Yes

Representation ID: 92627

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Bex Thomson

Not if it impacts green belt

Yes

Representation ID: 92667

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Fairburn

I agree - but on the plan for potential development sites you have housing around Bordon Hill (SG18). We have seen increased flooding of Shottery Brook since the development north of Evesham Rd on Bordon Hill. Further development on that Hill, must surely make this worse - affecting the homes along Luddington Road and Stannells Close, where I live.
So - we need more than fine words about not building in a way that increases flood risk for others. We need better modelling.

Yes

Representation ID: 92812

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carolyn Stacey

For this reason- greenfield site development and associated loss of vegetation and increase in impermeable surfaces should be avoided.

Yes

Representation ID: 92829

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mr JAMES STEWART

Reducing flood risk is essential for sustainable development. New housing should always be built in the lowest flood-risk areas to protect communities from future disasters. Converting greenfield land into development increases flood risk by reducing natural drainage and increasing surface runoff. Instead, grey belt and brownfield sites should be prioritized, as they offer a safer and more sustainable alternative without damaging farmland or worsening flooding. Protecting green spaces helps manage water flow naturally, reducing the risk of future flooding and ensuring resilient, long-term development.

Yes

Representation ID: 92980

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Dominic Momcilovic

Development on farming or green belt land is well proven to increase the risk of flooding. I would not support anything that creates flooding as farmland & green space absorbs water - development does not in the same way.

Yes

Representation ID: 93004

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Alison Blake

Putting in flood defences after development is going to be more costly in the long run

No

Representation ID: 93058

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Matt Sansom

Building anymore housing/industrial sites is going to significantly increase the levels of flooding, especially between the main road access to the area which already floods regularly. This is already a problem which is causing road damage and now very frequent water pipe damage under and around this road.

Yes

Representation ID: 93089

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Martina Hunt

Flood risk is serious within Clopton Quarter. There has already been a huge impact with the developments on the top of Birmingham Road, with recent roadworks taking place to try and rectify flood and water drainage, with local new housing experiencing flooding. SG18 development will further exacerbate this problem. New development should be prioritised in lowest flood risk areas and on brown field sites, away from existing urban areas.

Yes

Representation ID: 93148

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Penny Gray

The councils should strongly enforce this as developers are all too happy to build in flood plains/areas at risk of flooding, this increasing the risk and impacts of flooding in susceptible areas such as Stratford.

Other

Representation ID: 93466

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Wellesbourne and Walton Parish Council

Flood risk from all sources is mentioned and that flood risk assessment should be obtained, and a drainage strategy is needed. This is not necessarily part of outline planning permission and should be included before this is given and included at preapplication. . To add it after outline permission has been granted is too late.

Yes

Representation ID: 93467

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Vivien Haggarty

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 93665

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Claire STEWART

Minimizing flood risk is crucial for sustainable development. Housing should be built in low-risk areas to protect communities from future flooding. Developing greenfield land disrupts natural drainage, increasing runoff and heightening flood risks. Instead, grey belt and brownfield sites should be prioritized, offering a safer and more sustainable option without harming farmland. Preserving green spaces helps manage water naturally, reducing the likelihood of flooding and ensuring resilient, long-term growth.

Yes

Representation ID: 93696

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Cllr David Armstrong

Yes, I agree.

Yes

Representation ID: 93743

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr George Power

Siting new developments in areas of known flood risk is hazardous and short sighted. Destruction of green belt land by turning it into development sites will increase flood risk.

Yes

Representation ID: 93798

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr William Campbell

Agree in principle

Other

Representation ID: 93838

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Zbigniew Franczuk

Building on agricultural land which is also on a flood plain in the end affects all the residents in this area
Agricultural land should be used for it’s purpose and not for other purposes

No

Representation ID: 93903

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Patrick Embleton

Inevitably increased housing in and around Shipston on Stour will cause increased flooding in the old town. The existing new builds flood resilience work has been found wanting so unless there is serious new ideas the old town is doomed

Yes

Representation ID: 93909

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Beverley Comley

To reduce surface run off more importance should be put into increasing the levels of woodland and floodplain areas to increase biodiversity and prevent the big riverside towns from the more frequent flooding that is now the norm. Any area for development should be well away from any river or brook and no surface water from the development should enter the sewers or rivers.

Yes

Representation ID: 94094

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Samantha Stafford Scott

Priority should be given to grey and brownfield sites with the lowest flood risk. Furthermore protection from development should be given to greenfield sites and farmland which would otherwise increase floodrisk

Yes

Representation ID: 94117

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Kelly

New development should be prioritised in areas of lowest flood risk. Turning green field into urban
areas increases flood risk, greybelt/brown field land should be prioritised over greenfield and farmland for development.

Yes

Representation ID: 94135

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Stuart Mace

Flood plains should not be built on.

Yes

Representation ID: 94313

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Ms M Walker

`

Yes

Representation ID: 94390

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Alan Blandamer

Any new development should be in areas of lowest flood risk and should avoid turning green field areas into urban areas which would increase flood risk. Greybelt and brown field land should be preferred over greenfield and farmland for development.

Other

Representation ID: 94633

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Rainier Developments Ltd

Agent: Turley

Rainier have broad support for this, but we note that the data and policy context around flood risk is in a state of flux, and that policies such as this need to ensure they take the right approach to flood risk. One example is around surface water flooding and ensuring that risk is informed by site specific FRA rather than high level Flood Map for Planning and the Flood Risk from Surface Water, which the draft policy currently suggests.

Yes

Representation ID: 94932

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Ainsworth

Yes - new devel;opments should be built where no or the least risk of flooding is. Turning green filed areas into urban aras increases flood risk. Grey bel and brown field land should always be developed before green belt and farm land even though it may be less profitable for the developers.

Yes

Representation ID: 95003

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

Yes, but it must be enforceable. It can be envisaged that a new site for development could easily push a known surface water flooding problem onto the adjoining site – a problem that might not become apparent until a few years after completion i.e. after the developer has left the site and/or any commercial liability

Other

Representation ID: 95020

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Tracey Grimes

The problem is that regardless of what fllod plan is laid out, developers ride rough shode over it and the planning departments are not strong enough in contering it. The evidence of this is the fact that Flood Re has had to be established in the UK market which unfortunately only has a certain life span, so i fear for the future.

Yes

Representation ID: 95149

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Frawley

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 95299

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Lee Tallen

Yes, it is obvious that development should occur in areas not prone to flooding, something clopton quarter of SG18 is prone too and has been made much worse due to development allowed nearby (videos of water streaming down roads etc). This does not appear to have been taken into account in the 'preferred options' consideration? Tarmac'ing farmland/greenbelt will only increase flood risk surely?

No

Representation ID: 95303

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Alamo

Agent: Harris Lamb

Draft policy J largely reiterates the guidance contained in the Framework and the PPG on flood risk and the sequential test. It is unnecessary in our view to repeat national policy in the Plan and it should just refer the reader directly to the Framework and PPG.