Yes

Representation ID: 90456

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sheetal Tailor

none

No

Representation ID: 90523

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Dr Louise Stewart

The principles are sound however the potential construction of 6700 new homes in BW will be in agricultural land which is currently bounded by hedgerows and ransom strips. During the course of the year starlings, deer, hares, weasels, otters, swifts, swallows and skylarks (amongst many other species) can be regularly seen and heard within the environs of this proposed new town. Building this town will completely destroy this beautiful habitat and further contribute to the extinction of the landscape and local wildlife. No amount of sterile urban planning will ever be able to compensate for this loss.

Yes

Representation ID: 90557

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Gavin Simpson

Plant, Plant, PLANT

No

Representation ID: 90604

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Pack

No, the plan should set out a tree canopy target, as other Councils have done, to be more ambitious at a wider scale.

Yes

Representation ID: 90687

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Martin Littlewood

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 90754

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Tim Goodwin

Existing trees, copses and woodlands provide vital habitat for wildlife and must be protected and not bulldozed by developers chasing profit.

Other

Representation ID: 90949

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Jason Lupton

dead, dying or dangerous - this shouldn't be used. Replace with dead, diseased or dangerous. The arguement is everything is technically dying.
Additional protection is needed for existing mature tree stock, re-survey the trees in the county and ensure the correct ones are protected.

Yes

Representation ID: 91219

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Radford Semele Parish Council

Radford Semele Parish Council supports the suggestions.

Yes

Representation ID: 91363

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Giles Dugmore

Site 492 Land at The Greens, South of Alcester Road, SuA, and site 827 South of Alcester Road, SuA: Any development of this field will put at high risk the ancient hedgerow and trees surrounding the area. Whatever statements are made by developers we all know that they can be ignored with irreversible consequences for nature. The nearby example at The Burnside Hotel where the owner has ignored planning regulations is a case in point and is causing the council a lot of problems as well as annoying local residents. Leave the field as a field.

No

Representation ID: 91404

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Lucia Restall Orr

The policy as laid out is entirely lacking in ambition or commitment to the environment goals needed. Plans for a tree canopy target, as laid out by other Councils, should be added.

Yes

Representation ID: 91464

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Bev Atkinson

Site 492 Land at The Greens, South of Alcester Road, Stratford-upon-Avon and site 827 South of Alcester Road, Stratford-upon-Avon.

Any development of this field will put at high risk the ancient hedgerow and trees surrounding the area. These are all protected and homes to a wide variety of biodiversity.

We all know that developers will often ignore the hedgerows and fields with irreversible consequences for nature. The recent example at The Burnside Hotel where planning regulations were ignored is an example of this. The council now has a problem and local residents are angry. Leave the field as a field.

No

Representation ID: 91518

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mary Adams

The plan should set out a tree canopy target, as other Councils have done, to be more ambitious at a wider scale.

Yes

Representation ID: 91582

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sidney Syson

No further comment

Yes

Representation ID: 91716

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Norman

Sensible

No

Representation ID: 91822

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Tim Burridge

No, the plan should set out a tree canopy target, as other Councils have done, to be more ambitious at a wider scale.

Yes

Representation ID: 91863

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Hanno Kirner

Protect what we have got

Yes

Representation ID: 91913

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Donna Goodwin

Developers should be restricted from removing existing trees, copses and woodlands provide vital habitat for wildlife and must be protected.

Yes

Representation ID: 92063

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Salford Priors Parish Council

Support the inclusion of a local tree policy that prioritises the retention of existing trees, woodlands, and hedgerows, recognising their invaluable ecological, environmental, and community benefits that take decades to fully develop. In supporting sustainable growth, all development proposals should be required to incorporate new tree planting to enhance sites, contributing to the green infrastructure. It should seek to address disparities in tree canopy cover across the district foster, healthier, more diverse, climate-resilient tree population. By working inclusively with Local Communities / Parish Councils, ensuring that tree preservation and planting efforts reflect the unique character and needs of each area.

No

Representation ID: 92101

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Dee McGowan

No, the plan should set out a tree canopy target, as other Councils have done, to be more ambitious at a wider scale.

No

Representation ID: 92150

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Patricia Scott

I object to the term "trees of value". In too many instances developers employ consultancies who designate hedgerow trees as of little or no value and so they have been cut down and grubbed out. In fact the trees have simply been badly managed. Even neglected hedgerows perfom a function for wildlife, providing shelter and foraging resources for bats and insects. Similarly, dead and dying trees are an important resource for the insects which are the base of the food chain. I would also like to see the councils setting an ambitious target for tree canopy cover

Yes

Representation ID: 92265

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Isobel McLauchlin

I would like to see trees, hedges and woodland prioritised where possible.

Other

Representation ID: 92351

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr G Wyatt

The tree canopy cover has not been stated as an objective.

Yes

Representation ID: 92435

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Christine Slaughter

SG18 Clopton Quarter would require removing established trees, hedges and woodland and destroying habitats.

Other

Representation ID: 92506

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Julian Brown

While I agree in principle, I believe poor-quality agricultural land should be used to create new woodlands and bio-diverse environments for future generations. Strategic sites for new woodlands, wildlife, and insect habitats should be considered. Warwickshire has many potential sites, but the current plan lacks forward-thinking for new woodlands. Creating parks and open spaces within developments is good, but we should also focus on establishing new woodlands and make a real change and difference.

Yes

Representation ID: 92666

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Yates

Agree but need additional planting to ensure the species survive when ancient trees die. In addition to helping reduce flooding by reducing amount of runoff from ever increasing rain fall

Yes

Representation ID: 92704

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Heidi Ambrose-Brown

n/a

No

Representation ID: 92727

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Luke Kempton

No, the plan should set out a tree canopy target, as other Councils have done, to be more ambitious at a wider scale.

Yes

Representation ID: 92836

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carolyn Stacey

Too much lost already and far better to maintain current trees than risk the failure of planting new ones.

Yes

Representation ID: 93015

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Dominic Momcilovic

I agree, Trees, hedges and woodlands provide valuable habitats for wildlife and contribute to the character of the wider landscape and the overall amenity by contributing to high quality designed desirable locations to live and work

Yes

Representation ID: 93209

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Martina Hunt

SG18 could be considered as a wildlife development area, as it links directly to the Welcombe Hills and Clopton sanctuary area in front of Clopton House and up to the Obelisk.