No

ID sylw: 106124

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Diane Bird

I am writing to formally register my objection to the potential development of a large new settlement at Hatton on site B1 including the areas around Hatton Park.

There is insufficient justification /demand for this volume of housing in this area
There is not local demand for anything approaching this level of housing. I have been told that some of the justification for building more homes than we need locally is the overflow demand from Coventry. Presumably the Coventry overflow, even if they chose to live in Hatton, would have family or work connections back in Coventry. The Hatton train line does not go directly to Coventry (it would require a slow journey via changing train at Leamington). Therefore excess road traffic will surely be created, as people would not opt to travel by train to Coventry from this location. This negates much of the speculative benefit of siting a new settlement near Hatton Station.

Loss of Green Belt, when non green belt sites are an option
This site is green belt. There are not exceptional circumstances that would justify removing this site from green belt, when other non green belt sites are an option.
Loss of agricultural land and the negative impact of that on food security
Significant parts of the potential Hatton settlement are on actively farmed land. Surely maintaining food production will be increasingly important in the future.

Loss of wildlife habitat and wildlife corridors

Can the health infrastructure cope?
Obviously such a large settlement would require significant infrastructure development, such as schools, supermarket, and GP surgery which I assume will be included in the plans. I have concerns though as to whether hospital capacity will be addressed, as Warwick hospital is on a site with very limited scope for expansion. Warwick hospital declared a critical incident only recently when it was operating at capacity.

Road infrastructure difficulties
The current road infrastructure would need significant upgrading to cope with the dramatic increase in traffic. The A4177 and Stanks island with the A46 would need major improvements and the A4189 and Longbridge island would also need major improvements.
If the employment site SG07 were to also go ahead adding many lorries to the traffic at A4177/A46 then these problems would be even greater.

As a Hatton Park resident, who has just experienced one year of relatively minor roadworks on the A4177, with the traffic issues that created, I am acutely aware that the A4177 is the ONLY way on and off our large estate for all residents. So extra consideration would be needed as to if/how the A4177 could accommodate the extra traffic.

Negative impact on the historic town of Warwick, with potential for traffic gridlock
It seems highly unlikely that a new settlement, whilst coming close in size to a small town, will benefit from being built with the full facilities of a town, therefore this will cause significantly more traffic into neighbouring Warwick. The nature of Warwick with its historical town walls and buildings, and the river through it may make it impractical to accommodate significantly increased traffic flow, without negatively affecting the feel of our lovely town.

No

ID sylw: 106134

Derbyniwyd: 21/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Anne Insley

I would like to raise my objection of B1 Hatton. For the purpose of housing,for between 4,500 - 8,000 houses.
I realise we need housing,preferably affordable for those not earning massive wage. Ie farm workers, Forrester etc.
The site your proposing as "preferred". Is actually someone's livelihood as a working dairy farm. I presume people will always need dairy products? This farm apart from being well managed, is also necessary to balance all the concreted, land in the area, plus motorways. Un built on fields act as wonderful receptors for rain water,snow etc, saving a lot of water damage by flooding.
As this is part of the ancient forest of Arden and we are told constantly of the good trees do to the environment why not revert some of it back???
Also from 1938 a bill was passed for green belt areas.This I know yourselves will know about, to STOP cities and towns becoming the concrete jungle they are going to be.
As I realise you are well aware other sites,more sensible in area have been mooted,without the need for the massive reconstruction of roads.
You could argue we have the station.From what I can gather the station is to capacity with trains,and cannot be enlarged enough to be viable.
One other point, there is a desperate need for schools, has no one thought having extend Hatton Park and planning double the. houses again,why not reduce amount of houses,construct a junior and senior school instead?? I would have said a much better investment for everyone.

No

ID sylw: 106140

Derbyniwyd: 25/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Ellie Marks

Please find following my strong objection to the proposed development in Hatton (B1 area) for 8000+ new homes, addressing traffic infrastructure, wildlife, green spaces, hospitals, and suggesting Leamington Spa as an alternative:

Objection to Proposed SWLP Housing Development in Hatton (B1 Area)

I am writing to express my strong objection to the proposed development of 8000+ new homes in Hatton (B1 area). While I understand the need for new housing, I believe this location is fundamentally unsuitable and will have severe negative consequences for the existing community, the environment, and local infrastructure.

The current road network in and around Hatton is already under significant strain. Adding 8000+ homes will lead to unacceptable levels of congestion, increased commute times, and air pollution. The existing infrastructure simply cannot support this level of development without major, disruptive, and likely insufficient upgrades. A good example of this is the junction of Hockley Road with the A4177, where there are already huge queues at peak times. Any new residents in this proposed area would need to utilise this junction to gain access to Warwick, Leamington and beyond. I can't imagine how long the traffic queues would be if this goes ahead.

Effect on Wildlife and Biodiversity: Hatton and its surrounding areas are home to a diverse range of wildlife and valuable habitats. This large-scale development will inevitably lead to habitat loss, fragmentation, and displacement of wildlife. Construction activities will cause noise and light pollution, further disrupting ecosystems. The environmental impact assessment must fully address these concerns and propose concrete mitigation measures, which I believe will be difficult to implement effectively.

Loss of Local Green Walking Spaces: The proposed development threatens the loss of valuable green spaces used by residents for recreation, exercise, and relaxation. These green spaces are vital for both physical and mental well-being. Studies have consistently shown the benefits of access to green spaces for reducing stress, improving mental health, and fostering community cohesion. The destruction of these spaces will negatively impact the quality of life for existing residents.

Effect on Hospitals: Local healthcare services, particularly Warwick hospital, are already struggling to meet current demand. Adding a population equivalent to a large town will place an unbearable strain on these services, leading to longer waiting times, reduced quality of care, and increased pressure on already overworked staff. The proposal fails to adequately address how the increased healthcare needs of the new residents will be met.

Alternative Location: Leamington Spa: A more suitable location for a development of this scale would be Leamington Spa. Leamington Spa possesses a more robust road network capable of handling increased traffic flow. Furthermore, Leamington Spa benefits from a significantly better-connected train station, facilitating sustainable transportation options for residents and reducing reliance on private vehicles.

For the reasons outlined above, I strongly urge the planning authorities to reject this proposal. The negative impacts on traffic infrastructure, wildlife and biodiversity, local green spaces, and hospitals far outweigh any perceived benefits. A more sustainable and responsible approach would be to consider alternative locations like Leamington Spa that are better equipped to accommodate large-scale development.

Yes

ID sylw: 106144

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Julian and Emma Philcox

Nifer y bobl: 2

Like site BW Hatton has a station - Hatton Station. This links to Stratford and Warwick/Leamington and onwards. And Warwick Parkway is just moments away for frequent direct services to London Marylebone or Birmingham. Hatton itself has direct journeys to Solihull, Birmingham, Warwick, Stratford with one change at Warwick Parkway for London Marylebone.

Like site BW this location has been underplayed. It is also close to the strategic road network (A46/M40).

Both sites BW and B1 have greater sustainable credentials than site E1, which has been overstated in many regards.

No

ID sylw: 106152

Derbyniwyd: 25/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Stephen Marks

Objection: Hatton New Settlement (SWLP B1)

I have lived in Shrewley since 1997 and have seen plenty of development in the surrounding areas since this time. I truly find it quite unbelievable that anybody thinks that this local area could support another 8,000 plus houses. To my mind this is quite unbelievable and not at all based on local knowledge. These are some of the points on which my strong objection is based:

1. Transport infrastructure. The roads around this area have become much busier over the recent years, which I can only imagine is because of a local increase in population. Just one example is the junction with Hockley Road and the A4177 main Warwick Road. It is always extremely busy, especially at peak times. So much so that I often see drivers becoming stressed as this is a real bottleneck which is bad enough to cause people to be late for work and appointments, even sometimes performing dangerous three-point turns in the road to attempt to find different routes. To exacerbate this problem, often drivers divert down The Green to attempt to circumvent the traffic. The Green is a small, quiet road where Ferncumbe School is located which now has a lot more fast paced, rushing traffic as people try to get where they are going on time. This puts the children and staff of the school at risk. This is already a problem, and will become a much bigger problem if there are thousands of extra houses built in the local area, which will most definitely use this junction to get to Warwick and beyond. This is just one example of how the already struggling Transport infrastructure will be significantly affected by this proposed development but there will be many many more in the area that are already super busy especially at peak times.

2. Hospitals. Warwick hospital is already a ‘problem’ hospital, with many reports of huge waiting times in the A&E department, very long waiting times for appointments and procedures, and a car park that it is almost constantly full to capacity and spilling out to illegal parking as people try and get to their appointments to avoid being cancelled and put back into the queues. I personally have witnessed instances of “car park rage” as people fight for spaces… not dissimilar to the days leading up to Christmas in retail parks, but all year round. I can't imagine the chaos that this would cause to this already very very busy hospital if all these new houses are built in the B1 area and even in the surrounding areas in this region.

3. Wildlife. The policy does not provide enough detail on how important environmental assets will be protected and enhanced, especially when a large number of the allocations are next to and even covering important designated Local Wildlife Sites. The policy says ‘expected to support the principles’ and this wording isn’t strong enough. If the Councils intend to reach 30% of land dedicated to nature and in recovery by 2030, as stated in the Environment Act 2021, then more ambitious targets are needed. I am extremely concerned by the scale of the proposed housing, which seems grossly exaggerated. The Plan reports a need for 1,679 dwellings per annum, but suggests allocating 600 surplus houses to allow sufficient flexibility. This will have a significant negative impact on the important habitats and protected species across the area. Many members of the community enjoy walking in these green spaces. Not only does this encourage cohesion in the local community, but it also protects the mental health and well-being of the residents of this rural community. This, in my opinion, outweighs the need for extra housing.

No

ID sylw: 106154

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: John Howard

We live in central Warwick. We have very little space where we can walk which isn’t built up, full of people or noisy and polluted. The impact is on our physical and mental health. We love seeing the green grass, breathing in the clean air, looking at the wildlife, trees. The peace and quiet is glorious. We object to the building of green belt as this was supposed to be the guaranteed land preserved protection of the countryside, a space we need and enjoy.

We are elderly and don’t drive to far these days and fear that the continuous building leaves us driving further than we may one day find too much in order to find the countryside we need each day to serve as the break we very much need for the hustle and bustle we have in town. We don’t want Hatton to become another town. We have a town in Warwick, that has expanded so much in the last few years. Please leave it there. We need green space.

No

ID sylw: 106155

Derbyniwyd: 25/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Vickie Marks

I wish to formally object to the proposal for the construction of 8,000 new houses in the Hatton B1 area due to significant concerns regarding traffic infrastructure, negative effects on wildlife and biodiversity, and the impact on local hospitals.

The current traffic infrastructure in the Hatton B1 area is inadequate to support the expected increase in population. The addition of 8,000 new houses would lead to a substantial rise in vehicle congestion, which poses safety risks and could result in gridlock on local roads. The area lacks sufficient public transportation options, leading to an increased reliance on personal vehicles. Without necessary upgrades to roads and enhancements to public transit, the proposal will exacerbate existing traffic issues, affecting residents' daily commutes and overall quality of life. In terms of rail links, Warwick Parkway only has two platforms and Hatton Station has three, both with very limited options in terms of destinations, whereas Leamington Spa has four platforms and offers routes in many different directions, as well as having a road network with much more headroom for expansion, making housing developments around the Leamington Spa area much more viable than Hatton, and much more likely to reduce private car usage and make the utilisation of public transport a reality rather than a pipe dream.

The proposed development site includes vital habitats that support local wildlife and biodiversity. The construction of such a large number of houses would result in habitat destruction and fragmentation, threatening the survival of numerous species. The loss of green spaces not only endangers wildlife populations but also diminishes the ecological balance essential for a healthy environment. Preserving these habitats is crucial for maintaining local biodiversity and ensuring that future generations can enjoy natural green spaces and enjoy the benefits to health and mental wellbeing that these spaces currently provide.

Warwick Hospital is already operating under significant demand. The influx of thousands of new residents would put additional pressure on their services, potentially leading to longer wait times and reduced quality of care for all patients. Without corresponding investments in healthcare infrastructure, the well-being of both new and existing residents could be compromised. It is imperative that healthcare resources are adequately addressed before proceeding with such a large-scale development.

In conclusion, given the critical concerns regarding traffic infrastructure, the impact on wildlife and biodiversity, and the strain on local hospitals, I urge the planning committee to reconsider the proposal for 8,000 new houses in the Hatton B1 area. The potential negative effects on the community and environment far outweigh any perceived benefits of this development.

No

ID sylw: 106177

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Jade Ronan

As a resident of Hatton Park, it saddens me that our beautiful village will potentially become a large town, but I am worried about other issues even more so.

Firstly, the traffic through Warwick is horrendous as it is, especially at peak times. How will travelling through the town be feasible with potentially 8000-16000 more cars (assuming 1-2 cars per household) on the roads? Surely unless there are plans to knock down and rebuild the whole of Warwick town (please don't do this), this would not be possible?

Secondly, how will the NHS services cope? The hospital waiting lists and A&E wait times are already extremely worrying; it would be devastating and potentially life threatening to so many people to have them lengthened further.

These issues are obviously in addition to the destruction of our beautiful countryside and many habitats, and problems associated with schooling and other services, but are the ones that alarm me the most, and the ones for which I can't see a solution to if the plans are to go ahead.

No

ID sylw: 106179

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Joseph Taylor

The land and view are enjoyed, it’s a valuable open space enjoyed every day by the public, bird watching, wildlife spotting, dog walking, exercising, improving mental health.

The noise and pollution with development will increase dramatically, especially due to the busier roads.

Green belt buffer between town and country side. Are we to lose all countryside? Artificially created ‘open spaces’, playing fields and parks etc on a small scale avoided by most wildlife not the same as natural open spaces.

Why choose green belt when other options are not green belt?

Highway safety will be compromised as access Dark Lane is incredible dangerous at times, parts are single track and well known to flood in multiple locations.

The bottom of Mill Lane ices up, it’s a complete sheet of ice. You have to exit Mill Lane onto the main road (Hockley Road) very slowly and carefully in winter and this will be almost impossible with more traffic. The lane is not gritted as much of the proposed area for development isn’t on a bus route.

Council is under pressure to reduce number of cars on the road, this area is lacking public transport so this would be difficult to commit to. The local roads would not be able to cope with the 10k extra cars on the road.

There has been recent flooding on the A46.

Has anyone unbiased conducted a tree survey as there are many ancient trees and other flora that need to be protected?

No

ID sylw: 106229

Derbyniwyd: 27/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Karen Malone

The grounds for objection to this Strategic Growth Area/ proposed New Settlement location within the South Warwickshire Local plan is as follows:

I moved to Hatton 3 years ago to enjoy the countryside and the quite, peaceful life that Hatton has to offer. I have lived in inner city Birmingham most of my life and couldn't wait to escape the excessive traffic, noise, pollution, over population and rat race of a City.

I love Hatton as it is and the chaos and upheaval to the wildlife and every day life of residents will be enormous.

I live and work in Hatton [redacted place of work] and the current beautiful views will be totally ruined. The grounds for objection are as follows:

It will totally ruin the peace and quite that Hatton is renowned for. The countryside, wildlife, views and lifestyle of residents will be altered dramatically and it is not what anybody that lives here wants.

It's not because we don't like change, but the whole infrastructure of Hatton and the surrounding areas will be unrecognisable and no longer a village, but a town.

In conclusion, I believe these objections are important because:

The reputation of Hatton is one of a beautiful, peaceful and calming landscape, that is close enough to shops in Warwick, Solihull and Leamington, but provides tranquility and peace to all that live here.

I respectfully request that planners and councillors refuse the allocation proposal for the site(s) referenced, based on the reasons provided. Thank you for considering my objections.

No

ID sylw: 106244

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Claire Wainwright

The Strategic Growth Area of B1 - Land at Hatton is unsuitable for development because of the
strain it would place on existing health and education infrastructure. Furthermore, it will decimate
the unique rural character of this village, situated in a countryside location, with ancient
woodlands, medieval Church site, and public footpaths.

Additional notes:
I have included this link as evidence for your consideration alongside my objection:
https://www.swft.nhs.uk/about-us/news/critical-incident-declared-south-warwickshire-universitynhs-
foundation-trust.

No

ID sylw: 106252

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stuart Wainwright

Road infrastructure in this area is clearly inadequate to serve the increased commuter traffic that this development would generate. I know first hand the severe impact that is caused by even the slightest decrease in traffic flow due to temporary lights or, a near by diversion or, a road closure due to flooding.
In addition to this, with very limited and infrequent bus and train services to the local area, residents have no real alternative but to drive private vehicles on the roads during peak times.

No

ID sylw: 106266

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Caroline Wilkie

I am writing to the Warwick District Council to highlight my objections to the inclusion of these developments in the SWLP and request that they be removed for the following reasons.
1. Green Belt Destruction: The development would eliminate productive farmland that contributes to food security and environmental sustainability.
2. Destruction of Canal Amenity: the proposed area is adjacent to the conservation area of the Grand Union canal.
3. Insufficient Infrastructure: The proposed 8,000-10,000 houses (comparable to Kenilworth's size) would require significant new infrastructure including hospital expansion, schools, medical facilities, and recreational amenities that aren't adequately planned.
4. Traffic Congestion: Despite proximity to a rail station being cited as justification, how realistic is it to expect people to walk or cycle 2.6-3 miles (particularly the area around Hatton Park) to Hatton Station? The development would realistically add 8,000-10,000 vehicles to already congested roads, particularly the A4177. The proposed commercial development (SG07) would worsen this situation.
5. Inadequate Public Services: Current utilities (drainage, waste, water, electricity) would be overwhelmed without significant advance investment.
6. Environmental Impact: The development would destroy habitat for local wildlife and birds. I am particularly concerned about extra traffic accessing houses via Brownley Green Lane, an ancient highway, previously deemed unsuitable for increased traffic when the Inspector was looking at the previous Local Plan.
7. Community Disruption: The development would transform our well-established small rural communities into urban sprawl, causing some current residents to consider leaving the area and breaking up the community.
In summary, I consider these developments to be inappropriate for this green belt area and that they should not be included in the SWLP.

No

ID sylw: 106267

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: David Laidlow

Hatton Green Development (Site B1)
> 1. Use of good farming land (green belt) which would be better used for food production to help limiting the import from countries thot are many thousands of miles away, such as the USA, thus limiting the environmental impact.
> 2. The building of 8500+ houses on the site will have a massive detrimental impact on the wildlife habitat. Deer, bats, green woodpeckers and greater spotted woodpeckers for example are regularly seen in Hatton Wood
> 3. The increase in the population will have a massive impact on the number of cars using roads that are inadequate for the current volume of traffic. No plans have been published for road development, where will the houses built round Hatton Wood access the main roads for example. The Hockley Heath road is too dangerous for access and access to Hatton Green would be opposite a busy school.
> 4. What plans have been made for additional schools and when and where would these be built to cater for the increasing number of students over the life of the development?
> 5. The current hospital including A&E in Warwick is currently struggling with the volume of patients requiring treatment with no room for both extending the building and too little room for parking cars for both staff and patients.
> 6. Other medical facilities will be required for doctors and dentists
> 7. Have any plans been made for other infrastructure requirements in addition to roads and parking, water, sewage, electricity for example?

No

ID sylw: 106268

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Joyce Laidlow

I write to object to the proposed development of Hatton New Town which is potentially going to destroy a lot of green belt land to be used for housing known as Site B1.

Several things worry me in that the roads are currently already very busy and in need of constant repair due to sizeable and heavy lorry’s that weave though our narrow country roads. The Warwick road is extremely fast despite speed limits applying and the Hockney road is very twisty and also very fast.

The present traffic situation causes gridlock most mornings trying to get into or through Warwick for work and adding another 20000 cars into the mix will see traffic stuck for quite sometime before they can proceed through the bottle neck that is Warwick .

The suggested use of Hatton Station is quite laughable as there are no facilities for anyone disabled to reach the platform into Birmingham unless they can climb the stairs and over the bridge. There are no lifts and no lower level pedestrian crossing to enable people to catch the Birmingham train. There are,only a few trains a day that actually stop at Hatton and the car park is normally full with the early train catchers travelling to London.

Surely with the expected influx of people into this area this green belt would be better used providing for growing food rather than importing food from elsewhere .

The proposed site is adjacent to the old Hatton Woods which are home to all kinds of wildlife , we have two types of bats, visits from deer, monk Jack and roe, badgers , we have red kites flying overhead with honey buzzards and the occasional eagle. These would vanish if houses were being built alongside with wood.

In these plans no mention is made for the present overcrowded hospital in Warwick to extended or a new one for such a growing population.

I feel this this plan has not taken into account any infrastructure which would surely have to be started before any other work could take place for a development of this size.

No

ID sylw: 106293

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stephen Ingram

Turning a rural community surrounded by productive farmland into a small town, by developing
green belt is totally inappropriate. If this plan was approved, Hatton (Town) would be linked by
the construction of the proposed industrial/commercial estate to Warwick Town. Green belt is
supposed to prevent Urban Sprawl!
The Birmingham Road is already heavily congested, which was exacerbated by the 11 months
of roadworks deemed necessary to provide access to the new Union View Development,
this resulted in School buses arriving late or choosing not to run at all.
With regard to local transport, there is no bus service into Warwick or Knowle along the
Birmingham Road. Indiego does not pick up on the main road. Hatton station does not provide a
direct link to Coventry, you need to travel to Leamington Spa and then change to get to
Coventry.
Warwick Hospital is already struggling to cope with the existing demographic, how would they
manage 8000 new homes or an extra 16000 prospective patients?

No

ID sylw: 106295

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Lorna Ingram

a) Hatton's rural location means there are little or no transport links. The Birmingham Road (
A4177) is the only main road. There is no bus service, therefore at rush hour the traffic
congestion is already considerable. More houses = more cars = more pollution. The road
capacity is inadequate to cope with amount of traffic this would generate.
b) Hatton Station has no capacity or funding from Network Rail to expand. As a result, the only
access will be by foot or cycle....not ideal for those living in the 8,000 homes proposed. The
railway does not go to Coventry where many new residents are expected to come from as
Coventry's housing needs have been decreased.
c) Because of its rural location, the amount of infrastructure needed - roads, schools, shops and
doctor's surgeries is enormous and costly. Warwick Hospital does not have the capacity to cope
with the secondary medical needs of this new town.
2. a)The size of the proposed site will result in the urbanisation of the countryside - Hatton and
the surrounding area will be joined onto Warwick - urban sprawl, particularly if SG07 goes
ahead. It will be a town the size of Kenilworth covering a much smaller area. The visual impact
of a development of this size will impact the whole character of the area.
b)Over a thousand acres of green belt, agricultural land will be lost. The effect on bi-diversity
will be immense. The loss of ancient woodland ( once part of The Forest of Arden) means
medieval hedgerows and oaks that have stood for hundreds of years will be lost. Each oak
supports over 2,000 species.

This development is out of all proportion to the housing needs of the area - previously estimated
by Warwick District council to be 600. Without evidence that it is needed; building a sizeable
town in a completely rural area with no infrastructure, no utilities or access roads will impact the
whole area, damaging the environment and putting pressure on the already busy roads into and
out of Warwick.

No

ID sylw: 106298

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Philip Laidlow

I am writing to object to the plan of building around 8000 new homes around Hatton known as site B1.

People live in Hatton Green because it is a village and not a town, by adding all the proposed houses and accompanying schools, offices etc. it becomes the Proposed Hatton New Town.

Green belt land should be the last place built on as it is meant to prevent urban sprawl and if all this lovely farm land is lost to help the housing crisis when other brown field sites could be used it is a great shame.

It will not help the housing crisis as the majority of the houses will be expensive and with the majority of building projects such as this the projection of how many socially affordable homes they put forward will significantly drop.

There would be a need for massive infrastructure expense, roads, sewerage and power to be in place before this expansion, and like social housing, would probably not be paid by the builders at the end of the project which is the case in many areas of this country at the present time.

I feel a project of this size would not enhance lovely rural Warwickshire in any way and would simply be a blight on the landscape .

No

ID sylw: 106300

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Faith Badger

I do not agree with this location being considered for a new settlement.

Reasons

1. Excellent food producing land needs protecting.
2. No need for so many houses in this area.
3. New infrastructure needs would be massive.
4. New settlements should be on the edge of town or near existing main roads.

No

ID sylw: 106308

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Leone Nicholson

I strongly object to Plan B1 at Hatton. The area is prime agricultural land which we desperately need for own food chain. We must keep it as we are importing 50% of our food already! This is green belt land and it shouldn't be built up. We need to keep the rural aspect for all the wildlife, plants and trees! The walkers, cyclists and horse riders too would have to go.

The roads can't cope with anymore traffic, the train stations are full, the water supplies couldn't cope with any more houses, there would be sewage problems. The national grid is struggling. There will be more floods if you concrete over the green belt. There would be more mental health problems if you remove the much-needed countryside! The birth + death rate are equal now and there are over 700,000 houses empty so why are they even considering this. If you must build more homes, then do it on brown belt please!!

No

ID sylw: 106314

Derbyniwyd: 27/02/2025

Ymatebydd: M Yurkwich

NO I do not agree with this suggested proposals for 8,000+ houses AND an industrial estate planned for Hatton - particularly B1.

Objections

- Loss of Green Belt - loss of 1415 acres of productive farmland (UK increased population to feed).
- Roads totally inadequate. Junction improvements needed, A4177/B4439, A4177/A4141, B4439 five ways.
- Bridges - canal - railway. YEARS OF ROADWORKS TO ENDURE.
- Hatton Station - Limited capacity to improve etc.
- Population increase (18,000) plus (10,000) private cars. 10 mins from industrial estate.
- Please take local residents views and objections and not simply STEAMROLLER your proposals through for once.

No

ID sylw: 106328

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Tammie Rose Barlow

To whom it may concern,

Re: Objection to Proposed Development on Site B1
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development on Site B1 as outlined in the South Warwickshire Local Plan (SWLP).
My objections are based on several key concerns including contravention to Green Belt Policy, harm to rural character and setting, environmental concerns, lack of sustainability and strain on existing infrastructure.

I strongly urge the planning committee thoroughly re-evaluate the inclusion of site B1 in the development plan.

No

ID sylw: 106330

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Anthony McAtamney

As a resident who has lived in this area for over 35 years, I am writing to formally object to the proposed development on site B1 as outlined in the South Warwickshire Local Plan.

Green Belt Contribution: The site's location significantly impacts the Green Belt's primary purpose. According to HELAA results, developing this area would compromise the essential function of preventing urban sprawl and maintaining the region's distinct rural character.

Environmental Impact: The proposed development poses substantial risks to local ecological systems. The area supports diverse wildlife habitats that would be materially disrupted by large-scale construction.

Infrastructure Concerns: The current local infrastructure is demonstrably inadequate to support an additional 6,000 homes. Existing transportation, educational, and healthcare systems are already operating near capacity and would be severely strained.

Community Impact: The scale of the proposed development is fundamentally misaligned with the existing community's structure and character. Such a dramatic transformation would significantly alter the area's social dynamics and established community identity.

Sustainability Issues: The current proposal lacks robust provisions for sustainable development. There is a notable absence of comprehensive plans for sustainable transport links and energy-efficient housing solutions.

I respectfully request that the planning committee thoroughly re-evaluate the inclusion of site B1 in the development plan and consider alternative sites that minimize environmental and community disruption.

No

ID sylw: 106337

Derbyniwyd: 25/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Tara Jones

The grounds for objection to this Strategic Growth Area/ proposed New Settlement location within the South Warwickshire Local plan is as follows: I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at Site B1, Hatton, as outlined in the South Warwickshire Local Plan (SWLP). My objections are based on several key concerns:
Green Belt Impact: The site is part of the Green Belt, which plays a crucial role in preventing urban sprawl and maintaining the character of our rural communities. The Green Belt Review Stage 1 indicates that this area makes a strong contribution to Green Belt purposes. Developing this site would undermine these purposes and set a concerning precedent for future encroachments.
Environmental Concerns: The proximity of the site to potential local wildlife sites is alarming. Approximately 12% of the site is within 25 metres of a potential local wildlife site, which could threaten local biodiversity and disrupt existing ecosystems.
Infrastructure Strain: The proposed development of 6,000 homes would 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 potential congestion and reduced quality of services for existing residents.
Sustainability Issues: The site does not align well with sustainability goals. It lacks proximity to essential facilities and public transport links, which would likely increase reliance on cars, contributing to higher carbon emissions and traffic congestion.
Community Impact: The scale of the proposed development is disproportionate to the existing community, threatening the rural character and community cohesion of Hatton. Such a large influx of new residents could alter the social fabric of the area significantly.
In conclusion, I urge the planning authorities to reconsider the inclusion of Site B1 in the SWLP. The potential negative impacts on the environment, infrastructure, and community far outweigh the benefits of this development.

No

ID sylw: 106379

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Christopher Dowson

Objection to Proposed Development at Hatton B1 (Ref ID: 153) I am
writing to formally object to the proposed development at Hatton B1, located at Dark Lane,
Hatton, Warwickshire, as part of the South Warwickshire Local Plan (SWLP). 1. Green Belt
Concerns: The proposed site falls within the Green Belt, which is intended to prevent urban
sprawl and protect the countryside. Developing this site to the size outlined is wholly
disproportionate to would undermine these principles and set a precedent for future
encroachments into protected areas. 2. Heritage Impact: The site is in proximity to a
conservation area, which could be adversely affected by the scale and nature of the proposed
development. The character and setting of the existing settlements must be preserved, and this
development poses a risk to the local heritage assets. 3. Infrastructure Strain: The development
of approximately 8,156 dwellings will place an unsustainable burden on the existing
infrastructure, including roads, schools, and healthcare facilities. The rural road network is not
equipped to handle the increased traffic, leading to congestion and safety concerns. 4.
Environmental Impact: The development could have significant negative impacts on local
biodiversity and geodiversity. The loss of open spaces and natural habitats would be detrimental
to the local ecosystem and wildlife. 5. Community Character: The scale of the proposed
development is not in keeping with the character and scale of the existing community. It risks
altering the rural nature of Hatton, impacting the quality of life for current residents. In
conclusion, I urge the council to reconsider the inclusion of Hatton B1 in the SWLP. The
potential negative impacts on the environment, heritage, infrastructure, and community
character outweigh the benefits of this development. Thank you for considering my objections. I
look forward to your response. Yours sincerely, Christopher Dowson
I attach the following evidence for your consideration alongside my objection. (See
email attachments).
-
Additional notes:
The region is already close to meeting government targets for housing development. This
disproportionately large proposal will destroy the local communities and break the local service
provision.

No

ID sylw: 106382

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Geoff Wood

As resident of Hatton Park I have been keeping abreast of the current proposals to build up to 8,000+ homes on what is primary green belt land in the immediate vicinity, not to mention industrial buildings and infrastructure necessary to support this huge explosion of buildings.
Sir Keir Starmer, following the aftermath of the change of government announced a new category of land called “grey belt” which prioritised development on grey and ugly areas of the green belt including scrub land of which I would have no objections to its development.
The area currently earmarked for development falls firmly in the green belt and under no circumstances can be regarded grey or brown belt given the fields comprising vast areas of magnificent Warwickshire countryside the majority of which is being meticulously farmed with the rotation of arable and grazing as each year passes. With many brownfield sites in existence these should be earmarked first to be cleaned up and made suitable for development.
The loss of greenbelt land as a source of food for the nation will have disastrous results, inevitably forcing the need for reliance on imported foods no doubt at an increased cost and inferior quality.
In the addition to the above I have serious reservations as to:
• The level of adequate infrastructure required within the limited boundaries to serve all the new builds and the industrial state.
• Massive road congestion at peak times from 20K additional vehicles of all types.
• Totally overwhelmed GP Practices, Warwick Hospital and dentists.
• Totally overwhelmed public transport and car parks.
• Enormous loss of wildlife which currently thrives alongside us.
• Substantial reduction in property values.
• The whole issue of food security for the future.
• The inevitable breakdown of the unique identity of our community in Hatton.
• The loss of large tracks of countryside and possibly even the loss of rights of way will be detrimental to general wellbeing and to those suffering from mental health.

I wholeheartedly object to the proposed developments, as is apparent from the above. I am not a nimbyist but am deeply concerned for the future environmental preservation of the area.

No

ID sylw: 106384

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Jon Evans

Our grounds for objection to the Proposed Development on Site B1 are the following points:
Green Belt Concerns
Removing our safe space for mental health recovery
Environmental Impact on local biodiversity and ecosystems.
significant ignorance to the Infrastructure Strain
Lack of Deliverability Assurance and clarity of detail
Local Community Opposition

According to the HELAA results site B1 is located entirely within the Green Belt,
playing a crucial role in preventing urban sprawl and maintaining the character of our rural areas.
The Green Belt Review Stage 1 indicates that this site contributes strongly to Green Belt purposes.
Developing this site would breach these purposes and set a concerning precedent for future
encroachments.
Removing safe space for mental health: we use the rural lanes in B1 for daily walking our dog as a
means of providing mental health walks,this has been a lifeline to provide time and space for our
wellbeing.
Environmental Impact:The development of site B1 could have significant adverse effects on local
biodiversity and ecosystems. The area is home to various species of flora and fauna that could be
disrupted by construction activities and increased human presence.
Infrastructure Strain: It would place significant additional strain on local infrastructure, including
roads, schools, and healthcare facilities. Ferncombe school had to expand and is now full.Likewise
budbrooke medical is already at max.Union View roadwork calamity of 18 months means B1 site
would cause chaos for years.
As we have seen locally, developers are only interested in building for profit without substantial
investment in these areas, the quality of life for existing residents would be negatively impacted and
those commuting.
Lack of Deliverability Assurance:B1 site was brought forward in the 'Call for Sites', but its
deliverability remains debatable. Without any clear assurances and plans for infrastructure and
community support, the development could lead to incomplete or unsustainable growth.
Community Opposition:There is significant opposition from the local community regarding the site.
Many residents, like ourselves, feel that the character and integrity of our community would be
compromised by such a large-scale site.
In conclusion, I believe these objections are important because:
In conclusion, I urge the planning committee to reconsider the inclusion of site B1 in the South
Warwickshire Local Plan. The potential negative impacts on the environment, infrastructure, and
community far outweigh any perceived benefits.
In addition, vast new builds are consuming the countryside with developers surreptitiously using the
government objectives to line their profits, without consideration.

No

ID sylw: 106432

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Richard Munday

I object to the whole of the proposed Hatton B1 development .

Destruction of rural character of area and loss of agricultural land.

The Hatton area is green belt which is designed to stop urban sprawl and if this development of 8000 houses which equates to a town of 20,000 people goes ahead a massive urban sprawl will result. The area has a charming rural character at present and is an important recreational area for walking on its roads and footpaths and along the canal towpath which will have houses on both sides of it thus destroying its rural character. The area has small amounts of woodland small woods, spinneys and coppices as well as agricultural land therefore it will be very detrimental to wildlife. Warwick Town cannot cope with all the present traffic so another 20,000 people on its doorstep would be horrendous. Because of the historic nature of the centre of Warwick it is virtually impossible to build new roads to alleviate the situation.

Increase of traffic

The traffic from 8000 new houses pouring on to the existing road network will be a nightmare for drivers.

The Green Belt designation must remain permanent and not be capable of being overturned by spurious "special circumstances". Massive overcrowding of the local area will be detrimental to people's mental health.

No

ID sylw: 106433

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Clive Radnall

We feel very strongly that this area does not have the infrastructure or amenities eg doctor surgeries, schools to support a further housing development.

Much of the Warwickshire countryside has sadly already been lost forever due to the construction of HS2.

We appreciate that more homes are required but believe that disused brown belt sites could be used for such developments which would improve that area as well as providing affordable homes.

In addition traffic travelling to and from Warwick on the Birmingham Road experienced long delays during the construction of the housing estate opposite the Shell garage.

No

ID sylw: 106449

Derbyniwyd: 20/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Robert Smith

This is the most ludicrous proposed site for a housing development and appears to have been put forward with the objective of financial gain for the land owner and development team, with absolutely no thought to the practicalities of anyone living within the proposed development, or in the surrounding. I have detailed my objections within this document with the following subject headings:
1. Roads and Infrastructure- The road infrastructure surrounding the proposed B1 site is completely inadequate to take even 100 more dwellings, let alone the proposed 8000 new dwellings. A complete overhaul of ALL roads around the development, link roads, and main junctions further afield would be required from the outset (before any dwellings are built) for this to even be considered a potential future site for development
2. Cycling - Cycling on the roads will be dangerous – it is already unsafe, but with 8000 more dwellings it would be suicidal. There was talk that a huge cycle path would be created as part of the proposed B1 development to run from Hatton Station all the way through to Warwick. Whilst this is a nice idea and probably ticks boxes for their sustainability strategy, in reality the cycle path needs to cut under VERY low and difficult arched canal bridges and narrow areas that cannot be widened.
3. Railway- Hatton Station is not a suitable railway station to build a new town around. The services to and from Hatton Station from anywhere are extremely limited. The station has no facilities and is unsuitable for users that cannot use stairs as the only way to access platforms 2 & 3 is via the footbridge. A complete redevelopment of Hatton Station from the outset (before any dwellings are built) would be required for this to even be considered a potential future site for development.
4. Social Housing - The location of Hatton station or the B1 proposed site is not suitable for social housing. Train services are extremely poor and extremely expensive – there is also no way of crossing the track other than via the footbridge, so people with disabilities would struggle, or find it impossible to use the service. With no main supermarkets within walking distance, a train journey leads to a cost of circa £10 to every shopping trip, and also due to the poor train times, means a round-trip to Dorridge or Warwick can take 4 hours or more. There are no other conveniences nearby. There is also no other employment opportunities nearby – so to build social housing on this site, would be to further isolate people possibly already in a vulnerable position.
5. Greenbelt- Proposed site B1 is greenbelt land that has always been actively used for agriculture, providing valuable food for our country. This should not be used for a housing development when there are other proposed sites within the SWLP that encourage the recycling of derelict and other urban land – for example the development of areas around Wellesbourne airfield and other brownfield sites that should be allocated and used first, before considering greenbelt as an option. Whilst there are brownfield and other non-greenbelt locations, proposed site B1 should be excluded from the preferred options, and excluded from any future development options.
6. Village Life- People move to villages purposefully to live a quieter life away from noise, light pollution, heavy traffic, crime etc and to a place where they can raise children in a slower pace of life, walking, cycling, dog walking etc, without the fear of heavy traffic or crime. Building a town of 8000 dwellings not only takes that away from the occupants of the mere 100 dwellings at Hatton Station, but also takes it away from the occupants of all surrounding villages and hamlets nearby including Shrewley, Little Shrewley, Pinley Green, Hatton Green, Yew Green, Haseley, Littleworth, Wolverton, Norton Lindsey, Claverdon, Langley, Rowington, Lapworth and many more surrounding areas.
7. Employment - There is very little, to no, employment nearby. The developers proposal leads to deceive the local government within its proposals stating there is adequate employment within the area through Hatton Country World and Hatton Technology Park. The reality of the situation is that everyone will need to travel to their place of employment which will have a greater impact on the environment as well as local transport infrastructure. This could also potentially lead to a pocket of deprivation should travel not be an option for occupants within standard and social housing within the proposed new development.
8. Better Sites- Hatton Park has already been developed and had extensions to that development. This has already put a significant stress on the rural setting, wildlife, and countryside, around Hatton as well as put a stress on local infrastructure.
Sites such as E1, G1, F3, F2, F1 & X1 offer significant scales of development without encroaching on greenbelt, which should be a last resort as per the NPPF
Sites such as G1, F3, F2, F1, A1, A2 & X1 have much better existing road infrastructure
Sites such as F3, F2, G1 & E1 contribute less to what would be deemed as urban sprawl (if they were greenbelt).