The traffic in the morning is awful on the Bimringham Road up the the A46 and adding another 90 homes to Hatton Park can only make this worse.

I would like to submit my objections to the proposed plan to build 90 houses on GREENBELT land at Hatton Park. We live right next to the field where the development would be, so its fair to say we are furious about the plan. Every morning the Birmingham road is at a standstill between 7.50AM and 9.30AM and again at 4.50PM and 6.20pm, so any the area simply cannot handle any more traffic.
But the thing that makes most of the residents angry is the total lack of school places in the area, with both Budbrooke and Ferncumbe schools full to the maximum, we face having one child in the local school and the other having to travel miles away to a different school.
This is totally unacceptable and the residents of Hatton park will fight this pathetic plan all the way to its conclusion. Clearly this plan has been drawn up by people who have not considered any of the points outlined above, otherwise this ridiculous idea would never have been suggested in the first place. Do not under estimate the residents of Hatton Park, as we will not lie down and let the council ruin our way of life.

Re: New Local Plan - Strong objection for additional housing on land connected to Hatton Park R115. R126.

I am putting forward my objection against WDC building a further 70 - 90 houses on Hatton Park, and would like to know why this decision has been reversed.
When two years ago, 'Sally Jones/Development Services', advised in an email to those present at a meeting in July 2011, held at Hampton Magna Village Hall, that there would be no further houses built on Hatton Park.

A piece of land referred to as R115 in the 2013 Local Plan, lies at the back of my house, and I beleive forms part of a water balancing tank system.
When we moved to our house sixteen years ago, we were advised that this field was very significant to the eco water system, and no further houses could be built on this land, as it would upset the balancing system.

Every time there are heavy down falls of rain this field adjacent to the A4177 (R115) floods, and therefore would seem not be deemed to be an appropriate piece of land to use.
The Eco environment would also be destroyed as we have a number of different wild animals roaming around these fields and also there are bats nesting in this area.

Currently there are 80 houses spread over Tidmington Close, Crombroke Grove and Ebrington Drive which are located next to R115.
There are approximately two cars per household. This equates to between 100 - 150 cars coming from two Cul de sacs onto Ebrington Dive , and then Charingworth Drive onto the A4177. Three quarters of these families use their cars go to work/school runs, each morning and then throughout the day, and then those left will use these roads around 3/4 times a day.

We moved to this lovely rural location sixteen years ago, and since then there has been a dramatic increase in traffic using the A4177.
During the school term there are now even more buses ferrying children to various schools in and around this 10 mile radius catchment area.
The school buses now have to leave half an hour earlier than a few years ago, due to the heavy traffic and congestion that besets the Birmingham Road everyday during the school period.

Also there is a bottle neck everyday for residents trying to get off Charingworth Drive onto the A4177, and as there is no proviso for a yellow junction box in place to allow traffic off Hatton Park, it is a fight always to leave the estate, and this adds to the inner roads on Hatton Park also becoming jammed.

Only two weeks ago there was an accident on the M40 at junction 15 which caused gridlock for 10 miles in and around Hatton Park and there were cars queuing within Hatton Park up Barcheston Drive, and Charingworth to get onto the A4177.
If a further 70 - 90 houses were to be built on R115, this would add a further 140 - 180 cars on top of the already 100 - 160 cars using Tidmington Close and Crombroke Grove onto Ebrington Dive and then onto Charingworth Drive.

As there are only two exit routes out of Hatton Park, it would be assumed that if R115 was developed this would effectively cram all the traffic through one road which already has two Cul de Sacs.

The length of the road could not allow such a volume of traffic to work. On top of which there is no infrastructure in place to deal with the ever increasing traffic jams that
happen on a daily basis on the A4177. This can be exasperated on occasions when there is an accident on the M40/M42 and then traffic will use the A45/A4177 to bypass the motorway congestion , and adding to the misery already being experienced.

The A4177 is now recognised as one of the top ten hotspot roads in the UK as having more than average amounts of accidents, throughout the year.
There is not a week goes by when the police or medical services are not attending some incident or other within a three mile radius of Hatton park.

The recent introduction of 40MPH from Hatton Village hall all the way down to the Stanks roundabout has done nothing to deter drivers to slow down.
There should be a speed monitor in place near to the Falcon Public House advising people to slow down, instead of painted 40MPH signs on the road.
The 40 MPH speed monitor near to Shell garage has not worked for the last two years, and we see and hear speeding vehicles all day long.

In my opinion the infrastructure surrounding Hatton Park cannot sustain any further additional homes or gypsies sites , which in turn would bring even more traffic issues.

Warwick hospital has reached it's capacity in terms of expansion and the two local schools are also at full capacity.

Additional homes anywhere in this vicinity will just bring Warwick and Leamington to a grid lock situation. This is already happening at peak times.

Furthermore within these plans there is very little being offered for the aging population in terms of retirement homes or residential care home
With the price of land ,how can affordable housing be built on green belt land.

The evidence being put forward within our Parish shows that the statistics WDC have put together do not give the real picture. When the Parish agreed to
Hatton Park being developed twenty years ago they fulfilled their obligation in terms of houses needed and beyond.

We appreciate that additional developments have to be considered over the next 15 years, but there are certainly many other areas away from Hatton Park which
can accommodate additional housing without causing what is already a very chaotic situation, which cannot be addressed in the next ten years.

We accept that the WDC have to make allowances for Gypsies sites within in our county, but again R75/R125 is not the area to be considering such a site, as all of the above comments
reflect there is no infrastructure to deal with this.

As one who is heading towards the aging population it seems to me that we should learn lessons from other countries in the way they have developed
new housing complexes. The infrastructure is already in place, allowing people to use buses and trains to ease the congestion on their roads.

I feel sorry for the next generation, and hope that our beautiful countryside is managed correctly over the next twenty years, and not churned up, and the legacy's such as Hatton Park
are turned into ghetto's .

Land north of Birmingham Road - 5.21 ha developable area with a substantially reduced development capacity of 90 dwellings.

1) this area is at the bottom of a hill and is subject to wet boggy land which will require draining.
2) Direct access onto the Birmingham Road will involve opening up a bridle way and the traffic will conflict with traffic through the petrol station, as well as rush hour traffic along the Birmingham road causing added congestion to already significant congestion.
3) This added development will isolate Smith's Covert and leave wildlife stranded in the middle of a building development.

Although the preferred option site is separated by the Birmingham Road it is in close proximity to the Grand Union Canal. Canal & River Trust would require any development at Hatton Park to; not adversely affect the integrity of the waterway structure, quality of the water, result in unauthorised discharges and run off or encroachment; detrimentally affect the landscape, heritage, ecological quality and character of the waterways; prevent the waterways potential for being fully unlocked or discourage the use of the waterway network. The waterways can be used as tools in place making and place shaping, and contribute to the creation of sustainable communities. Canal & River Trust would seek for any development to relate appropriately to the waterway and optimise the benefits such a location can generate for all parts of the community.

As per normal it always seem to be green belt land that it chosen for new housing developments with the impact to wild life. We are heading into a food crisis we are yet to lose more farm land to housing. The area chosen also has a history of flooding onto the Birmingham Road so are we building on flood plain which takes the rain water from the higher ground of Hatton Park. Estate . My main objection to the new housing is the amount of traffic trying each morning to leave the estate going into Warwick. On a normal day the traffic is very heavy so another 70-90 house will certainly not going to help. On some days if there is a accident on the M40 the Birmingham Road into Warwick is grid locked & could take up to 1 hour to cover only a few miles into Warwick We were also told that no new housing was going to be build on the land between Hatton Park and Warwick due to the traffic problems the last time the council were looking into new housing in the area so what has changed to reverse that decision

This means that the new houses will be built at lower level, likely to suffer flooding. Increasing traffic flow where the village school children catch the school buses. This site will be clearly visible from Charingworth Drive, devaluing property and creating an 'eye sore' for residents over looking them. Your reason for discrediting option two was a highly visible site, this option is exactly that from the residents of Hatton Park. There will be disruption and threat to wildlife in Smiths Covert if this plan is carried through, as well as bats that are protected and inhabit this area.

I should like to inform the council that I have witnessed a number of bats flying between Smith's Covert (Hatton Park) and the rear of the properties on Honington Close (occasionally also to the front of these properties). I have lived on Honington Close since September 2006 and sightings have been made regularly each year. I should be grateful if you could document these observations, as I believe bats reside in and around Smith's Covert and any further development encroaching near to Smith's Covert may threaten their habitat thereby adversely undermining what should be designated, if not already, a Local Wildlife Site (Smith's Covert).

I would like to draw your attention to page 67 of the Warwick District Habitat Assessment Habitat Biodiversity Audit Partnership for Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull c/o Warwickshire Museum Field Services The Butts, Warwick, CV34 4SS August - published October 2008:

"Bats can be found in many buildings and trees, even those that initially appear to be unsuitable. Bats and their roost sites are protected under the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act, the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and the Habitat Regulations 1994, the latter of which deems them a European Protected Species. Therefore it is recommended that a pre-determinative bat survey of the buildings, woodland and mature trees is undertaken at an appropriate time of year by a qualified ecologist.

Recommendations The three pLWS/SINCs (Smiths Covert SP26N2, Budbrooke Farm Woodlands and Black Brake Plantation SP26T1 and Brownley Green Lane SP26N1) should be retained and a buffer zone implemented to prevent direct or indirect impact on the sites."

Available at: http://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3AD13473-716B-41DA-BCF2-5C607D78CDEC/0/WarwickDistrictHabitatAssessmentstandardsizereduced.pdf

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to object to the proposed application for 70-90 houses around Hatton Park nearby Charingworth Drive/Birmingham Road.

That many dwellings in that area of land is preposterous and I do not believe the builders would stop at 70-90 houses and will simply want to build and build until all the rural land is consumed and Hatton is no more than a suburb of Warwick.

As well as providing a serious eye-sore to the landscape the continued building in this area will cause significant issues to the supporting facilities (there are no nearby shops except 1 small corner shop, limited capacity of Ferncombe primary school).

When I moved to Hatton in 2000 the school was about to be closed and my son attended Ferncombe which had a class of about 15 pupils made up of Reception, Year 1 and Year 2 altogether. When my eldest daughter was going to attend in 2003 the intake exceeded 30 pupils for Reception, the school was incapable of handing this volume and needed significant increases in resources. The continued expansion of Hatton Park by builders is not proportional to the surrounding facilities to support the builders' profiteering.

Given the various other sites that are available in the local area, I cannot believe the council would seriously consider this application.

Furthermore, I understand other sites have been proposed with 250 houses and have been declined (eg. South of Gallows Hill, Warwick) so why are the council considering this.

I feel as though houses are trying to be placed in every single bit of countryside in and around Hatton.
Having lived here for 13 years I got tired for 10 years of continuing living on a building site as phase after phase of different builders built and built on Hatton exploiting the rural landscape to the maximum. Each house getting more and more compressed, smaller and smaller gardens to the point where people now appear to be living on top of each other.

This appears another builder trying to do so the same by starting another phase of the Hatton build. Where will it end ? When they have built right upto the A46 ?

There must be so much more alternative plots , the re-claimed plot where travellers once were on Browley Green Lane ? Warwick Gates ? Or the land just off Junction 15 of the M40 ? I cannot believe these are not more viable than packing more and more people into Hatton Park ?

One moment the British Waterways are cleaning up the Canal and ensure that Hatton provides a level of attraction to locals for the walks and the countryside, the next Builders want to maximise profits by building more and more houses, soon there will be no lovely fields near my house, it will just be a labyrinth of roads and mazes of houses. I have seen this happen in Solihull with Monkspath and Hillfield and it has destroyed any village and social community and creates simple a giant housing estate.

Where are the plans to balance the building with community buildings, shops, facilities ? It is simply a revenue and profit based exercise by builders until there is nothing left.

Could you please forward our views ref 90 houses proposed on Hatton Park.

I appreciate there is a demand for houses in the area although it would be a shame to see the estate get bigger as there are few facilities such as schools, drs, shop of a decent size, etc.. That can cope with any further additionality.

The first option to plan them on the field facing the main birmingham rd from erbrington close we do not think is suitable due to major traffic congestion already at school run / rush hour. The roads are very pressurised. Also at the bottom of the hill it is very water logged and flooded. We walk our dogs around there and I think it could be difficult with drainage and flooding onto the main road. It is frequently flooded and boggy.

The option two placing the houses further up towards the public house the Hatton Arms I think would be more sensible if they have to be in this vicinity by Hatton, as a better position and less crowdedness with being on a large estate already, plus the flooding issues will not be apparent and the vehicles leaving at similar times will be more spread out. I think it would cause more congestion but I appreciate you have targets to meet for new housing .

I write to say that I strongly object to the proposed building of 90 houses next to the current Hatton Park settlement. Currently the traffic situation in this estate is extremely busy at peak hours and I feel that additional housing would only make this matter worse and lead to an impossible, severely congested and unsustainable situation. As well as the roads, the current setup at Hatton park in terms of schools, (lack of) shops, and other amenities does not lend its self to another 90 houses. There are numerous other reasons of which I object to this proposed development, but in general, I am extremely dismayed that such a development has even been considered (in what was considered a green belt area) and could potentially come to fruition.

I wanted to register my concern about the proposed house building plans for the sites in the vicinity of The Birmingham Road next to Hatton Park.

Firstly I have just completed a walk around Warwick town, and I have identified a number of buildings that are empty that would provide excellent homes. They may cost more than building on green belt fields but would prevent readily available space from becoming wasteland and would make the town more attractive.

Secondly, building 90 homes next to the Birmingham Road actually means introducing 180 cars directly onto the Birmingham Road. This is not likely to reduce the traffic on the Birmingham Road. Nor is it likely to reduce traffic in Saltisford. Charingworth Drive will become very congested with people trying to leave the estate in the mornings. How will this improve or enhance the standard of living in Warwick?

I really do think that the requirement for extra homes can be met without the need to build on fields.

I wish to object to the proposed development of houses within Hatton park. The area simply cannot handle any more traffic, as the roads are gridlocked every morning and evening around the estate. The area has no doctors surgery, only a single tiny shop and the local schools are full to capacity. The people living on Hatton park do not want this local plan development to happen, as there is so many negative aspects against it. The other site (near the waterman pub) would be a better site, as the traffic would enter and exit directly on to the main Birmingham road, which would relieve the pressure of traffic on Hatton park.
The plan to extend Hatton park must not happen, as no residents are backing the scheme due to the problems outlined above.Its time Warwick District council listened to the residents views, as we are the people who have to live with the consequences.

Loss of amenity for houses nearby, increase in traffic during construction phase, and consequent noise and danger.

I strongly object to this proposal, or any plans for additional housing around Hatton Park, as there appears to be no obvious consideration to:
- The fact that Hatton Park has already seen the largest growth in housing and population of any of the villages in the last 15 years - 47%
- The volume of traffic already causing huge congestion along the Birmingham Road at peak times (consideration should be made to the impact on traffic from other outlying areas, including the additional housing planned for Leamington, surrounding villages and Solihull Borough; also HGVs heading for the new Sainsburys planned for Dorridge and the M6).
- The provision of school places in primary and secondary schools. For example, the proposed additional places at Budbrook should surely draw from Hampton Magna to prevent additional traffic from Hatton Park?
- The current issues with flooding along the Birmingham Road.
- The lack of parking as sustainable prices at Warwick Parkway, Warwick Hospital, Walsgrave Hospital and generally in Warwick and Leamington.
- Impact on local wildlife in Smiths Covert.
- The nature and standards of the proposed housing and it's likely affect on value of existing homes. Are their any proposed designs or environmental and landscape standards which builders should meet?
- Likely timeline for phases of the build in relation to improvements to infrastructure, school places, community facilities to accommodate additional residents.
- Any additional community facilities.
- Any compensation offered to residents bordering any proposed site who may be directly affected.
- Any likely impact on the quality of life appreciated by the existing community because the estate isn't overcrowded or densely populated.

As a resident of Hatton Park I would like to express my opposition in regards to the new build proposal in the Hatton Park area. It would ruin the green belt and appeal the site currently has because of this. The schools are aleady full and the roads re not copeing with the traffic as it is.

We strongly object to any development on hatton park. We object to new housing on land north of Birmingham Road - 5.21 ha developable area with a substantially reduced development capacity of 90 dwellings. We object to this proposed preference site 1. We will aim to give our reasons below. We will highlight how you might address these issues.

Please note that at the recent hatton parish meeting on 13 January, 100% of attendees rejected any housing development on hatton park. I encourage you to closely consider the points highlighted as to why residents objected.

Firstly, we have on many previous occasions, repeatedly written to you by email about our representation and strong objection to the new planned housing development on land adjacent to Birmingham road on Hatton Park. Despite our requests you are failed to confirm receipt or respond to my concerns. We would like to receive clearly communicated feedback on how my issues will be addressed.

A major objection for plans for new housing on Hatton Park is accessing directly onto Birmingham Road would cause even more havoc and significant congestion. This plan is ludicrous and clearly not researched, especially in terms of congestion at peak times in term time. The planned access is on a blind bend, shortly after a very busy petrol station and in front of residents housing on to he opposite of the road. Cars accelerate as they are approaching a 50 miles per hour limit (recently changed from 60 miles per hour) only 100 metres or so away from the intended access point onto Birmingham road. This is highly likely to cause serious road traffic accidents. You should be aware that residents are already concerned about the high load of traffic and heavy congestion on Birmingham Road. If traffic was intending to enter Birmingham Road and turn right from the intended planned housing, they would be waiting for a very long time during rush hour periods. It can take me over 30 minutes to get from Hatton Park to the end of the Birmingham Road (A46) at 8.15am. If traffic control measures were implemented, this would result in even longer cues of traffic in both directions on the Birmingham Road (plus greater air polution problems which will impact on our protected rural souroundings). This would create a huge problem for commuters getting to work, accessing schools and in cases of emergencies getting to local hospitals (which for me, is a very significant concern). It also needs to be considered how other similar plans in nearby smaller communities might impact on the congestion a on Birmingham road. If the plans in Hampton magna go ahead, this again will impact on the current congestion outlined above.

We also need to consider children and families who wish to cross Birmingham road. At present it is not advised during peak periods. Pedestrianised crossings are therefore likely to be needed to allow people to get to the shop at the petrol station or canal. Although safety is important, just a small delay on traffic would result in huge bottlenecks way up past the hatton arms and beyond. Tailbacks already result should a car stop traffic by waiting to turn right into the petrol station.

If there were plans to develop an alternative access via Ebrington Drive, this is simply not possible as traffic parks along this narrow road from neighbouring houses, this has resulted in it being a single lane road during almost all times in the day and night. Young children reside in this street and a massive increase in traffic along Ebrington Drive would significantly compromise their safety. Parking along this street would cause extreme difficulties for contractors and for any new residents. Please note the small plot of green land at the end of ebrington drive is used by children on the street to play and during the summer months, people residing in this area gather for social events on this land. This is a really important plot of land which should not be considered as a road to connect the new planned housing.

I strongly encourage you to retract this plan to build on the important green belt of land and focus on other larger scale housing developments in other areas. Please refer to our other considerations below.

We wanted to provide some general feedback on the plethora of information available related to the New Local Plan. Over recent years we have attended two planning meetings in Hampton Magna. We are aware of some of the issues that residents are concerned about. We will aim to outline the main issues below and also include our own personal thoughts. However, these are not exhaustive and we strongly encourage you to speak to your representatives, who attended all of your meetings, to get their feedback on issues that were raised.

We strongly object to the development of additional housing on land connected to Hatton Park. Please see below for a detailed explanation as to why we oppose this development at Hatton Park: a) Birmingham Road would not cope with the considerable congestion that this would cause and the dangers this would bring to drivers and padestrians; b) transport links are already stretched; c) it would have a significant impact and destroy our longstanding animals and wildlife that is established on this land; d) our local primary schools would not have capacity to cope with more children requesting places; e) impact on drainage; f) impact of current residents quality of life and psychological Wellbeing; and g) impact on child development through added pressure on early starts caused by transportation to schools. You would need to consider and implement changes in the education, transport, drainage infrastructure and maintain a greenbelt space for the wildlife already in place on this land for us to be happy with these plans.

Recent proposal by developers:
I have recently been informed about more details of the housing plans for the preference site 1. The plans are outrageous and go against the considerations outlined in the proposal related to respect for current residents along the side of Tidmington Drive and Combroke grove. There is a lack of open space and the houses are packed in allowing scope for further development at a later date. Please be aware that the local plan states that a "comprehensive masterplan will be required for this area to integrate the site with the existing settlement. Attention will also need to be paid to providing sufficient screening from existing residential properties and the area of ancient woodland to the north of the site." The proposed housing does nothing of the sort and takes no consideration of the points we highlight.

Evidence base
We are extremely concerned that the available documents are still not fully engaged in "evidence-based" consultation. Specifically, it is our concern that there are limitations in the methodology used to develop the Local Plan Preferred Options Consultation. This is an important foundation to any research, report and future recommendations. The consultation documents still lack transparency in terms of the employed methodology. We strongly encourage you to document how you plan to utilise the information gathered at meetings across the district. This is a valuable opportunity to gather qualitative evidence on people's acceptability, satisfaction and attitudes towards the plans. There has been a lot of frustration voiced at meetings related to the apparent failure to consider, appreciate, and operationalize people's views. There is a need to inform people how about how their views are going to be considered and synthesised to inform your decisions. For example, large scale questionnaires have been undertaken with residents by local parishes (Hatton Park and Hampton Magna) which provide valuable information. These state clearly that the majority of respondents strongly oppose any further development on sites connected to Hatton Park. People need to feel listened too. At the meetings in Hampton Magna we were assured that housing development would not take place in Hatton Park. I feel extremely disappointed that our voices and views were not taken on board. It is important to allow people to voice their opinions and acknowledge how they will be considered. You need to empower people. Your research will then be richer and more representative. At present it is not representative and lacks the rigour on which you are planning to make decisions.

We are extremely concerned about the generalizability of your 'research' / 'evidence base' to date. There are clear weaknesses in the rigour and robustness of your methodological approach and evidence base which need to be considered again. Asking experts/developers/planners their opinion is low quality evidence. How you synthesise the data already collected is crucial. If you have lots of meetings, obtain lots of response to the plans and don't individually consider each of the points raised then your data gathering is confounded and flawed - I am sorry to say, this appears to be the case.

Residents views about planned housing on land adjacent to Hatton Park:
From a personal point of view we need to express our upmost disapproval over expanding housing adjacent to Hatton Park on green belt land. There is considerable worry and upset among residents who live on Hatton Park and surrounding areas about potential increased housing on this site. This would significantly impact on their quality of life. These small communities are already overburden by through traffic (e.g. Birmingham Road) and schools are at capacity. Please work closely with parishes and residents before considering any expansion in these areas. I repeat you have not responded or acknowledged our previous highlighted concerns. Residents now feel helpless as you are not listening to the issues. Residents now feel that regardless of how much they object, the planning office will not listen to their objections, since they have been telling you the same issues and considerable concerns for the last two years.

IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
Schools and early year care:
There needs to be greater focus on the impact on what more children residing on Hatton park will have on local schools. These schools will need to be expanded. Please be mindful of the plans for other housing in Hampton Magna which will also mean school places will be in greater competition. For example, as you are aware, Budbrooke Primary is at capacity and it takes children from Chase Meadow & Hatton Park. The Ferncumbe Primary School at Hatton is over capacity. How much expansion is needed? Further growth on Hatton Park would result in more children having to travel to schools outside the catchment area, resulting in greater pressure on families and impact on their quality of life. If you go ahead with development on Hatton Park you would force people to leave the area and take their businesses elsewhere due to the likely impact on commuting, links to the A40 and transport to schools. This would certainly be the case with my family. Children are already having to set off earlier and earlier to get to school on time - again this is likely to have an impact on their maturational development and quality of life. I cannot take this risk for my family.

Early-year care needs careful consideration at an affordable price. Already many nurseries are at capacity or in considerable demand. The costs are also unmanageable for many parents wanting to return to work after maternity leave. Added housing would place increased demand on these services. Schools would need to be extended, better transport to schools would need to be introduced and schools would need to be made aware of the fact that the children travelling for Hatton Park will need to be picked up by coaches much earlier that currently done, as it will take a lot longer to get to school. I hope the planners appreciate what this could mean for children's cognitive development caused by less sleep and sleep pattern disruption.

Respecting our green spaces and green belts:
The wildlife on the land occupying site 1 on hatton park outlined in the plan, needs to be respected and the natural habitats for our wildlife maintained. Housing on this planned site has resulted in considerable frustration and objection at meetings we have attended. Consult with residents please. Please note that Muntjac deers, bats, birds of prey, pheasants, and many small mammals reside on Hatton Park on this planned land. I can take pictures to prove this. You need to undertake a environment survey. I feel strongly about destroying their habitat. Protecting our natural flora and fauna is important. Adding just a small number of houses and introducing lighting and more cars, will have a high price on our wildlife (here and surrounding it) which will not be repairable. You need to ensure that you can guarantee that the above would not be damaged by any planned development. You also need to be mindful of the privacy of the current residents housing who would be adjacent to this planned housing. Building on greenbelt areas should only be done in exceptional circumstances - I do not believe the reasoning for expansion on this site is exceptional.

Transport:
As noted above, expanding our road networks is going to be important to deal with the increasing cars on our roads. Birmingham road is already heavily congested. People on the Hatton Park estate are being required to set off earlier and earlier to avoid the congestion which results every morning. We also need to consider the impact this will have on noise and air pollution for residents already residing in places of growth. There is no easy cheap solution to this issue. You are likely to need to spend alot of money to redevelop the road networks, introducing dual carriage ways, roundabouts, crossings - however, this would not be suitable in this quiet location.

Public Transport:
There needs to better public transport in areas of expansion. More regular bus services, in particular, to train stations and Universities are needed.

Parking:
More affordable parking in town centres and at train stations are urgently needed.

Drainage:
We are extremely concerned about how the current drainage system will cope with expansion on site 1 off Birmingham. The costs this could involve should not be overlooked. This small expansion could cause considerable problems. Caution is needed and careful mapping of the current foundations is essential. Please note flood water is common on Birmingham road at the planned entrance site.

Facilities on Hatton Park:
There is a lack of facilities to support an expansion on Hatton Park. There is only one shop and a shop at the local garage (across the busy Birmingham road). A GP surgery, nursery and another local school is urgently needed for residents on Hatton Park and surrounding area.

Employment:
Greater housing expansion requires more employment. Expansion in the health, retail and educational sector presents good opportunities.

Emergency services:
An increase in the population of the District will lead to an increased need for community policing and an increase in the number of local "incidents" to which the policing service will be required to respond. We need to make sure residents are protected from crime.

Healthcare:
Ensuring that GP surgeries and hospitals can cope with the housing expansion will be of upmost importance. GP surgeries are already struggling to cope.

To reiterate, we strongly object to the development of additional housing on land connected to Hatton Park for the reasons stated above. We do not feel you can adequately address our issues without considerable economic burden. The small housing benefits would be outweighed by the significant detrimental harm these plans would have on the current wildlife, quality of life of current residents are we therefore strongly encourage you to revisit this planned small scale development on Hatton Park. Please be mindful to our concerns.

We appreciate your careful consideration of these issues.

It is unclear how the evidence base has been assessed to construct a preference in favour of the site abutting Smith's Covert in Hatton Park.

WDC appears to discount four other sites on the grounds that these either represent a threat to potential Local Wildlife Sites or constitute unwelcome ribbon development. I fail to understand why the same reasoning does not apply to Smith's Covert? This is a valuable tract of ancient woodland that harbours a variety of wildlife and fauna and is a potential Local Wildlife Site. In particular, it is an important roosting area for bats and many birds (including buzzards and owls). I should like to draw to the Council's attention the following recommendation in a study it commissioned and made public in 2008:-

(See page 67 of the Warwick District Habitat Assessment Habitat Biodiversity Audit Partnership for Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull c/o Warwickshire Museum Field Services The Butts, Warwick, CV34 4SS August - published October 2008):

"Bats can be found in many buildings and trees, even those that initially appear to be unsuitable. Bats and their roost sites are protected under the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act, the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and the Habitat Regulations 1994, the latter of which deems them a European Protected Species. Therefore it is recommended that a pre-determinative bat survey of the buildings, woodland and mature trees is undertaken at an appropriate time of year by a qualified ecologist.

Recommendations The three pLWS/SINCs (Smiths Covert SP26N2, Budbrooke Farm Woodlands and Black Brake Plantation SP26T1 and Brownley Green Lane SP26N1) should be retained and a buffer zone implemented to prevent direct or indirect impact on the sites."

It appears that the Council has yet to act on this recommendation but is nevertheless recommending in the New Local Plan an environmentally detrimental housing development.

Further, I also note in Appendix 6 of the New Local Plan (page 280) it comments on preferred site 1: "Large open field site which has good connectivity to Hatton Park. Requires substantial
Environmental buffering to the north and east of the site and further work required on site access and localised surface water flooding." The matter of flooding should not be taken lightly and remedial works would be overly invasive and environmentally damaging. I note also that WDC indicates that Smith's Covert may be designated a Local Wildlife Site: "Smiths (sic) Covert potential Local Wildlife Site is to the north of the site." (also page 280).

On pages 233-36 in Appendix 7 of the New Local Plan (Warwick District Council Landscape Sensitivity and Ecological & Geological Study Produced jointly by WCC Ecological Services & Habitat Biodiversity Audit and WCC Landscape Architects November 2013), it appears that the Council's consultants believe that a small ribbon of trees extending only at least 10m would suffice to screen and protect the environment (p. 236): "It is also imperative that a landscape buffer of native trees, at least 10m in width, should be created to maintain a visual link and wildlife corridor between Smith's Covert and the wider countryside to the east." This would be a woefully inadequate remedial measure. Were any development within site 1 to take place, which in my view should not be allowed, a buffer extending at least 100m should be created using Ash and Oak saplings and native shrubbery.

I would object to developent on this site for the following reasons,
1. The site is within the greenbelt and would be contrary to the presupmtion against development in the greebelt based on the desire to protect the visual and landscape amenity and quality.
2. This proposal will generate a significant increase traffic movements on the A4177 a road which already has too many vehicles on it at peak times and a gridlock can be created.

Whilst support is given to the allocation of Preferred Option 1 Land north of Birmingham Road we would like to make the following observations. The access as currently shown onto the Birmingham Road is poor and a far more sustainable solution would be to take access through Hatton Park to ensure the new community properly integrates with the existing community, to ensure connectivity to the village and existing bus stops and local facilities and to avoid an unnecessary new access onto the main road.

Response Re: New Local Plan Pages 46 - 47 WDC (Warwick District Council) Brochure (Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries Consultation)

Settlement Response: Hatton Park
Nature of Representation: Object

Reasons for objection:

* There is already an enormous burden on the local infrastructure within and around Hatton Park, with traffic saturation points between the hours of: 7.30am to 9.30am and again at 3.30pm to 6pm.
* Warwick Hospital is at its operational capacity presently, additional homes would obviously increase the burden. Likewise with the Doctors' Surgery at Budbrooke.
* Schools: Ferncumbe and Budbrooke are at capacity also, even with further re-development of these, they will be still over-subscribed within a few years.
* The proposed development has indicated access points firstly: off Ebrington Drive and another off the Birmingham Road. Both having their own inherent risks and danger to safety: - Ebrington Drive is just over 100 meters long - extra traffic flow of some 100+ vehicles daily would cause major road safety concerns along this stretch. Access off the Birmingham Road, near the Shell Garage again would give many highway safety issues, as this area is a already a specific traffic pinch point. Additional traffic accessing a proposed site, traffic entering and exiting the Shell Garage, and vehicles turning in an out of the junction by the Garage (Ugly Bridge Road) would increase the likelihood of further collisions in an already high risk area.
* Further to the above point - A crossing would be essential near the entrance of the proposed site on the Birmingham Road, as many people would consider the Shell Garage to be their local convenience store - with pedestrians attempting to cross the road at its most dangerous point.
* The Birmingham Road is classified as an A road with a speed limit of 40mph. The speed limit would ideally need to be reduced to 30mph along this stretch of the road. I am not aware of any other A roads with a limit of 30mph - this would give further concerns to pedestrian safety if the limit were to remain at 40mph. Even if the speed limit were to be reduced to 30mph, how would it be enforced would be a further concern, as the current speed limit of 40mph through this section I believe is not adhered to by many vehicles.
* There have been concerns regarding surface drainage (rain water) on the Birmingham Road over the past few years, with flooding apparent. I am aware of the remedial action taken by WDC to rectify this. The development of new homes will surely add to the problem experienced with surface water drainage, as the proposed development would allow more rain water to be channelled onto the road with obvious road safety concerns.
* I believe that the village shop at Hatton Park has been incorrectly classified as a supermarket - I would like WDC to reconsider the classification of this? As it is incorrect, and to alter the scoring of the proposed development site accordingly.
* There would also be a detrimental effect to the wildlife within Smiths' Culvert (next to the proposed development site) if the proposed scheme were to be granted.
* Greenbelt land should not be encroached upon within Warwickshire - brown field sites should be the top priority for WDC and Central Government to re-develop within the area.

If you would like to discuss any of the points raised in further detail I would be happy to speak to you on my mobile number listed above

The main issue for me is simply the volume of traffic going through the centre of Warwick at rush hour. I travel to the Warwick Technology park, as will many of the potential new residents living in any new house west of the A46, and the infrastructure simply isn't there when travelling through the centre of Warwick.

I object for the following reasons:
1) Traffic congestion on the A4177. It can take up between 10- 15 minutes to exit the estate in the morning at the moment. With the addition of more houses this would just get worse.
2) The risk of additional flooding on the A4177. The road floods now and the building of more houses may increases the risk of more flooding on a very busy road.
3) Environmental impact- Birds of prey, bats and wildlife feed and live on that field. The building on this field will be a permanent and irrevocable loss to all of these creatures.
4) Infrastructure plan- I cannot see how the local schools, doctors and hospital will cope with an increase of houses. Both Ferncombe and Budbrooke schools are full.
5) I do not agree with how Hatton Park has met the criteria of being a secondary service village. Our local shop is not a supermarket.
6) We already have a suitable mix of houses and Hatton has already contributed approx 800 homes in the last 15 years.
7) The houses built on that land would probably use the shell garage as their local shop. This road is dangerous to cross now. It would be dangerous for those crossing the road and also for motorists.
8) Traffic would cut through Edbrimgton Drive. This would be a hazard for residents and also create congestion in this area.
9) I cannot see how existing local services can support any new development. With the austerity measures set to continue this will only get worse.

The addition of any new housing on the land immediately adjacent to Hatton Park will further increase traffic levels on the A4177 -a single lane carriageway and busy commuter routeto the A46/M40 and Warwick and Leamington Town Centres. To build circa 90 homes on a site barely 75 metres beyond the existing roundabout and almost directly opposite a point where traffic turns into a petrol station and into Ugly Bridge Road will create mayhem. In addition the site is has poor drainage and cuts through ancient woodland threatening local wildlife which will in essence be 'trapped' between two settlements.

Any development of this site will have a significantly detrimental impact on the ecosystem of Smith's Covet. The abundant wildlife, both resident and visiting this ancient wood rely on the adjoining fields for food. Whilst there have been references to 'wildlife corridors' this would still not cause irreversible damage.