Other

ID sylw: 104565

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Ian Dunning

YES ONLY IF the development is high density, linked with public transport and active travel infrastructure.

Do not build detached homes anywhere.
Painted bicycle gutters are NOT active travel infrastructure.
A bus is a bad public transport solution.

Yes

ID sylw: 104636

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Ian Dunning

Stop building sprawling car-dependent suburbia. You are killing people with these decisions. Cars kill people, stop making people have to get in their cars to get to places. Build high density walkable neighbourhoods with active travel infrastructure.

Paint is not cycling infrastructure.
Buses are bad public transport.
Don't build any detached houses.

No

ID sylw: 104757

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Charlotte Grumball

Farmland surround sites, lack of infrastructure for change to dwellings, such as 60 mph roads, no pavements, no buses, no street lighting. Schools full, no shops or services. I strongly object to change

Yes

ID sylw: 104870

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Elizabeth Heath

This development does not take land out of greenbelt and therefore has a lower negative impact on biodiversity. It's also closer to existing infrastructure and services

No

ID sylw: 104920

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Susan Clarke

Insufficient educational establishments
Flood risks
Erosion of ancient village
Congested roads
Insufficient health provision
Increase in antisocial behaviour as no provision for young people
Lack of policing

Other

ID sylw: 105237

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford upon Avon District Council

Bidford-on-Avon Group – SG20 – NO OBJECTION

No

ID sylw: 105523

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Sarah Stallard and Adam Brown

Nifer y bobl: 2

We strongly object to Strategic Growth Location SG20 and Site REFID 16 the planning application as local residents living next to the proposed site. Our concerns include insufficient infrastructure, noise and pollution from construction traffic, severe drainage issues, and the high visual impact of the fields. Additionally, we are worried about the loss of agricultural land, the proximity to grade 2 listed properties, and the lack of public transport. The area's narrow roads pose hazards, particularly for children, and local health services and schools are already overloaded. We also emphasise the importance of wildlife and environmental conservation.

No

ID sylw: 105792

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Gillian Nussey

I have several objections to the proposed large housing developments in the mapped submissions. Firstly, there is no secondary school in Bidford, as the previous one was demolished for housing. Additionally, there is no bus service or train station in Bidford, and road communications are at risk due to an ancient bridge. Increased traffic from Bidford to the A46 would adversely affect the small villages of the Graftons, endangering pedestrians. Lastly, the housing in the Refid 16 plan would have a negative visual impact and is located on actively worked land.

Other

ID sylw: 105872

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Steven Holloway

The map indicates that one area south of Grange Road, extends down to the River Avon opposite Barton. This area is part of the floodplain and as climate change becomes more frequent, this area has flooded at least four times during the winter.
The other area of concern is to the north of Grange Road up to Tower Hill. There is a huge difference in level with the ground sloping towards Grange Road and this will present any builder with a massive logistical problem with drainage, both foul and storm. The foul drainage along Grange Road is a pumped system and part of this is within the Conservation Area.
The area to the east of Grafton lane would extend the size of the village by too much.
The area to the north east of Waterloo Road would extend the village up to the Golden Cross which would be a huge excessive development.
Similarly, the area to the west of Waterloo Road would extend the village up and into Broom. It was always my belief that the old railway line was the defining point between Broom and Bidford-on-Avon.
The areas to the west of Victoria Road, I would consider to be acceptable, along with the small area to the south of Salford Road.

No

ID sylw: 105940

Derbyniwyd: 28/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Louise O’Sullivan

I am writing in response to the Strategic Growth Locations SG20 between Bidford on Avon and Ardens Grafton.

Ardens Grafton is a non-service hamlet with a very distinct character. There are no facilities in the village besides a community bus service which provides 1 bus twice a week. There is no mains gas, and many properties have no mains drainage. Most of the roads serving the village are single track, which are ungritted in the winter.

In my view, I think it is highly inappropriate to consider building on existing arable land between Bidford and Ardens Grafton. From the document ‘Meeting South Warwickshire’s Sustainable Development Requirements’ section 4.3 states that

‘it is also important to define the boundaries between settlements and the surrounding countryside. This provides a distinction between the various scales of settlements and the open countryside’

SG20 would be a development in open countryside. Brown field land and infill should be the first consideration rather than building on land currently used for food production. This land was previously assessed in 2021 and rejected on the grounds of environmental suitability and landscape impact due to its elevated position.

Section 4.1 of the Spacial Growth Strategy states that Sustainable Travel and Economy should be incorporated.
‘ sustainable travel - rail stations and bus stops with good travel times to major towns’

Clearly there is no access to local rail stations, with the closest being in Honeybourne. Bus stops in Bidford would be over a 1 mile walk.
Development on this parcel of land would therefore increase traffic on the very narrow roads.

No

ID sylw: 105960

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Lesley Allemann

I am writing to inform you of my objection to the proposal to build a huge number of new homes in the fields between Bidford upon Avon and Ardens Grafton and Temple Grafton.

The landscape is an area of outstanding beauty and is incredibly important for the diversity of wildlife that is so needed in our community and indeed the whole region.
Ardens Grafton and Temple Grafton are arguably two of the most lovely places in South Warwickshire, and these proposed developments will seriously detract from their significance and heritage.

I cannot understand why these villages should be destroyed by a huge conglomeration of new builds with all the excess traffic that would also ensue. Grafton Lane in Ardens Grafton is not even gritted in winter yet it would be subjected to a huge increase in traffic flow. The villages are used as a quick way to get from the A46 to Bidford rather than using the bypass from Alcester to Bidford. The A46 at this point of the road is one lane only and is the site of many traffic accidents and fatalities. There is no plan to upgrade the road or indeed the junction and more cars will surely result in yet more accidents.

The villages have no sustainability features that would recommend more housing and the cost in pounds and in destroying the environment to provide the infrastructure required must be excessive. The houses should be built elsewhere in a more suitable location where there are facilities, jobs and public transport. There is no need to build homes in areas where people will have to travel far by car to get to work.

No

ID sylw: 106126

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: MLJ Jasinski

Regarding the proposed development SG20: facilities in Bidford-on-Avon is already over developed and under resourced in respect of basic services. Again, valuable farmland would be lost should this development be approved.

No

ID sylw: 106147

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: William White

I am strongly objecting to the development of Strategic Growth Location SG20. The 2021SHLAA Land Parcels Assessment rejected development of the fields around Bidford on the grounds of environmental suitability, landscape impact, impact on settlement character, and agricultural land quality. Due to elevated and exposed topography, effective mitigation cannot be achieved.

There are insufficient sustainable transport options for further expansion of Bidford. There is no train station or regular service to Alcester or the Graftons. Development would put more pressure on the A46. Ardens Grafton and Temple Grafton are used as a cut-through to the A46, and this causes issues with speeding and traffic during peak periods when children are walking to school. Developing Grade 1 & 2 agricultural land damages food security.

No

ID sylw: 106443

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ian Rose

I refer to SG20 and to the further plan area from the Golden Cross to Little Britain it lacks SUSTAINABILITY
It is accepted that change is inevitable but it is how that change is managed that is important and this looks poorly managed I only found out about these proposals by accident. It is to be hoped that the next stage at the end of the year is better publicised so that people are aware in a timely manner.
This proposal seems to almost double the size of Bidford on Avon and to nearly quadruple the size of the hamlet of Ardens Grafton, a non service village.
Who ever would have thought that Ardens Grafton could become a suburb of Bidford 'town'.
If the district has no current shortage of property as reported at one meeting, where are the owners of the new properties coming from? and why?
The plans do not show how many houses are involved in these sites but the local road infrastructure is already inadequate/ poorly maintained Access to the Ardens Grafton site is via a very narrow street and unmade private road This together with other infrastructure such as doctors and schools requires significant input from developers. Significant works will be needed to provide mains water (there is non down our lane) sewerage, which sometimes struggles to cope and once flooded our patio with raw sewerage because the pipe under the road was blocked and surface water cannot access gullies due to lack of maintenance
It seems to me that there has been some opportunistic landowners who have put forward their land as likely sites for development and some of those allegedly are parish councillors. For the district to accept this is naïve in the extreme, especially in areas 1 & 2 which appear to be random parcels of land disconnected to any settlement. This also applies to parts of area 3.
I am 81 so these plans will probably not be seen in my lifetime but I have concerns about the environmental legacy we leave for the next generations
I am concerned about the impact on the very varied wildlife, both mammals and birds
The sites are on good grade arable land development of which which is unnecessary and will impact food security.
There are ancient footpaths over these sites. Together with hedgerows rich in bio diversity.
The rape of our countryside will continue with these developments.
Additional mobile coverage will be required (I can't have a smart meter as the signal is too poor!)
The Grafton Road is subject to flooding at Framlington.
One has to wonder what benefits there might be to existing residents such as are we to get more police, fire and ambulance cover given the increased population in these developments, also Hospitals. I see this as sadly doubtful. The extra council tax generated could be up to £80m where will this disappear to?
If the continued expansion of Bidford is to be allowed then perhaps the developers should be required to construct a much needed second crossing of the Avon to protect the medieval bridge which keeps getting damaged. This is a great opportunity!
The whole proposal is urbanisation on a completely ill thought-out and inappropriate manner
I wish to object in the strongest possible terms and urge rejection of these proposals which make no sense especially the Golden Cross to Little Britain piece and the New Road site, which seems to be in the middle of nowhere

No

ID sylw: 106531

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Christian White

The approach taken in this draft policy is flawed and risks undermining its own objectives due to three critical shortcomings: an overreliance on inadequate or outdated evidence, a failure to meaningfully incorporate community perspectives, and an unrealistic optimism about implementation that ignores practical constraints. These issues collectively render the policy less a blueprint for sustainable development and more a speculative exercise detached from South Warwickshire’s real needs.
In sum, this draft policy’s approach is a house of cards—built on shaky data, propped up by tokenistic consultation, and topped with unrealistic expectations. Rather than addressing South Warwickshire’s pressing needs, it risks becoming a costly distraction, misallocating resources and alienating the very communities it claims to serve. A credible policy would start with rigorous, place-specific evidence, embed residents as active partners, and ground its ambitions in a sober assessment of what’s achievable. Anything less is a disservice to the region’s future.
This proposal contravenes multiple planning policies, lacks essential infrastructure, threatens biodiversity and conservation areas, and risks merging rural villages into unsustainable urban sprawl.

No

ID sylw: 106553

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Colin & Jenny Haycock

Nifer y bobl: 2

Whilst we agree that it is essential with growing population that villages have to take their responsibility to accommodate a fair share of their increase we consider the land options in Bidford-on-Avon available, which if used would more than double (maybe treble) the population, would disastrous.

However any proposed development should not go ahead without a guarantee that the infrastructure is in place to support the development.

We are particularly against any development which is visually detrimental to the beauty and tranquillity of the countryside on either side of the river in both directions from the bridge - a feature which is cherished by most Bidfordians.

No

ID sylw: 106557

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Patricia Johnson

I do not agree that there is any further need for housing in Bidford-on-Avon.

The village has been over-developed over the past 5-10 years in terms of housing with no increase in school places - both primary and secondary. The GP surgery covers a wide area - as far as Welford-on-Avon, The Littletons, Salford Priors. The road infrastructure has not changed other than country lanes being used as 'rat tuns' by the heavy commuter traffic.

Although the strategic plan indicates further infrastructure provision, experience indicates that this would not be followed through. There are no additional employment opportunities and none identified in the strategic plan.

No

ID sylw: 106587

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Chris Size

Bidford has once again been selected to take yet more housing development without improving its infrastructure.

1. Primary school is full
2. We have no secondary school
3. Access is via a 12th century listed bridge
4. Alcester has a small population but many more facilities
5. One GP health centre, which is full
6. Sewage plant is inadequate

No

ID sylw: 106588

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Judy Size

Bidford has already absorbed a huge amount of expansion without improvement to its infrastructure.

For example:
1. Lack of schools - 1 primary school, full to capacity
2. GP Practice struggling to cope with excessive number of patients
3. At busy times traffic backs up beyond Tower Hill (B439) and from the bypass (Salford Road). Also blocking the High Street.
South access to the village via a single track 15th century bridge!
4. Increased risk of flooding given the gradient on good farmland close to the Avon and adjacent to Conservation Area, listed properties etc.
5. Few amenities compared to similar settlements.
6. Inadequate sewage system.
7. Lack of jobs/employment.

No

ID sylw: 106693

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Emily Sumerling

It is sited within an area of high visual impact
Coalescence between Bidford and Ardens Grafton
Non serviced Villages
Land is currently actively farmed – grade 1 & 2
2021 SHLAA Land Parcels previously rejected some of the proposed fields (BD03 & BD04) nominated in SG20 on the grounds of environmental suitability, landscape impact , settlement character and agricultural land quality .
Significant increase in the requirement for healthcare primary, social, adult healthcare, screening services, A&E & dental which is already under huge pressure.
Lack of train station in Bidford, no active bus service between Bidford and the Graftons.
No secondary school in the Graftons or Bidford within 2km walking distance
Road infrastructure is needed for the proposed growth.

No

ID sylw: 106791

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Exhall Parish Council

Lack of sustainable travel options:

•Lack of train station in Bidford
•No active bus service between Bidford and the Graftons or on the Wixford Road

No provision to improve the A46 between Alcester roundabout and Stratford/Wildmoor roundabout to accommodate the increase in traffic that will be on that road that will arise from increased housing.

Objections to SG20 & Refid 562

•It is sited within an area of high visual impact
•Coalescence between Bidford and Ardens Grafton
•Land is currently actively farmed – grade 1 & 2
•2021 SHLAA Land Parcels previously rejected some of the proposed fields (BD03 & BD04) nominated in SG20 on the grounds of environmental suitability, landscape impact , settlement character and agricultural land quality . Due to the elevated and exposed approach of the parcels of land means that effective mitigation cannot be achieved. Nothing has changed in the landscape since the last proposal.

Other

ID sylw: 106927

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Historic England

Potential impacts on setting of Bidford-on-Avon CA and multiple LBs.

Recommend: HIA prior to allocation.

No

ID sylw: 107313

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Exhall Parish Council

It is unclear how many homes might be accommodated in SG20 but the area is vast. Section 4.3 states it is important to define boundaries between settlements to distinguish between scales of settlements and the open countryside. SG20 is in open countryside and will coalesce with Ardens Grafton. It is also an elevated area of high visual impact.

The chosen Spatial Growth Strategy is "Sustainable Travel and Economy". Bidford has expanded significantly but the nearest train station is in Honeybourne. When Bidford bridge is closed, rail users from Bidford and north of the river need to detour via Welford bridge. This has also been shut on numerous occasions due to flooding, via Barton is unpassable when the river overspills its banks. Bidford does not have a secondary school within a 2km walk to support sustainable travel. The nearest secondary schools are in Alcester, Stratford-upon-Avon and Chipping Campden.

No

ID sylw: 107409

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bidford-on-Avon Parish Council

Bidford on Avon Parish has already been overdeveloped in the last 5 years (over 600 dwellings) with no corresponding infrastructure improvement or increased job opportunities.
-As mentioned above, there is very poor public transport, specially considering it is a named Main Rural Centre.
-It is noted that all the sites mentioned in SG20 are Agricultural and, in the present climate, Council strongly supports they remain so. These sites could be considered for biodiversity, supporting Objective 12, or for sports facilities, supporting Objective 10)
-The site identifies as Land at Kings Meadow would be supported as an orchard (Objective 12)
-The site to the south of Tower Hill towards the river – it should be noted that the area close to the river floods regularly.
-It was also noted that some of the large sites are in Broom, which should remain countryside with no new development except Rural Exception or replacement. There should also be a distinct boundary between the settlement of Bidford on Avon and Broom.

The Parish Council has resolved to review its current NDP which will include a revision of any possible sites suitable for sustainable development

Yes

ID sylw: 107431

Derbyniwyd: 16/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Moreton Morrell Parish Council

No objection

Yes

ID sylw: 107461

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Temple Grafton Parish Council

It is sited within an area of high visual impact
· Coalescence between Bidford and Ardens Grafton will result
· The Graftons are non-service villages, with no street lighting, limited sewerage system only in main population areas.
· Land is currently actively farmed – grade 1 & 2
· 2021 SHLAA Land Parcels previously rejected some of the proposed fields (BD03 & BD04) nominated in SG20 on the grounds of environmental suitability, landscape impact , settlement character and agricultural land quality . Due to the elevated and exposed approach of the parcels of land means that effective mitigation cannot be achieved. Nothing has changed in the landscape since the last proposal.
· Little Haven Nature Reserve focussing on moth conservation by the old railway line. Part of Warwickshire County Council Local Biodiversity Action plan
· Significant increase in the requirement for healthcare primary, social, adult healthcare, screening services, A&E & dental which is already under huge pressure

No

ID sylw: 107653

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bill and Susie -

1.The location is not a sustainable one; given people would be travelling to work (probably in the Stratford/Warwick/Coventry direction & that would have to be by car) the infrastructure would not cope. The A46 has a very dangerous section between the edge of Stratford and Bidford.
2. The development would stretch beyond the boundaries of Bidford, across open countryside and result in a coalescence of Bidford with Ardens Grafton (a non serviced village), which has no local bus services.
3. The development is in an elevated area, creating high adverse visual impact against the Council’s policy CS12 for the Ardens SLA.
4. The development would stretch beyond the boundaries of Bidford, across open countryside and result in a coalescence of Bidford with Ardens Grafton (a non serviced village), which has no local bus services.

No

ID sylw: 107902

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Matthew White

I object strongly to Strategic Growth Location SG20.

SHLAA Land Parcels 2021 rejected the proposal to develop the fields around Bidford that form part of SG20 proposal on the grounds of environmental suitability; landscape impact, impact on settlement character (BD03) and landscape impact, settlement character and agricultural land quality (BD04). Due to the elevated and exposed approach of both parcels of land means that effective mitigation cannot be achieved.

There aren’t enough sustainable travel options to support further expansion in Bidford ie no train station, active bus service to the Graftons or regular service to Alcester.

Increased development in Bidford will put more pressure on the A46 between Alcester roundabout and Wildmoor roundabout – a single stretch of a major trunk road. The villages of Ardens Grafton and Temple Grafton will see increased traffic at peak periods when children are walking to Temple Grafton School as commuters use it as a cut through to get to A46. Speeding has been a big issue through these villages.

Proposals are looking at developing agricultural Grade 1 & 2 fields that are in active use. We need to preserve food security.

No train station in Bidford to support sustainable travel for an increase in population.

No

ID sylw: 108201

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Thomas White

Strongly object to SG20 and Call for Sites REFID562 & REFID16.
Development of open countryside. Coalescence with Ardens Grafton. Elevated position - high visual impact. Grade 1 & 2 agricultural land.
No train station in Bidford - closest is Honeybourne but Bidford bridge closures mean people travel to Warwick Parkway/Worcestershire Parkway. Impact on A46 accessed through Graftons - congestion and dangerous junction. No established bus network to Stations.
No secondary school in Bidford.
Surface Water issues.
SHLAA previously rejected BD03 & BD04 on the grounds of environmental suitability; landscape impact, impact on settlement character (BD03) and landscape impact, settlement character and agricultural land quality (BD04). This also is relevant to SG20 & CfS 562.