Yes

Representation ID: 98315

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr

The approach is relevant and proportionate. Hopefully the penalties stated in bullet point 2 will be applied to Smiths Concrete's application to their current quarry excavation proposals for Barford.

Other

Representation ID: 98606

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alice Hibbert

Avoid increasing air pollution in Stratford. This could be achieved by prioritising settlement options outside of Stratford to relieve the air quality issues.

Yes

Representation ID: 98640

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: X2 New Settlement Consortium

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: 98945

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Cotswold District Council

Support

No

Representation ID: 99965

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Welford on Avon Parish Council

New settlement proposal E1 should not go ahead if this policy is adopted. There is now way that this development in the middle of no wehere can be considered as sustainable. Everyone drives in the their cars to everywhere !! we know this we live there !!

Yes

Representation ID: 100234

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Loades

Agreed. The potential impact from an massive increase in development on the environment, and in this case pollution, MUST be taken into consideration.

Yes

Representation ID: 100385

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Parsons

I agree with the approach laid out and note that by developing any of the proposed areas highlighted for potential development would not align with this approach due to the inevitable rise in pollution and reduction in air quality that increased habitation would involve

Yes

Representation ID: 100396

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

Air quality in Stratford is a concern and any development that increases road use should be avoided.

Yes

Representation ID: 101032

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Rowington Landowner Consortium

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

In summary, Draft Policy Direction 29 provides a robust framework to address pollution concerns, ensuring that new developments contribute positively to environmental sustainability and public health.

Other

Representation ID: 101160

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mac Mic Group

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: 101198

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land Management Limited

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: 101404

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bellway Strategic Land / Ashberry Strategic Land

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: 101483

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land

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: 101526

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Alderley Holdings Trust

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: 101595

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Bart Slob

Yes, I agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-29-Pollution. The policy takes a comprehensive approach by addressing various forms of pollution, including air, noise, light, and water, and ensures that development is designed to minimize environmental harm. The emphasis on ensuring that development does not lead to significant pollution and includes mitigation strategies aligns with the goal of protecting public health and local environments. Moreover, the focus on Air Quality Management Areas and the requirement for air quality assessments is particularly important in areas like SG04, where development could impact air quality and residents' health.

No

Representation ID: 101701

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the area

Yes

Representation ID: 101837

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Isabel Collins

we should avoid increasing air pollution in an area where the quality is already a concern

No

Representation ID: 101925

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

We need to make sure in reducing pollution we ensure the drains and sewage system is adequately updated to cope with additional demand from new homes before the homes are built to remove the reality of raw sewage and overflowing drains.

Yes

Representation ID: 101966

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Walkden

Protecting Stratford from additional pollution and degradation of air quality is essential so development in new settlements should support this.

No

Representation ID: 102050

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Bianca Hollis

Why is the council still using pesticides on the grass verges along Avon Crescent, Dale Avenue and Banbury Road??
I’m deeply concerned by The River Avon being polluted. Wildlife, plants, soils and humans are suffering.
The town air is terribly polluted and the traffic is terrible!
Transport and air and water pollution must be addressed!

Yes

Representation ID: 102123

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Crump

The issue of pollution is clearly central in relation to proposals regarding Meon Vale and Long Marston Airfield. If motor vehicle journeys are generated through the need of residents to travel to and from urban work and other locations, then noise, air and light pollution will be the consequences. There would be a negative impact upon both the environment and the individuals living within it. This would defeat the policy objective and render the development proposals unsustainable.

Other

Representation ID: 102318

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Alton

Decisions of the council have led to significant increases in pollution. Examples include the Union View development, the roadworks on the A4177 adjacent to that development, the work at Stanks Island which causeed enormous disruption and associated pollution (not to mention cost) for little or no practical benefit and the current traffic scheme serving Tachbrook Park. A good policy is of no benefit if it is then badly applied - which has occurred far too frequently.

Yes

Representation ID: 102352

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: BDW Trading Limited

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

In summary, Draft Policy Direction 29 provides a robust framework to address pollution concerns, ensuring that new developments contribute positively to environmental sustainability and public health.

Yes

Representation ID: 102363

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough

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: 103084

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bloor Homes

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: 103327

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jenny Stevens

Air quality in Stratford is already poor

Yes

Representation ID: 103636

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Laura Nicholas

The quality of our environment must be protected by not building on greenbelt sites, protecting waterways and ground water

Yes

Representation ID: 103928

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Amarjit Gill

Air quality is important so we should avoid making Stratford even larger and increasing congestion where better alternatives exist

Other

Representation ID: 104064

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Mary Manandhar

Refer to other comments on pollution in this submission and Wold Health Organisation's policies and guidelines on this. I am happy to provide more information and resources as a recently retired WHO HQ's technical officer and long-time public health professional.

Yes

Representation ID: 104181

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Norrie

Yes, this is a good policy.

I would only add that urban greening (e.g. trees, green roofs, etc) absorbs air pollution, and should be mentioned as supported under this policy.