Yes

Representation ID: 95558

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Allan Stewart

Brownfield sites should be a priority.

Yes

Representation ID: 95575

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jon Redhead

The use of brownfield sites for development must be a priority, to protect green belt and unmolested nature sites for future generations.

Other

Representation ID: 95598

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr James Davis

Using brownfield land is always preferable for development than using green belt land. It would protect from urban sprawl and loss of open countryside.

Yes

Representation ID: 95645

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Clare Shales

to reduce the need to encroach on to true greenbelt.

No

Representation ID: 95675

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs J Waterhouse

N/A

No

Representation ID: 95678

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs J Waterhouse

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 95687

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Clarke

Makes sense

Yes

Representation ID: 95845

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr UDAYA EEDUPUGANTI

Brownfield land should always be used for development over green belt land

Yes

Representation ID: 95911

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Tesh

agreed

Yes

Representation ID: 96049

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Marshall

As an absolute priority provide the infrastructure supports the proposed use.

Yes

Representation ID: 96099

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr nigel Freeth

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 96237

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Stafford-scott

Brownfield Land should always be used for development over green
belt land as set out in the policy for the importance of protecting from urban sprawl and the loss of open landscape.

Yes

Representation ID: 96271

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Coughlan

Using brown fill land is a preference to green belt which should be preserved.

Yes

Representation ID: 96301

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Southam Town Council

Southam Town, District and County elected representatives support this Policy Direction.

Yes

Representation ID: 96446

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Julie Springate

Brown field MUST be considered for development before destroying countryside areas.

Yes

Representation ID: 96569

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Shipston Town Council

Agreed

Yes

Representation ID: 96636

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Mark Griffin

The opportunity to use Brownfield sites should have been addressed years ago. These could be affordable solutions and should be a priority rather than new sites

Yes

Representation ID: 96644

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Alan Griffith

I support brown field development first at all times. As part of this process consideration must be made to ensure that as brown field site arise they ther is a coordinated approach.
Ie Western Road in Stratford is key residential area close to communities. Areas must be made available to house the car showroom elsewhere in a planned approach. Garages can be on the out of town.
Stratford Hospital expansion would fall under the same heading.
This is just one issue of potential residential sites that counld be released.

Yes

Representation ID: 96648

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: John Dinnie

No comment

Yes

Representation ID: 96699

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs G Wood

Using Brownfield sites makes use of otherwise spoilt land and therefore make practical use of land which may be otherwise wasted. Moreover it saves Greenfield land .

Yes

Representation ID: 96707

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Janet Gee

no further comment

Yes

Representation ID: 96836

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Alcester Town Council

Alcester Town Council, Arrow with Weethley Parish Council, Kinwarton Parish Council, Wixford Parish Council and Great Alne Parish Council (together referred to as Alcester Parishes Group or ‘APG’) strongly supports the Policy Direction in that it requires brownfield land to be developed first. This correctly follows NPPF para 124.

Yes

Representation ID: 96934

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

It is much more eco friendly to use Brownfield Land

Yes

Representation ID: 97034

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Emily Morris

Brownfield land should always be preferable for development over greenbelt land to prevent urban sprawl, protect our landscape and our wildlife!

Yes

Representation ID: 97044

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Victoria Alcock

This should be the only proposal. Green belt should not be used

Yes

Representation ID: 97055

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs R Douce

The regeneration of brown field sites should take priority over building on green belt land and should be used to provide high quality, well designed dwellings that meet the needs of a range of house buyers. Brown field sites can also make full use of existing infrastructure.

Yes

Representation ID: 97120

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Tysoe Parish Council

Yes

Yes

Representation ID: 97289

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Peter and Sheila Lewin

Yes, by law, brownfield sites must be used first. I understand that this Plan has more than sufficient land to meet its needs without building on green belt land.

Yes

Representation ID: 97308

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Bernard Davis

n/a

Yes

Representation ID: 97324

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lucy White

I agree that brownfield sites should always take precedent over greenfield sites