Yes

Representation ID: 86075

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

No

Representation ID: 86664

Received: 29/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

Keep South Warwickshire Farming means keeping it as Farms.

Farmers get huge subsidies for owning land and large tax breaks. If any farming business then uses this privilege to diversify out of farming, they should be facing the same planning demands as any other individual or business. There is nothing special about farming as a business.

Most South Warwickshire farms do not produce food for humans, they produce food for animals. This is not a carbon sustainable model.

Public support for farmers should be focussed on getting public benefits in return, by way of land, water and air sustainability improvements.

No

Representation ID: 86915

Received: 31/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Arthur Hogan-Fleming

The level of rural crime increasing and the "family farm tax" will gradually kill off rural employment.

Yes

Representation ID: 87369

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Bryony Dinnie

Rural development and employment must be supported especially if more houses are built in rural areas

Yes

Representation ID: 87394

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

None

Yes

Representation ID: 87576

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

I agree

Yes

Representation ID: 88417

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: British Film Institute

Agent: Ms Giulia Bunting

BFI is the UK’s lead organisation for film and the moving image.
BFI’s storage facility at Lighthorne forms an integral part of the BFI’s National Archive. BFI is currently looking at options to expand its operations at this long-established brownfield site.
Draft Policy Direction 18 should provide for the development of existing brownfield sites in rural areas enabling the growth and expansion of businesses and operations, subject to criteria relating to impacts, to support the appropriate expansion of all types of sustainable businesses in rural areas.
This approach is supported by NPPF paras 85, 88(a), and 89.

Yes

Representation ID: 88420

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Maurice Stokes

Farmers need the additional supplementary income.

No

Representation ID: 88690

Received: 17/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Ida Marjorie Brown

Rural Employment and Diversification should be reviewed on case by case basis and merit where it provides opportunity for rural jobs in rural communities. I do not agree that is should be tied to your spatial growth strategy. That is too rigid and inflexible and can be misinterpreted. I believe if a solid business case and proposal can be put forward and justified then the councils should have the flexibility to approve on a case by case. The SWLP should not dictate where these sites should be.

Yes

Representation ID: 88822

Received: 18/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sidney Syson

But this also ties in with transport and accommodation needs.

No

Representation ID: 89035

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

Agriculture must come first and preservation of land classified in quality of 3A and above should be protected. Diversification should only be allowed where it will not damage agriculture or harm the environment

Yes

Representation ID: 89248

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Jon Knight

Providing rural opportunities means that communities can stay together, especially in the face of mechanised farming reducing workforce sizes over the last 30+ years. I think this policy should work well with draft policy direction 17, so that the new diversified rural industries are gree/eco-friendly/biodiversity friendly ones. Don't just allow car body shops and container storage facilities on "spare" bits of farms.

Yes

Representation ID: 89406

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Amanda Knight

No additional comments

Other

Representation ID: 90459

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Dr Louise Stewart

If the intention is to support local agricultural businesses, then please advise why the BW strategic growth proposal has been included? This is primarily based in inclusion if agricultural land and won’t=ld therefore seem to run counter to the proposals included for consultation on this section.

No

Representation ID: 90492

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Jayne Jones

No evidence of how this will apply with SG17, without details of proposed infrafstructure improvements

Yes

Representation ID: 90587

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Terry Simmonds

Incentivize employers to set up in rural areas, encourage long term commitment, then provide housing only if the employers come.

Don't just allow more housing to be built assuming it will then attract new employers.

Other

Representation ID: 91164

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Radford Semele Parish Council

‘This policy should make it clear that it does not provide support for solar farms or wind
farms which should be subject to a separate set of criteria.’

Yes

Representation ID: 91264

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Norman

Sensible

Other

Representation ID: 91754

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Taylor

I agree providing that Nature and ecological goals are set and kept

Yes

Representation ID: 92276

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: SolStar Power Limited

Agent: Enzygo

SolStar Power support Draft Policy Direction 18, but consider that the draft policy could be further expanded.

Other

Representation ID: 92389

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Julian Brown

I partially agree with the policy but oppose employment development outside settlement boundaries, even if it aligns with the Spatial Growth Strategy. Developing on green belt land near towns with better infrastructure (within 5-7 miles) is unwise. This plan lacks adequate road infrastructure planning for potential growth. For instance, SG23's employment development is unnecessary when SG24, B1, A2, and BW are more suitable sites for larger housing and business development.

Other

Representation ID: 92947

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Alison Blake

I presume you are consulting with the farmers about this, though I would like to have seen mention of encouraging the growing of different crops to keep supply local.

Yes

Representation ID: 93795

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr William Campbell

Agree in principle

Yes

Representation ID: 93894

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Beverley Comley

No comment

No

Representation ID: 94075

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Stuart Mace

Expansion of and enhancement to existing businesses should be promoted before diversification. Focus must be on food sustainability and home grown produce, ahead of turning farms in to campsites or 'solar farms' with consequential loss of arable crops, grazing land and rural landscape.

Yes

Representation ID: 94789

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Caroline Jackson

I support this. Taking away agricultural land which is earning money then gives the need for farmers to diversify if they have the opportunity to do so

No

Representation ID: 94889

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

The wording in second bullet point seems to permit development outside of settlement boundaries if of an appropriate scale to location.
Supporting rural employment is accepted BUT this must be within a BUAB. Experience has shown that an approved application for business accommodation can subsequently be demonstrated as lacking demand and the application converted into residential. Attempts to breach Settlement Boundaries by offering rural employment accommodation with subsequent variation must be avoided. Similarly if the development takes place but not occupied Change of Use should not be permitted. The developer should revise tenancy type and/or charges

Yes

Representation ID: 95146

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Frawley

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 95621

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jon Redhead

The area of Green Belt land behind my property has, in the past, been used by the local Farmers for Sheep grazing, Wheat, & Barley crops, and was always a fertile, viable business, for which there is now, so much need. This would be a fantastic return to use for the land, which is needed to support our present population.

Other

Representation ID: 95842

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Carter

This policy should make it clear that it does not provide support for solar farms or wind farms which should be subject to a separate set of criteria.