No

ID sylw: 106454

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Caroline Southall

As a resident of Hatton Park I am objecting to the sheer scale and viability of this proposed site and its proximity to Hatton Park. In particular, I have serious concerns regarding the potential impact of the proposed site on the loss and/or devastation of the Green Belt, the environment, food security and infrastructure. I understand the plans are at a ‘conceptual level’ and I am concerned that they are seemingly computer generated with various erroneous assumptions made which the wider Keep Hatton Rural objection document outlines with evidence.

Greenbelt

The proposed development represents inappropriate development on Green Belt Land which will result in the loss of the openness of the greenbelt. This will lead to urban sprawl in a rural area, undermining the purpose of the greenbelt to prevent such sprawl and protect the countryside. This site does not indicate any natural boundaries which would inhibit expansion or further sprawl. The Green Belt is irreplaceable and necessary for protection against climate change, protection of our wildlife/nature and for people to enjoy the outdoors/wellbeing. This is vital and a major argument against this proposed new development. We should be building on Brown Belt sites and other options before building on Green Belt.

I am also concerned about the impact of our food security and the food chain. The land is currently being used for various food for both humans and livestock. The land in this proposed site is graded three a in terms of agricultural value which means it has a significant benefit in farming and food production. Given the impact of the war in Ukraine and the lack of grains surely we should be preserving land for food and supporting our farmers with food security and not changing the land immeasurably by encouraging them to sell?

Environmental impact

The implementation of a new settlement in B1 could lead to significant environmental degradation in the area. The proposed development site is home to various species of flora and fauna and its destruction will result in the loss of significant biodiversity and degradation of natural habitats. The Plan does not push for significant bio diversity nor is there a plan for blue and green infrastructure or a review of existing infrastructure.

There is insufficient details to how important environmental assets will be protected and enhanced. The Environment Act 2021 Statutory Duties on Councils and this plan does not demonstrate how the Councils across SW will reach 30% of land dedicated to nature and in recovery by 2030 as the Act stipulates.

Infrastructure

A) Roads & Transport

The proposed development under would place an undue strain on the existing infrastructure including roads, schools and healthcare facilities .

The current road and transport network is not designed or fit for such a significant increase in housing and/or industrial/commercial use. Significant changes in terms of widening roads and improving connectivity across flooded lands in order to meet the requirements would be hugely expensive and disruptive to the community. Just to develop a short piece of road to accommodate the new Taylor Wimpey site took 12 months during 2024 with significant impact. Traffic congestion the B1 development proposed will lead to increase traffic exacerbating existing congestion and air pollution in the area. Additionally Highway Safety will be compromised. This will have a detrimental impact on the quality of life for current residents.

Existing road infrastructure is already busy during commuting hours and often becomes clogged when traffic is diverted from the nearby A46 and motorway network. Many of the local roads are single rural roads that flood. The additional housing means that the current road infrastructure would not be able to cope with disruption and would likely fail. The new sites would need to have adequate and appropriate access points which means further harm to the greenbelt and it is unlikely that the connection to existing road infrastructure will be feasible.

The proposed site has 2 train stations but Hatton Station is not fit for purpose with regard to accessibility and parking for such a large scale development and significant changes will be necessary. They will also not be within the 20 minute neighbourhood concept.

B) Utility Services
High density development means significant changes and impact when installing adequate drainage, electrical capacity and water supply to the area.

C) Education

The proposed housing would also play significant burden on the existing local primary school which would not be able to cope with the increase in demand. The current plan does not indicate how much funding would be made available to build a new school and expand the capacity. Additionally, there are concerns regarding secondary school catchment areas.

D) Health

Proposed housing would also place significant burden on the existing local health infrastructure (GPs, Hospitals, Dentists) which would not be able to cope with the increase in demand. The government has recently delayed critical projects to upgrade or rebuild hospitals due to spending cuts. Warwick hospital is already overloaded with waiting times of up to 24 hours in A&E due to supporting other excess patients in the region. To add in another @ 4500 to 8000 dwellings plus commercial/industrial units would mean expanding the existing provision in the region. Warwick hospital is not in the 20 minute neighbourhood concept to walk there from Hatton Park. This scheme would place in an unmanageable burden on existing primary and secondary care.

Impact on local communities

This proposed development threatens to alter the character of the Hatton/ Hatton Park community. It will have a detrimental impact upon residential amenity and the visual impact of the development. A high density development will take up more of the Green Belt. Even though the proposed space allows for landscape, the noise, privacy, light will impact people’s quality of life. Overdevelopment in increasing the size dramatically will lead to the loss of local identity and reduce community cohesion. It will also have an adverse effect on the visual beauty of the area, natural landscape, and Ancient Land.

Sustainability

The proposal does not align with sustainable growth policies. There is a lack of good connection to public transport routes and the proposal would place additional strain on existing public transport links B1/SG07 fails to meet South Warwickshire sustainable development requirements which aim to balance economic growth with environmental protection of social well-being as such this would be unsound and should not be progressed.

Flooding

There are existing flooding problems in the area. It is not clear from the proposed local plan if flood mapping data has been considered and assessed. Drainage in the area is insufficient for the existing housing the proposed development under B1/SG07 could exacerbate these issues leading to an increase of flooding for current or future residence consequently B1SG07would be unsound if progressed

In conclusion I strongly oppose the adoption of B1/SG07 in the South Warwickshire local plan. It is clear that this site would be unsound due to the unsustainable pressures it would place on the local community, local road network, local health and educational infrastructure. I am also concerned that development of these sites would do immeasurable harm to the local environment and wildlife. Furthermore, the whole plan is based on AI conceptual designs rather than fact as it currently stands.

Consequently B1/SG07 should be removed from consideration for many further iterations of the local plan. I hope that the planning authority will take these concerns into account.

No

ID sylw: 106462

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mike Sperrey

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of 6,000 homes on sites C1 and B1 as outlined in the South Warwickshire Local Plan (SWLP). My objections are based on several key concerns:
Impact on Green Belt Land:
Both Sites are located on designated Green Belt land. The development would lead to the irreversible loss of this protected area, which serves as a crucial buff er against urban sprawl. The Green Belt Review Stage 1 has not suffi ciently justifi ed the "exceptional circumstances" required to release this land for development, and there are other proposed sites that are not within the Green Belt
Loss of valuable Agricultural land:
Preserving England’s agricultural land is crucial for food security, environmental sustainability, and rural economies. With increasing pressure from urban development, maintaining farmland ensures a stable domestic food supply, reducing reliance on imports and enhancing national resilience.
Agricultural land also plays a vital role in carbon sequestration, biodiversity, and fl ood management. Once lost to development, it is almost impossible to restore, threatening future generations' ability to produce food and maintain ecological balance. Protecting farmland is essential for sustaining both the economy and the environment.
Environmental Concerns:
The development poses signifi cant risks to local biodiversity.
The proposed development includes Rowington Coppice; an ancient woodland.
Rowington Coppice is home to various protected species, and the destruction would disrupt their natural habitats. The environmental assessments provided do not adequately address these impacts or propose suffi cient mitigation measures.
Infrastructure Strain:
The local infrastructure, including roads, schools, and healthcare facilities, is already grappling with the existing demands of the community. The addition of 6,000 homes would undoubtedly amplify these issues, potentially leading to a cascade of negative consequences.
Traffi c Congestion: The infl ux of new residents would inevitably result in a signifi cant increase in traffi c. Roads, particularly those leading to and from the development, would experience heightened congestion, especially during peak hours. This would not only lead to frustration and delays for commuters but also hamper the ability of emergency services to respond promptly to incidents. The
resulting gridlock could have life-threatening implications in critical situations.
School Overcrowding: The local schools are already operating at or near capacity. The sudden infl ux of families with school-age children would strain the system further. Overcrowded classrooms would lead to a diminished quality of education, as teachers struggle to provide individual attention and resources are stretched thin. This could have long-term consequences for the educational attainment and future prospects of the children in the community.
Healthcare Strain: The healthcare facilities in the area are already experiencing high demand. The addition of thousands of new residents would place an even greater burden on the system. Patients would likely face longer wait times for appointments, procedures, and emergency care. This could lead to delayed diagnoses and treatments, potentially jeopardizing the health and well-being of the community.
B4439 "Old Warwick Road" Bottleneck: Both proposed development sites (B1 and C1) are solely reliant on the B4439 "Old Warwick Road" for access. This road is already notorious for its congestion at both ends (Hockley Heath and Hatton) during rush hour, where waits exceeding 20 minutes are becoming the norm rather than the exception. The additional traffi c generated by 6,000 new homes would exacerbate this issue, turning the road into a major bottleneck. This would not only inconvenience residents but also have a ripple eff ect on the surrounding areas, as traffi c diverts to alternative routes, causing congestion and disruption elsewhere.
Environmental Impact: The increased traffi c congestion resulting from the development would also contribute to higher carbon emissions, negatively impacting air quality and the environment. This would be further compounded by the strain on public transportation systems, potentially leading to greater reliance on private vehicles.
Emergency Services: The increased traffi c congestion and road blockages would also hinder the ability of emergency services to respond eff ectively to incidents. Delays in reaching those in need could have devastating consequences, particularly in cases where every second counts.
Overall, the strain on the local infrastructure resulting from the addition of 6,000 new homes would have a signifi cant and detrimental impact on the quality of life for existing and new residents alike.
Reduced Access due to fl ooding:
The Old Warwick Road is regularly closed due to rainwater fl ooding near The Boot Inn, and also at the edge of Rowington at the Hatton side. This often paralyses movement in, or out of Rowington.
Sustainability Issues: The proposed site is not in close proximity to essential services and public transport links, which contradicts the sustainability goals outlined in the SWLP.
The railway station at Lapworth is confi rmed to be at capacity in terms of frequency of trains, and the length of train stock, so additional capacity cannot be found. In addition there are just 16 car-parking spaces, with no ability to expand this. This would likely result in increased car dependency, further contributing to carbon emissions and undermining eff orts to promote sustainable living.
Community Impact: The scale of the proposed development is disproportionate to the existing community, potentially altering the character and social fabric of the area. The consultation process has not adequately engaged with local residents to address these concerns.
In light of these points, I urge the planning committee to reconsider the inclusion of sites B1 and C1 in the SWLP. I believe that alternative sites with less environmental and community impact should be explored.

No

ID sylw: 106489

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Andrew Ruyssevelt

Objection to SG07 and B1.
I wish to formally object to the proposed construction of industrial, commercial, warehouse,

and distribution units at Stank’s Island (SG07). This project is disproportionate in scale and

raises concerns regarding adherence to responsible planning regulations and environmental

stewardship.

Grounds for Objection

Green Belt Protection

The Green Belt is intended to prevent urban sprawl, conserve natural landscapes, and

ensure balanced development. This project contradicts the principles set forth in national

planning regulations, which emphasize urban expansion within designated zones rather

than protected rural areas.

The National Planning Policy Framework (2023) dictates that Green Belt land should remain

untouched unless "exceptional circumstances" apply. Given that viable alternative

locations—such as designated industrial zones near the M40 and Coventry—are available,

this proposal is both unnecessary and inappropriate.

Environmental and Legislative Violations

This project endangers local ecosystems and protected wildlife habitats, breaching several

key laws, including:

• The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981

• The Hedgerows Regulations 1997

• The Protection of Badgers Act 1992

• The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010

• The Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000

• The Natural Environment & Rural Communities Act 2006

In addition, the increased carbon footprint from industrial operations contravenes:

• The Climate Change Act 2008

• The Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) Energy Efficiency Scheme

• The Industrial Emissions Directive (IED)

• The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016

• The UK Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS)

The project also heightens flood risks by disrupting natural drainage, in direct violation of:

• The Flood and Water Management Act 2010

• The Land Drainage Act 1991

• The Water Resources Act 1991

• The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016



Traffic and Infrastructure Strain

If allowed, this development will cause an influx of HGVs, leading to:

• Elevated air and noise pollution.

• Increased congestion on already overburdened roads.

• Higher accident risks for pedestrians and cyclists.

Loss of Community Green Space

Public footpaths, bridleways, and recreational green spaces will be permanently lost,

negatively impacting local quality of life.

Conclusion

This development is both unnecessary and detrimental to the environment, infrastructure,

and community well-being. I strongly urge the council to reject this proposal in favour of

sustainable alternatives.

No

ID sylw: 106497

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Claire Hammond

Main objection to the B1 Hatton New Settlement location is the number of
cars that the development will bring to the already struggling roads around
this area.
10,000 more cars is not viable.
Rush hour and school traffic already bring the roads to a standstill in
surrounding villages and towns and this would only increase.
Regular flooding, which often closes several roads at the same time, already
puts extra pressure on these villages and towns and often single track
country lanes are expected to withstand huge amounts of traffic.
Not just flooding – pot hole repair, utilities digging up the road, A46 and
M40 closures etc all happen regularly and the area struggles to cope with
the traffic pressure these events create.
There a hardly any bus services (often just one bus a week), and the train
stations are not big enough to cope with more train services – single tracks
and either limited or no parking. Not all rural train stations are safely
accessible on foot, there’s no bus services linking them, and as a result
people have to drive to a station to use them = no reduction of number of
cars on the road

Other

ID sylw: 106500

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Mike Dutton

Comments on B1 Kingstanding Farm, Kites Nest Lane, Beausale, Warwick, CV35 7PB (REFID: 166)

Road network is non-existent, this part of the development will rely substantially on the improved infrastructure required in the other part of B1, namely power, water supply, drainage, sewerage and facilities Health services, Doctor, education [all levels], youth services, policing and social services. Existing A4177 cannot be upgraded without substantial investment. WDC took enforcement action against developments in or adjacent to this area regarding planning matters.

No

ID sylw: 106534

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Beverley Silverwood Beausale

Please find below my objections to the proposed local plan development of Hatton / Birmingham Road
Infrastructure- the proposed sites and consequential increase in traffic in an area surrounded by narrow country lanes which are often only passable by one car , poor road surface conditions, flooding and soft verges make these lanes totally unsuitable for any increase in traffic that would create “rat runs “ to avoid the inevitable build up of traffic and increased congestion on the Birmingham Road and approaches into Warwick.
With the recent approval of the solar farm Five Ways / Honiley road there is a risk of losing further open countryside and creating urbanisation in green belt / rural areas

Environmental-this rural area currently provides a haven for wildlife . For example Kites which have returned to Kites Nest Lane , deer, birdlife in the hedgerows which would be put at risk by the proposed developments.
Also the loss of ancient agricultural farmland which threatens local food production and would destroy the historic landscape synonymous with this area The conservation area of Hatton Locks would be become subservient and dominated by the proposed commercial and residential developments along the Birmingham road

Loss of leisure/ mental health/ wellbeing for local community/ residents This area is popular for local residents as a place for walking, cycling ( eg designated cycle route along Brownlea Green Road to Rouncil Lane ) , horse riding. With an increase in population, traffic, buildings, this threatens and diminishes this natural leisure environment which people from the surrounding areas and visitors have the freedom to benefit from .

No

ID sylw: 106540

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Eleanor Gilks

I hope this email finds you well. I’m writing to comment on the proposed preferred options for the SWLP around Hatton, Hampton Magna, Hampton on the Hill and the surrounding Budbrooke area.

I do not believe there should be any more houses built on these surrounding sites. The road networks are not fit for more road users, with peak hours in the morning and evening already being unbearably busy and congested. Adding hundreds more people and cars will make it so much worse.

Additionally, the local schools, doctors and pharmacies are already hugely overwhelmed. It’s a struggle to get an appointment, wait times are long, the staff work tirelessly and face abuse from people who are frustrated by the delays to the service. It’s simply not acceptable to try and add thousands more people to these already struggling institutions and businesses.

Lastly, I am truly concerned about the surrounding flora and fauna that call these proposed sites home. Humans are already encroaching more and more on their homes. There are beautiful species of birds like Green Woodpeckers, Great Spotted Woodpeckers, Kestrels, Buzzards, Kites, numerous smaller birds like finches, tits, robins, field fares, jays and others that will be hugely impacted by increased housing and expansion. Not to mention the impact on the already hugely declining insect population, without which we would not survive. We cannot afford to lose any and more of these species, and the impact they have on people’s mental wellbeing by being able to go out in nature and find joy in the surrounding greenery.

South Warwickshire is already a massively overpopulated area and I beg that you consider the impacts on everyone and everything that lives here should the choice be made to build further housing. It cannot be supported. To support would be to accept that we don’t love our country enough to safeguard the rapidly shrinking beauty that still exists here.

Please listen to the many people that are against these proposed plans.

No

ID sylw: 106630

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Tessa Morris

I am totally against the building of the proposed 8,000 new homes to be built near Hatton.
People have little idea how to drive on these single track lanes and the state of these roads are just getting worse due to the amount of traffic that now regularly uses them they are full of large pot holes and the edges of the road just fall away into the verge, an accident waiting to happen. These roads just can't take the amount of traffic that these new houses would bring.
The A46 can't cope nor can the M40 junction on days when accidents happen Warwick and other areas struggle and it can take hours to get anywhere! The train station at Hatton does not make life here easier, you can not rely on it to get you to and from work at times you want, not enough Trains stop here! It is already working at full capacity. To live out here you need a car otherwise it can make you feel very isolated.
The people who live in Hatton do not want these houses built here you would ruin the whole area of ancient woodland/farmland that has been unspoilt for years. There are farms and farmland that would be lost forever if this development was allowed. We have to right to have some countryside nobody wants to live in a concrete jungle. Where is the money coming from for the upgraded roads and infrastructure that would be needed if this development gets the go ahead? The council hasn't got the funds to keep ourpresent roads in a good state let alone upgrades to junctions etc that would be needed. The peace and tranquility of the area around Hatton would be lost forever, we already have the regular noise of the railway and the motorway let alone extra noise that a development of 8,000 houses etc would bring. Building like this on such rural historic countryside will open the floodgates to build on all countryside over the county this would be truly terrible. Please do not let this development get the green light!!!

No

ID sylw: 106685

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Alan Davies

• Infrastructure - Hatton Station would be difficult and hence expensive to expand. Local roads are narrow country lanes with very limited expansion possibilities. New, expensive, bridges will be required, funded by developers or Government?
• Green Belt - this development would significantly harm the environment and wildlife, and lead directly to an increase in urban sprawl. Its status should encourage a preference for re-using derelict or unused urban areas.
• Education - new schools would be necessary. These are expensive and would increase pressure on existing transport facilities.
• Electrical, Gas and Water - expensive new infrastructure needed to meet demands of such a development. Gas services are not available so additional oil tankers would be needed for heating unless all new homes are electric only - there is an inadequate electricity supply.
• Healthcare - existing surgeries lack capacity and are well outside sensible walking range. Warwick Hospital is also outside the suggested sustainable walking range.
• Visual Impact - proposals would have negative impacts on the existing area. The preponderance of low-cost, high density houses are similar to those built at Warwick Gates and would be detrimental to the overall beauty of the countryside.

No

ID sylw: 106689

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Laura Bartlett

1. Road and rail infrastructure couldn't accommodate traffic from B1. Park Lane frequently floods. Station Road is winding, with poor vehicle access to the railway station.
2. The flow of traffic is frequently disrupted on the A46, causing backlogs along the A4177 and B4439. Considerable expenditure on new highways is required prior to house-building or traffic issues would escalate.
3. Hatton Station is small and requires extensive reconfiguration before greater use; challenging given proximity to the canal and a housing development. There are no passenger facilities and limited parking.
4. This predominantly Green Belt site should be protected. The country needs to produce more food, so loss of a successful family farm is concerning. Other non-Green Belt sites have been put forward.
5. Attempts to improve infrastructure on B1 would require loss of mature trees and wildlife habitats. The area contains an important canal conservation area.
6. Applications to build social housing in Hatton village were refused. A recent housing survey indicates need for 3 dwellings! Builders stopped work at Union view due to lack of sales!
7. Existing cycle track from Hatton to Warwick is rarely used and poorly maintained. More cycle paths do not solve traffic congestion.

No

ID sylw: 106691

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: John B. Williams

B1 Hatton - No

New housing on Green Belt Land should not be allowed. It is vital that farmland should be retained.

I believe that this is the wrong site for housing development.

No

ID sylw: 106725

Derbyniwyd: 27/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr R Hewer

Hatton Station has limited access, parking, and capacity, with limited or no options to improve/extend. It would not therefore provide a viable commuter hub for an additional 8000 + houses.

Warwick is an historic town with limited access/exit points which are narrow with presumably no options to widen (listed structures?). The Hockley Road / Birmingham Road / Stanks Island are already congested at peak times. The addition of 8000 + homes could increase traffic flow by up to 20000 vehicles. This would not only lead to severe congestion on the busy roads mentioned but also probably gridlock in Warwick's narrow streets.

Add to this additional traffic flow from the proposed industrial area and the latest extension to Hatton Park would result in traffic chaos!

No

ID sylw: 106727

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Sue Beard

I object to the B1 new settlement. It will result in loss of prime agricultural land. It is all Green Belt, designed to protect the countryside and prevent merging of towns and villages. Food security is important given climate change and disruptive world events. The proposed settlement would destroy ancient woodland and hedges, and the habitats of many insects and animals. Farmland is an important wildlife corridor. When links are broken, wildlife declines due to lack of breeding partners. Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is concerned by the impacts of large-scale house building.

Water, sewage and electrical infrastructure are struggling and couldn't cope with these proposals. The local train stations are at full capacity, with no plans to increase train numbers or parking levels. Hospitals would be swamped and send residents miles to the next-nearest facility. Highly-rated GP surgeries would be replaced with much larger facilities, resulting in loss of the doctor-patient relationship. Local schools would be overwhelmed. Country lanes and narrow bridges couldn't deal with the extra cars and delivery vans, leading to more bottlenecks and accidents. Lanes in the area flood and concreting over land will make this worse.

There is an estate being built in Hatton opposite the Shell Garage and another one in Barford. There have been difficulties in selling these properties. Why is it necessary to build so many new dwellings in the area? Births and deaths are virtually equal. There are at least 700,000 empty houses, and numerous shops and offices that could be converted.

No

ID sylw: 106734

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: James Tranter

I oppose B1 because of concerns about traffic, pollution, development on the green Belt, and pressure on local services.

No

ID sylw: 106765

Derbyniwyd: 01/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Valerie Whittaker

I am writing concerning the above mentioned proposed developments and wish to register my objection to these proposals.

With regard to the Hatton Settlement, the land offered is Green Belt and as such should be preserved. I understand that the purpose of Green Belt is to prevent urban sprawl and if these developments go ahead, we will effectively be joined to Leamington Spa. In addition we would lose valuable agricultural land and consequently contribute towards loss of food security for our Country.

The infrastructure in the area is woefully inadequate. The station at Hatton is approached by a small country lane, there is insufficient parking and I understand that Chiltern Railways have told us that the line is full to capacity. There is no room for expansion at the station.

The traffic generated by these developments would cause huge traffic jams and delays. Getting in to Warwick during the early morning rush hour is difficult now and would be nigh on impossible if these developments go ahead.

There would need to be upgrading of sewers, water supply and electricity supply all of which would affect the local environment. The countryside would be seriously affected with loss of habitat and environmental destruction.

Warwick Hospital is struggling to treat patients now and the increased population would put an extra strain on this hospital. I cannot see how this can be resolved.

Finally, with regard to the proposed industrial site between Hatton Park and the A46, the traffic generated by such a development would cause huge problems for local residents and would surely mean expensive and extensive upgrading to local roads. In addition we would once again be losing valuable farm land.

No

ID sylw: 106772

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Dr James Wilkie

Objection to the Housing Developments B1

I am writing to object to the above proposed development for the following reasons:
1. Reduction of productive farming land and redesignation of ‘Green Belt’ land:
The proposed development will have the effect of reducing the amount of currently productive farming land in Warwickshire and are also a destruction of ‘green belt’ land. The former is important given the potential for the UK to have to feed itself in the future. The ‘green belt’ land adjacent to Warwick should be maintained to protect the natural environment, provide public recreational space and retain the character of Warwick as a historic town and tourist centre.
2. Fundamental change in Residential Amenity and loss of rural environment:
The proposed development will convert a rural environment into an extended urban area and have a very negative impact on the countryside amenities which existing residents, tourist visitors and wildlife currently benefit from. Privacy may well be invaded for many residents. In addition, the wider community will lose a very valuable local green recreational space.
3. Lack of infrastructure locally and within the plans:
The proposals essentially produce an urban area equivalent to Kenilworth but without adequate infrastructure of schools, health centres, shops, and other hubs for the new community of 8000 – 10000 houses. It is evident from an examination of other recent developments in the Warwick/Leamington area that promised infrastructure has not been delivered along with new housing. As a result, existing regional educational, medical and community infrastructure is already at maximum capacity. The proposed development should not proceed until the required infrastructure has been properly planned and put in place by the District Council / Local Government / National Health Service and other relevant bodies.
4. Inadequate Utilities in the proposals:
Significant investments in new drainage and waste services, water supply and electricity provision are needed before any further local expansion in housing goes ahead. Without this, there are likely to be increasing problems of utilities supply to both existing and hew households. In addition, reduction in water runoff land caused by paving over presently open fields will likely result in additional flooding, damage to property and even potential risk to the integrity of the Grand Union canal which is a significant National asset and local tourist attraction.
5. Impact on Traffic Congestion:
Despite claims to the contrary, there are no regular bus services of sufficient capacity across the area of the proposed development. This lack of public transport especially disadvantages those living in the social (affordable) homes within the development. Neither are there safe cyclepaths or pedestrian routes. Because the majority parts of the proposed development are not within a reasonable walking distance of either Warwick Parkway or Hatton stations, each proposed household will require at least one car (likely more than one) to commute to work, take children to school and reach essential services. Such an increase in vehicular usage (10000-plus vehicles) will lead to very substantial delays and clogging of existing routes particularly the A4177 and B4439, both of which already see large traffic queues at peak times. This leads to environmental damage, increased emissions and reduced national productivity, in contradiction of stated Government objectives.
6. Loss of wildlife habitat and country lanes
The countryside included within the proposed development provides a diverse habitat for a wide range of wildlife including deer and several species of birds-of-prey. There are also many ancient hedgerows and trees in the development area together with old narrow lanes which are havens for many species of flower and plants. Loss of this habitat to an urban setting will displace these animals and severely reduce the diversity and numbers of animals and plants in Warwickshire.

No

ID sylw: 106773

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Neil Munro

I am writing to raise my significant concerns regarding the proposal to develop a significant settlement of up to 10,000 new homes in Hatton.

While I appreciate the need to provide more houses to meet demand. The impact of such a huge new development in the countryside and near to Warwick is a major concern for the following reasons:

Loss of countryside, biodiversity and habitat
Loss of opportunity for residents of Warwick to have access to natural open space within 15 min walk of Warwick
Negative impact on Warwick- the impact of small estates such as Montague Point and the larger estates on the periphery are already evident with increased traffic and impact on air pollution
Infrastructure-the main A4177 is a small road which struggles with the amount of traffic it carries as it is - the proposal of 10,000 houses 20,000 cars is just preposterous-the highway network won’t cope and it will cause congestion, gridlock, poor air quality, increased risk of accidents etc
Infrastructure- it is already virtually impossible to get a doctors appointment- more houses will put more pressure on doctors, dentists and critically Warwick hospital
Flood risk -building on our green spaces increases the risk of flooding

There is a risk that a
Soulless new town will be developed with a lack of amenities and supporting infrastructure-
Meaning increased traffic into Warwick - which will negatively impact on the character of the town and result in disamenity
For existing residents.

Once our green spaces and habitats are gone they are gone for good!

No

ID sylw: 106775

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Valerie Burrows

I write to object to the Land at Hatton B1 being included as a preferred site for a new settlement.
The Government has now realised that there is an increasing food security problem and the loss of around 400 hectares (900 acres) of prime agricultural land would be disastrous.
This land is designated as Green Belt and provides a hugely important buffer around Warwick and Leamington.
Such a development would be highly damaging to the Environment and to its Biodiversity. Barn Owls, Roe Deer, Badgers, Slow Worms and other wildlife are known to be present in this area. To knowingly disturb these would be completely contrary to the environmental and biodiversity aims of the District Council and the Government.
As the Canal Conservation Area runs through the middle of this land, a development such as proposed would completely destroy much of the reason for the conservation area.
This rural area is widely used for recreational purposes with visitors to the canal and locks using the many footpaths for exercise, wellbeing and mental health. The development would therefore be contrary to the District Councils aims of a better place to live.

No

ID sylw: 106816

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Sheila Dalman

I am sorry to say I have to object to this proposal. I am fully aware that we need more housing but this is not the best site. It will cause unbelievable amounts of traffic when fully completed, and, the roads at this development are not big enough. Railway is at capacity now. And people today are lazy. They won't walk or cycle as much as you believe they would. Local people will be forced to move as they won't be able to afford these prices, especially the young.
Green Policy: How many of these houses will be built with solar panels on roofs instead of taking up more land and growing acres of solar.

No

ID sylw: 106817

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Jack Beever

I strongly object to the proposal on the following grounds:
Destruction of green belt, valuable farmland and Arden landscape and the subsequent loss of wildlife habitat.
Increased flood risk as a result of loss of fields and hedgerows.
The rural aspect of Hatton Station would require extensive upgrades to make it a viable commuter hub- the infrastructure required would cost multi million pounds.
Brownfield and grey belt should always be used in preference over green belt.

No

ID sylw: 106835

Derbyniwyd: 24/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Ruth Spaczyk

There is insufficient infrastructure to support such a large development, the surrounding roads are mainly rural and already cause congestion. Hatton Station is already fully utilised and cannot be extended, notwithstanding that very few trains stop there, which means commuters will have to drive to Warwick Parkway for the transport requirements. The Birmingham road will be overloaded with the addition of approx 11,00 cars. There is no public transport at all on Hatton or Hatton Park, so the only means of transportation will be private vehicles.

The Warwick Hospital is already at breaking point, so how will it cope with the additional population planned for this large development, this also applies to our fire service. This is Greenbelt land and looking at the plan of sites up for development there is sufficient non greenbelt land to meet the development needs. The Government has stated that greenbelt land should only be used when there is no alternative, this is not the case for B1.

No

ID sylw: 106839

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Andrea Ashmore

This is greenbelt land and is part Ancient Arden . Development on this site This is greenbelt land and is part of constitutes desecration of our countryside which once is lost, has gone forever It is vital that We preserve our farms as the need to Source food locally is essential to food security Station which is accessed from a narrow The proposal Weighs heavily on Hatton this a viable option are giving to be country lane the costs of making astronomical
The lanes already struggle with flooding will make this problem even worse The electrical capacity can only cope with100 houses - where is the powers associated infrastructure Coming from ?

No

ID sylw: 106843

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Paul Tilley

Site B1 is comprised of small rural communities, aside from Hatton Park. 8000 homes would not preserve the area's character. The country lanes currently provide a peaceful environment for visiting walkers and cyclists. The area is in Green Belt, there to prevent urban sprawl, and part of the Ancient Forest of Arden. It should be a protected site. Much of the land is class 3a agricultural land. It supports one of the few dairy farms in the area. We need to produce food locally and not rely on foreign imports. Hatton Station is a small rural station at near capacity, limited service, and has constraints to expansion. It doesn't justify this many houses. The vast majority would use local roads, which weren't built for high traffic. They are narrow, winding and have poor visibility.

No

ID sylw: 106845

Derbyniwyd: 25/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Pratyush Mahapatra

1. The lack of infrastructure at the moment and therefore the need to create this – more roads,
widening road, etc. This is likely to cause to cause a detrimental traffic delays/disruptions for
many years during the proposed development and afterwards
2. Increased traffic will increase pollution of the area
3. The proposed development will increase the population greatly with increase in traffic flow
4. The increase in the population will pressure on services such as the NHS – Warwick Hospital, GP surgeries and Dental surgeries
5. Need for more nurseries and schools;
6. Increased Disruptions to – Water/sewage Utilities
7. Increased risk of flooding due to building works from removal of trees, hedges and soil;
8. Increased population means increased waste production and the need for their appropriate
disposal;
9. Devastating damage and disruption to the environment and ecosystems - to wildlife and
loss in their habitat
10. There is a lack of employment in area and this can potentially lead to increased crime
11. Violation to the human rights of the existing owners to lead a peaceful family life as per ECHR rules
12. Union View housing development in Hatton, has only recently been completed with a huge increase in population, and corresponding huge number of traffic issues;
13. There are of plenty of brownfield sites that can be developed without this proposal

No

ID sylw: 106846

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Catherine Davies

• Green Belt - protection of environment and wildlife; preventing urban sprawl; encouraging re-use of derelict or unused urban areas. Provides open spaces for mental and physical health.
• Farmland - would mean loss of existing farms and increased food imports.
• Road Access - Station Road, Dark Lane and Pinley Green Lane are narrow country roads unsuitable for increased traffic. Road-widening impossible given TPO on oak tree. Railway station access is difficult. Bridge over railway line and canal would be costly to replace.
• Visual Impact - developments South of Leamington suggest houses would not fit character of our area. These houses are tightly packed, unimaginative and some resemble a prison camp.
• Public Transport - no regular bus service. Hatton Station would require expensive upgrades financed by developers and/or Government
• Healthcare - such a large development couldn't be catered for by existing providers, requiring expensive new facilities.

No

ID sylw: 106848

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Kenneth Bartlett

Road and rail infrastructure in B1 is inadequate for a development of this size.

Accidents/incidents on A46 frequently cause a backlog of traffic through Hatton village.

An extensive and very costly upgrading of infrastructure would have to be completed before housing development begins.

Hatton station could not easily be extended because of its present location

Permitting building development on green belt/good farming land would be foolhardy when this will be needed for future food production

The conservation area in B1 must continue to be protected. The loss of mature trees, hedgerows and natural habitat must also be protected from loss and over development.

No

ID sylw: 106850

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Rosanne Moseley

The lanes around here are already hazardous, especially if you meet large vehicles.

Departing from the Station has very restrictive sight & then there is no pavement for pedestrians.

Farmland should be retained for farming. Once it has been built on it can never be recovered. There must be plenty of land which was built on & now left to waste.

No

ID sylw: 106853

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Janet Harrison

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

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

Looking at each of the Strategic Objectives in turn:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No

ID sylw: 106857

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Graham Harrison

I believe a new settlement should be freestanding, self-sufficient in energy, and minimise the need for travel. B1 does not meet any of these.

The NPPF states that Green Belt should only altered in exceptional circumstances, and this should be fully evidenced and justified. The proposals for Hatton are contrary to the purposes of the Green Belt, and particularly contravene purposes a), b), and d), which are the three principles that the PSED (Public Sector Equality Duty) specifically says should be avoided when proposing alterations to Green Belt boundaries.

This new settlement would join Hatton with Warwick, which is already inseparable from Leamington, leading to a sprawling contiguous linear development from Leamington to Hatton Station.

No

ID sylw: 106858

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Shelly Plyming

No. The roads are already over capacity in this area.

The space is not suitable for this development.