Whilst the sites are suitable the infrastructure cannot sustain this development.
It would be reckless to increase development if more traffic was placed on Station Road, Hatton without widening at the two points where cars cannot pass being by oakslade farm and at the right hand bend. The sight lines where station road meet the old Birmingham road are so obscured that accidents are regular but minor.
The over-loading of the junction of the A4177 and the old Birmingham road has also led to major accidents and these need to be addressed before any development is undertaken

The basis of my concern relates to the effect that an increase in local population and buildings would have upon the immediate locality. Specifically these concerns are:

1) The water and drainage provision for Hatton Station is not sufficient to sustain additional properties. Without improvement all existing homes would be at risk of decreased water pressure and insufficient foul water drainage.
2) There is no provision for the recreation of children.
3) Road access is limited, especially into the land east of Oakdene Crescent. There is an unacceptable risk that emergency vehicles would not be able to gain access into the new development.
4) Local roads do not have footpaths. An increase in traffic would mean an increased danger to people walking along existing roadways without footpaths (e.g. Station Road).
5) Public transport is minimal. Bus services are not sufficiently frequent to provide a reasonable access into Warwick, Leamington or Stratford. Despite having a rail station, services do not provide a sufficiently regular daytime service.
6) Pressure on school places at the local school at Hatton Green (Ferncumbe) means that children may not be able to gain a place at school.
7) For an increase in population there is no facility for shopping.


For these reasons I suggest that the proposed developments are not sustainable in the locality and that the Council should object to the application.

I have lived at Oakdene Crescent for just over 30 years, and my late husband and I were among the many who opposed the first development of social housing at Oakdene Crescent. The problems which arose after those houses were built have still not been addressed, nor have the concerns arising out of increased traffic to/from the Station, only vindicating our concerns which led to our opposition to those houses and those problems still remain:

* There are many problems already in existence with parking along the length of Oakdene Crescent, at its junction with Station Road and in Ash Close. Each property has space for two vehicles, but many now need greater parking, and there are traffic problems and Oakdene is reduced to single track along its length, and vehicles parked at its junction with Station Road and Ash Close cause considerable problems.
* I understand that a 30mph limit is proposed for Station Road; this will be unenforceable and visits by the local PCSO will not be sufficient to deter speeding motorists using Station Road to/from the Station. Station Road is a rat run at peak times for motorists either going to/from the Station or using it as a short cut from the A4189 Warwick/Henley road to the A4177 Solihull road.
* The first three houses in Oakdene Crescent are on a private sewer. The others have their waste dealt with via a huge underground tank and pumping mechanism in the drive of No.4 Oakdene Crescent. This particular set up still has problems, only yesterday afternoon the road was blocked completely by a tanker which had come to empty the underground tank and the smell was vile, on a day when windows had to be open because of the heat. There are often problems with the system, requiring the maintenance company to visit to rectify. This system has not worked efficiently since the outset; we must express our concerns that if six houses can cause such problems, this can only escalate when many more are built.
* Neighbouring properties in the Elms are affected by sewage problems, which no one wants to own and which Severn Trent refuse to admit are present and there has been sinking in next door gardens. None of these problems were experienced before the properties were built and, despite Severn Trent's assertions to the contrary and their complete lack of response, the law of probability says that the construction of the underground tank etc. are the root cause.
* There are absolutely no amenities at Hatton Station, for families, for the elderly or vulnerable; the only amenity is the Station. The bus service is intermittent and at times which are unsuitable for getting children to local schools, thus throwing families' reliance back on to private cars when there are infant/junior school children in the family. Equally there are no amenities for youngsters of any age; the children play in the street, running risks with cars etc. As they get older they get into mischief and residents get frustrated with them, we have instances of this "mischief" leading on to minor crime. The youngsters are bored; the adults are irritated; eventually the adolescents acquire wheels, either a car or motorcycle and a different situation emerges. This pattern is repeated with different age groups growing up. There have been one or two youngsters who have caused more serious problems; with the increase in the numbers of properties for families and no amenities, these problems are likely to increase.

I have looked at the different proposed areas on the website; what I cannot see or work out is the criteria by which these areas are judged as "possible" or "suitable". If I could understand the principles, then I might judge differently. The houses in Oakdene Crescent were built four/five years' ago on the premise of a "local need"; indeed that was the undertaking given to the residents at the time. NONE of the people who have taken up those properties have any local connection, and never have had any local connection; be it family or employment, which only confirmed the suspicions of local people who were opposed to the development.

I do not object to the land at Oakdene Crescent being utilised in some way, rather than as an area for dumping rubbish; but NOT without SENSIBLE answers being proposed to some of the obvious problems that such a development will create, i.e. hugely increased traffic and a woeful lack of amenities for families who might take up residence there.

Potential property development in Hatton Station


We are a young family who have lived in Hatton Station for 12 years. We proactively chose to live here in order to enjoy the rural lifestyle and closeness to green fields and wildlife that comes from a living in a small hamlet such as this.

You have kindly made us aware of 2 potential developments within our community:

A: Triangle of land off Station Road adjacent to the M40

We understand this land to be green belt which was planted as an attractive meadow until clearing took place recently. Whilst it may enjoy access from 2 separate roads (something not enjoyed by site B) it is extremely close to the motorway and without significant noise reduction measures would be wholly unsuitable for residential development.

B: Land to the East of Oakdene Crescent

Our garden backs onto this meadow. This is currently a meadow containing a plum orchard and is a haven for rare wildlife and a natural play area for local children who also have the option of visiting Hatton Country World which is located a short walk of 2 fields away adjacently.

Alongside other members of this community, we will object strongly to an application to put housing on this meadow on the following grounds:

1. Planning Policy

* Such applications have been declined twice in the past and there is no compelling rationale to revisit granting permission today.

* This is green belt land and therefore subject to stringent planning criteria.

* No evidence of need exists in this small isolated hamlet.


2. Wildlife & Ecology


* There are rare bats nesting in the field. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 it is illegal to:
o recklessly kill or injure any bat
o disturb a bat at roost
o damage a roost site or obstruct the entrance

* There are large number of slow worms and newts in the field and we frequently have them in our fish pond. Some of these we believe to be rare great crested newts.

* Ash trees in the UK are suffering from Ash die back, which is expected to infect most of our 90 million trees in the next 10 years (The Guardian). There are a large number of very young ash trees in the field and these should be protected to ensure the Ash has the greatest possible number of young trees post die-back.

* This is without mentioning the very wide range of birds, butterflies and other insects, hedgehogs, fieldmice and other species of wildlife that live or feed in the meadow (we can provide you with our 'spotting list' if required).


3. Building on this meadow - site considerations


* Traffic flow and access to the Oakdene Crescent/Antrobus Close area is already dangerously over stretched, as follows:
o There are insufficient off-road parking spaces, and cars frequently park on both sides of the road leaving only minimal passing space for the smallest of cars.
o There was recently a head on collision at the junction of Oakdene and Station Road and we have suffered frequent 'near misses' due to the poor visibility and restricted size of the road at this junction.
o Commercial vehicles delivering heating oil, regular rubbish and recycling collections often find the area congested. Development would prejudice the ability to meet council's access and on-site turning standards - also for emergency vehicles (fire engines & ambulances).
o Commuters using the adjacent station frequently park their cars in Oakdene, Ash Close and Antrobus Close rather than using the station car park. Residents have regularly had to call the police regarding inconsiderate parking that has caused obstruction.
* Existing public sewers are already subject to capacity issues.
* There are existing drainage problems associated with recent development of social housing in Oakdene Crescent. The sewers for these houses become blocked approximately once every 2 months, resulting in a sewerage company having to pump them out with all of the associated disruption to traffic and unpleasant smells permeating properties.
* The field is believed to have been an ammunition dump in a previous life and there are residents who still recall the discovery of unexploded ordinance. Disturbance to the ground could pose a threat to health of occupants through previous contamination.
* All of the properties backing onto this meadow would suffer a substantial loss of privacy, becoming overlooked across the entire length of garden and back of houses.
* Hatton Station is connected to the Claverdon telephone exchange. There are currently no plans to upgrade this exchange, yet existing residents suffer very poor connection speeds which prejudice both local small businesses and ruin residents' enjoyment of TV and internet services. Some 80% of people in a recent BBC survey said internet access is a fundamental right (March 2010); this is being studied by the UK government and is already enshrined in law in Finland and Estonia.

4. Business disruption


There would be significant disruption to the operation of local businesses if construction were to take place in Hatton Station due to noise and traffic, and suitable compensation would be sought.

5. Hatton Station Community needs


Local surveys are purported to have identified various community needs over preceding years and there is no doubt Hatton Station would benefit from, amongst other things:

1. a dedicated shop,
2. community hall,
3. public house,
4. better public road transport links,
5. children's playing field,
6. dedicated paths to keep horses off the narrow lane access to Hatton Station

We contend that should any potential developments mentioned here go ahead, they would not increase the size of the Hatton Station community enough to warrant commercial investment in any of the above amenities. It is believed that potential developers have offered to put a small children's play area into their plans, but given the size of the plots and their obvious need to turn a commercial profit, any such area would be extremely small and of limited use to the small number but wide age range of children within Hatton Station. In any case, our children currently enjoy the benefits of natural fields, streams, gardens and local habitats for healthy play, which would be compromised by development of the meadow!

If the Parish Council is truly interested in improving facilities for the community's children, as has been stated, we suggest perhaps a community action, facilitated by the Parish Council, to establish a large play area including a field to accommodate (e.g.) ball games. This could be done in conjunction with Hatton Estate, potentially by donation of a small piece of land.








6. Summary


In summary, we have seen no evidence of need for additional housing in Hatton Station. It can be summised that this is simply an opportunity for a developer to once again seek permission to build on precious greenbelt land that has been declined already on 2 previous occasions.

We appreciate the efforts of the Parish Council to keep residents informed of local plans and would ask that we are kept closely in the loop regarding any meetings, updates or further developments, communicated by all available media (our contact details attached).

Hatton Station. My initial reaction is that Hatton Station is too small an area to allow for more development; however should such development become necessary, I would suggest that Site B, the land to the east of Oakdene Crescent would be the more suitable.

Site A, the land in the triangle, is in a "wet" area, with barely adequate sewage facilities. The amount of infra-structure work needed to improve this site would be considerable.
Also, existing housing in that area consists entirely of bungalows, with the exception of the one house next to the motorway; this would mean that any development there would be resisted strongly by residents unless it also consisted of single storey dwellings. Additionally, the proximity the motorway would not make it particularly attractive for potential purchasers. On the other hand, it could provide a community amenity area, possibly a children's play area.

Site B. by contrast, has already got good amenities, and some recent development has already taken place there. Although I still stand by my first statement, should development become necessary Site B should be the preferred option.

We strongly object to the proposed housing - social and private - on the land which runs between the old and new parts of Station Road Hatton.

The reasons for this are:

a) The houses at that end of Station Road, are all private and not overlooked by any development, a deciding factor when we and we would think most people who bought there homes took into consideration. We live on a road - with although quite a volume of homes - our own plots are quite private and tranquil.

b) The land that is being considered is a small copse which is another barrier to the noise of the M40 just yards from it.

c) Station Road itself has no speed limit on it, and to put 25+ house in this location would be a deadly accident waiting to happen - not too mention the increased volume of traffic this development would generate, as all the households would have at least one car.

d) The water run off caused by such a development would put additional pressure on the already hard pressed drainage around this area, and living right next door to the water course which has already been very near to breaking its deep bank, at our end, additional run off would make this threat all the more probable, and the gardens at the houses lower down the brook, would almost certainly be under water as there banks are only half the depth of where we are.

e) Then comes the question of human waste - and I don't mean re-cycling - the pumping station which is on our land - can it cope - would extra work have to be carried out to this to enable it to cope. We already have to allow Severn Trent access to this pumping station - is there going to be work carried out in conjunction with this development - leaving our property wide open to coming and goings of which we have no control. Is there likely to be construction vehicles wanting access, and no-one taking responsibility for any damage done.

I understand that there is an alternative sight also being looked out, up by the railway station on what could already be classed a housing estate - the obvious answer to further develop that, thus leaving the "tranquil" area of Station Road to remain just that. The current Hatton Station/Station road community has no facilities except for the Railway Station - and I for one want it to remain a small idyl - not a satalite for the larger towns/villages - and even Birmingham and London.

I am sure from this you can comprehend that number 94 is totally against this proposed development.

Potential property development in Hatton Station


We are a young family who have lived in Hatton Station for 12 years. We proactively chose to live here in order to enjoy the rural lifestyle and closeness to green fields and wildlife that comes from a living in a small hamlet such as this.

You have kindly made us aware of 2 potential developments within our community:

A: Triangle of land off Station Road adjacent to the M40

We understand this land to be green belt which was planted as an attractive meadow until clearing took place recently. Whilst it may enjoy access from 2 separate roads (something not enjoyed by site B) it is extremely close to the motorway and without significant noise reduction measures would be wholly unsuitable for residential development.

B: Land to the East of Oakdene Crescent

Our garden backs onto this meadow. This is currently a meadow containing a plum orchard and is a haven for rare wildlife and a natural play area for local children who also have the option of visiting Hatton Country World which is located a short walk of 2 fields away adjacently.

Alongside other members of this community, we will object strongly to an application to put housing on this meadow on the following grounds:

1. Planning Policy

* Such applications have been declined twice in the past and there is no compelling rationale to revisit granting permission today.

* This is green belt land and therefore subject to stringent planning criteria.

* No evidence of need exists in this small isolated hamlet.


2. Wildlife & Ecology


* There are rare bats nesting in the field. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 it is illegal to:
o recklessly kill or injure any bat
o disturb a bat at roost
o damage a roost site or obstruct the entrance

* There are large number of slow worms and newts in the field and we frequently have them in our fish pond. Some of these we believe to be rare great crested newts.

* Ash trees in the UK are suffering from Ash die back, which is expected to infect most of our 90 million trees in the next 10 years (The Guardian). There are a large number of very young ash trees in the field and these should be protected to ensure the Ash has the greatest possible number of young trees post die-back.

* This is without mentioning the very wide range of birds, butterflies and other insects, hedgehogs, fieldmice and other species of wildlife that live or feed in the meadow (we can provide you with our 'spotting list' if required).


3. Building on this meadow - site considerations


* Traffic flow and access to the Oakdene Crescent/Antrobus Close area is already dangerously over stretched, as follows:
o There are insufficient off-road parking spaces, and cars frequently park on both sides of the road leaving only minimal passing space for the smallest of cars.
o There was recently a head on collision at the junction of Oakdene and Station Road and we have suffered frequent 'near misses' due to the poor visibility and restricted size of the road at this junction.
o Commercial vehicles delivering heating oil, regular rubbish and recycling collections often find the area congested. Development would prejudice the ability to meet council's access and on-site turning standards - also for emergency vehicles (fire engines & ambulances).
o Commuters using the adjacent station frequently park their cars in Oakdene, Ash Close and Antrobus Close rather than using the station car park. Residents have regularly had to call the police regarding inconsiderate parking that has caused obstruction.
* Existing public sewers are already subject to capacity issues.
* There are existing drainage problems associated with recent development of social housing in Oakdene Crescent. The sewers for these houses become blocked approximately once every 2 months, resulting in a sewerage company having to pump them out with all of the associated disruption to traffic and unpleasant smells permeating properties.
* The field is believed to have been an ammunition dump in a previous life and there are residents who still recall the discovery of unexploded ordinance. Disturbance to the ground could pose a threat to health of occupants through previous contamination.
* All of the properties backing onto this meadow would suffer a substantial loss of privacy, becoming overlooked across the entire length of garden and back of houses.
* Hatton Station is connected to the Claverdon telephone exchange. There are currently no plans to upgrade this exchange, yet existing residents suffer very poor connection speeds which prejudice both local small businesses and ruin residents' enjoyment of TV and internet services. Some 80% of people in a recent BBC survey said internet access is a fundamental right (March 2010); this is being studied by the UK government and is already enshrined in law in Finland and Estonia.

4. Business disruption


There would be significant disruption to the operation of local businesses if construction were to take place in Hatton Station due to noise and traffic, and suitable compensation would be sought.

5. Hatton Station Community needs


Local surveys are purported to have identified various community needs over preceding years and there is no doubt Hatton Station would benefit from, amongst other things:

1. a dedicated shop,
2. community hall,
3. public house,
4. better public road transport links,
5. children's playing field,
6. dedicated paths to keep horses off the narrow lane access to Hatton Station

We contend that should any potential developments mentioned here go ahead, they would not increase the size of the Hatton Station community enough to warrant commercial investment in any of the above amenities. It is believed that potential developers have offered to put a small children's play area into their plans, but given the size of the plots and their obvious need to turn a commercial profit, any such area would be extremely small and of limited use to the small number but wide age range of children within Hatton Station. In any case, our children currently enjoy the benefits of natural fields, streams, gardens and local habitats for healthy play, which would be compromised by development of the meadow!

If the Parish Council is truly interested in improving facilities for the community's children, as has been stated, we suggest perhaps a community action, facilitated by the Parish Council, to establish a large play area including a field to accommodate (e.g.) ball games. This could be done in conjunction with Hatton Estate, potentially by donation of a small piece of land.








6. Summary


In summary, we have seen no evidence of need for additional housing in Hatton Station. It can be summised that this is simply an opportunity for a developer to once again seek permission to build on precious greenbelt land that has been declined already on 2 previous occasions.

We appreciate the efforts of the Parish Council to keep residents informed of local plans and would ask that we are kept closely in the loop regarding any meetings, updates or further developments, communicated by all available media (our contact details attached).