This is a sensible option if this plan preserves the integrity of the existing community.

As a village we have no infrastructure to sustain the consequences of 70 - 90 new houses. We have no doctors, school and only one main road through the village that is already over used impacting on the air quality and noise levels. It appears that Warwick District Council is using Baginton as a dumping ground for any new planning development that comes their way including the Gateway Technology Park, Gypsy and Traveller site, Bretheran School all impacting on GREEN BELT land.

As a village we have no infrastructure to sustain the consequences of 70 - 90 new houses. We have no doctors, school and only one main road through the village that is already over used impacting on the air quality and noise levels. It appears that Warwick District Council is using Baginton as a dumping ground for any new planning development that comes their way including the Gateway Technology Park, Gypsy and Traveller site, Bretheran School all impacting on GREEN BELT land.

As a village we have no infrastructure to sustain the consequences of 70 - 90 new houses. We have no doctors, school and only one main road through the village that is already over used impacting on the air quality and noise levels. It appears that Warwick District Council is using Baginton as a dumping ground for any new planning development that comes their way including the Gateway Technology Park, Gypsy and Traveller site, Bretheran School all impacting on GREEN BELT land.

I object strongly to The Gateway and the totally unsuitable development of Green Belt land. In no respect should this project be given credence in the light of unfounded promises of boosting employment numbers and eroding such large areas and blighting the land. Please take on board the BPC concerns and see less commerce £ signs and a more balanced view of the benefit of such a scheme. In light of so many industrial units being empty in and around Coventry and businesses crumbling daily, it seems preposterous for more green belt land to be taken forever and lives and homes ruined.
Where extra housing is also concerned, please take into account the lack of transport, amenities, schools, doctors are a-lacking in this area and a small village can only take so much. 70-90 properties is extreme. A small number as was built in Andrews Close would be acceptable, but no more. Farmland and people's properties would have to be purloined to accommodate to high numbers. If there is a good infrastructure to support such changes then they should be considered but not until.

I object to the Gateway and Housing Strategies for Baginton Village.

Inappropriate development for Green Belt Land and its environmental and community impacts.
The Gateway scheme does not enhance or improve the area and would have far-reaching negative impacts on local communities and the environment. The proposal is deeply flawed in content and sustainability. THis proprosal should be withdrawn.

The proposed extra houses could number 70-90 is too high a figure for such a small village. There is an acute lack of land and amenities for such a development. More Green Belt Land? Where's the services, transport, shops, schools, doctors etc? An acceptable small number could be accommodated but a limit to around ten.

Both schemes unsustainable and the Green Belt should be protected. Last year there were approx 72,000 empty homes in the W MIdlands and 64,000 in the E Mids. Why aren't they being renovated and re-used...why more erosion of green belt and small communities?

This development is too large for the village. In accordance with the parish plan and housing needs survey a maximum of 20 should be considered.

I wish to object to some of the proposals to be placed in the Local Plan's Revised Development Strategy for Warwick District Council.

I feel very strongly that the Gateway Development on green belt land between Baginton and Bubbenhall is unsuitable and inappropriate for the proposed location. It does not satisfy the very special circumstances necessary to dictate the change of land use and furthermore I do not believe it will ever attain the projected job numbers. I therefore request that the Local Plan should remove all references to the Gateway and amend its projections accordingly.

The target of 70-90 houses outlined for the village of Baginton in the Local Plan seems highly ambitious to me for the size and scope of the settlement and its amenities. Furthermore it does not take into account the Parish Plan or Housing Needs survey completed which suggest a maximum of 20 new build houses would be desirable for the village. Under the Localism act I would wish to see the number of properties revised to this lower number to reflect the Parish Plan and Housing Needs survey.

With regard to the proposed Gypsy and traveller sites in Baginton (ref G101 and G107) I feel this is further development (on top of new housing and Gateway) that the village can not sustain and is also inappropriate use of green belt land. The cumulative effect of all these additional developments on the village will dramatically change the character and atmosphere of the area for the worse having considerable adverse effects on visual landscape quality, noise, pollution and environment.

The sites are not within easy reach of local facilities and there is poor provision of public transport. There are already three traveller sites within a few miles of those proposed, at Siskin Drive, Brandon Lane and Oxford Road. These additions would not satisfy the Local Plan strategy of 'distributing development across the district'.

I also feel it is unacceptable to adversely impact the successful plant nursery business when there are more suitable sites such as those proposed to the south of Warwick District. These have better access to facilities, are outside green belt and would fulfil the requirement to appropriately distribute the development.

Baginton is a historic Doomsday village that deserves to have its integrity maintained, supported by a Local Plan that respects its heritage and the wishes of its community. I would urge you reconsider the current proposals for the Local Plan that will adversely affect our village and amend the details accordingly.

I am writing to strongly object to the Development Strategy planned for Baginton Village.

1. Gateway

The Gateway is an unsustainable and inappropriate development of the Green Belt land with no very special circumstances. It will have a very great affect on the quality of life within the village and cause an unnecessary increase in traffic through the village particularly Mill Hill. The bridge in Mill Hill will certainly not be able to cope with the increase number of buses proposed to service the commercial businesses planned. There is plenty of commercial land around this area that could be used for commercial development without impacting on our rural community.

2. Housing

Although, I welcome the development of new housing within the village particularly affordable housing, I totally disagree with the proposal put forward of 70-90 houses, a more realistic number would be 20. The Local Pan must not dictate the type of housing development to villages, but should take into account individual village desires under the Localism Act. Outcomes of Baginton Parish Plan and Housing Needs Survey should be used in preference to the proposals in the consultation document.

3. Gypsy & Traveller site Options

The proposed Gypsy and traveller sites in Baginton (ref G101 & G107) are an inappropriate Development of the Green Belt. The consultation documents identify major negative effects as to the sites being located on Green Belt land and being adjacent to Coventry airport, the industrial park and in the vicinity of several sewage treatment works, with the associated noise, light and air quality effects.

The proposed sites are not within easy reach of local facilities such as doctors, schools, hospitals etc and there is poor public transport provision. Access from the sites to the village along the grass verges are unsuitable for pushchairs, wheelchairs etc.

There are already three sites within a few miles of Baginton at Siskin Drive, Brandon Lane and Oxford Road. Therefore, the proposed sites do not satisfy the Local Plan Strategy of "distributing development across the District".

The proposed site in Stoneleigh Road is on private land, which includes part of the local nursery. It is unacceptable to adversely impact on a rural business by forcing them to give up part of their land for such a development, when there are more suitable sites.

The alternative sites proposed to the south of Warwick district are preferable options to the two proposed in the Baginton parish as they are outside the Green Belt, they also have better access to facilities, would not have an adverse impact on a rural businesses and would not lead to an over-concentration of sites in one area.

I moved to Baginton with my family nearly 3years ago at considerable financial costs so that I and my family could enjoy the benefits of living within a rural community. Since moving here the village of Baginton has continually had to fight Warwick District Council over a number of proposed developments. Can you please take into account that this is a village and not an overspill from Coventry and I would very much like to enjoy the rural setting we now enjoy!!!

As new residents of Baginton, my wife and I would like to take a moment to raise a few objections in regard to proposed development plans for the village. We realise you will have heard these comments already from the Baginton Parish Council, but we just wish to confirm that we share these opinions and that we are concerned for the future of our community.
Local Plan - Revised Development Strategy
The Gateway is unsustainable and inappropriate development of the Green Belt with no very special circumstances. We agree with the BPC's request to remove references to the Gateway and associated projections from the Local Plan.
70-90 additional houses is far too big an increase for a village this size. The Localism Act should be considered and the outcomes on the Parish Plan and Housing Needs Survey should be used to gauge additional housing requirements.
Gypsy and Traveller Site Options (G101 and G107)
The proposed sites are (like the Gateway) inappropriate use of Green Belt land and we agree with the negative effects cited in the consultation documents. Amenities are not within easy reach and public transport links are inadequate. Three sites already exist within a few miles of the proposal, which therefore in its objective to distribute development across the district. The Stoneleigh Road site is privately owned and Smith's nursery is a well-regarded and popular local business, which would be unfairly impacted by this development. The other proposed sites to the south of Warwick are preferable because the issues outlined here do not apply.

I feel I must write and show my objections for the proposed Local planning development strategy for Baginton village.

gypsy / travellers site.

* The size of this site will result in it becoming a dominant feature within the village,
this will increase demand for the already over stretched amenities.

* There will be a significant number of children from the site requiring school places within the
Baginton catchment area, where it is already difficult for the Baginton children to obtain their
first choice school.

* The link between gypsy / traveller site and crime is hotly debated, however it's mere perception
Will cause the value of property within the area to decrease.

* With the Coventry and Warwickshire gateway been given the go a head, this is far too much
development for a small community, causing a reduction in the quality of life for both travellers
and current residence alike.

* There are already three traveller sites within a few miles of the proposed site at Baginton.
Therefore the proposed site at Baginton will not satisfy the local plan strategy of
distributing development across the district.


Housing.

* The 70-90 houses proposed for Baginton is an unacceptable increase for a small community.
The council should take into account village desires under the localism act,
the outcome of our parish plan and the housing needs survey should be used.

I wish to strongly oppose decisions being made about the development around Baginton.
The Gateway being the first joke amongst it all - no new construction is going to make the area richer - it may create a few jobs here and there but thats about it, there are numerous site like the gateway in the surrounding 5 mile radius that are not thriving now after being built for numerous years - units left empty, business going under, vandalism so why will this new development be any different. I dont feel it was a fair vote on whether it is good for the area or not - more like a back hand deal or two to ensure the casting decision was made with 'yes' votes. And to take away more of the green belt is disgusting - why not revamp current business parks and get them to full capacity first.
Housing proposed for baginton - 70-90 - where is the requirement for such a number of new homes - surely this number should be lower - an increase of that many houses is totally unnecessary and probably now wanted by most of us that already live in Baginton.
And finally the proposed Gypsy site just a short walk from my home in Oak Close????? We are a small village with not enough facilities at present, how on earth does the council intend to support this development with additional facilities or will the parish of Baginton miss out on school places to the travellers, are we getting additional doctors surgeries in the area? Will you be providing a permanent police presence if this development goes ahead? We already have three other developments close to Baginton so can you please explain why Baginton yet again is being dumped on - I cannot see how WDC are distributing these sites fairly across the District. The new proposed site is again on green belt land???? Surely there are better options that are not on green belt land.
I have never been more disappointed in WDC than I have over the last few months, The Gateway will never work, too much housing will turn Baginton into a small town not a village and another traveller site will ruin us all together. Security in the village alone will be majorly compromised. We have over the last year and a half had a major increase in crime, with the local team of police struggling to assist us all as the distribution in numbers of the police is very poor considering the increase we have had, the current team do their best but we already need a bigger police presence than budgets can allow so with all this growth it will only increase - an easy target to thieves. CCTV throughout the village would of helped deter but we seem to of been forgotten in Baginton and thats very, very sad indeed. I'm not financially well off, just an average person trying to live day to day, single mum (not out of choosing) working to keep my family going and I myself am in debt due to my burglary last year because of all the additional security I had to put in place and now with all this proposed development I feel we will be even more at risk of crime, local business will suffer and the Baginton I have lived in for 13 years will go downhill. I chose to live in a village because it is a village, will our house prices suffer even more due to all the development - more than likely, who in their right mind would want to buy a home near to a traveller site.
Please, please, please consider all the current residents in Baginton before you just green light proposals, I think the scale of development will just ruin Baginton and is very, very unfair on the area as much of it is on green belt land.

see attached

see attached

Dear Sirs

We wish to lodge our objections to some of the proposals of Warwick District Council in their consultation documents, as they adversely affect our rural village community.

Gateway:
The Gateway is unsustainable and inappropriate development of the Green Belt with no very special circumstances. We support Baginton Parish Councils' request that the Local Plan should remove all references to the Gateway and amend all its projections accordingly.

Housing:
The 70-90 houses proposed for Baginton is unacceptable and disproportionate increase for the village. The Local Plan must not dictate the type of housing development to villages, but rather should take into account village desires under the Localism Act. Outcomes of our Parish Plan and Housing Needs Survey should be used in preference to the proposals in the consultation document, i.e. a maximum of 20 houses.

Gypsy/Traveller Site Options:
* The proposed Gypsy and traveller sites in Baginton (Ref G1010 & G107) are inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The consultation documents identify manor negative effects as to the sites being located on Green Belt land and being adjacent to Coventry airport, the industrial park and in the vicinity of several sewage treatment works, with the associated noise, light and air quality effects.
* The proposed sites are not within easy reach of local facilities such as doctors, schools, hospitals etc. And there is poor public transport provision.. Access from the sites to the village along the grass verges are not suitable for pushchairs, wheelchairs or use by the inform
* There are already tree traveller sites within a few miles of those proposed in Baginton at Siskin Drive, Brandon Lane and Oxford Road. Therefore the proposed sites d not satisfy the Local Plan Strategy of 'distributing development across the district'.
* The proposed site in Stoneleigh Road is on private land, which includes part of the local nursery. It is unacceptable to adversely impact on a rural business by forcing them to give up part of their land for such development, when there are more suitable sites.
* The alternative sites proposed to the south of Warwick district are preferable options to the two proposed in Baginton as they are outside Green Belt, have better access to facilities, would not have an adverse impact on a rural business and would not lead to an over-concentration of sites in one area.

After carefully reading your proposals for the local plan I wish to comment as follows.
Gateway.
The Gateway is totally inappropriate development on green belt with NO special circumstances. The green belt was set up to prevent city sprawl into the countryside. I request that you take all reference to Gateway out of the local plan.
Housing.
It is encouraging that WDC have at long last agreed that small housing developments in local communities should be allowed. Small growth sustains local amenities like shops and post offices. In order to protect the character of our village it is important to have a balance between market and affordable houses and it is good to see this incorporated in the proposal. However to suggest 70 - 90 houses over such a short time frame an this is totally unacceptable. The minimum should be deleted and left with just a maximum number and the final number should be in line with local needs and wishes.
Gypsy Sites.
Eric Pickles has announced that no gypsy sites will be built on green belt land so why is WDC proposing one on land opposite Coventry Airport which is in our green belt? We currently have 3 gypsy sites within 1 mile of Baginton and the guidelines require that such sites should be distributed across the district. The guidelines also require sites to be near a school, a doctor's surgery, a hospital and good local bus services; Baginton does not meet any of this criteria!. One of the proposed Baginton sites is on land owned by Smith's nursery; this is causing a very negative reaction locally which could harm the business potential of this local employer. WDC have identified other potential sites within Warwickshire that are not on green belt land which are more appropriate.

Please take my views into consideration when creating the next stage of the drafting process.

See Attached

I am writing to strongly object to the Development Strategy planned for Baginton Village.

1. Gateway

The Gateway is an unsustainable and inappropriate development of the Green Belt land with no very special circumstances. It will have a very great affect on the quality of life within the village and cause an unnecessary increase in traffic through the village particularly Mill Hill. The bridge in Mill Hill will certainly not be able to cope with the increase number of buses proposed to service the commercial businesses planned. There is plenty of commercial land around this area that could be used for commercial development without impacting on our rural community.

2. Housing

Although, I welcome the development of new housing within the village particularly affordable housing, I totally disagree with the proposal put forward of 70-90 houses, a more realistic number would be 20. The Local Pan must not dictate the type of housing development to villages, but should take into account individual village desires under the Localism Act. Outcomes of Baginton Parish Plan and Housing Needs Survey should be used in preference to the proposals in the consultation document.

3. Gypsy & Traveller site Options

The proposed Gypsy and traveller sites in Baginton (ref G101 & G107) are an inappropriate Development of the Green Belt. The consultation documents identify major negative effects as to the sites being located on Green Belt land and being adjacent to Coventry airport, the industrial park and in the vicinity of several sewage treatment works, with the associated noise, light and air quality effects.

The proposed sites are not within easy reach of local facilities such as doctors, schools, hospitals etc and there is poor public transport provision. Access from the sites to the village along the grass verges are unsuitable for pushchairs, wheelchairs etc.

There are already three sites within a few miles of Baginton at Siskin Drive, Brandon Lane and Oxford Road. Therefore, the proposed sites do not satisfy the Local Plan Strategy of "distributing development across the District".

The proposed site in Stoneleigh Road is on private land, which includes part of the local nursery. It is unacceptable to adversely impact on a rural business by forcing them to give up part of their land for such a development, when there are more suitable sites.

The alternative sites proposed to the south of Warwick district are preferable options to the two proposed in the Baginton parish as they are outside the Green Belt, they also have better access to facilities, would not have an adverse impact on a rural businesses and would not lead to an over-concentration of sites in one area.

I moved to Baginton with my family nearly 3years ago at considerable financial costs so that I and my family could enjoy the benefits of living within a rural community. Since moving here the village of Baginton has continually had to fight Warwick District Council over a number of proposed developments. Can you please take into account that this is a village and not an overspill from Coventry and I would very much like to enjoy the rural setting we now enjoy!!!

I am writing to formally object to the planning proposals set out in the following development proposals for Baginton Village.

I will try to describe within this letter what I believe are compelling reasons not to over develop the area in and around the Village of Baginton, and in particular the following three developments proposed namely:
1. The Gateway Project
2. The proposed 80-90 houses
3. The Gypsy & Traveller site
I believe all three developments are non-beneficial for the village of Baginton, I hereby ask the WDC to reconsider the proposals based on my comments below:


1. The Gateway Project
I am formally against the gateway project.
I am astonished at the way this project proposal has been manipulated and do not feel happy with the process that it has undergone in order to reach a state of "go ahead", however I will again list this time in brief why I feel this project should not go ahead.
I believe that the gateway project is an unsustainable development of precious green belt, the proposal being supported by little or no circumstance \ evidence that make it a more appropriate site than the many others suggested, the sheer scale of the proposed development is both out of character and destructive to the local area,
All Industrial sites will in the future need modernising perhaps even demolishing; when has this ever been the case with green belt and wildlife, the presence of green belt and wildlife is quite literally timeless.


2. The proposed 80-90 houses
I am formally against the proposed development of 80 - 90 houses in Baginton.
I understand that the Paris Councils "Housing Needs Survey" discovered that the residents thought that a maximum of 20 New houses should be the maximum; 80 - 90 houses in Baginton is too much for the village to be expected to accommodate and is a disproportionate growth of the village.
Surely the village has some say in how it is developed; it would appear that WDC are not considering its Baginton Parish Councils needs and ultimately its parishioners; instead I suspect they consider the development of an outlying village is of little or no consequence. I hope this isn't the case and would like to see more care being taken of our precious greenbelt with these proposals being tempered to acceptable levels or rejected outright.
3. The Gypsy & Traveller site
I am formally against the development of the Gypsy & Traveller site.
As I have already stated the development of green belt should be avoided where ever possible, to this end the inclusion of a traveller site cannot be allowed to go ahead within Baginton, the loss of the greenbelt and the associated negative effects listed in the consultation documents must be taken into account and an alternative site chosen.
I understand that several traveller sites already exist in close proximity to the ones proposed at Baginton - Siskin drive, Brandon lane and Oxford road. Surely this does not satisfy the Local Plan Strategy of "distributing development across the district" .
Baginton is a village as such it is not serviced as other larger populations are, the availability of doctors, schools, hospitals and public transport are all just adequate, stretching them further would not help anyone receiving these services.
I believe the two sites proposed to the south of Warwick District are preferable options compared with the two in Baginton, they are away from the greenbelt and have better capacity for the amenities required.
I urge Warwick council to reject the planning proposals mentioned above; Baginton is a beautiful village with buildings listed in the doomsday book, including listed buildings, an ancient monument, the remains of a Roman fort and a defined conservation area. These features must be considered in terms of proximity to the proposed developments. We rely on our council to temper these developments and ensure that they manage with a long term view.

see attached

I am a Bagington resident and object to the proposals in your consultation document as follows:

1 Gateway Proposals The erosion of Green Belt that would be occasioned by this development does not seem to be justified by exceptional circumstances. The case has not been made for the necessity of a distribution centre of the size proposed. It is important that Green Belt be preserved, especially round a village so close to Coventry city.

2 The number of new houses proposed is completely disproportionate to the size of Baginton village. A smaller number (e.g. no more than 20) would be acceptable and contribute to the sustainable viability of the local services without adversely affecting the character of the village community.

3 The proposal for gypsy and traveller sites within Baginton parish boundary would seriously affect the Green Belt and again needs justification given the close vicinity of three other sites within a few miles. The proposal to create a site on private land adjacent to Smith's nursery and requiring part of their land is unfair and unacceptable.

4 I believe the options of traveller and gypsy sites south of Warwick district would help to spread the load and minimise the affect on local businesses.

Please see attached documents and plan.