BASE HEADER

No

ID sylw: 107305

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Mark Gleaves

The area bounded by REFID 400 is also included in the area bounded by REFID 123. This double-counts capacity.

The sites <10 ha are proposed to be denser than even 2 existing Bearley estates and the forthcoming site with outline permission. This is contrary to the village's character.

Sites 123 and 590 will exacerbate surface water flooding on the Grange Road estate. Runoff from these sites already contributes to flooding on Site 400. 60% of that site is expected to be prone to surface water flooding by 2040-60 (see government long-term flood risk maps). These sites contribute to flooding on the sports field, sports club, the A3400 and beneath Bearley railway bridge.

Site 123 would intensify use of two narrow and poorly aligned highways. These junctions present risks for traffic and pedestrians. Use-intensification of the Grange Road/Oaktree Close or School Lane/Old Snitterfield Road routes would exacerbate risk, particularly during rush-hour.

There is only a dirt track access to Site 400 from Snitterfield Road. A through-road to access the adjacent 'landlocked' Site 123 would reduce Site 400's capacity and only one route for potentially 1,000 vehicle movements per day is neither safe nor practical.

Access to Site 590 via Oaktree Close and Grange Road or via Old Snitterfield Road and School Lane is undesirable for the same reasons as for Site 123. Part of the boundary borders Snitterfield Road but there is no access, the land is approx. 1m above Snitterfield Road, and given proximity to the Ash Lane junction, the blind bend by St Mary’s Church, and the Church Lane junction, an access road would make a hazardous section more dangerous.

Development of Site 673 would exacerbate frequency and volume of flooding on Church Lane, Bearley Green estate, and increase volumes of water channelling over Ash Lane and on to proposed Site 765. The only access is via Church Lane and a farm track. Development would intensify use of a narrow and poorly aligned highway and cause danger to traffic and pedestrians (there is no room to incorporate a pavement).

Parts of Site 765 are prone to flooding already. It receives runoff from the A3400 due to its topography. Land should be set aside for SUDs and a green buffer zone in case later expansion is needed. Parts of the site may be required for expansion of waste water treatment works. Access to the A3400 is feasible but would require significant upgrades, particularly if a new school is provided. Traffic would be increased through Wootton Wawen, Henley-in-Arden and at the A46 at Bishopton roundabout. Measures will be needed to prevent Snitterfield Road and Gospel Oak road becoming worse "rat-runs". Most residents will use cars due to flexibility and convenience over public transport outside of a city.

This is Green Belt land, the vast majority never developed. Bearley Bushes is a SSSI to the east. Together with three designated LWS these cover approx 31 ha. There are four potential wildlife sites within 1km of St Mary's Church. These sites support a range of protected species, including common and soprano pipistrelle, brown long-eared bats, lesser horseshoe bats, bats of other (indeterminable) species, grass snakes, and badgers; butterfly species of white admiral, small heath, grizzled skipper, and white letter hairstreak; and great crested newts. Bearley Bushes would lose its last natural border if Site 673 was developed. One of the proposed uses at Site 673 is renewable energy. A study at University of Bristol suggests solar farms are severely detrimental to bats.

LIDAR surveys suggest Roman Fort foundations beneath one of the fields of Site 123.

More realistic capacities are listed below:

Site 123 | 0 dwellings
Site 327 | 37 dwellings
Site 400 | 49 dwellings
Site 590 | 0 dwellings
Site 595 | 46 dwellings
Site 609 | 66 dwellings
Site 632 | 159 dwellings
Site 673 | 0 dwellings
Site 765 | 4685 dwellings

Capacity is therefore c.5000 dwellings - below the 10,000 needed for a sustainable new development and the 6,000 for a new settlement. Proposal BW should therefore no longer be considered.