No

ID sylw: 105528

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: William Thomson

Proposed G1 future building

1 No infra structure eg doctors /dentists / proper amenities
2 Building on part flood plain. Knightcote bottoms
3 would create over development with Lighthorne proximity
4 no public transport links eg trains
5 shortage of schools
6 Increase in traffic for junction 12.
7 impact on rural life and loss of farming

No

ID sylw: 105547

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Christopher Ellis

I object to the proposed new housing at site G1, west of Knightcote, as it does not align with several Strategic Objectives. The scale of over 5,000 homes would drastically alter Knightcote’s character and overwhelm existing infrastructure, including roads and rail. The increased traffic would compromise safety and health for residents. Additionally, the development would harm the views and setting of the nearby Burton Dassett Country Park, which is a Special Landscape Area, and destroy local wildlife habitats. Flooding risks would also escalate, making this proposal unacceptable.

No

ID sylw: 105621

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Cllr Eileen Edwards

G1 – Land west of Knightcote – OBJECT - capacity 5360 homes: too close to GLH, urbanising area and causing harm to character of landscape, lack of rail connectivity

No

ID sylw: 105653

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr David Bickley

Whilst I appreciate that there is a demand for housing, there must be more suitable sites that the areas surrounding small villages and the Dassett Hills. I refer in particular to G1 and F3 covering the areas near the small villages of Knightcote and Fenny Compton. The plans do not appear to take into account the long term impact on our communities, infrastructure and the surrounding countryside. Building so many houses in a concentrated area will destroy the areas natural beauty and put pressure on roads, schools and hospitals. I hope the council see sense and do not progress plans.

No

ID sylw: 105656

Derbyniwyd: 02/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Helen Bickley

I strongly object to the proposals for developing areas G1 and F3 in Knightcote and Fenny Compton. The long-term effects on our communities, infrastructure, and surrounding countryside will be detrimental. Concentrated housing will damage the area, strain traffic, schools, and hospitals. The Dassett Hills enjoy a stunning vista across historic open countryside. Hundreds of houses will destroy this historic landmark and surrounding views. Additionally, major road upgrades will be necessary in an area already prone to flooding. There must be alternative locations for addressing the housing shortage that won't harm the countryside.

Yes

ID sylw: 105671

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Edward Heynes

If substantial growth is to occur in Stratford, it should occur on the northern side due to better access to Stratford Parkway station, the strategic highway network, and existing employment. A relief road must be positioned on the southern side, linking the A34 with the A46, but proposals around the eastern side are not feasible. Additionally, growth should focus on new settlements near public transport interchanges, including railway stations and access to Birmingham Airport. Options around X1, X2, SG09, 10, 11, G1, SG13, 14, and B1 appear to be the most sensible.

No

ID sylw: 105691

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Bernard Keavy

G1 land West of Knightcote - 5360 homes will be too close to GLH, urbanising the area. This will cause significant harm to the character of the landscape. Lack of Rail Connectivity.

No

ID sylw: 105892

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Chris Saint

Proposed new town site G1 is in an area whose rural ambiance and attractiveness in the Burton Dassett hills should be retained, notwithstanding the presence of the landfill site at Ufton and the local polo grounds. There have been reported issues with connecting all new development in this area to the National Grid

Yes

ID sylw: 105918

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Sworders

Asiant : Sworders

We strongly agree that New Settlement Location G1 should be included within the Local Plan. As set out above, the new NPPF methodology for calculating the required annual housing delivery states that SWLP accommodate at least 2,188 dwellings per annum.G1 is very sustainably located along the M40 motorway providing excellent access north to Warwick and Birmingham, and south to Oxford and London. The site is also in very close proximity to existing employment locations.G1 is located within Flood Zone 1, at the lowest risk from fluvial flooding. It is not affected by Ancient Woodland, green belt, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, local nature reserves, site of special scientific interest, historic battlefields, conservation areas, listed buildings, scheduled ancient monuments or any other statutory planning designations or constraints. A public footpath runs along the eastern boundary of G1 which may be improved with new links as part of the development. As such, it is considered that G1 is a very suitable, available and deliverable location which can deliver a significant number of homes to those required during the plan period.

No

ID sylw: 106071

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Patricia McDonaugh

Such developments would urbanise these areas, resulting in significant harm to the general character of the landscapes, and have an overall detrimental effect. Wellesbourne has expanded considerably over recent years, without infrastructure to meet the demand on all services in the village. Medical services, dentists and educational facilities are heavily subscribed, and there is an existing and increasing traffic and parking problem in Wellesbourne. This is all too apparent near the school in Mountford Close, where there is no effective traffic management, drivers regularly ignore road markings, park on footways, resort to driving along footways when meeting head on vehicles travelling in the opposite direction, plus use any resident's drive as a turning point. Also, a driver travelling in the opposite direction to the main stream of traffic, opting to reverse back down Mountford Close towards the main school gate/road junction amongst parked and moving traffic ,food waste bins, parents and children making their way to the main school gate. The Newbold Road in Wellesbourne is also often clogged with parked and moving traffic. To introduce more through traffic to Wellesbourne would create even greater congestion, and is untenable.

No

ID sylw: 106446

Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Richard Watson

The transport and education provision assessments of large-scale development of isolated rural communities, clearly show that these options are not economically or socially viable.
Overall numbers would suggest the need for 1 new secondary school for 6,000 new dwellings and 2 new secondary schools for 10,000 new homes.
At primary we would suggest the need for 3 or 4 new primary schools for 6,000 new dwellings and between 5 and 7 new primary schools for 10,000 new dwellings.
There are no existing schools, primary or Secondary within safe walking distances and so home to school transport would need to be provided for all children until new provision built.
In contradiction to the above education assessment requiring a minimum of 1 new secondary and 3 primary schools. In the intervening 3 months between this report in October 2024 and a subsequent Infrastructure Plan published January 2025 being published, the delivery of new schools has been completely eroded, instead relying on a vague plan to changing admissions arrangements and force some current capacity back into Oxfordshire:
The lack of detailed plans for inevitable capacity issues in Education and Healthcare, when compared with the evaluation of transport or environmental considerations are severely concerning. The existing development of Lighthorne Heath has continued without consideration
for Education or Healthcare capacity to increase, it appears that the County Council are currently unable to plan these provisions effectively, and are unable to enforce conditions upon developers to meet these needs within their proposals.

No

ID sylw: 106761

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Marie Tuffrey

If this site is developed it would be a detriment to the local wildlife, light pollution, destroy the views from Burton Dassett country park, the local rural nature of the area, also the local surgeries and schools are hardly coping with the present local population.

Other

ID sylw: 106939

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Historic England

No designated heritage assets within the site.
Several Gll LBs within Knightcote village and village of Northend to south also has several LBs.
GII Beacon Tower on Windmill Hill in Burton Dassett Hills Country Park to south.

No SMs within the site. Good ridge and furrow survival around Knightcote. Site will be in views from Burton Dassett beacon. The beacon is poorly understood and probably represents a folly of a nearby designed park. Understanding the beacon and its connection with a designed landscape will help inform impacts.

Recommend: HIA prior to allocation.

Other

ID sylw: 107320

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford-on-Avon District Social Inclusion Partnership

New but really extension of existing - E1/G1 – established albeit new(ish) settlements, no train at present, and therefore more isolated, will require community builder capacity for enhanced development of community.

No

ID sylw: 107444

Derbyniwyd: 16/02/2025

Ymatebydd: Moreton Morrell Parish Council

capacity 5360 homes: too close to GLH, urbanising area and causing harm to character of landscape, lack of rail connectivity

No

ID sylw: 107457

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Teresa Robson

I object to this application on the following basis which I would very much appreciate being taken into consideration- 1. There will be significant highway safety issues on the narrow country lanes leading to & from the proposed development which are already busy with increased local development outside Fenny Compton, Bishops Itchington, Lighthorne Heath & the large Jaguar Landrover development at Lighthorne Heath. The narrow lanes are used by large agricultural vehicles, horse riders & walkers.
2. There are NO rail transport links nearby for this new development. The train line nearby is for military use, not public transport 3. Junction 12, M40 is already at capacity with Jaguar Landrover traffic & increased local development 4. There are already significant traffic & parking issues in nearby Fenny Compton & Bishops Itchington villages where local amenities such as schooling, village store & GP are based.
5. The proposed development will greatly impact the design & appearance of the local area being highly visible from Avon Dassett Country Park, Northend & Knightcote & is not in keeping with traditional lowland Feldon settlements.
6. There are drainage issues to the north & south of Knightcote which will need consideration as to the impact on existing drainage in the village which can be cut off following heavy rainfall.
7. The current open agricultural land is important habitat for mammals & birds including the barn owl which has Schedule 1 protection under Wildlife & Countryside CT of 1981.
8. The open farm land also supports overwintering birds from Europe such as the short eared owl, lapwings, redwings, fieldfares & starlings.
9. Knightcote has already seen much loss of such habitat as a result of solar panel development to the North west of the village.

No

ID sylw: 107459

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: 107488

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Tim Bull

What was the rationale for this? The area is even more remote and poorly served for transport than SG13 and SG14. Likely ecological, transport, sewerage and pollution (light, noise and chemical) impacts. Existing villages have been blighted by previous developments. Marston is better suited as it has a railway connection. The Council needs to give residents sufficient time to respond to proposals.

Yes

ID sylw: 107625

Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Stratford-upon-Avon Town Transport Group

We suggest a new settlement between the M40 and Chiltern Rail Line. This location would include a hotel, major high tech employment within the M40 employment corridor, and provide the most sustainable connectivity. Expansion of Warwick University onto this new settlement would provide a further anchor employment.

Further, a substantial well designed new settlement at this location would accord with the expected recommendations from the Sir Michael Lyons New Settlement Task Force expected in the summer.

No

ID sylw: 107725

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: 107824

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: 108027

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: 108132

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Evelyn Gould

No

No

ID sylw: 108143

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Peter Northwood

No

Other

ID sylw: 108377

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Simon Tagg-Wilkinson

Concerning Site G1 which is currently open farm land but encompasses a section of the Old Salt Road dating back to at least Roman times but also probably incorporating old pack horse routes. The site is also located on top of a Romano British Farm, (ROMANO-BRITISH SETTLEMENT AT UPPER SPRING FARM, BISHOP'S ITCHINGTON - MWA19119) that has been stated as being of national importance. There are burial mounds within Itchington Holt, which has replanting ancient woodland and it, and the adjacent fields are habitat stepping stones for animals who’s natural routes have already been cut off by the construction of the M40, which has few crossing places.

Other

ID sylw: 108897

Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire County Council

Minerals and Waste

No objections on mineral sterilisation grounds subject to:
• Materials Management Report (for assessing the sourcing and use of construction materials including the availability of on-site materials for reuse/recycling),
• Soil Management Plan (a plan to manage all soils on site during construction)

Active Travel

This site is not well served by cycling infrastructure. National Cycle Route 48
(Farnborough to Deppers Bridge) passes through the site. It follows relatively low trafficked roads. To the south it is possible to follow NCR48 and NCR5 to connect to Banbury, but this is a circuitous and indirect route. The Edge Hill escarpment is a significant barrier to provide active travel connections to Banbury. To the north of the site NCR48 stops south of Southam, however this connection may be completed by the imminent delivery by HS2 Ltd of a new cycle route adjacent to the A423 between Ladbroke and Southam.

Once HS2 Ltd construct a new cycle route along the A423 it would be possible to connect to Southam via NCR48 however the route between Ladbroke and Southam will be a minimum standard shared use facility and as such has limited capacity.
Consideration would need to be given to upgrading this route to accommodate the additional demands the site would create and to create a more appealing route for cycling trips. In addition, the existing NCR48 will need to be maintained. This would need to include ensuring this route on low trafficked roads is not negatively impacted by increased traffic flows associated with the development. At 10km the route to Southam is likely to be at the greater end of distances people are likely to be willing to cycle for regular trips.

If the existing NCR48 route could be maintained as a low trafficked lane it may be possible to provide a connection to Southam. However, at approx. 10km and requiring users to mix with traffic it seems unlikely that this route would attract a large number of people to regularly undertake trips by cycle. There is no obvious means of providing a continuous off-road route between the development site and Southam.
Distances to the larger service centres of Warwick, Leamington Spa and Rugby are too far for most people to complete trips by cycle.

Rail

The site currently has poor connectivity to the rail network with the nearest stations being located at Leamington Spa and Banbury, both of which are around 12 miles away. Train services on the line are principally provided by Chiltern Railways with a half-hourly frequency in each direction between London Marylebone and Birmingham Moor Street/Snow Hill, with some services extended to/from Stourbridge Junction in the peaks. Arriva Cross Country services also use the line with an hourly service between Manchester and Bournemouth and a less frequent Newcastle/York to Reading service (these have been recently reintroduced following the post-Covid recovery of rail demand).

Site G1 lies near the single-track Fenny Compton to Kineton line, which is used exclusively by the Ministry of Defence for rail movements to/from the Kineton MoD site. Any use of this line for passenger services is unlikely, so it has been excluded for the purpose of this assessment.

The main issue on the rail network in this area is the lack of any substantial capacity to increase service frequencies beyond their current level. The corridor is heavily used for freight, most notably intermodal services to/from the deep sea ports at Southampton.

There would appear to be two options for a new station to serve the settlement. The first option would be to locate a station on the western boundary of Site F3, although it should be noted that the railway at this point is on a substantial embankment, parts of which have recently been subject to reinforcement work by Network Rail. This may have engineering and cost implications for a new station. A new link from the A423 would be required through Site F3 to access the station. It is not clear how residents located in Site G1 would access the station in this location without substantial new highway being constructed across third-party land to the south east of Knightcote village.

The second option would be to locate a station in the vicinity of where the A423 crosses the railway south of Fenny Compton Marina, although it should be noted that the railway at this point is in a substantial cutting and running adjacent to the Oxford Canal. This may have engineering and cost implications for a new station. The proximity of Fenny Compton Down Goods Loop and its associated signaling and turnout would be a consideration in the siting of the station. It should be noted that this location is also some 2-3 miles from both sites F3 and G1.

Current journey times between Leamington Spa and Banbury for Chiltern and Cross Country passenger services is around 16-17 minutes. A key issue will be whether either operator would want to make an additional call at a station to serve the new settlement, for example Chiltern who may have already made three calls in this area (Warwick Parkway/Warwick/Leamington Spa). Issues around abstraction from Leamington Spa and Banbury would need to be explored as part of demand forecasting, along with the extent to which a new station in this area would support wider access to rail objectives from local communities such as Bishop’s Itchington, Fenny Compton, Kineton and Farnborough.

Given capacity constraints on this section of line it is envisaged that a new station would need to be served by existing train services. Adding a stop into a timetable will not only extend the overall journey time by several minutes, but it can also have wider implications for how the service interacts with other key parts of the network such as the timing at Aynho Junction south of Banbury and locations including Reading and Didcot where pathing points in relation to other services will be critical. These issues will need to be explored with the Train Operating Companies (TOCs) and Network Rail.

The typical cost of a new rail station is around £30-35m (based on the estimated cost of Rugby Parkway), although this may be higher for the location in question due to the engineering challenges noted above. Given the potential wider benefits of a new station to local communities in the area who do not currently have direct access to rail there may be a case to bid for public monies to part fund the station.

Chiltern Railways and Arriva Cross Country have been contacted to ascertain whether they would be interested in calling at a new station between Leamington Spa and Banbury, given that it forms part of a number of the options for a new settlement in South Warwickshire. In responding, Arriva Cross Country confirmed that their focus is on providing fast Inter City services and that longer distance passengers are their priority. Given the likely destinations of new passengers being Leamington Spa, Birmingham and London, they believe that Chiltern Railways would provide a better fit for the generated trips from the new settlement (possibly as part of a new hourly Birmingham to Oxford service which is currently under consideration). They confirmed that an assessment would be needed to understand the impact of any new station on capacity between Leamington Spa and Aynho Junction, including the performance and reliability of their reintroduced services between Reading and Newcastle (via Solihull). Unfortunately, no response has been received from Chiltern Railways.

Bus

The sites are close to the existing 77A service between Banbury and Leamington Spa. There are limited other local bus services in the area.

It is proposed to serve the site with a new, frequent bus service from Banbury to Leamington Spa and Warwick via JLR near Gaydon. Opportunities to divert the existing 77A service to serve the new settlement as well should be explored with Warwickshire County Council as the 77A service is fully subsidised. Opportunities to connect the new settlement with Southam through a separate service should also be explored.

Provision of high quality bus stops with shelters, Real Time Information and raised kerbs, along with bus priority measures at key junctions on the route of the proposed inter-urban service and within the new settlement should be provided.

The proposed inter-urban bus service and associated infrastructure improvements should be deliverable and affordable. There are concerns that the service may not prove to be viable in the long term due to the long distance nature of the route.

Highway (Strategic)

The site is reasonable well-located in relation to the SRN in terms of proximity to M40 Junctions 12, although current access relies on a network of predominantly ‘C’ roads to reach the B4451.

M40 Junction 12 was upgraded around 2015/16 to address queuing on the mainline motorway because of vehicles exiting to access the major employment areas at Gaydon (Jaguar Land Rover and Aston Martin Lagonda). This included the construction of a new dual-carriageway link from the junction towards the B4100.
The scheme has been successful in achieving its aims.

Previous modelling of major growth around M40 Junction 12 has highlighted the need for changes to be made to the slip-road arrangements. This should be reassessed if this option were to go forward for more detailed assessment. Traffic modelling should also be undertaken to identify if M40 Junctions 13-15 require a contribution towards an improvement, particularly when considered in conjunction with the wider SWLP Spatial Strategy.

The timely involvement of National Highways in the assessment process should ensure they are able to help scope the traffic modelling and ensure the understanding of the analysis of its outputs. Initial discussions have taken place with National Highways regarding the principle of a new single junction to potentially amalgamate M40 Junctions 13 and 14.

Improvements to any of the M40 junctions may have deliverability or affordability issues depending on their scale and the need for third-party (non-highway) land. It is assumed the costs of amalgamating M40 Junctions 13 and 14 will be met in full as a result of other development.

Highway (Local)

The site (particularly to the north east of Knightcote) is well related to the LRN in terms of the A423 which links Coventry with Banbury (and links to Rugby and Daventry from Southam). The B4100 provides access to Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath and the B4455 Fosse Way near Chesterton and the employment areas around M40 Junction 12. The ‘C’ road from Gaydon to Kineton is an important link to Kineton School. Otherwise, the network in this area consists of minor roads and lanes which are not designed to cope with large scale traffic.

The A423 was a trunk route prior to the opening of the M40 in the early 1990’s, which includes bypasses of both Southam and Ladbroke. The route has some spare capacity due to its downgraded status, although there are capacity constraints in and around Southam. There are issues with rat-running (particularly to/from JLR at Gaydon) and speeding traffic on the local ‘B’ and ‘C’ road network with several junctions having poor casualty records. As noted above, there is a limited network of other minor roads and lanes in the area, reflecting its rural nature and sparse
population.

A targeted package of improvements to the A423 around Southam, the Fenny
Compton Wharf staggered crossroads and the B4100 as well as other key junctions will be required to ensure that local traffic generated by the new settlement uses the most appropriate roads, thereby protecting local villages in the area and minimising rat-running onto less appropriate roads.


The proposed LRN mitigation is considered to be broadly affordable, however there will be a need to establish a clear network and hierarchy of routes given the current limitations of this area.


Education Impacts

Overall numbers would suggest the need for 1 new secondary school for 6,000 new dwellings and 2 new secondary schools for 10,000 new homes.

At primary we would suggest the need for 3 or 4 new primary schools for 6,000 new dwellings and between 5 and 7 new primary schools for 10,000 new dwellings.

The possibility of delivering all through schools to be considered, i.e. co-location of at least part of the primary offer with new secondary facilities.

There is an assumption that all new primary facilities will include early years facilities and Special Resource Provision facilities.

There is an assumption that all new secondary schools will provide for sixth form teaching on site and that there will also be a Specialist Resource Provision included.

There are no existing schools, primary or Secondary within safe walking distances and so home to school transport would need to be provided for all children until new provision built.

No safe walking route so home to school transport would be required.