Other

ID sylw: 94279

Derbyniwyd: 18/02/2025

Ymatebydd: David M Walmsley

I wish to reiterate my opposition to further development on greenbelt land, emphasising that existing options should suffice. I am concerned that key figures in the consultation do not reflect the HS2 route, which should act as a boundary to prevent further erosion of the greenbelt. Specifically regarding site 569, I believe it should be removed from consideration due to significant flood risks, its crucial role in maintaining greenspace, and inadequate infrastructure access. I also argue that the Climate Emergency should not justify developments on greenbelt land, as alternative solutions exist.

Yes

ID sylw: 94291

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Helen Matcham

REF ID 193: Grove Lane, Ashow. This is a small village, circa 40 houses with a small single road access to the development. There is currently no mains sewage in the village which therefore means cesspits have to be emptied regularly and all of the houses have to rely on oil deliveries for fuel. Additional houses will mean additional traffic through the village to provide these essentials, passed listed buildings.
The surrounding area is fields, river and woods within Green Belt, all of which make a unique habitat which will be compromised further with a large development.

Yes

ID sylw: 94348

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Steve Edwards

REF ID 193: Grove Lane, Ashow. This is a small village, circa 40 houses with a single road access to the development. A green belt area, that if developed would completely alter the visual impact. There is currently no mains sewage in the village, resulting in regular lorries attending to empty cesspits, we also have no mains gas, generally meaning regular deliveries of oil, again using lorries. Drainage is a concern, especially as there are a row of houses, below the level of the field highlighted for development. Additional traffic through the village to provide these services, passing listed buildings.

Yes

ID sylw: 94366

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Trevor Pickard

As a resident of Hatton Green, I wish to object to the development of Sites ID 159 and 160, for the following reasons:
• Sites are situated within the Green Belt.
• Increase traffic congestion in and around Hatton Green.
• The local infrastructure cannot support the number of dwellings being proposed.
• Will lead to the loss of valuable green spaces.
• Will affect the character of the rural community of Hatton Green.
• Lack of evidence that additional housing is required.
• The sites have been proposed previously and rejected because of road access and safety concerns.

Yes

ID sylw: 94399

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Stephen TURRELL

SITE ref 650

This site has a regular winter issue with flooding on the Henley road, which would prevent access to and from the site, which could be an issue for medical reasons, school runs etc. Additionally this access point is just past the Village hall on a sharp bend and will cause traffic congestion and potential accidents.
There is also a public footpath through this land, which is a consideration given the erosion of public footpaths nationally.

Yes

ID sylw: 94400

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Robert Heath

The site is entirely unsuitable for development, is part of the protected greenbelt and is not a sustainable site for development of the nature proposed. The HELAA assessment process itself ranks 521 sites as being more suitable, and these sites should be pursued and developed before there could be any justification to lose this amount of protected land or, through the development, to join two small villages contrary to the NPPF. It is unsuitable due to flood risk and would ruin the character of the area, not to mention that transport links are poor

Yes

ID sylw: 94415

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Neil Davis

I.D.522. This council yard and recycling depot is intrinsic to the local community. Over the last 15 years it has become an essential part of life in Shipston and should not be disposed of. If the council yard is to close then the available land should be made available for employment uses/ light industrial to support the local community

Yes

ID sylw: 94443

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Neil Davis

i.D.148.
This site is unsuitable for development , being a flood plain. In the last 30 years in has flooded consistantly each year. Access to the site would therefore not be available to and from the town. This has been mis-represented as a suitable development site

Yes

ID sylw: 94474

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr richard butler

site 148 Fell Mill Lane Shipston and Site 747 Leasow Lane Barcheston

Taking the two connected sites together...both subject to serious access problems to neighbouring Shipston involving two old, small bridges -ancient, narrow and fragile Honington bridge and the bridge on the Brailes road out of Shipston which is virtually restricted to single line traffic. Impossible traffic congestion would result.

Years of driving down Fell Mill Lane has confirmed regular experience of flooding on and around the road. The area is clearly prone to this hazard (as we see has already been noted) and not suitable for housing development .

No

ID sylw: 94501

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Professor Jonathan Davies

I object to the inclusion of sites in Leek Wootton within the South Warwickshire Development Plan. These proposed developments threaten the village's character, encroach on Green Belt land, and risk overdevelopment, straining infrastructure and services. They would worsen traffic congestion, pose risks to listed buildings, harm local wildlife habitats, and increase noise and air pollution. Additionally, they would lead to the loss of recreational spaces and increase flooding risks. I urge the reconsideration of these proposals in order to protect Leek Wootton’s integrity and environment, and request the removal of the mentioned sites from the draft

Other

ID sylw: 94505

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Michael Holmes

Subject: Opposition to Proposed Development – Land at Warwickshire Golf Club (Ref ID2)
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed housing development adjacent to existing properties and on green belt land at the Warwickshire Golf Club. As a resident of this area, I am deeply concerned about the potential negative impacts that this development will have on our environment, community, and quality of life.

No

ID sylw: 94513

Derbyniwyd: 24/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Charlotte Green

I object to the proposed development at Birmingham Road, Hatton Green due to a lack of amenities in existing developments, which has not seen an increase in essential services like schools, healthcare, and community facilities. The proposed houses would exacerbate traffic issues, pollution, and drainage problems, while harming local wildlife. Residents value the rural lifestyle, and increased development threatens their mental well-being and the natural environment. Additionally, overcrowded schools and transport facilities further highlight the unsuitability of more housing in the area. These objections are crucial for preserving our community.

No

ID sylw: 94515

Derbyniwyd: 24/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Parveen Hayre-Wheeldon

I am writing to object to the proposed development at Land at Chessetts Wood Road, Lapworth (Ref ID 615) and to raise concerns about the cumulative impact of multiple developments in the area. This development threatens the rural character and environment of Lapworth, exacerbates traffic congestion, results in the loss of agricultural land, increases flood risk, and lacks evidence of local need. The proposed developments pose significant risks to our community and I urge the council to reconsider them based on these concerns. Thank you for considering my objection.

No

ID sylw: 94532

Derbyniwyd: 24/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Iain Mortimer

I oppose the development of REF 148 Land at fell Mill Lane, REF 747 Land at Leasow Farm, and REFSG 17 Shipston.

Shipston town does not have the facilities for this development. The bridges are too small, the car parking is already overcrowded and the development is in a flood plain.

Yes

ID sylw: 94559

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: mr alan markham

In relation to the land at Wasperton designated a "preferred site", comments are as follows (and as previously found in recent consultations):-
1) The land in question is at the heart of a Conservation area in the village setting and which is unique within Warwickshire villages;
2) Developing it would have an adverse impact on the residential amenity of neighbours;
3) It would have an unacceptably negative impact on the site and on the village;
4) It would be out of character in its location;
5) The loss of views from neighbouring properties would be an adverse visual impact.

No

ID sylw: 94578

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Millidge

Land East of Marton Road Site Ref: 469 (2.23 Hec)

site address Land at Debdale Farm, Marton Road Site Ref: 633 (5.26 hec)

I write to object to this potential allocation of land for residential development on the following grounds:

Access – any new access would have to go onto the A423 (Marton Road) although the road is 30 mph – there is limited enforcement of this in actual practice, up until the village limits. The users of the road experience a sweeping bend that the access would be located on, and visibility is short. Egress out on to this busy road would place a additional stress on the already heavily used road. Users requiring to right tun into any new residential development would restrict the free flow of traffic and extensive road alteration would be necessary to alleviate this.

Flooding and drainage – Even though this land is acknowledged to be with Flood Zone 1 the local surface water flooding is always evident, and I can supply that evidence if needed.

Landscaping – new built development in this location will be extremely visible in the landscape when viewed from public vantage points along Marton Road, the new constructed estate and existing dwellings along Marton Road.

Given the above it is my opinion that this is not the location for new development in the village – other less constrained sites have been put forward, that could be developed with significantly less harm and visual impact.

The local secondary school is also struggling for capacity with my own daughter being refused entry to this school as it was over capacity in 2018.

Other

ID sylw: 94579

Derbyniwyd: 24/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Tanworth Educational Fund

Asiant : Hancock Town Planning

Hancock Town Planning Ltd represents the Tanworth Educational Foundation (TEF), which owns land assessed as Site 238 in the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment. TEF supports the new settlement A2 and the inclusion of Site 238, highlighting its availability, proximity to sustainable transport options, and existing community facilities. The HELAA's constraint score for Site 238 is challenged, particularly regarding educational needs and agricultural use. TEF argues that the site has low visual sensitivity and suggests that the area near the electricity line can support biodiversity gains without reducing developable space.

No

ID sylw: 94601

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Rainier Developments Ltd

Asiant : Turley

Site reference 181 needs to be reassessed taking into account updated flood modelling. See detailed modelling agreed with the EA - the site should not be sifted out for flood risk reasons.

No

ID sylw: 94608

Derbyniwyd: 24/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Anthony Timbrell

I have the following comments on a specific site proposal and Housing Land

Availability Assessment (HELAA) results:

Ref 596 - Aylesbury Road, Hockley Heath
My personal interest in this specific development site proposal is Flood risk and loss of green belt.

The grounds for objection are as follows:

the area has flooded for many years, although it wouldn't appear to be Warwick councils issue as the area that floods is on Solihull councils boundary. The loss of green belt and lack of evidence of how you will manage the dispersal of water.

In conclusion, I believe these objections are important because:

There is not a master plan for how you would build, how you would support the infrastructure. How you would integrate these into the plan already in place from the neighbouring council. You have not considered the people and this is a let down.

Yes

ID sylw: 94669

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Adam Clegg

Land North West of M40 Junction 15. REFID: 44
I object to this development as it will disrupt purpose-built landscaped areas, including trees and hedges that form part of the green belt. Removing land from the green belt to meet sustainability targets is counterproductive and unsustainable. The proposed site will compromise our privacy by allowing homes to be overlooked, reducing natural light, and introducing unwanted noise and odors. The road network is already at capacity and the A46 continues to struggle with the volume of traffic at present.

Yes

ID sylw: 94670

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Paul Dunster

Land at The Greens, South of Alcester Road, Stratford upon Avon, CV37 9DF. REFID: 492 and South of Alcester Road, Stratford-upon-Avon. REFID: 827.
Why are there differences between SHLAA and HELAA ratings?
How has the road access and resulting safety issues been considered.
I would question the accuracy of the flood mapping.
What consideration has been taken about the important Ride & Furrow Landscape.

Yes

ID sylw: 94672

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Adam Clegg

Land southeast of Hampton Magna. REFID: 715
I object to this development as there have been water and sewerage issues at the Hampton Trove site, which suggests that further construction in this area would only worsen these existing problems. It will disrupt purpose-built landscaped areas, including trees and hedges that form part of the green belt. Removing land from the green belt to meet sustainability targets is counterproductive and unsustainable. The proposed site will compromise our privacy by allowing homes to be overlooked, reducing natural light, and introducing unwanted noise and smell.

Yes

ID sylw: 94673

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Gala McBride

B1 Hatton, outside Warwick
Please leave the green and wooded spaces threatened by this housing proposal to combat climate change and continue to provide habitat for the myriad flora and fauna. Both humans and animals are already subject to vastly increased car fumes, noise (including many more sirens) and artificial light because of the 3 recent, large housing developments here (Union View, which cause traffic delays for a year, Hatton Park and Hampton Trove). We have lost so much of the beauty and peace of our little village already - the proposed development is larger than the current village:

Yes

ID sylw: 94683

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Richard Lyttle

Hampton Magna area has already taken its share of additional housing and also commuters to Warwick Parkway. As indicated earlier the road infrastructure and supporting facilities cannot cope with any further development. This covers 245,119,621,68,233.95,573,55,718. In addition the original Budbrooke village site was subject of the plague and therefore building on it was be unwise for health and safety reasons, believed to be shown as119. It is land to north of Budbrooke Road opposite army staff houses.

Yes

ID sylw: 94721

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Nicola Rowarth

Land North West of M40 Junction 15. REFID: 44 I strongly oppose this development as it will disrupt carefully designed landscaped areas, including trees and hedges that are integral to the green belt. Removing land from the green belt in the name of sustainability is both counterproductive and unsustainable. This project will also compromise our privacy, with homes being overlooked, natural light reduced, and increased noise and odors affecting residents. Additionally, the local road network is already at capacity, and the A46 is struggling to cope with current traffic levels, making further development in this area unfeasible.

Yes

ID sylw: 94722

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Nicola Rowarth

Land southeast of Hampton Magna. REFID: 715 I strongly oppose this development due to existing water and sewerage issues at the Hampton Trove site, which further construction would likely exacerbate. Additionally, it will disrupt purposefully designed landscaped areas, including trees and hedges that are vital to the green belt. Removing land from the green belt in the name of sustainability is both counterproductive and unsustainable. This development will also compromise our privacy, leading to overlooked homes, reduced natural light, and increased noise and odors.

Yes

ID sylw: 94723

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Nicola Rowarth

Land South of Chichester Lane, Hampton Magna REFID: 55.
I oppose this development as it will disrupt purpose-built landscaped areas, including trees and hedges that are integral to the green belt. Continuously removing land from the green belt to meet sustainability targets is both unsustainable and counterproductive. This project will also compromise our privacy, with homes being overlooked, natural light reduced, and increased noise and odors affecting residents. Furthermore, previous water and sewerage issues at the Hampton Trove site indicate that further construction would only worsen these existing problems.

Yes

ID sylw: 94742

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Nicola Rowarth

East of Banbury Road, Stratford-upon-Avon. REFID: 833
I oppose this due to lack of local infrastructure, such as sufficient road networks, GP surgeries and local hospital which are already at capacity. Noise, smell and damage to the local area through building.

Yes

ID sylw: 94744

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: David Gosling

Land east of Norton Grange 1 FID 268 REFID 277 0.48 hectares
Land east of Norton Grange 2 FID 541 REFID 295 0.48 hectare
Both parcels are in an Area of Restraint and should be deleted

Land to north of Warwick Road REFID 855
This site has been developed

Yes

ID sylw: 94745

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Adam Clegg

East of Banbury Road, Stratford-upon-Avon. REFID: 833
I oppose this development due to the insufficient local infrastructure, including overstretched road networks, GP surgeries, and the local hospital, all of which are already at capacity. Additionally, the construction process will bring increased noise, unpleasant odors, and potential damage to the surrounding area.