No

ID sylw: 105986

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr John Liverton

Nifer y bobl: 2

The roads leading through and into Ladbroke are narrow and large vehicles need to slow completely to get past a car.There are few pavements except in the centre of the village which put pedestrians and horse riders at risk from traffic .

There is a strong History of flooding around and in the Village itself.Personally we have lost our home on 2 occasions but also the fields around retain water in their clay soils which spills out making the road impassible at times

There are no facilities in the Village itself.Residents need to travel for Shops,Doctors ,Chemists etc.

The Village of Ladbroke and surrounding area is in a Frost Hollow
The temperature can be at least a degree lower here than in the surrounding areas
Snow and Frost are slow to melt leaving the roads treacherous at times.

There are several species of Owls living amongst us ,often heard at night particularly around Ladbroke Hall.

In Conclusion Ladbroke has retained its attractive Village appearance and reputation despite being so close to the town of Southam.It does not seem appropriate to challenge its status and to make it be absorbed into a lager Conurbation.

No

ID sylw: 105991

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Sara Copley

Firstly, the local road network comprises country lanes and the pressure of traffic from additional housing on the A423, A4451 and other lanes connecting Bishops Itchington, Deppers Bridge and Ladbroke would be unsustainable. With limited employment opportunities in this local area new housing would just create high volumes of commuters heading for Birmingham and Coventry with major negative impacts on the local environment. Also the area does not benefit from a local train station, nor would a new station be viable, creating further traffic where longer distance commuters travel to railway stations in the conurbations.

I am also concerned at the impact of flooding throughout the F2 and F3 areas having experienced the difficulties caused by water run off on local roads in my own everyday work. The impact of major housing development on the existing groundwater levels would greatly increase this problem.

As someone living in the locality I am aware of the limited provision of basic services in this rural area, GP surgeries are under major pressure, hospitals are some distance away in Warwick, Banbury or Coventry etc. Adding to the pressure on these services through major increases in the population is not, in my opinion, a viable option leading to major under provision of essential services.

Finally, the destruction of the countryside that the F3 site involve would create a major loss of biodiversity in contradiction with the stated strategic objectives.

No

ID sylw: 105993

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stephen Copley

1) The remote rural nature of the F2 and F3 locations and the limited employment opportunities in the area will result in significant traffic flows as people would look northwards to Coventry and Birmingham for employment opportunities. The currently limited infrastructure in the area to meet medical social and educational needs also generate significant traffic flows unless major investment in infrastructure was undertaken in advance of any housebuilding activity.
2) Whilst the transport assessment for F3 is red, F2 is given as Amber and I would argue that this should also be red. The proposed F2 development would rely upon the road through Bishop Itchington to the M40 - the likely main commute route for employed residents, this road is already under pressure due to housing development in the village, with calming measures being required due to traffic volumes
A further transport limitation is the lack of railway transport, whilst a rail line runs close to the two sites there is no station and the proximity to stations at Leamington (7 miles) and Banbury (10 miles) means that a new station would be uneconomic, this would result in additional traffic flows compared to sites not so rurally situated.
3) Flooding has been an ongoing issue in and adjacent to the F2 location in Ladbroke where houses have been subject to flood, at the junction of the Ladbroke and Deppers Bridge road which becomes impassable with sustained heavy rainfall and on the road between Bishops Itchington and Ladbroke at the railway bridge.
4) The rural nature of these sites results in there being limited employment opportunities in the locality - limited to Southam and local farm based businesses, with major employers being to the north of in Coventry and Birmingham. New settlements in F2/F3 locations would not meet the strategic objectives of the Council in this respect.

5) Given the rural nature of the F2/F3 locations strategic objectives with regard to increasing biodiversity clearly cannot be met as the natural environment would be destroyed. The boundary of the F2 site abuts the Ladbroke conservation area with its Grade I church very close to the development area and Grade II houses adjacent to the village roads. The proximity of the F2 development and the traffic generated would seriously impact the local environment.

No

ID sylw: 106063

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Nick & Erica Kemp

Nifer y bobl: 2

Ref SO1: The site is not a sustainable location. Whilst the site is close to a railway line, there is no immediate access to a station. This means any residents would be reliant upon motor vehicles.

Health and Education Services as well as community facilities are non existent in the area. Residents will need to travel to Southam, Leamington or Banbury to access these facilities. Therefore they will require a car or a much improved Bus Service.
Ref SO2 & 3: Whilst we appreciate that some of the infrastructure would come with a new settlement, this rural site would not have any existing infrastructure in place when the development commences.

Transport
Rated in the reports as Amber TRANSPORT should be Red.

SO4-The opportunities for jobs lie towards the North of the District, in Birmingham and Coventry.This site is a considerable distance from these areas, and also from any Strategic Growth Locations in the Emerging Spatial Growth Strategy Options. As there is no railway station near this site, residents would need to travel by car to get to these economic activity areas; this is not sustainable and not within the Strategic Objectives.
SO6- Biodiversity will not be encouraged or increased with more development.
SO5- Most of the site contains agricultural fields and not efficient use of land.
SO9- Many tourists will want to stay at Stratford, Warwick, Oxford or the Cotswolds.
SO11-Poor choice in terms of transport.
SO12- Building a new settlement on existing agricultural land neither protects nor enhances our environmental assets.
There are flooding issues on the site.

No

ID sylw: 106087

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Terry Payne

Surrounding roads - I have experienced the local roads at all sorts of times and all days. They are already very busy, Bishops Itchington & the route to the M40 being awful with congestion at all times. The route into Leamington already being majorly disturbed due to HS2 and the route to Warwick into Warwick already taking upwards of 40 minutes in rush hour.

An additional 4800 home and probably another 6000-7000 road users all heading out onto the local roads is just not going to work.

Flood risks - after a period of wet weather the corner where Harbury Road meets Deppers bridge turns into a reservoir and Harbury Road could be easy mistaken for a river. Ladbroke in general historically does not cope well with heavy and/or persistent rainfall. As you’ll know the proposed plans of F2 is largely on hilly terrain so therefore the knock-on effect of this is going to put the properties downhill at even more risk of serious flooding.

I believe there are better options with existing infrastructure which make much more sense. Also better prepared geographically, and also financially better for the tax payer.

Other

ID sylw: 106388

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Pauline Long

I’m writing as a local resident of Ladbroke Village as we have been invited to comment on the planned ‘F2’ and ‘F3’ housing development proposals.
I do have some concerns that I feel I need to be considered:

• The road network linking where the proposed sites are to the main A423 would directly bring more traffic through the village. There are already pockets of incredibly busy times around rush hour and there are already a lot of near misses and accidents on the country roads.
• The road network around Ladbroke village is not designed to cope with large traffic and HGV’s, the roads are too narrow, especially for vehicles to pass safely. This especially applies to the bridge in the village.
• There have already been deaths and numerous accidents where vehicles join the A423 from Ladbroke Village, the dangers of more traffic using the village as a cut through need to be considered.
• Southam would be the local town to many of these new houses and the parking/shops/doctors/dentists and local infrastructure are hardly able to cope now with the traffic and footfall from the local area, increasing this by another 11000 houses, with potentially another 33,000 people (based on 3 people per household) would just not be feasible.
I do have other concerns, but these would be my immediate thoughts for consideration.

Other

ID sylw: 106938

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Historic England

Site contains GII Manor farmhouse.
GII Listed canal bridge to south.
Villages of Fenny Compton to south & Wormleighton to SE have Conservation Areas & several LBS, plus SM
medieval settlement at Wormleighton and Knightcote village itself also has a number of GII LBs.

Recommend: HIA prior to allocation.

Other

ID sylw: 107323

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford-on-Avon District Social Inclusion Partnership

New and no connections (rail) - F1, F2, F3, No rail links at present, accessible to employment in Banbury/L/Spa but geographically isolated and potentially limited access to employment.

No

ID sylw: 107443

Derbyniwyd: 16/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Moreton Morrell Parish Council

capacity 6300 homes: significant harm to character of landscape, situated in Flood Zone 2 area, lack of rail connectivity and is the worst performing option for transport and accessibility and is one of the worst for employment.

No

ID sylw: 107458

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Andrew Saunders

I am writing to you to express my objections and disbelief at the future planning proposals planned around the villages of Northend and Fenny Compton.
When Stratford District say they are an ambitious, fair, inclusive, and responsible organisation which will put our communities at the heart of everything they do, I feel it is a lie, if this project goes ahead. It is developers who are the ambitious ones with only them gaining.
Existing communities will have to live with a blight on a beautiful landscape, which for generations, people have visited to enjoy the views of an unspoilt South Warwickshire. Estimated 75000 known visitors last year. Building a metropolis below the Burton Dassett hills would be a disaster.
Increase of road traffic on a road system which is already struggling and falling apart due to lack of maintenance.
Increase of local population putting more strain on the General Practices and the NHS. It's 2 weeks and more for a Doctor's appointment to be granted at the Fenny Compton surgery at present.
On clay soils and with it in the name, Fenny coming from the word Fen, meaning wetland, an increase in flooding is a massive risk, which Fenny properties have suffered with in the past.
The lose of vast amounts of agricultural land which when lost to developments can never be regained, losing our ability for self sufficiency as an area and as a country as a whole.
I think most importantly is the environmental impact to the area. The massive lose of habitat for a wide variety of species. Mammals, birds, trees and invertebrates will all be hugely effected by any such proposals. Hedgerows and wildlife corridors will be removed and token planting of a few areas can not be deemed as an appropriate replacement. It is tick box exercise which developers do to clear their conscience and appease naive councillors.
I think no one is denying the necessity that more housing is needed, but a development of this scale is too much for a rural community to cope with. There will be a massive impact to the lives and well being to so many.
A massive development has already begun around the area of Lighthorne Heath and stretching to Chesterton Woods covering hundreds of acres. Farmland now lost forever. Wildlife habitat destroyed. No new Doctors surgery or school built to accommodate the new influx of residents.
Fenny Compton has already had to suffer the building of new houses at Compton Locks which as a result has pushed flood water towards the main village. Although the only positive point was built on a brown field site.
Smaller developments would be acceptable and appropriate to fill the need for housing and I think that is what is needed for future consideration. Looking for brown field sites and other appropriate locations or acquiring places like the now vacant Ettington Chase hotel.
Please don't be swayed by the legal teams of the developers who will paint a perfect picture of a new development situated in the middle of a rural community. It will result in a lot of problems which you will not see or feel. This is not NIMBYism. It is a practical view of the reality of the situation.

No

ID sylw: 107724

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Anna Bickley

Dear Sirs,

I am writing to object to the planning applications for the land at the back of Knightcote and Fenny Compton. This new proposed development will be nothing but a detriment to the local area.

Firstly the roads in our local area are in a state as they are. They are full of potholes and it appears they can barely sustain the current levels of traffic. If further housing developments were built, this could increase the number of cars on the roads to 10,000 meaning that the roads will most likely collapse.

Another main issue is the lack of infrastructure, especially with regards to Knightcote. The most local shops and schools to the village are in Fenny Compton and Bishops Itchington. Both very small village shops have very little to no car parking. They would not be able to cope with the sheer volume of people.

The Dassett County Hills Park is known as a Special Landscape area. By placing 5,000 houses at the hills feet, it will cause serious damage to the views. The public loss to the park will be immeasurable.

Finally, the land the developers have chosen to build on is already an area which floods in the rain, the land could not possibly hold a development and it would cause flooding to the local villages every time it rained. This is not something that would be sustainable and a nuisance to the villagers.

I therefore strongly object to the developments listed to be behind Knightcote and Fenny Compton.

Other

ID sylw: 107826

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Andrew Martin

Sites X1, X2, G1, F2, F3 are relatively close to the M40 and thus to A46, at least offering ready made car routes. Further, there is potential for a new station near Harbury, that could then serve F1 and perhaps F2 and F3 subject to parking, and/or a new station near Bishop’s Itchington.

No

ID sylw: 108028

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Rebecca Ellis

Location itself is not aligned with the Strategic Objectives SO1, SO3, SO7 to SO12.
Scale of the new housing is disproportionate to the current size and population of Knightcote.
Existing road and rail access could not support the scale of the new housing. Such a scale of housing should be near existing suitable infrastructure (A-roads, railway stations), not in remote locations.
M40 Junction 12 and access roads cannot support increase in traffic volumes.
Burton Dassett Country Park is a treasured local asset. Views to and from the park would be ruined by the new housing.
Increased population would be damaging to the well-being of the existing residents of Knightcote as it would no longer be a peaceful, remote village.
The site floods, and cannot be mitigated given the proposed scale.
The new housing would destroy local habitats.

No

ID sylw: 108131

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Evelyn Gould

No

No

ID sylw: 108142

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Peter Northwood

No

Other

ID sylw: 108380

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Simon Tagg-Wilkinson

Concerning sites F2 and F3 these are in an area which shows ancient features, includes ridge and furrow. The area is consistent with a landscape that was in use throughout much of the Iron Age period, perhaps between 600 BC and 100 BC. Ancient drove roads can be identified within local Parishes, such as the Hunscote Lane saltway, which has been renamed Knightcote Bottoms just off the M40 Junction. The old road then joins the Hambridge road another ancient roadway which can be followed from Burton Dassett to the River Itchen and Bishops Itchington. A possible river crossing point for generations and a high probability of archeology (as stated in a recent planning report).

Yes

ID sylw: 108542

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Chapel Ascote Farms

Asiant : Framptons

We support inclusion of proposed settlement location F3. The settlement scored well in the New Settlements Assessment due to not being in the Green Belt or AONB and having no impacts on Registered Parks and Gardens, SSSIs, ancient woodland, mineral sites and safeguarding, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, scheduled ancient monuments, and registered battlefields.

Concerns were raised in the assessment about deliverability as 0% of the land had been put forward in the Call for Sites. Chapel Ascote Farms are putting forward 18.61 ha of land within the F3 settlement along with additional land in case it is required. Chapel Ascote Farms are in discussions with the remaining landowners in F3 and are happy to work with other landowners to bring the site forward.

Yes

ID sylw: 108665

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Landowner 2 Site F3

Asiant : Newton LDP Limited

For the following reasons, the proposal is supported:
- Housing Numbers - a higher housing figure needs to be planned for (a minimum of 2,188dpa)
- Housing Land Supply - SDC's published housing land supply figure is disputed (estimated to be 4.4 years, not 24.65 years)
- Sustainability Appraisal - the assessment is disputed
- Flood Risk - impacts can be mitigated
- Biodiversity and geodiversity - no known protected species present and impacts can be mitigated
- Landscape - a minor impact is expected and impacts can be mitigated through considerate masterplanning
- Heritage - masterplanning can mitigate potential impact to Manor Farmhouse
- Education - a new primary and secondary school could be delivered on site
- Human health - should not be scored low as significant public greenspace could be provided
- Accessibility - the assessment of transport impacts is disputed as a new station could feasibly be provided and highway impacts could be mitigated
- Coalescence - disagree with conclusions - no coalescence expected
- Green Belt - the site is not green belt

Yes

ID sylw: 108666

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Landowner 3 Site F3

Asiant : Newton LDP Limited

For the following reasons, the proposal is supported:
- Housing Numbers - a higher housing figure needs to be planned for (a minimum of 2,188dpa)
- Housing Land Supply - SDC's published housing land supply figure is disputed (estimated to be 4.4 years, not 24.65 years)
- Sustainability Appraisal - the assessment is disputed
- Flood Risk - impacts can be mitigated
- Biodiversity and geodiversity - no known protected species present and impacts can be mitigated
- Landscape - a minor impact is expected and impacts can be mitigated through considerate masterplanning
- Heritage - masterplanning can mitigate potential impact to Manor Farmhouse
- Education - a new primary and secondary school could be delivered on site
- Human health - should not be scored low as significant public greenspace could be provided
- Accessibility - the assessment of transport impacts is disputed as a new station could feasibly be provided and highway impacts could be mitigated
- Coalescence - disagree with conclusions - no coalescence expected
- Green Belt - the site is not green belt

Yes

ID sylw: 108667

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Landowner 4 Site F3

Asiant : Newton LDP Limited

For the following reasons, the proposal is supported:
- Housing Numbers - a higher housing figure needs to be planned for (a minimum of 2,188dpa)
- Housing Land Supply - SDC's published housing land supply figure is disputed (estimated to be 4.4 years, not 24.65 years)
- Sustainability Appraisal - the assessment is disputed
- Flood Risk - impacts can be mitigated
- Biodiversity and geodiversity - no known protected species present and impacts can be mitigated
- Landscape - a minor impact is expected and impacts can be mitigated through considerate masterplanning
- Heritage - masterplanning can mitigate potential impact to Manor Farmhouse
- Education - a new primary and secondary school could be delivered on site
- Human health - should not be scored low as significant public greenspace could be provided
- Accessibility - the assessment of transport impacts is disputed as a new station could feasibly be provided and highway impacts could be mitigated
- Coalescence - disagree with conclusions - no coalescence expected
- Green Belt - the site is not green belt

Yes

ID sylw: 108668

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Landowner 1 Site F3

Asiant : Newton LDP Limited

For the following reasons, the proposal is supported:
- Housing Numbers - a higher housing figure needs to be planned for (a minimum of 2,188dpa)
- Housing Land Supply - SDC's published housing land supply figure is disputed (estimated to be 4.4 years, not 24.65 years)
- Sustainability Appraisal - the assessment is disputed
- Flood Risk - impacts can be mitigated
- Biodiversity and geodiversity - no known protected species present and impacts can be mitigated
- Landscape - a minor impact is expected and impacts can be mitigated through considerate masterplanning
- Heritage - masterplanning can mitigate potential impact to Manor Farmhouse
- Education - a new primary and secondary school could be delivered on site
- Human health - should not be scored low as significant public greenspace could be provided
- Accessibility - the assessment of transport impacts is disputed as a new station could feasibly be provided and highway impacts could be mitigated
- Coalescence - disagree with conclusions - no coalescence expected
- Green Belt - the site is not green belt