Yes

Representation ID: 85942

Received: 10/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sidney Syson

Although I appreciate why all the information is here it is confusing to those who have logged on to comment as it looks as if we have to log on again.

No

Representation ID: 85981

Received: 11/01/2025

Respondent: Miss Rebecca England

I only support the renewable energy proposal, we do not want a gypsy site in this area.

Yes

Representation ID: 86041

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

No

Representation ID: 86117

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Ms Cathryn Yeomans

I do not agree with the proposed planning outlined. It will have a significant, negative impact on the way of life for local residents, and wildlife. It will reduce property value significantly for local houses. The plans overlap a national cycle route which would be impacted negatively by the sight and traffic of a new development.

No

Representation ID: 86165

Received: 13/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anna Taylor

I don't support the development of land SG18 between Birmingham Road and King's Lane. Development of this land would put further pressure on the Birmingham Road, rendering it unfit for purpose. It will also be encroaching onto the Welcombe Hills. This nature reserve is beloved by countless people in the community and is also bursting with wildlife. Encroaching towards this land would be detrimental to the serenity of the reserve. As a resident of Burbage Avenue it would have a massive impact on the view from our home, as well as a devastating impact on the wildlife that inhabit it.

No

Representation ID: 86173

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Miss Caitlin Regan

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed mass housing development on our local green belt land. This development threatens to destroy vital habitats for local wildlife (deer etc) and disrupts the delicate ecosystem that thrives here. The area is already prone to flooding, and further development is unsuitable given the environmental and infrastructure challenges. The increase in pollution from more cars and overcrowding will harm the quality of life in our village, which has always been surrounded by green spaces—not an outer city sprawl. This plan is detrimental to our countryside, and I urge you to reconsider it.

Yes

Representation ID: 86255

Received: 17/01/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

None

Yes

Representation ID: 86284

Received: 19/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Checkley

Fine

No

Representation ID: 86299

Received: 20/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Amy Ingram

There is limited information on how you will protect nature, whilst building new infrastructure. You will need new roads to reduce congestion in the local area and reduce the impact on local facilities. Are there plans to build new schools or extend schools to cater for the increase in population? Are there plans to attract new GPs to the area and build capacity for GPs to operate? How will you cater for the public right of ways?

No

Representation ID: 86312

Received: 20/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Nash

I find this very confusing and lengthy document. My particular interest is in the proposals for the C1 area but cant find d any section to do this

Yes

Representation ID: 86350

Received: 21/01/2025

Respondent: Ms May Lau

N/A

No

Representation ID: 86378

Received: 22/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Dimambro

I strongly disagree that area SG06 be used for residential development.
We live in Princes Drive and already have traffic jams three times a day. Any further population increase will make the situation worse. Roads generally are not able to cope with additional traffic. It will be more serious for emergency vehicles especially to reach Warwick hospital.

No

Representation ID: 86386

Received: 23/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Bevan

SG24 - is not supportable.
There has been insufficient consultation with Solihull council - there have been recent developments (Blythe Valley) and their own plan that are already impacting on the limited resources currently available.
The nearest primary school is single form entry with no room to expand. The housing will be closer to high performing Solihull senior schools that are already at capacity. Using Warwickshire schools will require driving and increase congestion
The main road is a motorway relief road and frequently experiences gridlock.
There is no doctors or chemist
There are limited bus services and no train station

No

Representation ID: 86397

Received: 23/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Chennells

This number of houses and additional travelers provisions is not suitable for this area. We do not have the infrastructure to support this large housing development. We are already struggling with access to schools, doctors etc with our current housing provision we have already many new houses in the town and this needs to be considered carefully when proposing further development as traffic and access to facilities is already an issue. The houses on the Sixth Form site will also add additional traffic etc, etc. where will the employment be found for all these new citizens.

Yes

Representation ID: 86438

Received: 24/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Norman

No comment

No

Representation ID: 86462

Received: 25/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Janine Lee

I do not agree with the proposed plan for development between Wilmcote and Bearley.

No

Representation ID: 86463

Received: 25/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Janine Lee

How to have your say has been made as difficult as possible for users. Finding the form is almost impossible it is not user friendly at all. My neighbour and I have spent hours trying to find the form even after following directions from a District Councillors, it will prevent many people from responding. Whoever designed this site needs to think again that most people would need a degree in computer science to wade their way through it to find the form.

No

Representation ID: 86477

Received: 26/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Melissa Girling

I do not believe Shipston has the infrastructure to support an additional 1600 new houses. This is a rural area surrounded by small villages. Doctors and dentists are already significantly over subscribed. The road through Shipston is the main and only route to the north, adding several thousand more people into the vicinity will make a busy route even more difficult to navigate. It is completely unacceptable to wipeout our green belt land in order to build even more houses. Thank you.

No

Representation ID: 86531

Received: 27/01/2025

Respondent: Miss Elizabeth Edwards

xx

No

Representation ID: 86535

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs judith britton

The planned proposal for building an extra 1,600 houses in Shipston on Stour is ludicrous. Some of the land is a flood plan ,I have lived in Shipston for 18 years and at least twice a year the farmland proposed from Fell Mill Lane adjacent to the River Stour is completely flooded. It is in fact like this today , I have photos to prove it . Please rethink this for the future of our town.

No

Representation ID: 86547

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

The method of consultation is too complex and requires a great deal of detailed reading and work to engage with it. This will not encourage "grass roots" responses from the electorate, only from, those organisations with a significant angle and resources to engage, such as developers.
There could be a far simpler questionnaire to gather the priorities and preferences of the electorate.

Yes

Representation ID: 86585

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Darrell Muffitt

I am in favour with the aim of encouraging as much feedback as possible but this online process is extremely time consuming and not easy to use. The fact that answers to each element of the consultation trigger an email back to my inbox is an unwelcome burden and distraction. I think that many people will begin the process of commenting but then lose interest.

No

Representation ID: 86626

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Weston

Regarding the South Warwickshire Plan to build 1400 houses on the greenfield site at Fell Mill Lane, Shipston on Stour I most strongly object to any such plan.

No

Representation ID: 86639

Received: 29/01/2025

Respondent: Miss Georgia Ratford

I have deep concerns regarding this proposal. I live on the Stratford road and have seen how the river floods directly into the fields opposite every time it rains also the sheer amount of fast traffic already on the Stratford road is a cause for concern and with no adequate crossings or wide enough paths. As a resident who’s lived here for 4 years I still have no access to a local dentist due to the sheer demand and also the lack of large shops here requires you to travel to get food which then means more traffic!

Yes

Representation ID: 86804

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Mr GERALD KELLY

No comment

No

Representation ID: 86830

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Ms Kate Horlor

The proposed building in green belt sites off Old Milverton Road would take away bauble green space. There is not the infrastructure to take that many new houses or people. The roads aren’t good enough, the schools aren’t big enough. Green space is important for mental health, not to mention the animals you’d displace.

Yes

Representation ID: 86837

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Fossett

is it 1000 houses that triggers infrastructure or 6000 ?

No

Representation ID: 86965

Received: 01/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Olivia Guglia

Devastating news, leave our lovely villages alone! There is no capacity in local secondary schools to take additional children. Flooding on A3400 and Old Warwick Road is getting dangerous due to lack of fields to absorb the water.

No

Representation ID: 86983

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Gregory Hanna

Huge traffic impact on Barford.
Environmental damage and impact
Additional run off from hard surfaces further exacerbating flood risk and damage.
Loss of rural nature of thr area
Emergency services GP and hospitals do not have capacity to take on all these extra people.
The 'settlement' will not function for years putting huge pressure on surrounding areas services and infrastructure.
Damaging HGV traffic to the area for years.
Loss of fertile famland

No

Representation ID: 86986

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Elaine Pettit

As a resident of shipston, I would like to say we do not need any more houses. We have no infrastructure warrant anymore. The schools aren't big enough . The doctors surgery is drowning already. Shipston floods now if more houses are built the floods will get worse. The new houses we have already ha e caused problems with sewerage ending up in people's gardens. The town As no parking facilities for the houses we already have. You are turning our beautiful town into a city we Don' t want or need. Please think twice before you give consent.