Other

Representation ID: 91306

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Tony Devenney

I strongly oppose the plans for Hockley Heath. This small area is home to an abundance of natural wildlife such as wild deer and numerous birdlife including an eagle. There are ancient hedges which have been here for thousands of years. The roads cannot accommodate the increased traffic and the potential for more flooding will be even greater, the Stratford Road floods on a regular basis, so with more homes this will only compound the issue.
I understand the necessity to build new homes, but there are much better locations than the beautiful Green belt land in Hockley Heath.

Yes

Representation ID: 91346

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Norman Thomas

no comments

No

Representation ID: 91347

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Tracey Godefroy

i want to make comment on swlp - i am not sure if this is the correct form as the website is so complicated

Yes

Representation ID: 91350

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Michelle Mendoza

n/a

Other

Representation ID: 91644

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Taylor

This is a very complex document - its not easy to take in all this information and be able to comment on it as a lay person.

No

Representation ID: 91657

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Mark Ganderton

My last objection was for SG22 in Studley.

No

Representation ID: 91729

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Ms miranda maloney

N/A

No

Representation ID: 91837

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent:

Information is too detailed and needs to be provided in a more succinct format. Too many sites, too many policies and too much information for the lay person to navigate - this prevents the process from being inclusive.

No

Representation ID: 91871

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Bex Thomson

I do not agree with the proposals.

Loss of green belt
Infrastructure inadequate
Brownfield sites should be utilised rather than productive farmland

No

Representation ID: 91872

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Bex Thomson

Do not support using green belt for renewables, traveller sites or any other purpose.

Other

Representation ID: 91881

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alexandra Neal

Infrastructure and Services concerns

Yes

Representation ID: 91966

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr David Woodman

Object to amount of housing due to:
Lack of infastructure ie no bypass for Stratford east and west.access to south mainly through town congested area already.
Increased flooding.drainage inadequate.rivers too shallow to take extra flooding sewers inadequate sewage being discharged into rivers now!
Inadequate rail links and parking and street lighting at stations.Only single track track to Leamington.
General infastructure inadequate.Before 1 brick is laid all these concerns should be addressed.
Schools ,doctors surgeries,shops and better publictransport should be upgraded.
The extra hard landscaping for this amount of houses will also add to flooding.
Less habitat for wildlife!

Yes

Representation ID: 92097

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs cynthia bettany

n/a

Yes

Representation ID: 92112

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Vincent

it is very complicated

No

Representation ID: 92239

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Nicole Walker

The infrastructure of Hockley Heath is not suitable for the amount of new homes proposed. There are no doctors in the village the nearest one being Dorridge which is a small practice , only one school, and one train station in Dorridge. Traffic will be impacted with the increase in motor vehicles especially towards the motorway island. Fields to the back of my property are constantly waterlogged with no drainage. It will impact the wildlife deer, badgers, foxes, rabbits, nesting birds. I totally oppose this decision which has not been thought through for the benefit of those that live here.

Yes

Representation ID: 92474

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Fairburn

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 92491

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Vanessa Lowe

No comments

Yes

Representation ID: 92492

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Vanessa Lowe

none

No

Representation ID: 92734

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Hayley Thompson

I do not support this application. We do not currently have enough facilities and infrastructure

No

Representation ID: 92737

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Dean

1) Road congestion and safety hazards on Birmingham Road etc towards Stratford and Henley plus Wilmcote, Bearley and surrounding villages due to approx 10,000 extra vehicles ! Already bad enough with car users using as “short cut” to avoid congestion
2) Parking problems on station road, Wilmcote as numbers using trains will increase considerably ( will need cars parked- where ?)
3) Escalation of flooding in already notorious areas
4) Fear of both village’s becoming connected to Stratford- no longer “villages”- one big town

No

Representation ID: 92759

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Covill

I object to further housing in Bidford on Avon as we simply don’t have the infrastructure to support more residents

No

Representation ID: 92764

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neill Murphy

I strongly object to the proposed development of SG24 and the negative impact it will have on green belted, Hockley Heath. There is not the infrastructure to support housing expansion; be it education, health or transport. The A34 is already busy through the village (also seriously impacting air quality), in conjunction with side roads also - noting that the immediate section outside our property is known by the Council to regularly flood, having a direct effect on the immediate properties . In addition SG24 would seriously destroy the spirit of the village and have a negative impact for all residents.

No

Representation ID: 92804

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Val Stallard

As a long time resident of Hockley Heath I am disgusted and upset by the proposed plans to build a large number of houses in the area especially on Greenbelt land. The village of Hockley is not designed to support this number of residents as schools are already at capacity as well as local doctors surgeries.

Yes

Representation ID: 93053

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Cathy Kennedy

I feel that the length of time for the consultation is unreasonably brief. Something that is to set the strategic goals for 25 years should not be consulted for a mere 8 weeks.

I’ve spoken with hundreds of people while walking my dogs near one of the proposed areas (X1) and not one single person had heard of the proposal. Some mentioned the Hatton development but *no-one* had heard of X1. This is planning by stealth.

No

Representation ID: 93120

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Steph Powell

No to more houses in Shipston until the infrastructure is massively improved!

No

Representation ID: 93122

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Dawn Ashley

this consultation is WAY TOO COMPLEX for your average resident.
firstly it took ages to find where to register - I tried 3 times before the registration went through - and feel for initial consultation it could have been made much simpler!

FEELS LIKE IT HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO PUT OFF COMMENTS

No

Representation ID: 93125

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Ford

There is already a vast amount of land being built on and planning to be built on (old school land) in Kenilworth. Can we please not add to this by destroying further scenic parts of Kenilworth for further housing. Nows the time to draw a line, before we lose further aspects of Kenilworth which all know and love.

Yes

Representation ID: 93162

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Ms maryanh dobbin

The main point of these comments is to demonstrate the devastating consequences of building more houses without the necessary infrastructure in place prior to building. The planning gain of previous builds was not evident in an increase in the infrastructures of the town. these decisions will be catastrophic to our town.

Yes

Representation ID: 93770

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

Broadly support

We find the consultation document overly complex and time-consuming to navigate. The complexity gives developers an unfair advantage with the resources they can call on to frame their response. For a Parish Council, where agreement on responses is democratically important, this is a difficult and time-consuming task. A simplified version with key policies, visuals, and links for further details would make engagement easier. We urge consideration of this approach for the next consultation.

No

Representation ID: 94000

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Helen Prosser

No more houses can possibly be built in Wellesbourne. Building destroys forests, wetlands & grasslands, leaving animals without shelter & food sources. If some natural areas remain, they may be cut off from each other, making it harder for animals to migrate, find mates, or access resources. Construction & human activity introduce noise, light, and chemical pollution, which can disrupt wildlife behaviour and health. Animals that remain in the area may come into conflict with humans, leading to issues like crop damage, attacks, or forced relocation.
Removing trees & vegetation reduces carbon absorption, contributing to climate change, which affects ecosystems.