Swansea PLAN - yes to LOW Impact Development, NO to Airport Expansion r0304182

road protests 2003 | road protests (current) | movement links

To: swarmlist@yahoogroups.com
From: catalyst@co-op.org
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:20:53 +0100
Subject: [swarmlist] Fw: Swansea PLAN - say yes to LOW Impact Development, NO to Airport Expansion!

Swansea PLAN - say yes to LOW Impact Development, NO to Airport Expansion!

Greetings from SANE (Swansea Airport No Expansion),

Please take 5 minutes TODAY to -

1) help stop Swansea Council from expanding Swansea Airport - the ONLY airport on an AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty)!! and to call for the inclusion of Low Impact Development in the plan!

2) call for the inclusion of Low Impact, Highly Sustianble Development in Rural Areas

The Pre-Deposit Draft of the UDP (Unitary Development Plan) is currently out for consultation, only no one has heard about it and copies cost £15.00!!!

As it stands the UDP is proposing Airport EXPANSION, but NO pollicy on Low Impact developments please send your letter(s) today! (consultation ends Thursday 17th April)

If you would like to register your comments, you can either log on to the Swansea Council website, and fill in a form -

http://www.swansea.gov.uk/aspwebfiles/devplan/default.asp

or send a version of the following to craig.anderson@Swansea.gov.uk and paul.mellor@swansea.gov.uk

1) Oppose Airport Expansion

From (name)
(address)

Mr Craig Anderson
Director of Development
The Guildhall, Swansea SA1 4PH

I would like to object to the proposed paragraphs below as -

1) Communities affected were not consulted

2) Aviation is the most polluting form of travel, so airport expansion contradicts the overall aim and purpose of the UDP 'to promote sustainable development and support commuity planning' (p.5, para 1.1)

3) Swansea council needs to seek legal advice on whether expansion breaks European Law under the Habitats Directive

4) The economic benefits of Airport expansion are likely to be outweighed by the economic, social and ecological costs, yet no detailed, independent studies have been undertaken

5) There needs to be a fully independent assessment of the overall environmental impact of airport expansion in terms of pollution, noise and visual impact.

Unitary Development Plan: Pre-Deposit Consultation Draft (Feb 2003) p.137, Ch. 6, Heading 6.8 Airport Paragraph 6.8.1 states: "It is envisaged therefore that there is opportunity for the commercial function of the Airport to be expanded and to widen its current function from primarily a recreational one to a regional airport in the medium term."

Policy AS12 states: "Schemes relating to the retention and development of a commercial aviation function at Swansea Airport including airport related infrastructure and facilities and other development ancillary to the primary airport function will be permitted subject to there being no unacceptably adverse environmental impact."

These should be removed and replaced with a clear statement that Swansea Airport will remain primarily recreational and that, given the unsustainable nature of aviation and the sensitivity of the site, there will be no further expansion of passenger or flight numbers.

Yours sincerely,

-----------------------------------------------

2) Low Impact development

From (name)
(address)

Mr Craig Anderson
Director of Development
The Guildhall, Swansea SA1 4PH

Highly Sustainable Developments in the Countryside

There is clearly a need for new criteria covering highly sustainable, low impact developments in the countryside. This would meet UDP 'Goal 3: Ensure the full range of housing and facility needs of the community can be accommodated' (p.8)

At para 4.1.2. the UDP states this goal is to be pursued by 'Providing a range and choice of type and location of housing opportunities.' (p.77). Introducing a new criteria would fully support this approach.

Housing Development priority 4.2.1.(i) (p.77) in favour of brownfield rather than greenfield developments is to be welcomed. However, there is currently no consideration of the embodied energy of housing or other developments. Equally design and layout with regard to passive solar heat gain, water table catchemnet/displacement and energy efficiency are ignored. Furthermore, whilst the UDP clearly aims to minimize traffic generation, through town centre locations, for example, there should be stronger and clearer emphasis on high-density, mixed use developments, including car-free developments. The UDP should be changed to require an analysis of these components for ALL future developments, with the setting of stringent standards in line with the commitment to sustainability.

Whilst there is a need to protect against the encroachment of unsustainable development into to countryside, there is a growing body of precedents and mechanisms through which local authorities have developed such policies, ensuring sustainable and affordable access to rural housing, land and livelihoods.

In addition to meeting national policy guidance such as that provided in PPG 7 and PPG 13, these Local Authority policies often address the crisis of affordable housing and sustainable livelihoods in the countryside. As para 4.2.20 notes 'In some rural areas of the County and particularly in Gower and Mawr, the price of housing has risen to levels well beyond the reach of many local people entering into the housing market for the first time.' (p.4.2.20)

Whilst Policy HC3 of the UDP seeks to address this, it could be further strengthened by the addition of stringent criteria for highly sustainable, affordable housing and associated highly sustainable developments. Such policies have been developed by several bodies, including Gloucestershire Structure Plan Deposit Draft Policy H10 Proposals for highly sustainable development in rural areas will be permitted where they comply with stringent criteria specified in the local plan.

6.5.25. ...Policy H10 provides opportunities for genuinely sustainable development which, by implication, is land-based and therefore rural. It is not the intention of Policy H10 to preclude innovative housing solutions in urban areas, but as these do not require a specific policy at the strategic level they should not need to be treated exceptionally.

Milton Keynes has a similar policy fully implemented, which drew on Dobbyn et al's (1999) Defining Rural Sustainability: Fifteen Criteria for Sustainable Developments in the Countryside (http://www2.phreak.co.uk/tlio/chapter7/defining.html). These critieria should be used as the basis for a new designation within City and County of Swansea's UDP.

Your sincerely,

-----------------------------------------------

3) Please forward as widely as possible

road protests 2003 | road protests (current) | movement links