No

Representation ID: 85999

Received: 11/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kate Harris

Sadly it does appear that developers very much have free rain to develop whatever they wish to in regards to small scale housing but these are taking up some useful infill land areas that could have provided some much needed local housing. For this reason I have an issue with the policy laid out I just don't think there is enough detailed mapping and direction on small scale development at a very local level.

Yes

Representation ID: 86056

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

No

Representation ID: 86087

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Clive Corrie

Green Belt land should be sacrosanct and not used for housing unless a local housing needs survey has been carried out at a parish level and the number and type of housing is agreed by residents.

No

Representation ID: 86204

Received: 15/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Alexander Wetton

Specifically site known as SG24 in and around Hockley Heath. Use of green belt not necessary. There’s enough brown, grey and other land to meet targets. Existing residents in this area have no mains gas, no full fibre broadband and little mains sewage provision as it stands, so further settlements will put pressure on the limited resources in the areas.

Yes

Representation ID: 86326

Received: 21/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Ashcroft

Rather than eradicating the greenbelt in some areas it would be preferable to incorporate more small scale development which would have a lesser impact on the sense of place we currently have

No

Representation ID: 86400

Received: 23/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Chennells

Small scale developments are not being proposed for Kenilworth they are large scale in an area that cannot cope with your proposals. Jobs are way out of Kenilworth so traffic if jobs become available will be a real issue. You are taking a very large area of our green belt away and introducing Travellers who will have little employment in the area and where will they be holding their circuses etc. please look at the whole of Kenilworth when deciding on this project as well as the impact it will have on local residents of many years.

Yes

Representation ID: 86425

Received: 24/01/2025

Respondent: Mr HAYDN REES

I believe that developments outside the New Settlements and SGAs should be small-scale and carefully monitored. If not we will end up with the worst of both worlds - large new settlements and large-ish developments tacked onto existing communities but without the infrastructure needed to bring them up to a high standard.
In the Green Belt limited infilling and limited affordable housing for local needs sounds sensible so long as the affordable housing is not bought up by wealthier residents for their children!

Yes

Representation ID: 86522

Received: 27/01/2025

Respondent: Mr justin kerridge

ok

No

Representation ID: 86582

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

The spread of existing village boundaries is insidious and should broadly be discouraged. Infill and denser development is a better option.

Yes

Representation ID: 86601

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Darrell Muffitt

Great attention should be given to Local Plan classifications of settlements and how any proposed developments score against them. For example if a settlement lacks the basic facilities of bus services, doctors surgeries a shop and a local school (ie not a Local Service Village but "Any Other Settlement") then development should be resisted unless there is very strong and clear local support.

Yes

Representation ID: 86741

Received: 29/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Linda Dane

here a settlement has recently had major expansion, the existing settlement boundaries should be maintained and not extended. These communities need time to become coherent.

No

Representation ID: 86823

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Roy Meacham

It is important to maintain the green belt as a whole, development priority should be given / made for brownfield sites.
Developing the green belt is in effect taking a salami slicing approch, then more and more will be developed, taking away the green belt that forms a natural barrier between existing urban areas. Development of the green in effect is starting a process of linking larger areas together

No

Representation ID: 86865

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Hopkinson

Naturally there is a shortage of housing in beautiful places. There is a terrible shortage in the Cotswolds. Stratford on Avon has often been voted most attractive place to live in Uk. It has all desirable assets. So there is a shortage of housing. Nationally around 1 million new houses were built in the last 10 years. That should be enough for 2 to 3 million people. Do we really need to make more space available in rural Warwickshire? Why not concentrate on making the towns and cities more attractive to live in?

No

Representation ID: 86897

Received: 31/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Arthur Hogan-Fleming

Don't agree to any further development - there has been too much already and council can't even fix the potholes/taxes increase unreasonably already.

Other

Representation ID: 87002

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: S Gardner

How does the strategy seek to ensure small scale developments carefully integrate into local communities?

Yes

Representation ID: 87165

Received: 05/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Bryan Hay

The provision of suitable small scale housing, which is appropriate to the exiting infrastructure, seems eminently sensible and practical.

Yes

Representation ID: 87214

Received: 06/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoffrey Morris

No further comment

Yes

Representation ID: 87259

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Stockton Parish Council

Existing Category 2 villages under the Core Strategy have mostly completed their allocations. Any further developments over 25 houses should only be approved if the existing infrastructure (roads, water, sewage, schools, recreation facilities) are capable of absorbing the increase.

No

Representation ID: 87364

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Bryony Dinnie

South Warwickshire does not need any more infilling. Places too much strain on ageing infrastructure

Yes

Representation ID: 87370

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

Sensible policy that gives the new plan flexibility and capacity to deal with changing circumstances.

No

Representation ID: 87548

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Michaelina Jakala

No I do not support any small scale development. The areas and infrastructure cannot even handle that.

No

Representation ID: 87556

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

I do not agree to building on green belt land

Other

Representation ID: 87672

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jo Lancashire

WIth regards to the Hatton Village propsal - I would suggest small scale development of much smaller pockets of land around this vacinity be an ideal option here, rather than trying to build what will be considered a 'Town' on current Green Belt Land. This will appeal like you say to smaller developers to build housing much more in keeping with that given permission at present. It will be in keeping with surrounding areas and met with much less resistance.

Yes

Representation ID: 87681

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Kim James

1. Balance the need for housing delivery with the protection of local housing needs and the appropriate scale of development for each settlement.
2. Review of the settlement hierarchy should ensure that any reclassification reflects local infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints, and community sustainability.
3. Neighbourhood Development Plans as a mechanism for allocating housing and employment land in smaller settlements is welcome, as it allows communities to shape development in a way that meets local needs.
4. Site selection must consider local infrastructure, services, and environmental impact to prevent overdevelopment in inappropriate locations.

Yes

Representation ID: 87708

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mr justin kerridge

Small scale development should contribute infrastructure to connect people to places and improvements in general within the wider settlement. Not necessarily at the building site alone. active travel and pedestrian connectivity improvements across the settlement and surrounding area and to nearby settlements, especially where services can be accessed. parking, amenity spaces or buildings etc

Yes

Representation ID: 87879

Received: 12/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Steve Taylor

Provision should be made for small sites for market housing adjacent to BUABS, including in Green Belt settlements, to support organic settlement growth along historic lines. Relying on infilling within BUABs is insufficient as all such locations have already been built out.

Yes

Representation ID: 87954

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Salford Priors Parish Council

1. Balance the need for housing delivery with the protection of local housing needs and the appropriate scale of development for each settlement.
2. Review of the settlement hierarchy should ensure that any reclassification reflects local infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints, and community sustainability.
3. Neighbourhood Development Plans as a mechanism for allocating housing and employment land in smaller settlements is welcome, as it allows communities to shape development in a way that meets local needs.
4. Site selection must consider local infrastructure, services, and environmental impact to prevent overdevelopment in inappropriate locations.

Yes

Representation ID: 88035

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sharon Quantrill

According to your policy you quote for Greenbelt In Green Belt locations:
Limited infilling within Built Up Area Boundaries;
Limited affordable housing for local community needs, within or adjacent to Built Up Area Boundaries.

So why is Wilmcote/Bearley even being considered for 6,500 houses when Bearley has 300 houses currently and is in greenbelt and parts are in conservation as well.

Yes

Representation ID: 88036

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Quantrill

I agree with the approach of small scale develoment within greenbelt and yet, for example, you are proposing a massive new development at Site BW and others which are in greenbelt! Parts of Bearley are within a Conservation area

Yes

Representation ID: 88079

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Sarah Vaughan

As long as these small settlements do not encroach current established villages and green space is surrounding the development and not solar farms or quarries. Smaller developments as a dispersal implementation is the best solution with guaranteed and proven access to existing transport infrastructure.