Support

Representation ID: 3851

Received: 26/08/2021

Respondent: Hollins Strategic Land

I am writing in regards to the Site Assessment undertaken for Site 371 – ‘Land adjacent to Wootton Upper School, Hall End Road, Wootton’.

There are various questions answered by the planning department that have not taken account of your officers’ and statutory consultees’ detailed comments on a recent planning application on the site. I attach the Officer’s Planning Committee Report which was published for a Planning Committee on 25th November 2019. This sets out many of the answers to the questions in Call for Sites site assessment section and the Council should take account of it in its site assessment work to ensure consistency in decision making.

In summary, the following points should be considered for each of the site assessment questions:

2a – the report confirms that “the site falls within a designated County Wildlife Site totalling about 13% of that total designated area…Recognition as a County Wildlife site does not confer protection on the site…The Wildlife Trust has been consulted on the application and they do not object to the development…It is therefore concluded that the scheme will result in an improvement to the biodiversity value of the site and that the benefits to be achieved and secured by the scheme outweigh the estimated loss of c.3.1 hectares of the neutral grassland at the CWS to achieve compliance with the NPPF”
2b – the report summarises that “The Habitat Survey has confirmed the presence of Great Crested Newts in the existing pond on site…and the presence of Badgers on the land, although no setts were identified…The Wildlife Trust has been consulted on the application and they do not object to the development”. A significant buffer is achievable to protect the existing pond.
2c – the report confirms that “It is therefore concluded that the scheme will result in an improvement to the biodiversity value of the site and that the benefits to be achieved and secured by the scheme outweigh the estimated loss of c.3.1 hectares of the neutral grassland at the CWS to achieve compliance with the NPPF”
2d – The report states: “The Masterplan demonstrates how a new landscaped footpath fringes the development site and connects the new
homes with built form to the edge of settlement. The proposed development will not obstruct the existing PRoW within the northern
and western site boundaries; this bridleway will be managed to ensure it remains suitable for use, with users encouraged to respect
the areas of protected Meadow land”. The site also borders a cycle route and can link into a green infrastructure opportunity network.
4a – The report states: “The application has been assessed by the Council’s Heritage Team and they have identified the development would result in a very low level of less than substantial harm which could be removed altogether with suitable siting and screening of the development. … They have advised that the site makes very limited contribution to the significance of the identified heritage assets…”
5a – The report confirms the site would provide “associated support to the local economy”
9b – The report confirms that the loss of Grade 3a agricultural land on the site would be “of a minor nature”.
15f – The site assessment references application 19/00894/MAO which confirms the Highway Authority consider 81 dwellings to be acceptable. No issues have been substantiated on highway or junction capacity.
Contaminated Land – The report confirms “The Council’s Contaminated Land Officer has raised no objections to the findings of the [desk based study] which recommends full intrusive investigation (and any required mitigation) is undertaken. Subject to a condition to require this investigation the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of contaminated land”.
Environmental Health – The report confirms “The Council’s Environmental Health Team has raised no objections to the application”.