Testun llawn:
Objection on the following grounds:
1) This is green belt land and should not be built on as this will set a precedent for further development and destruction of the environment. The 2006 Planning Inquiry concluded that the boundaries of Hatton Park should be retained in the face of petitions to remove parts of the boundary from the Green Belt, citing that "Hatton Park has reached its natural boundaries" and "the development is balanced". The current principle that development in the Green Belt is possible only in exceptional circumstances (NPPF). That the current Local Plan only allows development in rural areas that has a clear and direct local need, and only exceptionally in the Green Belt. The land is adjacent to an Ancient Woodland and the fields are home to number of wildlife as stated in other objections & comments. The environmental impact will be considerable. The land is also subject to flooding
2) There are 780 properties/2020 people already located here. The landowners, Burnam Brothers are planning to sell 3 fields. Their representatives, CP Bigwoods, have stated that the area will be suitable for at least 175 houses, an Extra Care Facility and further community facilities. As the plan is over 15 years, this area is likely to be further developed above and beyond the 70-90 houses presently proposed if the current plans are implemented.
3) The infrastructure will not sustain such a development impacting on health services, education, the transport system, emergency services and amenities. The schools are already at capacity and the figures for the increase in 0-15 years have already increased from 399 to 666. A further 90 houses will have at least 2.3 people on average per house. The number of cars on the estate will also double.
4) The traffic congestion from the estate to the A4177 is considerable with up to 15-20 minutes exit time from the estate in peak times
5) The scoring of the current community facilities , such as the village shop being classed as a supermarket, is incorrect. Decisions are being based on incorrect information.
6) Options for two Gypsy and Traveller sites in the vicinity as set out in Warwick District Council's document Sites for Gypsies and Travellers (June 2013) will also add to pressure on local infrastructure, services and roads.
7) The access road proposed will be opposite the Shell Garage and increases the hazards already existing