No

ID sylw: 106844

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Paul Tilley

Considerable demands will be placed on the major roads in the area (A46, A4177, B4439) by traffic generated from ongoing house building. At peak times these roads are already congested. Proposed development of 8000+ homes at site B1 will exaggerate this. If industrial units are built at site SG07 further traffic including heavy goods vehicles will lead to increased conjestion.

Kenilworth and Warwick are already experiencing large volumes of traffic. The construction of industrial units at SG07 will have a profound effect on the surrounding area. Substantial improvements would need to be made to the road network and would be prohibitively expensive to deliver.

No

ID sylw: 106847

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Andrea Ashmore

There is no need for further industrial development. These are fields crucial for food growth. In an uncertain global crisis we need to retain as much farmland as possible and not concrete over it. Damaging the environment and impacting our air quality- which is already seriously compromised.

No

ID sylw: 106849

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Kenneth Bartlett

Any proposed development in this area would cause further congestion on the A46 which is already at full capacity

Commercial development has already been done in other areas of Warwick, this has significantly increased traffic congestion.

No

ID sylw: 106851

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Rosanne Moseley

No further comment supplied.

No

ID sylw: 106855

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Graham Harrison

My objection is that this development would be contrary to Green Belt policy. My reasons are as follows:

1. The site forms a slender, but vital stretch of open Green Belt land that separates Warwick from Hatton Park. Building here would join the settlements, creating urban sprawl.
2. The A46 forms a strong boundary to the Green Belt that is likely to be permanent.
3. The NPPF gives two examples where redrawing Green Belt boundaries might be appropriate, namely instances where an authority cannot otherwise meet its identified needs for homes,
commercial and other development, or where development would be most sustainable.
4. In this case the range of Options under consideration clearly demonstrates that the authority can otherwise meet its identified needs.
5. There is no evidence to suggest that development of this site would make a significant contribution towards sustainability.

No

ID sylw: 106856

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Janet Harrison

I object to proposed new settlement B1 and strategic growth location SG07.

Adding development to the north-west of Warwick is not a new settlement. It is an expansion of the existing town which has already joined onto Leamington Spa. These towns have enveloped surrounding villages and it will not be long until these join onto Kenilworth, which will join onto Coventry and create an area almost of conurbation size through central Warwickshire. This is not well-designed and beautiful. Green Belts were conceived to stop pushing people further from the countryside and new settlements should be sited outside Green Belt as self-sufficient communities.

Looking at each of the Strategic Objectives in turn:

1. This is not a sustainable location. A new settlement should be sited away from existing towns and there are enough options listed to avoid significant inroads into Green Belt.

2. The Housing Needs Survey indicated a need for around half-a-dozen properties. Notwithstanding that provision has to be made help meet needs with not room left for expansion, jumping to 8,000+ swamps existing small individual communities.

3. The A4177 has regular queues. The B4439 is twisty with two crossroads with past fatalities. It is difficult to get out of side roads due to bends. Improvements of the level required aren't possible without demolishing existing properties. Other roads are narrow country lanes which keep the character of the Arden landscape. They would need improvement as well as their access points onto the A4177 and B4439. The impact of this scale of development will impact infrastructure of a much wider area including Warwick.

Railways: There is a limited service at Hatton. Have you checked with railway authorities that this could be expanded? Most who wish to use the train will drive to Warwick Parkway, adding to traffic on the A4177. The stations at Warwick, Leamington, and Solihull are outside the centres and travel to Coventry needs a change of trainat Leamington.

Cycle and walking routes: the Hatton Parish Plan indicates less than 10% of respondents walked or cycled to work/school. Just over 30% walked to the village shop for day-to-day requirements - this doesn't cover the weekly shop. Cycling and walking were primarily for leisure, but even then only 35% cycled and 50% walked. 80% used their car for leisure and shopping and 95% for work. Despite buses to some secondary schools and the Primary school at Hatton, over 60% still used a car for school journeys. There has been some limited change in habits but persuading large numbers to walk or cycle is unlikely.

It is unlikely infrastructure would happen until substantial housing has been built. The local school, doctors and hospital in Warwick are full to bursting point now.

4. There are limited job opportunities locally at present. SG07 is 3 miles from the residential areas and this would push cars onto the A4177. Some will work from home but most will commute in and out of Warwick.

5. Most of the land is under agricultural use and would be lost for food production at a time when the UK needs to grow more of its own food to protect against possible food supply disruption.

6. With such a spread-out length of development rather than a compact site this is likely to be a very carbon-producing site.

7. Hatton is attractive place with its Arden landscape of small fields, hedges, trees, small woods and the historic Grand Union Canal. 8,000+ houses, commercial uses and associated infrastructure will ruin this.

8 & 9. The Grand Union Canal and the surrounding historic Arden landscape are great heritage assets. The New Settlement would surround one-and-a-half miles of canal with housing and infrastructure and make it less attractive, which applies also to tourists seeking the countryside. The cafe, and pub/restaurant will be impacted and the Canal & River Trust would lose income from visitors parking.

10. The community is used to green fields and footpaths, and countryside walks which help health and general well-being. The New Settlement will worsen health and wellbeing.

11. There is no obvious centre in the plan so it is difficult to see how people will feel connected to place. It is likely to remain a series of separate communities. Create a new settlement away from existing towns, focused on an existing small village with an obvious centre.

12. Our environmental assets are the fields, hedges, trees, small woods and the canal. This huge proposal in the Green Belt will NOT enhance our environment. How does this fit with WDC's Biodiversity Action Plan, the Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines, and the Habitat Biodiversity Audit? Has a landscape assessment been requested from the County Council.

The call for sites encourages taking the easy option of including whatever land is offered by developers - this does not produce cohesive communities and it is not sound, constructive spatial planning.

No

ID sylw: 106859

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Shelly Plyming

No. Roads already a nightmare.

Who needs these homes?

Things like this need planning over a long period, not a fresh idea overnight.

No

ID sylw: 106861

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: M J Gummow

The land has been farmed for 70+ years.

No

ID sylw: 106865

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Jennifer Hinson

I am writing regarding the South Warwickshire Local Plan, specifically Areas B1 and SG07.

I strongly object to the extent of these proposed developments. The size and scale of the proposals are effectively creating a new town in the Greenbelt and would merge Warwick with Hatton and Hatton Park. This is why the Greenbelt was established. I do not believe that this amount of housing is actually required. There are more suitable sites for development - in town centres and on brownfield sites. The Greenbelt is precious - food production is essential and concreting over such beautiful countryside is criminal. The road where I live would be severely impacted by the increased traffic such a large development would inevitably create.

Please, please, please do not allow this to happen. If more housing is required, then surely there are more suitable sites.

No

ID sylw: 106869

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Susan Miles

1. Green Belt land must be protected so it remains open and not built upon with industrial units.

2. Farmland and food production is important on many levels and contributes strongly to environmental protection.

No

ID sylw: 106872

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Violet Jordan

No further comment supplied.

No

ID sylw: 107093

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Suzanne Jayne Richardson

Greenbelt land should not be used for industrial development.

We need to retain our farmland for true future food security.

No

ID sylw: 107095

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Jeanette Gaye Williams

No industrial development should ever be allowed on greenbelt!

We need our farmland!

We need food security!

We need to preserve this for the sake of our ancestors.

We need to stop inappropriate development.

No

ID sylw: 107097

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Philip De Hond

No further comment supplied.

No

ID sylw: 107099

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Skye Whitehead and Jamie Chapman

Nifer y bobl: 2

We are writing regarding the South Warwickshire Local Plan, specifically, Areas B1 and SG07.

Please do not give the go ahead for a development of this size at Hatton. It will totally ruin the area and will effectively merge Warwick with Hatton and Hatton Park. This area is already losing farmland to the solar farm at Honiley and the remaining greenbelt is precious and must be protected. There must be better sites, more appropriate than this. The Greenbelt has been established for very good reasons, all of which are still appropriate and relevant. This area will totally lose its identity, it will just become a suburb of Warwick, it is so important that this is not allowed to happen.

I have lived here all my life - I love this area - please do not destroy it. I strongly object to the proposals.

No

ID sylw: 107110

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Barbara and Barry Smith

Nifer y bobl: 2

I am writing regarding the South Warwickshire Local Plan, specifically Areas B1 and SG07.

I wish to object to the proposals regarding the new housing plans in and around Hatton. It will ruin the countryside, the Greenbelt should be protected, the plans are way too extensive for this small area.

No

ID sylw: 107130

Derbyniwyd: 28/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Lorraine Baker

Warwick, Leamington and Stratford already suffer from serious urban sprawl. Congestion creates stressful journeys and pollution. Massive queues are caused by the slightest issue and roads cannot cope with thousands more cars and commercial vehicles. Parking is a major issues, even on trading estates. Trains have limited capacity and do not take people to their destination. There is no underground or viable bus services. Green spaces provide wildlife habitats, mental health benefits, soak up pollution, and supply food. Settlements should be surrounded by Green Belt and its destruction should be a last resort.

New facilities are often promised but not delivered. There is no promise of a new hospital. Warwick Hospital is bursting at the seams. Building schools can be done but they require teachers and resources - will the developers be funding these as well? This development would have huge financial, environmental, and mental health costs.

No

ID sylw: 107132

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: James & Soad Hemming

The traffic is already bad at rush hour to get into Warwick or onto the A46 and bringing more lorries to that junction will only make it worse and stop people going to Warwick to stop etc.

No

ID sylw: 107136

Derbyniwyd: 10/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Hatton Parish Council, Shrewley Parish Council, Budbrooke Parish Council, Honily Beausale and Wroxall Parish Council, Norton Lindsey Parish Council

Nifer y bobl: 5

Site SG07, Wedgenock Park Farm is proposed for industrial use. This would make Warwick continuous with Hatton Park and site B1, so further eroding of the countryside around Warwick. We now understand that the 600+ smaller sites submitted are also included in this consultation. Our parishes contain numerous such sites, selection of any of which would compound the adverse consequences that would result from the adoption of site B1.

No

ID sylw: 107139

Derbyniwyd: 01/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Gillian Ward

Lack of infrastructure.

Roads unable to manage increased traffic.

Too many houses being built on farm green belt land.

Houses which have been built local to this site are unable to be sold.

No

ID sylw: 107145

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: L.I. Pearce

I wish to object to the proposed plan "around" Hampton Magna, building of more homes on Green Belt Land, Impact on the environment, traffic and transport, noise levels and pollution, also local amenities and services.

Our roads are already rat runs around Hampton Magna, they are extremely busy roads with grid lock. Concerns for wildlife and historical significance of a site. Both England and Wales have wildlife protection and policies. Taking all this into account, we will become grid locked. Please register my serious concerns

No

ID sylw: 107151

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: First Name not Supplied Sparks

No further comment supplied.

No

ID sylw: 107157

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Jean Ward

Too large development on good quality farm greenbelt land.

The need of greenbelt land between towns and villages.

Poor roads not suitable for the amount of traffic. Government would have to help fund the infrastructure.

Lack of services for schools, doctors and hospital unable to cope with demand.

No

ID sylw: 107158

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Rosemary Clare Robertson

I am a longtime resident of Station Road, Hatton. I am passionate about the countryside and wildlife. I enjoy walking and consider it vital for my well-being. I strongly object to B1 and SG07 on the following grounds:

• Large developments are out of keeping keeping with the local environment and heritage.
• The owners have designated this a Conservation Area and it is a shame they are prepared to destroy all the good work.
• Major upgrades to all roads around Hatton would be needed BEFORE work could take place - is this deliverable and affordable?
• Hatton Train Station has limited service and capacity to improve due to its size.
• No intention to enlarge or upgrade Warwick Hospital.
• GP Surgeries are at capacity and the proposed population increase would be unsustainable.
• Loss of productive farm land are permanent and would result in more reliance on imports.
• The new "Union View" housing estate still has unsold properties. Huge numbers of additional new houses are not needed.

No

ID sylw: 107165

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Alexander Robertson

I object to proposed allocations B1 and SG07.

Primarily, my concern is that the impact of large developments on Warwickshire's biodiversity is not clearly understood.

There is profound evidence that ecosystems are in decline through climate change and human destruction of natural habitats. The relationship between green infrastructure and human settlements determines the physical and mental health and well being of communities. Developers give assurances about biodiversity but their actions show otherwise; for example developers at the Heathcote Park site showed 'compliance' with laws protecting nesting birds by netting the trees and hedges before construction work to prevent any nesting. I doubt that independent scientific evidence would conclude that a development of this size would not alter the balance of biodiversity.

There has been no Natural Capital Accounting survey of the area. The value of the green assets on the site is unknown. Destroying them will harm air quality, production of food and clothing, increase costs for the NHS, and cause other social issues for existing communities. The Landowner has designated this site as a Conservation Area and likely received financial support from the government in return. This should be taken into account. The road network is inadequate for this level of development. Narrow lanes and weight-restricted bridges require continual repair. Network Rail confirm the platforms at Hatton Station cannot be extended and frequency of trains stopping will not be increased.

Transport, water, sewerage, and electricity infrastructure must be in place before development starts in order to avoid adverse impacts on existing communities. Developers and not council tax payers should be responsible for funding the infrastructure. There should be no road network disruption during implementation.

No

ID sylw: 107404

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Shrewley Parish Council

The site will:
-Worsen climate change,
-Damage local beauty and heritage
-Harm healthy lifestyles
-Increase traffic and reduce active travel
-Harm nature and wildlife
The site is located in green belt and there are no special circumstances to build on it.
Hatton Station has limited facilities and cannot be expanded and this will lead to traffic congestion.
The A4177, Stanks Island, and A425 will be overwhelmed by extra traffic. One of the most pressing issues is the inadequacy of the road network to accommodate the increased volume of traffic.
The local infrastructure is simply not equipped to handle the influx of road users that this development would create.
Schools, hospitals, and other services in Warwick will struggle to cope with more people.

Yes

ID sylw: 107418

Derbyniwyd: 16/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Moreton Morrell Parish Council

No objection

No

ID sylw: 107482

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Clare Langstone

SG07 would also be disastrous for whole infrastructure in my view.

No

ID sylw: 107501

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: John Mayers

The market town of Warwick does not have the desired infrastructure to cope with 8000 new homes.

No

ID sylw: 107548

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Sam Forster

NPPF 13 (protecting Green Belt land) has an imperative purpose, to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and should ensure priority is given to non-Green Belt sites. ‘Land is to be removed from Green Belt only if the established need cannot be met by other means’. This clearly is not the case given other options in the surrounding and further Warwickshire Area. (X1 and X2 provide 650 hectares of non-Green belt land suitable for development).
Access to the site is insufficient.
Reliance on an underfunded and substantially overstretched local rail infrastructure and near obsolete rolling stock, throwing considerable doubt on ability to fund and deal with extra capacity.
The proposed scheme will not attract employment from the south given the ongoing development and existing schemes at Segro Park - Coventry, Prologis Park - Ryton and the proposed Gigafactory at Coventry Airport.
There is a significant risk of excessive noise and light pollution to nearby homes.
Significant and unattainable drainage measures will be required to be implemented.