lower Heathcote Farm.

Object

Representation ID: 69975

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

We reserve out position as to whether the proposed triggers set out within Proposed
Modification 17 and 18 will adequately deal with and resolves the strategic matter of unmet housing need arising in the Coventry and Warwickshire HMA given the current level of uncertainty surrounding whether Nuneaton and Bedworth will assist in meeting the needs of C&W HMA and what likely impact this may have on the soundness of the Warwick Local Plan.