Other

ID sylw: 88701

Derbyniwyd: 17/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Jerry Corless

N/A

No

ID sylw: 88812

Derbyniwyd: 02/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Cathie Bailey

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development on site reference ID 160 as outlined in the South Warwickshire Local Plan (SWLP).
I am a concerned resident.
My objections are based on several key concerns:

Green Belt Impact: The site is located in an area that contributes significantly to the Green Belt. According to the HELAA results, this site has a moderate contribution to Green Belt purposes. Developing this site would undermine the integrity of the Green Belt, which is crucial for preventing urban sprawl and maintaining the character of our rural communities.

Infrastructure Strain: The proposed development of 6,000 homes will place an unsustainable burden on local infrastructure, including roads, schools, and healthcare facilities. The current infrastructure is not equipped to handle such a significant increase in population, leading to congestion and reduced quality of services for existing residents.

Environmental Concerns: The development poses a threat to local biodiversity and natural habitats. The area is home to various species of flora and fauna that could be adversely affected by large-scale construction activities. It is essential to preserve these natural environments for future generations.

Lack of Deliverability Assurance: The site's deliverability is questionable, as highlighted in the SWLP's preferred strategy document. Without clear assurances and a detailed plan for sustainable development, proceeding with this proposal is premature and potentially detrimental.

Community Impact: The scale of the proposed development is not in keeping with the character of the existing community. It risks altering the village's identity and could lead to a loss of community cohesion.

I urge the planning committee to reconsider the inclusion of site ID 160 in the SWLP and explore alternative sites that do not compromise the Green Belt or overwhelm local infrastructure.

Thank you for considering my objections. I look forward to your response.

No

ID sylw: 88813

Derbyniwyd: 02/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Cathie Bailey

Re: Objection to Proposed Development on Site ID 692

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of 6,000 homes on site ID 692 as outlined in the South Warwickshire Local Plan.

1. Green Belt Impact:
The site is located in an area that contributes moderately to Green Belt purposes. Developing this site would undermine the integrity of the Green Belt, which is crucial for preventing urban sprawl and maintaining the character of our rural communities.

2. Infrastructure Concerns:
The current infrastructure in Hatton is insufficient to support such a large-scale development. The local roads, schools, and healthcare facilities are already under pressure, and this development would exacerbate these issues, leading to congestion and reduced quality of life for existing residents.

3. Environmental Impact:
The proposed development poses a significant threat to local wildlife and biodiversity. The area is home to various species that could be adversely affected by the construction and increased human activity.

4. Questionable Deliverability:
The deliverability of this site is questionable, as noted in the HELAA results. Without assured deliverability, the risk of incomplete or stalled development projects increases, which could leave the community with unfinished infrastructure and housing.

5. Lack of Sustainability Benefits:
The proposal lacks clear sustainability benefits that would justify the exceptional circumstances needed to release this land from the Green Belt. The site is not sufficiently close to public transport links or essential services to support sustainable living.

I urge the planning committee to reconsider the inclusion of site ID 692 in the Local Plan and explore alternative sites that do not compromise our Green Belt and community resources.

Other

ID sylw: 88815

Derbyniwyd: 12/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Kelly Gilman

Ref 514 - Land at Station Lane Kingswood
An increase in cars means even more traffic issues for the primary school which has already
involved the police issuing tickets to drivers.
Roads are narrow and in bad repair, especially around the National Trust properties.
Small railway station car park which is often full on week days.
In conclusion, I believe these objections are important because:
Should the housing go ahead there will be no reason for people to visit our beautiful countryside
and canal conservation areas because there won't be any rural areas left.

Yes

ID sylw: 88876

Derbyniwyd: 18/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Richard Shiner

Grove lane REF ID 193 Grove lane has 4 grade 2 listed buildings on the entrance, large HGV type vehicle used for construction could have serious effects on the condition of our properties, plenty of examples of this throughout the UK when additional properties have been build close by. The village has very little infrastructure, adding additional properties will only makes things worse, Grove lane is a single track road, this would create a bottleneck directly outside my property while construction was ongoing, my windows are 250 years old, no foundations, we are really concerned about our property being damaged.

Other

ID sylw: 88881

Derbyniwyd: 15/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Rakesh Sharma

I would like to express my concerns during the SWLP consultation. Firstly, the proposed area is a flood plain, and building on it will exacerbate flooding. There is also a tenant farmer whose livelihood will be affected. I oppose further greenbelt development, as numerous alternative options already exist. Additionally, HS2 should be included in the plan, as it will impact the landscape. I urge the removal of site 569 from consideration due to its flood risk, greenbelt significance, and severe infrastructure limitations, which render it unsuitable for development.

Other

ID sylw: 88896

Derbyniwyd: 04/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Paulette Hockley

159 - Land adjoining Birmingham Road, Hatton Green
Noise, light, pollution, excess traffic, surrounded by building work.
Green belt land that is used as good farming which in turn supports wildlife including endangered bats and endangered hedgehogs ( I’m a release site for Warwickshire Hedgehog rescue. Many of them came from the Union view build , where on earth can they keep moving to . Union view occupants are still not in place in 40% of these houses , perhaps the hedgehogs
should have moved back in!!!! Also protected red kite live and source food here.
I worry about excess noise, excess traffic , , light pollution, crime . I fear the school will also go
as it won’t cope with extra pupils and it’s such a lovely school where will the road access be, will it turn our country lanes into main busy roads .

Other

ID sylw: 88899

Derbyniwyd: 16/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Sarah Breen

I’m writing to object to the proposed plans near Hatton Station: site 153, Hatton New Community, or Hatton Villages.

I’m dismayed to learn of the plans as I am a local resident and I regularly walk through the open countryside in that area. It’s an area of geographical beauty containing several wildlife habitats and is a valuable part of the green belt.

I feel the developments will also add to the risk of flooding in the area as we lose more and more soak aways to be replaced with tarmac.

I believe the plans will create chaotic and overwhelming traffic for the local area, create accident hotspots at access points to the sites and overwhelm local services.

I urge you to reject the plans which will spoil our local environment and to listen to the will of the local community rather than the financial interests of one party.

Other

ID sylw: 88901

Derbyniwyd: 15/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Kathleen Sharma

I wish to raise several concerns about site 589 during the SWLP consultation. Firstly, it is a floodplain, and building here would exacerbate flooding issues. Additionally, a tenant farmer relies on this land, and their livelihood would be jeopardised by development. I oppose further greenbelt development, as there are already sufficient options available. I also note that the HS2 route should be included in the plan, as it forms a significant landscape feature. I request site 569 be removed from consideration, citing severe flood risks, inadequate infrastructure, and its importance in maintaining greenbelt separation

Other

ID sylw: 88904

Derbyniwyd: 15/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Darryl Edwards

I support avoiding further development in the greenbelt, as there are already sufficient alternative options proposed. I believe the HS2 route should be included in the plan, as it is a significant landscape feature. Development should not extend over HS2 to prevent erosion of the greenbelt between Leamington and Coventry. I have concerns about the HELAS assessment of site 569, which I believe should be removed from consideration due to flood risk, its importance in maintaining greenspace, and significant infrastructure limitations that hinder access.

Yes

ID sylw: 88933

Derbyniwyd: 18/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Amanda Wasdell

Brailes parish Council is against SG17

Yes

ID sylw: 88934

Derbyniwyd: 18/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Amanda Wasdell

HELAA part A assessment as at Preferred Options: Land West of Sutton Lane
Brailes Parish Council has an adopted NDP, and would only be in favour of small developments in line with the NDP, and not those that are not part of the NDP.

Other

ID sylw: 88945

Derbyniwyd: 18/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Julia Brealey

REF ID: 610
The site at tunnel barn farm and foxbrook should not be allowed to go ahead as this is a wildlife refuge and should remain as such. Although tunnelbarn farm is a fishery there is plentiful opportunity for wildlife to live in the area without being disturbed. This is a large area without any traffic and with few footpaths where wildlife can live without undue influence from human habitation and needs to be allowed to remain in this manner.

Other

ID sylw: 88992

Derbyniwyd: 19/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford upon Avon District Council

There is substantial scope for including windfall sites. For instance Ryan Hill house on Warwick Road is to become available with the rationalisation of the NFU. New land should only be released where these is an identified and not theoretical need.

The plan should support the development of quality employment in key sectors and should not facilitate warehousing and storage particularly in the motorway corridor

Yes

ID sylw: 89055

Derbyniwyd: 19/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Martin White

Support of development within Great Alne to take into account the Rural Affordable Housing in Great Alne to combine the two schemes which I have concerns regarding the current procedure.

https://www.greatalne-pc.gov.uk/rural-affordable-housing-in-great-alne.cfm?source=left

Yes

ID sylw: 89095

Derbyniwyd: 19/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Tanworth Residents Association

A2 South of Tanworth/ A1 East of Wood End / C1 South of Kingswood (Lapworth)
All these sites are in very open countryside and Green Belt. Tanworth village is a discrete Conservation Area. There is little existing infrastructure and that is already overstretched. All are in a unique part of the West Midlands Green Belt under extreme pressure from aggressively expanding Redditch, Birmingham and Solihull. The M42, the M40 and the two railway lines via Henley and Warwick may be superficially attractive to planners, but they are already represent threats to many of the other Strategic Objectives set out above.

Other

ID sylw: 89324

Derbyniwyd: 20/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Martin Littlewood

I live at Westham House overlooking the fields proposed in your call for sites. Notwithstanding the fact that the site is prime agriculture land it also gets VERY wet and, regularly, partly FLOODED by the adjacent river. Anyone choosing this site on which to build would be a total idiot..

No

ID sylw: 89333

Derbyniwyd: 20/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Susan Norton

The area planned for building over 1200 homes near to Barford, Wasperton and Sherbourne is an ill thought out idea. The area has been shown to be at huge risk of flooding. The A429 is already loaded with heavy lorries and traffic making leaving the village of Barford hazardous. The pollution from the increase in vehicles is detrimental to the health of the local residents. The effect on the environment will be huge and the knock on effects with the changes on the environment catastrophic and felt in the conservation areas which are really close. Reject the plan please.

Other

ID sylw: 89446

Derbyniwyd: 20/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Ray Bradshaw

There is no viable access to Site 712 in Barford. Church Lane is a single width lane with no pavement. It then tapers down to a footpath for walkers only. This lane is used by children to access the playing field in Barford. Church Lane is only just wide enough for cars or small vans in one direction at a time.
Access to site 712 should come from the High Street directly but this would entail putting a new road through someone's side garden.
This site should now be dropped from the plan as unviable.

Yes

ID sylw: 89555

Derbyniwyd: 20/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr David Pritchard

Site 712 has no feasible access via Church Lane. There is not sufficient width between Dragonyard and the Church boundary wall to accommodate two-way traffic and a pavement for safe pedestrian access to further properties on Church Lane and King George playing fields and children’s play area. A 90 degree bend after 30 metres from High Street and a narrow road thereafter makes access dangerous and impassable. Dignified access to the cemetery would be very difficult and potentially dangerous for mourners. Children accessing the primary school would be put at increased risk.

No

ID sylw: 89603

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Nathaniel Coalson

467 Land at Manor Farm, Long Itchington not suitable for residential development due to restricted access, surface water flooding and natural habitat conservation

Yes

ID sylw: 89636

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Paul Anthony

re
E07000221
This land is a vital part of Manor Farm for cattle feeding and use for housing would seriously reduce the viability of Manor Farm business.
In addition the possible housing would shaddow the housing on the aother side of the road as the new site is significantly higher ground.
Finally, this is green belt and any encoachment is counter to stated national policy.

Yes

ID sylw: 89639

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Pete Meadows

Site C1 "South of Kingswood" is an inappropriate location. Electricity supply network is fragile, (power outages) schooling places already at stretch, road network is not capable of heavy volume of traffic. Water treatment facilities inadequate. Land is also conservation Green Belt.

Other

ID sylw: 89661

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Simon Cook

Vital wildlife sites would be impacted. The most up to date LWS layer should be used.
SG10/11 - River Avon and tributaries LWS, SG10/X1 - Oakley Wood, SG17 Shipston upon Stour - River Stour PLWS, SG20 - River Avon and tributaries LWS, SG18 - Hatton Hill Fields PLWS, Brownley Green Lane LWS, Home Farm Woods PLWS, Hatton Park LWS, Grand Union Canal West LWS, SG19 - River Avon LWS, disused railway PLWS, Bridgetown Fields LWS
SG20 - River Avon LWS, SG21 - River arrow LWS, Coldcomfort Wood PLWS, SG07 - River Avon LWS, Budbrooke Farm woodlands LWS, Warwick Cemetery LWS.

Yes

ID sylw: 89718

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Martin Grasby

148 - Land at Fell Mill Farm, Shipston
747 - Land at Leasow Lane
Existing Sewage Treatment Plant totally inadequate even without additional loading by such developments.
Development of these sites will compound their own flooding potential and of Shipston town which already suffers repeated river Stour overwhelm. If it's even possible, directing floodwater downstream will put other settlements at much higher risk. Water pollution a major issue in and around existing residential properties which will increase.
Lack of adequate transport links, employment, education and healthcare facilities.
Unrealistic, significant distances for emergency services to get to an ever-expanding population.

No

ID sylw: 89871

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Susan Muddeman

Interested in houses being built in Warwickshire village

Yes

ID sylw: 89881

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Kinwarton Parish Council

Land to North of Captains Hill, Alcester, B49 6FG (REFID 474)
Kinwarton Parish Council believe that the specific site proposal is not an appropriate site for housing/residential development:
1.Greenbelt - protect from development.
2.Insuffient infrastructure to support additional houses in the area. Schools are full and doctors/dentists are at capacity.
3.Transport links/hubs are severely limited: there is no train station nor a regular bus route.
4.The area is full of wildlife, including deer, badgers, foxes, rabbits, a wide variety of nesting birds and great crested newts.
5.A 2023 Housing Needs Survey did not reveal a demand for more local housing.

Yes

ID sylw: 89924

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Pillerton Priors Parish Council

Of the four sites within Pillerton Priors, we object to three of them as they are out of the BUAB. Any development within the village will have a negative impact to Pillerton Priors and neighbouring villages.

Yes

ID sylw: 89948

Derbyniwyd: 22/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr John Holden

This is the most confusing way of commenting in the correct section to do so!!

Living in Harbury my concerns are that if all of the proposed blue areas surrounding the village were to be developed then the village could not support thse. The school is already to capacity and there is no space to extend to 2 form entry - so whole new school required. Increased traffic driving through village would be too congested as narror streets.

Also identifing the field where Chesterton Windmill and Roman fort are located totally inappropriate.

Yes

ID sylw: 89956

Derbyniwyd: 22/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Alison Morris

Reference sites 148 & 747: these areas are within the Flood Risk Zone. They are Unsustainable, remote from existing development with access only via single track roads over single lane bridges which regularly flood. Lack of transport Infrastructure (no railway station, few buses, far from motorways) means more pollution from increased car use. Proposed development would cause significant harm to Landscape and impact Cultural Heritage of historic town centre. Proximity to sensitive habitats and SSI Impact Risk Zones threatens Biodiversity. Schools are at capacity so Education would be impacted and require further car use to take children to schools elsewhere.