No

ID sylw: 100253

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Nigel Gumley

The proposal is opposed. Once Green Belt land has gone we will never get it back including the loss of 1,415 acres of productive farm land.
An enormous level of new infrastructure would be required in the form of roads, Health Centres, Primary and Secondary Schools. The Government would have to fund these projects such is the size.
Access roads into Warwick and in the entire district would require unprecedented change and destroy the Green Belt much further afield than Hatton.
Priority should be given to sites adjacent to current development close to Motorway links and redevelopment of Leamington Station.

No

ID sylw: 100256

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Cheryl Reed-Davies

Local schools and GP surgeries are already oversubscribed for the current number of residents.

Lack of local infrastructure to support proposal - water, drainage, flooding risk and power supply.

Loss of green belt land around historic Warwick.

Increased transport - Birmingham Road is already hugely busy with commuters heading to/from Warwick/Leamington & the rest of the West Midlands. When M40 is closed it is also the route for all commuters heading from London/Oxford to the West Midlands and beyond. The current road networks cannot sustain additional traffic.
Environmental destruction and impact on our wildlife and their natural habitat.

No

ID sylw: 100273

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Dr Nicholas Tawn

The creation of a settlement in the proposed location is entirely unsuitable as the local infrastructure and roads can't accommodate the level of traffic that would accompany this. This would severely detriment the lives and culture of the locals who have chosen to live in this rural area. The proposal to completely transform their lives without compensation is abhorrent.
A development of this scale completely dwarfs the current settlement in this area and is not the way to build housing that is effective for creating community and sense of belonging in the area. What makes the area so special to live in and unique is the heterogeneity and characterful style of building.
The proposed number of houses being developed here wouldn’t just destroy the community; it is unclear that the local resources could provide the required provision. In particular, 4,500 would account for almost 1/3 of the population of Warwick, the local hospital would still be Wariwck, this hospital already has a significant issue dealing with waiting times for A&E and it is ludicrous to suggest adding an extra 1/3rd demand would be a viable option for the provision the hospital can manage. The service links with public transport are terrible. The train line is already at full capacity with an infrequent service that is insufficient for the local area.

No

ID sylw: 100308

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Sharon Linekar

As a local resident I object to B1. Preference should be given to non-Greenbelt sites. Development would harm Warwick's landscape and identity as a small historic market town. Solihull Council's call for sites put forward sites on the outskirts of Knowle and in Chadwick End and Balsall Common. Should these also proceed the gap between the West Midlands and Warwick would be eroded and Warwick’s identity diminished. Development should be allocated to strategic growth locations and shortfalls dispersed in small numbers to existing villages to avoid concentrating impacts in one area.

1,415 acres of productive farmland would be lost. Food security is crucial given increasing population and global instability. The area is part of the Ancient Forest of Arden. Development would result in permanent habitat loss for many species, some of which are protected.

Significant modification to surrounding roads would be required to accommodate development of this size. Birmingham Road would need further upgrades, as would many surrounding single-track roads. This would need to be in place before housing and there is risk of developers reneging on commitments. The railway and canal would require bridges. There are not currently safe walking routes due to lack of pavements and lighting.

There are currently no services in Hatton e.g. doctors, schools, buses. Car travel would be essential. Internalisation is unrealisable as people have needs outside their immediate area. The South Warwickshire Foundation Trust were unable to support a recent application for only 34 houses due to inability to meet additional demands. Excessive weighting has been given to the railway station. It has a limited services and severe constraints to improving the lines, train capacity and station accessibility. Much of the development is outside safe walking distance of the station. I support the response, reports and data supplied by 'Keep Hatton Station Rural'.

No

ID sylw: 100342

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Abbey Paterson

I am a student in the area who has lived here all her life. My primary school was surrounded by green fields and farmland, which we would regularly visited to learn about plants and animals. I think it’s important to keep these green spaces so that the younger generations can learn about the environment around them. As a student it’s important to get regular fresh air during exam season and being able to walk or run in outside spaces helps break up revision.

No

ID sylw: 100428

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Aimee Carter

This area has already been developed too far.
There are far better alternatives available within the plan.

No

ID sylw: 100469

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Emily Blackford

My Objection to the Proposed Development at Site B1
The proposed development will impact me directly. I object for the following reasons:
Local Capacity and Infrastructure Concerns
- The plans outline the construction of new schools and leisure centres, but I do not see any solid plans for expanding the medical care available in the area. Warwick hospital is already working at capacity, and 8,000 more residents will only add to this pressure. We already witnessed a critical incident this winter; people’s lives are already at risk without this increased volume of patients. Another hospital would have to be built, as the Warwick Hospital site does not have the capacity for the extra wards and new A&E that are needed. Plans must be put in place to alleviate this fullybefore any building can go ahead.
- On a similar vein, the mental health services in this area are already operating under great stress. Plans must be put in place to fix this, to ensure we are looked after, and your goal of a “Healthy, safe and inclusive South Warwickshire” is reached.
- The congestion at Stanks Island is already unmanageable – with an estimated 10,000 extra cars on the road from this development, it would no longer be functional.
- The train lines and stations would need a lot of work done to be able to
accommodate the new customers.
New bus services would have to be created –
- I do not believe that there are sufficient protections in place for the local
environment. I think that the proposed 10% net gain in biodiversity is not high
enough, as other councils have achieved higher figures than this.
- I am concerned for the welfare of the canal that runs directly through this site. It is a conservation area and is a vital habitat for local wildlife. There will undoubtedly be damage caused to this from the construction as the border is extremely close. The same goes for the site bordering on ancient woodland; this country is only 2.5% ancient woodland, so it must be protected as there are ecosystems within these woodlands that cannot be replicated.
- I believe that the LNRS strategy should be a non-negotiable part of the plan if it is to move forward. The 30% target is essential to ensure there is no further decline.
- I believe that Brownfield and non-Green Belt sites must be prioritised first. Green
Belt land should only be used in “exceptional circumstances”, which I do not believe have been met as I cannot see any sustainability benefits from using this specific site. I am also concerned that if this development is to go forward, it could open a door to more Green Belt developments occurring. Green Belt allocations must be respected, and this site would go against the very reasons these spaces were allocated:

In conclusion, I am aware that the plans for overall redevelopments in South Warwickshire will go ahead, and I know that more housing is requested from the government. Change is always inevitable, but I must implore you to reconsider any development of this site. You must consider the undeniable impact it will have on the people who already live here – I know emotions are not taken into consideration for these proposals, but people deserve to be happy and well looked after where they live. Many of our needs are not currently met,
and putting further stress on an already struggling area will only make things worse.

No

ID sylw: 100538

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Caroline Edwards

Please do not take this land out of Green Belt. The roads will not cope with the volume of traffic if such a large development should go ahead. Surrounding villages are already suffering with congestion! The visual impact this over-development will have, will ruin the area!

No

ID sylw: 100568

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Pauline James

B1 from A4177 to Hatton Station should remain greenbelt to preserve farming, trees, biodiversity and the character of the local area. Hatton Park A4177 roundabout to Hatton Station is 2.5 miles minimum. Development here would be excessive and fail the 20 minute principle. Warwick Parkway to Hatton Park A4177 roundabout is 1.4 miles but has pavements, street lighting and connects to coaches, buses, and trains.
8000 dwellings is achievable in just 50 hectares including roads and open spaces if built at the same density as Hamlet Way CV370AL (140 dwellings in 0.86ha). Building on 403.42 hectares wastes the countryside.

No

ID sylw: 100604

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Jacqueline Hill

This is a large area of green belt land (that the council says they support) & should be protected to maintain the wildlife & biodiversity of our countryside as well as prevent urban sprawl. It also provides agricultural land so building here will have a negative impact on food production.
The health infrastructure is already on the verge of a breakdown in this area, in particular at Warwick Hospital with greater demands on their services than ever before. These houses will bring population from outside of the area further increasing these pressures.
The transport infrastructure is also unable to cope.

No

ID sylw: 100729

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Beausale, Hasely, Honiley & Wroxall Parish Council

This proposal would remove valuable agricultural land, and greenbelt land, from the Warwickshire countryside.
The infrastructure to build a town almost the size of Kenilworth does not exist. Whilst building this, traffic would divert through the country , and often single track, lanes in our Parish. We noticed a considerable increase in traffic, and damage to grass verges, with the recent development at Hatton, with traffic avoiding the traffic lights on the A4177. This would happen again if this development proceeds – thus destroying the peace, tranquillity and wellbeing that our parish offers to all residents and visitors.

No

ID sylw: 100736

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Greg Diffen

Hatton proposal is not an ideal site for such a development. The traffic implications for the existing county road network around the site cannot take the increased use as many are single track roads. Our quiet Mill Lane will become a cut through road. Hatton Station is not up to scratch to take the load of extra passengers and the traffic on A4177 is already a mess during peak periods.
The site is an excellent reason why the Green Belt was invented, to keep England's natural beauty.
This is clearly the wrong site for this proposal.

No

ID sylw: 100772

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Hermione Pantling

Permanent loss of valuable agricultural land vital for food. Habitat distraction, negatively impacting local wildlife and biodiversity. Loss of green spaces and trees contribute to climate change. Building on green belt encourages further developments in protected areas. Building will fundamentally alter the character of the area, form rural to urban, undermining the distinctiveness of the area.

No

ID sylw: 100788

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Kevin Mole

I oppose Site B1 , citing concerns about Green Belt policy, community impact, infrastructure strain, and lack of sustainable development alignment. The Green Belt is crucial in preventing urban sprawl, but the proposed development would enclose Hatton within the urban area of Warwick and Leamington, contradicting its purpose. This is the Most egregious undermining of the Green Belt since urban sprawl is what the Green Belt policy is for (NPPR 142). No exceptional circumstances are presented (NPPR 146) The development would also disrupt the local character and social cohesion, leading to increased traffic congestion and travel times undermining sustainable development.

No

ID sylw: 100796

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Oliver Smith

My objection to the development of site B1, cites encroachment on the Green Belt, negative impacts on local residential amenity, infrastructure strain, safety risks, pollution, and privacy issues. It highlights that the development contradicts central government planning policy and poses numerous risks to the community and environment. I urge the council to reject the proposal.

No

ID sylw: 100821

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Sue Harrison

The reasons for designating Green Belt are as valid today as when it was designated. NPPF Chapter 13 attaches great importance to Green Belts. A new development, whether housing or employment, would undermine the purpose of the Green Belt, harm its openness, its permanence and erode separation between Warwick and the West Midlands.

The Arden LCA is internationally-famous for its historical and cultural associations and is an intimate landscape with a strong sense of place. Arden has a special character which forms the primary ancient landscape in Warwickshire, distinguished from later planned countryside elsewhere in the county. The characteristic settlement pattern is dispersed farmsteads and hamlets, in contrast to the rest of Warwickshire. The Warwickshire Landscapes Guidelines state this should be maintained. The importance of the Arden LCA is reflected by SDC’s Special Landscape Areas Study identifying much of Arden as a Special Landscape Area. This designation should be incorporated into the new Local Plan.

The site is also inappropriate for reasons such as lack of infrastructure, loss of productive agricultural land, and loss of countryside. Proximity to stations should not be central to site selection, especially as transport technology will develop in the future. Landscape suitability is more important.

No

ID sylw: 100840

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Rachel Hoult

I strongly object to the proposal for a new settlement at Hatton. Many residents have chosen to live there because of the beautiful surrounding countryside. If the proposal becomes a reality we will all have that completely destroyed by no fault of our own. The road infrastructure can't cope with the existing houses let alone thousands more. Any building work will have a massively disruptive effect on everyone. I am personally really concerned about the prospect of building behind Antrobus/Oakdene. If these plans go ahead it will be a travesty. I just pray they dont :-(

No

ID sylw: 100882

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs june Goldsmith

Hatton is not a suitable site for settlement as:
Too close to Warwick;
Will become a dormitory for Warwick;
Will increase traffic congestion in and around Warwick;
Will increase air and noise pollution;
Hatton is important as an area used for outdoor leisure and exercise, which promotes mental and physical health;
Hatton locks is an important English Heritage site;
A place of natural beauty, which promotes well-being.

No

ID sylw: 100898

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Stuart Foreman

The proposed development at Hatton is unsuitable due to several issues. The reliance on a small rural rail station for transport is unrealistic, likely increasing traffic congestion. Existing roads are inadequate for the projected traffic, and significant infrastructure investment would be needed. The scale of development would drastically alter the semi-rural character of Hatton and Hatton Park, negatively impacting local residents. Heritage and ecological concerns, along with the loss of green belt land, further complicate this. Additionally, the delayed delivery of essential services and the long-term disruption caused by construction make the site an unfit location for a large-scale development.

No

ID sylw: 100900

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs lorraine Jaeger

destruction of green belt and productive agricultural land. Once gone, gone forever. Lack of infrastructure, and decimation of countryside and village environment. Negative impact on roads and traffic. More suited brownfill sites around Warwick.

No

ID sylw: 100905

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Kirsty Mcmullen

Infrastructure is not in place, completely overwhelming the roads in surrounding villages. Utter disregard for local wildlife and loss of farming land. No local schools, insufficient NHS provision locally. Land borders local conservation zones such as the one we are under - Canal Conservation. The integrity of the local ecosystems which are carefully nurtured will be destroyed.

No

ID sylw: 100906

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr D Briggs

This is prime green belt with ancient oak trees, used extensively for both animal grazing and leisure. Across the sites are well used and established public rightss of way.

The canal sides are rich in diverse wildlife which would be destroyed by building on both banks. The historic towpath is narrow.

A significant proportion of B1 currently has limited road access and being mostly hemmed in by the M40 (south) with rail and canal (north) so effective road access would require new bridges (inappropriate for the historic canal).

This precious rural setting is valuable, rare and would be destroyed.

No

ID sylw: 100917

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr John Hoult

I strongly object to this proposal:
- Hatton Station could not handle more passengers/car parking. Access is poor and no expansion possible
- Road structure is at maximum capacity now without thousands more cars
- With building lorry traffic, the roads will become dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists
- Local services would be massively over capacity, GP services and Warwick hospital
- Policing a whole new area would be essential
- Irreversible loss of thousands of acres productive farmland
- Permanent loss of wildlife habitat
- Non greenbelt sites should be prioritised

No

ID sylw: 100943

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr david woodbourne

I strongly oppose the proposed settlement in our village, which would destroy greenfield sites, harm wildlife, and ruin our peaceful environment. Increased traffic and noise will disrupt daily life and endanger children. Our schools, roads, and healthcare services are already stretched—this development will overwhelm them. The loss of nature will deprive our children of safe outdoor spaces, impacting their well-being. This project threatens our village’s unique character, turning it into a soulless extension of urban sprawl. Housing should be built sustainably, not at the cost of our community and environment. I urge planners to reject this proposal.

No

ID sylw: 100944

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Graham Holmes

The existing infrastructure is inadequate for the current traffic levels and there is no capacity for the sort of infrastructure which would be required. It is not realistic to expect a non-motorised infrastructure the bus services from hatton park were cancelled due to lack of use. The loss of agricultural land will also be devastating to the environment for local wildlife.

No

ID sylw: 100955

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Pauline James

B1 from A4177 to Hatton Station should remain greenbelt to preserve farming, trees, biodiversity and the character of the local area. Hatton Park A4177 roundabout to Hatton Station is 2.5 miles minimum. Development here would be excessive and fail the 20 minute principle. Warwick Parkway to Hatton Park A4177 roundabout is 1.4 miles but has pavements, street lighting and connects to coaches, buses, and trains. 8000 dwellings is achievable in just 50 hectares including roads and open spaces if built at the same density as Hamlet Way CV370AL (140 dwellings in 0.86ha). Building on 403.42 hectares wastes the countryside.

No

ID sylw: 100966

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ruth Morley-Brown

Building houses in Hatton could lead to several issues. Firstly, it may disrupt local wildlife habitats and biodiversity, threatening endangered species. Additionally, increased traffic and development could strain existing infrastructure, leading to congestion and safety concerns. It seems unfortunate that I walk around Warwickshire and see many unused office buildings and similar areas where there is no wildlife to harm, and yet you choose not to build there, and put life into the dead surroundings. Overall, preserving Hatton's natural environment is integral to the development of our county, especially since our roads aren't suitable for an expansion of this size.

Other

ID sylw: 100996

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Mark Stevens

The proposed location is on a flood plane and the most recent building of homes in this area has resulted in a number of homes being uninhabitable due to flood / damp impact on the houses. Do not underestimate this issues, after all it would be crazy to build 8000 homes on a flood plane and then find that they are not fit for purpose because then you have a wasted development, loss of land and still not provided the required housing growth in practice.

Yes

ID sylw: 101055

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Melissa Gillone

This site is significantly better than the BW site, as it lacks heritage constraints and does not contribute to the same level of urban sprawl.

Other

ID sylw: 101112

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Mark Stevens

The upside as a new settlement should, by law, bring with it the necessary infrastructure. However, proposed location is on a flood plane. Recent house building nearby resulted in some new properties being uninhabitable due to a flood/dampness continuum. So, building 8000 houses could mean you have a large development of homes, but few people able to live there due to the flood plane issue. This will also mean mortgages and insurance will not be possible for a lot of people due to the risks. You will then have consumed land and still have folks needing a house elsewhere again.