Yes

Representation ID: 86149

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

No

Representation ID: 86961

Received: 31/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Arthur Hogan-Fleming

-

Yes

Representation ID: 87111

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: S Gardner

Whilst I support this section, there needs to be more emphasis placed on the importance of green and active paces in developments and the conversion of areas to those of AOBs or protected spaces…

Yes

Representation ID: 87118

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Steph Johnson

Broadly support.
However, do not support building on green belt in any circumstances.
More creative ways to compensate land owners should be invested in so that farmers and land owners don't just have to sell their land to developers to make money. They should be incentivised to create food for humans and animals. They should be incentivised for maintaining wild and bio-diverse spaces.

Yes

Representation ID: 87619

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

I agree

Yes

Representation ID: 89116

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

i agree

Yes

Representation ID: 89166

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Mr nigel Freeth

we need to protect our green belt land to support the environment. any poor grade no agricultural land should be used to off set CO2 emissions & not built on

Yes

Representation ID: 89301

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Jon Knight

Broadly supportive, although given past experiences with developments I wonder how much of this will be held up against the need for development land. But I'd rather have these measures here and find them less effective than I'd like, than not have them at all.

Other

Representation ID: 89423

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Tim Twynam

Agree and Disagree with elements of the policy.

Yes

Representation ID: 89762

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Compton Verney

n/a

Other

Representation ID: 90034

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Macvie

.

Other

Representation ID: 91037

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Canal & River Trust

The Local Plan should seek to ensure that new development close to canals aims to protect and enhance their role as wildlife habitats through appropriate and sensitively designed landscape planting schemes and design of open spaces within developments. New development should seek to strengthen the role of canal corridors as part of the strategic green/blue infrastructure network, and particularly their value in providing a connection between other areas of green space.

Yes

Representation ID: 91235

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Radford Semele Parish Council

‘Radford Semele Parish Council supports the overall thrust of the chapter on biodiversity and
environmental resilience but believes it should be strengthened. It should protect public
footpaths as linear open space. Areas of Restraint to avoid coalescence of settlements
should be protected from development. More emphasise should be placed on the
protection of productive Grade 3b agricultural land.

Yes

Representation ID: 91602

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sidney Syson

I am concerned about how the Council will monitor some of these propsals and enforce them.

Yes

Representation ID: 91728

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Norman

Sensible

Other

Representation ID: 92280

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: SolStar Power Limited

Agent: Enzygo

No further comments to what is provided under Draft Policy Direction 49.

Also have no comments for Draft Policy Direction 36-48.

Yes

Representation ID: 92414

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Daphne Tilley

Yes but the plan affecting new settlement B1 will lose valuable farmland which plays a valuable part in achieving these aims. Therefore, the loss of at least three productive farms contradicts this policy so B1 sound not be put forward as a viable site

No

Representation ID: 92664

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Bex Thomson

No green belt land should be used

Other

Representation ID: 93359

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Ian Michael Hayes

Greenbelt land should remain greenbelt land. Development should be focussed on areas that are not protected in this way

Yes

Representation ID: 93628

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr JAMES STEWART

I agree with this policy because the best and most versatile agricultural land must be safeguarded for future food production. Protecting high-quality farmland ensures long-term agricultural sustainability, supporting local food supply and reducing reliance on imports. Once lost to development, this valuable land cannot be replaced, threatening future food security. Preserving it allows for continued farming, maintaining rural economies and environmental benefits. Sustainable planning must prioritize agricultural land protection to meet future needs while balancing development responsibly.

Yes

Representation ID: 93755

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Cllr David Armstrong

Yes, I welcome the strong ambition for biodiversity and environmental benefit.

Yes

Representation ID: 93828

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Warwick District Green Party

We support the direction of travel implied in all the draft policy directions in this chapter. However, effective implementation will be challenging.

Yes

Representation ID: 94347

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: phillip claydon

Policy must have teeth. Existing/future and local sites must be protected. Any mitigations for developments must be undertaken as close to site as possible.

Yes

Representation ID: 94623

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Penny Gray

Just a couple of comments

1. I gather than the WWT's work on Local Nature Recovery Strategy hasn't been incorporated yet. It would be good to see this integrated.
2. Re DPD 49 on Agricultural land, some mention should surely be made re future food supply, given the increasing risk of future flooding andor drought and the need for adaptation.

Other

Representation ID: 95315

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

yes - subject to acceptance of specific comments against individual questions

Yes

Representation ID: 95909

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Carter

The overall thrust of the chapter on biodiversity and environmental resilience should be strengthened. It should protect public footpaths as linear open space. Areas of Restraint to avoid coalescence of settlements should be protected from development. More emphasise should be placed on the protection of productive Grade 3b agricultural land.’

Yes

Representation ID: 95983

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Tesh

Yes. See comments on11.3, 11.6, 11.7, 11.8, 11.11, 11.13 and 11.14.

No

Representation ID: 96079

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Edward Wilson

It comes across as a sticking plaster over the building developments and solar panel maps of destruction of the landscape.

Yes

Representation ID: 96377

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Southam Town Council

Southam Town, District and County elected representatives broadly support these proposals subject to comment on Policy Direction 45.

Yes

Representation ID: 96498

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Shipston Town Council

See comments on Draft Policy Directions.
This needs to have much more focus in the future. Experience has shown that developers have little or no regard or developed responsibility for the environment they change forever.