Draft Local Plan Review

Search representations

Results for Warwickshire Wildlife Trust search

New search New search

No

Draft Local Plan Review

10 Meriden - West of Meriden

Representation ID: 2537

Received: 14/02/2017

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

Contains fields that are identified as a potential Local Wildlife Site.
The LWS panel should be commissioned to survey and assess this site against the LWS criteria as a priority so as to inform the scheme design.
LWS areas should be protected and enhanced as part of the development.
Protection and enhancement of the LWS should be added to the likely infrastructure requirements.

Full text:

see attached response

No

Draft Local Plan Review

18 Solihull - Sharmans Cross Road

Representation ID: 2538

Received: 14/02/2017

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

Pow Grove Local Wildlife Site forms the western and southern boundaries of this site allocation, part of which includes ancient woodland. Mitigation will need to be in place to make sure that there is no direct or indirect harm to these habitats. Ancient woodland will need a semi-natural buffer to protect it from harm from neighbouring development.
Likely that the Green Infrastructure required will need to include a semi-natural buffer of the neighbouring ancient woodland so as to protect it from harm.

Full text:

see attached response

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q17. Do you agree with Policy P6? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?

Representation ID: 2541

Received: 14/02/2017

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

Suggest amended wording to bullet point 4:
Any unacceptable adverse impact on landscape or local nature conservation designations, ecology, biodiversity or the historic environment can be avoided or mitigated;

Full text:

see attached response

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q19. Do you agree with the policies for protecting the environment? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 2543

Received: 14/02/2017

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

Recommendchange to the paragraph on Biodiversity and Geodiversity (see full response).
Disagree with paragraph on LWS, LNR and Geological Sites. Should not be differentiated in terms of avoidance (see full response).

Full text:

see attached response

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q20. Do you agree with the policies for quality of place? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 2544

Received: 14/02/2017

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

Agree with proposals being expected to conserve, restore or enhance biodiversity.

Full text:

see attached response

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q22. Do you agree with the Policy P21? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 2546

Received: 14/02/2017

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

Agree.

Full text:

see attached response

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q21. Do you agree with the policies health and supporting communities? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 2549

Received: 14/02/2017

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

Agree with the inclusion of nature conservation and green infrastructure within this policy.

Full text:

see attached response

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.