No

Representation ID: 90572

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Terry Simmonds

South Warwickshire is a large area, prioritising these 3 areas doesn't solve the problem of people from the far south of South Warwickshire (Shipston-on-Stour) having to travel long sistances on bad roads, with poor public transport.

Rather than improving public transport, road infrastructure so people in rural areas can get to employment areas why not incentivize the employers to come to the rural areas?

SG17 is a perfect example, prioritise attracting employers, then build housing, not the other way round - Shipston (and other small rural areas where employment is prioritized) could be the pefect 15 minute towns.

No

Representation ID: 90614

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Pack

No. Evidence recommends that between 75 and 125ha of land be allocated for Employment Growth, however the Plan proposes 125ha, the upper limit. This is unnecessary and will important environmental assets and habitats, plus designated sites and protected species, and does not align with the Government’s 30% by 2030 targets.

The allocations are directly next to Chesterton Wood, an important Local Wildlife site, and extremely close to the River Avon and Tributaries LWS, Redlands Brake PLWS, New Waters LWS, Budbrooke Farm Woodlands and Black Brake Plantation LWS, development on which would have detrimental effects for wildlife and climate change targets.

Yes

Representation ID: 90651

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Warwick Town Council

Agree that new employment development be directed to existing settlements in the first instance. Ensures employment development located at most sustainable locations, reducing vehicle journeys and carbon emissions created through commuters, freight or customers to employment sites. Carbon impact of employment related road travel can be reduced eg through electric vehicles and 'last mile' freight journeys.
Setting clear mitigation requirements will ensure new developments don't exacerbate health risks, particularly in vulnerable communities. Support designing new developments to improve environmental quality, rather than relying on mitigation afterwards. Will the Councils be able to assess pollution impacts consistently and hold developers accountable?

Yes

Representation ID: 91146

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Radford Semele Parish Council

Radford Semele Parish Council agree with the suggestions.

No

Representation ID: 91169

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Janet Johnson

Unless there is a more cohesive plan you’re stuck with trying to fit industry into land that is available instead of looking at a map and starting from what’s needed. Where you put it will depend on all sorts of constraints but at least it will make some sense.

No

Representation ID: 91459

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Lucia Restall Orr

Evidence recommends that between 75 and 125ha of land be allocated for Employment Growth, however the Plan proposes 125ha, the upper limit of development. This is unnecessary and will have larger impacts on important environmental assets and habitats in the area, as well as designated sites and protected species, and does not align with the Government’s 30% by 2030 targets.

Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is also concerned regarding the lack of up to date employment need data, and no evidence for Strategic Industrial Need before 2045.

The allocations are also directly next to several important Local Wildlife Sites.

No

Representation ID: 91536

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mary Adams

Evidence recommends that between 75 and 125ha of land be allocated for Employment Growth, however the Plan proposes 125ha, the upper limit of development. This is unnecessary and will have larger impacts on important environmental assets and habitats in the area, and does not align with the Government’s 30% by 2030 targets.
The allocations are adjoining Chesterton Wood, an important LWS, and extremely close to the River Avon and Tributaries LWS, Redlands Brake PLWS, New Waters LWS, Budbrooke Farm Woodlands and Black Brake Plantation LWS, development on which would have detrimental effects for wildlife and climate change targets.

No

Representation ID: 91832

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Tim Burridge

Too much land is being allocated for employment growth and there is a lack of up to date employment data supporting this.

Yes

Representation ID: 91991

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Nigel Briggs

The suggested locations appear to be close to transport networks and within easy travel distance of centres of population.

Yes

Representation ID: 92117

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: General Aviation Awareness Council and Airfield Operators Group

The identification of sites to meet employment need is appropriate in order to support existing employment assets and to create the right environment and capacity for the ongoing economic health of South Warwickshire.
Potential Strategic Sites 2 and 1 together with upgraded road and rail infrastructure, are particularly well located to benefit from the proximity of, and services provided by, Wellesbourne Airfield.
The critical mass created in the Core Opportunity Area will benefit the wider South Warwickshire.

Yes

Representation ID: 92373

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Julian Brown

Agree = Logical

No

Representation ID: 92458

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Stuart Alford

I am strongly opposed to such development in the Greenbelt, therefore i believe Wedgnock Park Farm should be ruled out.

No

Representation ID: 92588

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Bex Thomson

Do not agree with any business development on green beit

No

Representation ID: 92661

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Heidi Ambrose-Brown

Wedgnock Park Farm is unsuitable for an employment site due to its proximity to the Birmingham Road and the A46. Both of these roads become quickly congested already with the current level of traffic. The A46 floods and queues on the slip road off to Warwick back up onto the A46.
The Birmingham Road would become very dangerous for both local traffic and pedestrians if there were to be an increase in the volume of vehicles - both domestic and commercial. It is already used as a cut through by lorries to get to the M6.

Build adjacent to M40.

Other

Representation ID: 92671

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Tony Hughes

There is massive concern that Gaydon village gets swept along with commercial/employment development proposed for the wider area adjacent to the JLR site. The proposed development (SDC e-planning 23/01054/OUT) will create multiple issues of air, noise, flooding and sewage pollution, in an area already subjected to a cocktail of pollutants from the M.40 and the building of 3,000 houses at Gaydon-Lighthorne Heath. The residents of Gaydon are not NIMBYs: I have been reliably informed that our area (including M.40 corridor) has one of the highest development quotients in UK over the past 30 years. SWLP surely can't permit further development...?

Other

Representation ID: 93374

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Ms heather golding

I am concerned that the current planning approach focuses too heavily on short-term, large-scale commercial developments, following an outdated economic model based on GDP and growth. This overlooks the increasing importance of small businesses, self-employment, and industries that foster long-term thriving over mere growth. Additionally, infrastructure, such as transport and flood risk management, is insufficient for the scale of development proposed. The lack of attention to aesthetics also undermines the creation of vibrant, desirable places. Planning should focus on fostering diverse, adaptable communities, supporting independent businesses, and building environments that balance economic growth with quality of life.

Other

Representation ID: 93393

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr geoff marston

Less land should be allocated for employment growth to protect important habitats.
better data and analysis is required
placement of allocations impacts significant sites (listed in detailed response)

Yes

Representation ID: 93829

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Stephanie Pullan

Agree with the proposal for land at Red House Farm, Wedgnock Park Farm and JLR allocation at Gaydon. These are sites with established infrastructure, transportation links, and fewer environmental constraints alongside a more positive HELAA score for development.

Yes

Representation ID: 93886

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Beverley Comley

Wellesbourne airfield needs protection as an airfield and its associated businesses - keeping two runways. Small scale development only in Wellesbourne.

Yes

Representation ID: 93934

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carina Taylor

More job opportunities required

No

Representation ID: 93978

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sue Scurrah

Disagree strongly with the wedgenock park farm site as this would involve loss of greenbelt, agricultural land and wildlife habitats.

No

Representation ID: 94359

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Waters

The 2 WDC sites provide almost double the area required so it is unnecessary to include the addition of the Gaydon site. The 2 WDC sites are already ideally located close to settlement areas and other suitable infrastructure

Yes

Representation ID: 94591

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon Town Centre Strategic Partnership

in principle

No

Representation ID: 94611

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd

Agent: Turley

The policy direction is too narrowly focused and is deficient in terms of non-strategic needs. The evidence states that short and medium term sites are needed around Warwick and we consider that no reliance can be given to the extant allocations or the strategic draft allocations in meeting this need. Rainier's site at J15 should be considered to address this need, but it needs to be reassessed with accurate flood modelling data as agreed with the EA. This will confirm it should not have been sifted out.

Other

Representation ID: 94851

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford-upon-Avon Town Transport Group

There is potential for a development around Gaydon to become a fully fledged Strategic Site. Location on the M40, and with the potential for a New Settlement with a new station on the Chiltern Rail Line, would provide enviable travel connectivity to Birmingham Airport, Leamington, Birmingham, and London, making use of released train pathways once HS2 is open from 2033.
Research centres and Warwick University expansion could expand the employment offering. A strong employment base would provide a New Settlement with a clear purpose, making it a success. See responses to SG13/14, and New Settlements F3 & G1.

No

Representation ID: 94968

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Darren Downes

Bearly & Wilmcote: The vast majority who would locate here would commuteback out of the immediate area to either Birmingham, Leamington, Warwick, Coventry and further south, and will use cars to do so. It is well documented that the housing will be taken up from people outside the area (Oxfordshire, Bucks etc) due to cheaper housing - the majority of which will remain in their existing jobs due to the higher pay levels they enjoy with jobs associated in those areas.

No

Representation ID: 95083

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Chris Maltby

Please see previous comments regarding proposed Wedgenock Park Farm and also the need to develop land located outside of the green belt as a first principle before land within the green belt is considered

No

Representation ID: 95503

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Sue Cuff

The Plan proposes 125ha, the upper limit of development. This is unnecessary and will have larger impacts on important environmental assets and habitats in the area, as well as designated sites and protected species, and does not align with the Government’s 30% by 2030 targets.

The allocations are directly next to Chesterton Wood, an important Local Wildlife site, and extremely close to the River Avon and Tributaries LWS, Redlands Brake PLWS, New Waters LWS, Budbrooke Farm Woodlands and Black Brake Plantation LWS, development on which would have detrimental effects for wildlife and climate change targets.

Yes

Representation ID: 95919

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Tesh

yes

No

Representation ID: 96158

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rosemary Collier

Evidence recommends that between 75 and 125ha of land be allocated for Employment Growth, however the Plan proposes 125ha, the upper limit of development. This is unnecessary and will have larger impacts on important environmental assets and habitats in the area, as well as designated sites and protected species, and does not align with the Government’s 30% by 2030 targets.