Other

Representation ID: 96856

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

The proposals are fine in theory but are idealistic and not achievable for all settlement sites. Site BW is a good example of this as it has productive agricultural land. To say that things should be protected unless you happen to decide otherwise is cynical.

Yes

Representation ID: 97132

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Alcester Town Council

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’) broadly supports the proposals in this Chapter.
Environmental protections are required to preserve the countryside and the landscapes that make this area special.
The preservation of local green spaces and the enhancement of biodiversity should be a priority.
Sustainable drainage systems are essential to mitigate flood risks.

Yes

Representation ID: 97191

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: John Dinnie

I agree with policy directions 36 to 49 and feel that these should also be used to re-examine the proposed SG sites in relationship to prior housing developments and, where necessary, justify the enhancement or improvement of them as open space, green space or space for nature in sympathy with the local landscape to rebalance the previous harms caused.

No

Representation ID: 97286

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Squab Hall Farm

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

The principle of Draft Chapter 11 is supported, although the current draft policy directions are at this moment vague, and specific issues are raised with Draft Policy Directions as set out above.

Yes

Representation ID: 97423

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Peter Lewin

All of is essential whenever, if ever, this development goes ahead.

Yes

Representation ID: 97767

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Jeffery

Proposals are fine in theory but are idealistic and are not achievable for all settlement sites. Site BW is an example of this as it contains productive Green Belt agricultural land.

Other

Representation ID: 97983

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Brenda Stewart

As farmland makes is a large percentage of the area I hope ways will be found and implemented to encourage and help farmers to farm their land sustainably, so that they can encourage wildlife and carbon sequestration while still being able to make a profit.

Yes

Representation ID: 97999

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Brenda Stewart

It is very important for our future food supply that South Warwickshire becomes more environmentally resilient, and that farmers are helped to deal with and adapt to the effects of climate change in a sustainable way.

No

Representation ID: 98141

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: William Davis Limited

Agent: Marrons

The principle of draft Chapter 11 is supported, although the current draft policy directions are at this moment vague, and specific issues are raised with Draft Policy Directions as set out above.

No

Representation ID: 98626

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: X2 New Settlement Consortium

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

The principle of Draft Chapter 11 is supported, although the current draft policy directions are at this moment vague, and specific issues are raised with Draft Policy Directions as set out above.

Yes

Representation ID: 99086

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Cotswold District Council

Support

Yes

Representation ID: 99230

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jacqueline West

Should also be a limit on amount of agricultural land that can be taken for large scale renewable energy within an area, with additional consideration of other developments identified. Otherwise likely to get solar farm + transport infrastructure + strategic growth / new homes all taking over in the same area with total loss of the rural landscape and its amenity/historic, wellbeing and food production benefits

Yes

Representation ID: 99579

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diane Wilson

If it ensure no further loss of green spaces. Well managed and supportive of wildlife habitats

Yes

Representation ID: 99697

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Gillian Padgham

I broadly support these proposals.

Yes

Representation ID: 99700

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Gillian Padgham

agree

Yes

Representation ID: 100468

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Loades

I broadly support the proposals concerning Biodiversity and Environmental factors.

Yes

Representation ID: 100506

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

NA

Yes

Representation ID: 100554

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Newbould

na

Other

Representation ID: 100606

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diana Heinrich

I don't believe that farmers are recognized for creating bidiversity. Around our area hedges are everywhere, old pasture, woodland, all arable fields have 3 meters edges. We have herrons ++, hares++, deer, badges, but no hedgehogs, numerous variety of birds etc

No

Representation ID: 100865

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Garry Rollason

I agree very strongly with the need to improve biodiverity and resilience but the policies do not go far enough. I would like the councils and the plan to be far more ambitious. It is however difficult to see how biodiversity can be maintained let alone improved given the scale of development proposed in the draft plan - there is a mismatch between the detailed policies / policy directions and the overarching objectives / vision etc.

Other

Representation ID: 100885

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Judy Steele

This policy needs stronger wording as it currently states that the SLA designation will not restrict development. In these areas, which are valuable for wildlife, development must be restricted and directed towards lower value areas where the impact on nature will not be so significant.

Yes

Representation ID: 101163

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Rowington Landowner Consortium

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

The landowner consortium generally supports the chapter and welcomes the positive approach to the natural environment, acknowledging its importance to the well-being of residents, the economy and nature. The chapter outlines a comprehensive strategy to protect and enhance the region's natural environment.

Key proposals include safeguarding existing biodiversity and geodiversity assets, aligning Biodiversity Net Gain requirements with national policy and legislation, and promoting green and blue infrastructure. These initiatives aim benefit key habitats and species, ensuring sustainable development that benefits both the environment and local communities.

No

Representation ID: 101261

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mac Mic Group

Agent: Marrons

The principle of Draft Chapter 11 is supported, although the current draft policy directions are at this moment vague, and specific issues are raised with Draft Policy Directions as set out above.

Other

Representation ID: 101509

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Alderley Holdings Trust

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

The principle of Draft Chapter 11 is supported; however, the current draft policy directions are at this moment vague, and specific issues are raised with Draft Policy Directions as set out above.

No

Representation ID: 101591

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land

Agent: Marrons

The principle of Draft Chapter 11 is supported, although the current draft policy directions are at this moment vague, and specific issues are raised with Draft Policy Directions as set out above.

Yes

Representation ID: 101702

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Bart Slob

Yes, I broadly support the proposals in the "A Biodiverse and Environmentally Resilient South Warwickshire" chapter. The approach to protecting and enhancing biodiversity, supporting the creation of new habitats, and using strategies like Biodiversity Net Gain aligns with the urgent need to address ecological declines. However, I would like to emphasize that areas like SG04 should be carefully considered due to the presence of important trees and habitats. Development in such areas could compromise biodiversity and the local environment. Protecting these natural assets, while also supporting sustainable growth, should be a priority.

No

Representation ID: 101769

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the area

Other

Representation ID: 101880

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council

Comments on Chapter 11 overall

There’s a lot of policies that seem to say the same thing but use different words. Is it possible to rationalise?
In light of the new NPPF and the government’s drive to build will some of these be seen as too restrictive during inspection?

No

Representation ID: 102384

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Richborough

Agent: Marrons

The principle of Draft Chapter 11 is supported, although the current draft policy directions are at this moment vague, and specific issues are raised with Draft Policy Directions as set out above.

Yes

Representation ID: 102489

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: BDW Trading Limited

Agent: Knight Frank LLP

BDW generally supports the chapter and welcomes the positive approach to the natural environment, acknowledging its importance to the well-being of residents, the economy and nature. The chapter outlines a comprehensive strategy to protect and enhance the region's natural environment. Key proposals include safeguarding existing biodiversity and geodiversity assets, aligning Biodiversity Net Gain requirements with national policy and legislation, and promoting green and blue infrastructure. These initiatives aim benefit key habitats and species, ensuring sustainable development that benefits both the environment and local communities.