Response from Oakmere Homes Limited Chris Middlebrook, c/o Steven Abbott Associates LLP
1. Oakmere Homes Limited Chris Middlebrook, c/o Steven Abbott Associates LLP : 26 Apr 2013 17:09:00
Please add your response below, quoting the main modification reference number: (limit 3000 words)
MM030. Policy LA2.5 – Land West of Oxenholme Road
1. These representations relate to the introduction of a detailed requirement by MM030 relating to the treatment of areas adjoining an un-named tributary of the Natland Beck watercourse within the allocated housing site. MM030 introduces an explicit requirement for a landscape buffer zone and habitat of 10 metres around the watercourse
2. These representations request that the explicit reference to a 10 metre buffer zone is deleted, on the basis that such a requirement is overly precautionary at this location, and is unnecessarily prescriptive within a Local Plan document.
3. Our client, Oakmere Homes (North West) Limited, is the developer who is promoting residential development of the allocation West of Oxenholme Road through an outline planning application.
4. In the context of that outline planning application our client has commissioned specific ecology/biodiversity advice from Wardell Armstrong (“WA”). WA considers that the River Kent SAC and this tributary could be safeguarded and other landscape and biodiversity benefits could be achieved at this location with reduced landscape and wildlife corridor width. In the context of the outline planning application WA proposed to incorporate an undeveloped landscape and wildlife corridor adjacent to both banks of the tributary of 8m width on one bank to provide necessary maintenance access required by the Environment Agency and a minimum width of 4m to 6m on the opposite bank – this would be subject to a design to be agreed with the Environment Agency and Natural England through development management.
5. WA have considered relevant literature and research and have based their suggestions on site specific circumstances. WA’s experience is “that the success, or otherwise, of landscape and wildlife corridors in a residential context can turn on the quality of design and long term management of the habitat”. A policy requirement to secure and deliver a good quality and effective landscape and wildlife corridor is more important than what is effectively an arbitrary corridor width of 10m.
6. The detailed assessment undertaken by WA to inform their view is based on:
- The low risk to water quality posed by residential development in comparison to (current/historic) agricultural use of herbicides, pesticides and approaching livestock;
- The lack of clear evidence base to justify a 10m buffer zone in a residential context;
- The small size of the watercourse (i.e. the corridor should be proportionate to the size of the watercourse);
- The ability to access both sides of the watercourse from one bank for maintenance purposes (therefore an 8m corridor only need to provided on one bank);
- The ability to provide a high quality functioning landscape and habitat corridor at a width less than 10m.
7. Both the Environment Agency and Natural England have accepted that a functioning landscape and habitat corridor can be achieved at a width less than 10m.
8. The precise detail and ultimate agreed width for any landscape and wildlife corridor is a matter for development management. In our view the explicit 10m width contained in MM303 is not justified or effective and does not represent positive planning. It is inappropriate for the Land Allocations DPD to seek to pre-judge and specify a width at this stage.
9. We respectfully request that the explicit reference to a 10m width buffer be deleted.
10. We note also that Policy LA2.5 continues to make reference to “measures to mitigate impacts on Great Crested Newts”. As far as we are aware there is no evidence to suggest that Great Crested Newts are present at the Oxenholme Road allocation and we would, therefore, question the relevance of this particular element of text.
