Yes

Representation ID: 94384

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Alan Blandamer

Air quality is always a concern and should avoid increasing air pollution in Stratford by considering settlement options outside of Stratford.

Yes

Representation ID: 94936

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Ainsworth

Air quality is a concern in stratford and settlment options outside should be considered first.

Yes

Representation ID: 95031

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Tracey Grimes

Moving to the midlands from Essex for us was to improve our life with fresh air and the countryside and a different pace of life. Air quality is all part of this and building next to the Welcome hills will impact this.

Yes

Representation ID: 95036

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lynette Sutton

Pollution will increase with the implementation of the south Warwickshire plan and the council must look at the pace of developments in respect of this.
Will have an effect on people living within these areas

No

Representation ID: 95125

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anna Finerty

The pollution will increase, it will have a negative impact on health and will ruin the beauty of the area

Yes

Representation ID: 95132

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Clarke

Development of Site SG22 would likely be a source of air pollution, increase light pollution within the area, and likely contribute to flooding events in nearby Middletown.
There should be active monitoring of all aspects Air Quality, light pollution etc. prior to developments being agreed in order to establish baselines and ensure no worsening of current situations arise as a result of the development. Monitoring should continue beyond the construction phase of the site.

Yes

Representation ID: 95223

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

no further comment

Yes

Representation ID: 95309

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Lee Tallen

Feels obvious to say, but yes avoiding further air pollution in Stratford should be a key consideration where air quality already feels like an issue, i.e. gridlocked Birmingham Road for example. New settlements would alleviate congestion and the air quality issues this causes.

Yes

Representation ID: 95472

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Barrie Goodman

Developing outside of Stratford where air quality is already a concern will obviously prevent levels from rising.

Yes

Representation ID: 95618

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr James Davis

Settlement options outside of Stratford would be preferable as air quality and pollution is already a concern. The Birmingham Road is already heavily congested and with the possibility of an extra 1400 cars the air quality due to extra pollution is a major concern.

Yes

Representation ID: 95759

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Bloor Homes Western

Agent: Marrons

An approach where environmental enhancement and pollution reduction are integrated into developments from the outset is supported. The proposed requirement that new development proposals do not have an adverse impact on existing operations lacks specificity regarding what constitutes 'existing operations' and the threshold at which an effect would be deemed unacceptable. Where development is considered to have a detrimental impact on environmental quality, there are already established legal responsibilities that prevent adverse effects, in the NPPF and statutory environmental protection.

Yes

Representation ID: 95854

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr UDAYA EEDUPUGANTI

Should avoid increasing air polution in Stratford

Yes

Representation ID: 95952

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Tesh

Yes

No

Representation ID: 96119

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Judith Palmer

C1 and B1 developments would remove the important nature and environmental corridor that help to balance the impact of the M40, M42, railway and major conurbations pollution and provides a haven for nature, bordered by these hazards to nature

Yes

Representation ID: 96348

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Southam Town Council

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

Yes

Representation ID: 96548

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Shipston Town Council

Agree

Other

Representation ID: 96885

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

Discounting idealistic but in practice unfeasible ambition for electric vehicles, mitigating pollution from traffic would be challenging if at all possible. Avoiding impact from run-off and sewerage on areas already prone to flooding would be difficult and expensive in proposed site BW.

Yes

Representation ID: 97019

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: John Dinnie

Yes

Yes

Representation ID: 97048

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Alcester Town Council

This approach is agreed by 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’).

Other

Representation ID: 97056

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Roger Horsfall

For pollution control, sites MUST fully comply with suitability for purpose and controls come from planning design not mitigation, with robust assessments and enforcement.
Baginton has suffered 4 years of Low Frequency acoustic pollution (UKBIC) due to noisy equipment placed on site nearest to the village and failed physical mitigation measures.
Noise regulations use outdated measures based solely on decibel levels & higher frequency sounds, ignoring the growing research results of physiological damage caused by the low frequency emissions of traffic, chillers, turbines etc. Employees leave the site after a shift, residents have constant exposure recognisably worsened during nighttime hours.

Yes

Representation ID: 97127

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Emily Morris

You should avoid increasing air pollution in Stratford, where air quality is already a concern and consider options outside of Stratford

Yes

Representation ID: 97195

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Tysoe Parish Council

Yes

Yes

Representation ID: 97269

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Squab Hall Farm

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

An approach where environmental enhancement and pollution reduction are integrated into developments from the outset is supported. The proposed requirement that new development proposals do not have an adverse impact on existing operations lacks specificity regarding what constitutes 'existing operations' and the threshold at which an effect would be deemed unacceptable. Where development is considered to have a detrimental impact on environmental quality, there are already established legal responsibilities that prevent adverse effects, in the NPPF and statutory environmental protection.

Yes

Representation ID: 97366

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Guy Morris

Any mitigation of air polution should be taken. Developing existing sites, adds to congestion and increases air polution.

Other

Representation ID: 97400

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Godwin Developments

Godwin Developments acknowledge the draft policy direction suggested in Policy Direction – 29 – Pollution. It is accepted that development should seek to minimise pollution and where possible contribute to the protection and improvement of the quality of air, land and water.

Other

Representation ID: 97783

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Jeffery

Mitigating safety issues arising from flooding would be extremely challenging and costly in proposed settlement BW. The ambition for predominately electric cars is to be applauded but in reality is unfeasible so pollution from traffic would be extremely difficult to manage

Yes

Representation ID: 97868

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Stafford-scott

Should avoid increasing air pollution in Stratford where air quality is a concern, and consider settlement
options outside of Stratford to relieve the air quality issues which have a massive impact of child health. It would be a very strange decision to approve settlements which would increase traffic further resulting in serious health consequences for children.

Yes

Representation ID: 97964

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Charlotte Careless

Building on Clopton quarter would put an unnecessary increase on pollution. We should look at alternative sites such as those not as close to Stratford.

Yes

Representation ID: 98015

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Bowater

We should try to avoid increasing air pollution in Stratford-upon-avon where air quality is already a concern.

Yes

Representation ID: 98117

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: William Davis Limited

Agent: Marrons

An approach where environmental enhancement and pollution reduction are integrated into developments from the outset is supported. The proposed requirement that new development proposals do not have an adverse impact on existing operations lacks specificity regarding what constitutes 'existing operations' and the threshold at which an effect would be deemed unacceptable. Where development is considered to have a detrimental impact on environmental quality, there are already established legal responsibilities that prevent adverse effects, in the NPPF and statutory environmental protection.