Yes

ID sylw: 103898

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Amarjit Gill

Brownfield sites in the district should always be developed first before any green belt is used

Yes

ID sylw: 104211

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Kenneth Chitty

Brownfield land should be utilised together with grey belt land to develop high density housing areas.

Yes

ID sylw: 104219

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Rachel Pope

This makes complete sense and is the corollary of Green Belt Purpose 5: To assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

Yes

ID sylw: 104336

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Amanda Waters

Yes, full use should be made of sutiable urban brownfield before development is considered in other locations. An brownfield outside urban areas should be considered in conjunction for opportunities to include employment and infrastructure as part of the development.

Yes

ID sylw: 104351

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Dr Nicola Sawle

agree

Yes

ID sylw: 104370

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: South Warwickshire Foundation trust

We support the prioritisation of brownfield sites for development before other sites are considered. We also support the release and re-purposing of land unsuitable for development for other common uses to support development and empowerment of local communities.

Yes

ID sylw: 104456

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr ROLAND CHERRY

As noted above in my comments on density, redevelopment of brownfield sites must be a priority to both improve the urban landscape and to provide housing close to people's place of work - a win win. Regeneration of old industrial sites in conurbations has a dramatic affect both on the welfare of local inhabitants and the wider city. Urban regeneration must be the key ambition for the West Midlands and beyond.

Other

ID sylw: 104659

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Mary Harman

Only agree with using brownfield sites in urban areas. Do not agree with using brownfield sites in Green Belt areas. Again this policy direction is not clear enough.

Yes

ID sylw: 104664

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Kay Williams

Use brownfield land wherever possible!

No

ID sylw: 104760

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Dan Brock

I object to the Sustainable Development Requirements section due to overestimated housing projections, excessive employment land allocations, and insufficient infrastructure planning. The proposed 54,700 new homes risk overwhelming local services and harming biodiversity. Negative employment land residuals suggest poor economic planning, and the lack of detailed infrastructure analysis raises concerns about sustainability. Additionally, the plan does not adequately reflect community input, undermining public trust in the process. Without addressing these issues, the development risks being unsustainable and detrimental to local communities.

Yes

ID sylw: 104781

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford-on-Avon Town Council

Industrial buildings with heritage value should be retained and redeveloped, wherever possible. This is a particular cause of concern in the Black Country.

Yes

ID sylw: 104862

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Fern Arnold

Yes brownfield sites used first.

Yes

ID sylw: 105010

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Charlotte Holme

Seems a sensible approach to make use of brownfield land

Yes

ID sylw: 105714

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property Development Ltd

Asiant : Carter Jonas

Figure 5: South Warwickshire Local Plan Spatial Growth Strategy Priority Areas depicts the Priority 1 Areas in darkest shading. These areas are centred on 19 settlements, including Bidford. We strongly support the identified Potential Locations for Growth.

Yes

ID sylw: 105750

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: HG Hodges Ltd

Asiant : Ridge and Partners LLP

The consultation document states that the SWLP Spatial Growth Strategy prioritises the use of suitable urban brownfield land before considering other locations. We support Policy Direction 9, which aligns with the NPPF, as it allows for brownfield land outside urban areas to be used to enhance sustainability in large-scale developments like new settlements. This is consistent with the NPPF's emphasis on utilising previously-developed land while ensuring it does not conflict with other policies, particularly those protecting biodiversity. Consequently, Draft Policy Direction 9 aligns with the NPPF. It highlights the LMA site’s potential as a new settlement given that a large part of the LMA site is brownfield land.

No

ID sylw: 106196

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Acres Land & Planning

Once again, this Draft policy does not seem to provide any useful guidance and therefore serves no useful purpose.

Yes

ID sylw: 106219

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Cala Homes (Cotswolds)

Asiant : Lichfields (London)

Cala supports re-use of brownfield land for new development as an effective use of land in line with the NPPF, and particularly Chapter 11 and Paragraph 124.

Cala therefore generally supports the policy direction as it states the spatial growth strategy will make use of brownfield land before development is considered in other areas. The existing allocation at Long Marston Airfield Garden Village (LMAGV) is a brownfield site that is currently delivering a significant quantum of homes and will continue to deliver housing over the course of the Local Plan period.

Cala is fully committed to the delivery of LMAGV, as evidenced by the continued build out and planning applications advanced and is encouraged that the preferred options identifies a wider area for expansion around the existing allocation at LMAGV, assuming that this is sensitively planned and integrated with the LMAGV.

Other

ID sylw: 106369

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: West Midlands Housing Association Planning Consortium

Asiant : Tetlow King Planning

Draft Policy Direction 9 explains that the Councils will make full use of suitable urban brownfield land before development is considered in other locations. While broadly supportive of this approach, we reiterate our comments made at Issues and Options consultation that the SW councils should be cautious to a brownfield led approach to development as it may hinder the delivery of affordable housing within the area. It is widely recognised that the development of brownfield land often has cost
implications that negatively impact the viability of delivering affordable homes at such sites.

Yes

ID sylw: 106510

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Wychbury Developments

Asiant : Cerda Planning Ltd

We broadly support the requirements to make efficient use of brownfield land. Recycling previously
developed land can (though not always) achieve a series of sustainability objectives.
However, the scale of housing required in the plan area – even by the HEDNA evidence, which is
significantly below the Standard Method and before adding in the duty to co-operate – is such that
brownfield opportunities are insufficient to make even a small contribution to overall housing delivery in
the plan area.
Furthermore, we object to any suggestion that a sequential approach should be taken to bringing forward
brownfield sites ahead of green field opportunities. Setting aside that broader sustainability objectives
should be applied (for example, a green field site on the edge of a town or extended village performs
significantly better than an isolated brownfield site in National Landscape) the NPPF contains no such
sequential approach to previously developed land. The sequential approach to brownfield development
was founded in PPS3 and PPG3 before it, and was expressly removed from the NPPF in 2012 and has not
been re-introduced in any of the revisions to the NPPF since

Yes

ID sylw: 106646

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire Property and Development Group

Asiant : Framptons

Yes, we support approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 9.

Yes

ID sylw: 107514

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Davidsons Homes

Asiant : Cerda Planning Ltd

We broadly support the requirements to make efficient use of brownfield land. Recycling previously developed land can (though not always) achieve a series of sustainability objectives.
However, the scale of housing required in the plan area – even by the HEDNA evidence, which is significantly below the Standard Method and before adding in the duty to co-operate – is such that brownfield opportunities are insufficient to make even a small contribution to overall housing delivery in the plan area.
Furthermore, we object to any suggestion that a sequential approach should be taken to bringing forward brownfield sites ahead of green field opportunities. Setting aside that broader sustainability objectives should be applied (for example, a Green Belt site on the edge of Stratford town performs significantly better than an isolated brownfield site in National Landscape) the NPPF contains no such sequential approach to previously developed land. The sequential approach to brownfield development was founded in PPS3 and PPG3 before it, and was expressly removed from the NPPF in 2012 and has not been re-introduced in any of the revisions to the NPPF since.

Yes

ID sylw: 107603

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: National Highways

Yes, National Highways agrees with this approach.

Yes

ID sylw: 107658

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Cala Homes (Cotswolds)

Asiant : Lichfields (London)

Cala continues to support the re-use of brownfield land for new development as an effective use of land in line with the NPPF. Chapter 11 (Making effective use of land) of the NPPF places great emphasis on use of previously developed sites, Para 124 stating that:
“Strategic policies should set out a clear strategy for accommodatingobjectively assessed needs, in a way that makes as much use as possible of previously-developed or ‘brownfield’ land”.
Cala therefore generally supports the policy direction in that it states the spatial growth strategy will make use of brownfield land before development is considered in other areas.
The existing allocation at Long Marston Airfield Garden Village (LMAGV) is a brownfield site that is currently delivering a significant quantum of homes and will continue to deliver housing over the course of the Local Plan period.
Cala is fully committed to the delivery of LMAGV, as evidenced by the continued build out and planning applications advanced and is encouraged that the preferred options identifies a wider area for expansion around the existing allocation at LMAGV, assuming that this is sensitively planned and integrated with the LMAGV.

Other

ID sylw: 107687

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Pete Frteeman

I believe that the most salient and relevant part of this information portal is "The call for sites" that seems to turn South Warwickshire into a patch work for housing and development. I believe that about 112 sites have been submitted for consideration to date with a substantial part of that land being offered by local farms thereby making it "greenfield" site by definition and not preferred "brownfield" sites.

May I suggest that given our country's ongoing predicament in terms of its reliance on foreign food imports. It would make more sense to prioritize
greenfield farm sites for the production of crops rather than be used for dwellings. I also find the concept of building in close proximity to infrastructure projects
such as HS2 not particularly pragmatic given the sort of noise likely to be inflicted on such proximal dwellings.

Other

ID sylw: 107817

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Catesby Estates Ltd

Asiant : Pegasus Group

This is consistent with national policy. However, the Urban Capacity Study has shown there is insufficient brownfield land available within settlements to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs. While there are other brownfield sites outside of settlement boundaries in Stratford and Warwick, the Urban Capacity is clear that ‘significant greenfield development’ including Green Belt will be needed. It should be recognized that use of both brownfield and greenfield sites is required to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs.

Other

ID sylw: 107946

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Rainier Developments Ltd

Asiant : Pegasus Group

This is consistent with national policy. However, the Urban Capacity Study has shown there is insufficient brownfield land available within settlements to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs. While there are other brownfield sites outside of settlement boundaries in Stratford and Warwick, the Urban Capacity is clear that ‘significant greenfield development’ including Green Belt will be needed. It should be recognized that use of both brownfield and greenfield sites is required to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs.

Other

ID sylw: 107962

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Earlswood & Forshaw Heath Residents’ Association

Your consultation questionnaire makes no mention of brown field sites. Whilst accepting that it will cost more in a substantial number of cases to refresh these sites, it’s also absolutely clear that once permission to develop agricultural land has been given, it will never be returned to that purpose. We may need more housing but we also need agricultural land to afford us food security. Your suggested proposals in the Land Availability Assessment at sites A1, A2 and C1 are such locations. Repurpose brown field sites for this purpose. CPRE’s research indicates that there is enough brown field land for 1m homes in this Country.

Other

ID sylw: 108067

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Seven Homes

Asiant : Pegasus Group

In encouraging the use of previously developed land, this Policy Direction aligns with national policy, with Paragraph 124 emphasising that as much use as possible should be made of brownfield sites. However, as discussed above, the Urban Capacity Study has already established that there is insufficient brownfield land available within settlements to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs. Whilst there are other brownfield sites located elsewhere in Stratford and Warwick, outside of settlement boundaries, the Urban Capacity Study is still clear that “significant greenfield development” (including Green Belt) will be needed. It should be recognised that the use of both brownfield and greenfield sites will be required in order to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs.

Other

ID sylw: 108119

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Catesby Estates Ltd

Asiant : Pegasus Group

In encouraging the use of previously developed land, this Policy Direction aligns with national policy, with Paragraph 124 emphasising that as much use as possible should be made of brownfield sites. However, as discussed above, the Urban Capacity Study has already established that there is insufficient brownfield land available within settlements to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs. Whilst there are other brownfield sites located elsewhere in Stratford and Warwick, outside of settlement boundaries, the Urban Capacity Study is still clear that “significant greenfield development” (including Green Belt) will be needed. It should be recognised that the use of both brownfield and greenfield sites will be required in order to meet South Warwickshire’s development needs.

Other

ID sylw: 108169

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bellway Homes (West Midlands)

Asiant : Cerda Planning

We broadly support the requirements to make efficient use of brownfield land. Recycling previously developed land can (though not always) achieve a series of sustainability objectives.
However, the scale of housing required in the plan area – even by the HEDNA evidence, which is significantly below the Standard Method and before adding in the duty to co-operate – is such that brownfield opportunities are insufficient to make even a small contribution to overall housing delivery in the plan area.
Furthermore, we object to any suggestion that a sequential approach should be taken to bringing forward brownfield sites ahead of green field opportunities. Setting aside that broader sustainability objectives should be applied (for example, a Green Belt site on the edge of Stratford town performs significantly better than an isolated brownfield site in National Landscape) the NPPF contains no such sequential approach to previously developed land. The sequential approach to brownfield development was founded in PPS3 and PPG3 before it and was expressly removed from the NPPF ion 2012 and has not been re-introduced in any of the revisions to the NPPF since.