No

Representation ID: 89694

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Mr john cooknell

This site for growth is situated on the wide flat floor of the Avon Valley and will be impacted by occasional flooding from the River Avon and its Tributaries.
The Level 1 SFRA technical evidence is only indicative a Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment should be carried out before this site is confirmed as a Strategic Growth location.

Yes

Representation ID: 89732

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Compton Verney

n/a

No

Representation ID: 90086

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Catherine Hewson

River Avon and tributaries LWS and Hampton Wood LWS, Grove Fields Lane LWS, Wasperton Manor Farm LWS, Hampton Lucy Escarpment LWS, Charlescote gravel pits and Thelsford brook LWS

Yes

Representation ID: 90387

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Jayne Jones

The Warwick Uni campus and surrounding areas, could offer an brownfield site for development. Furhter consdieratin needed of infrastrucutre.

No

Representation ID: 90585

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Jacquey Parker

I disagree with all the development

No

Representation ID: 90625

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Ben Ranner

Given the traffic levels on the A429, I have concern that a major development of this nature would require infrastructure capacity far in excess of what can already be catered for (Strategic objective 3). Given the restrictions already experienced by rural communities, this would be a major demand on power and telecommunications infrastructure which is already under capacity (strategic objective 11).

Yes

Representation ID: 90630

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Ben Ranner

Given the traffic levels on the A429, I have concern that a major development of this nature would require infrastructure capacity far in excess of what can already be catered for (Strategic objective 3). Given the restrictions already experienced by rural communities, this would be a major demand on power and telecommunications infrastructure which is already under capacity (strategic objective 11).

No

Representation ID: 90704

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Averil Stewart

getting to Wellesbourne is already painful - roads here do not support good growth

Yes

Representation ID: 90779

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Malcolm Fisk

I believe the redevelopment of Wellesbourne airfield is an appropriate use of brown field land, less so the fields south of the Loxley Rd and those to the east of Wellesbourne.
The links to the existing road network are established and the size of the proposed parcel seems appropriate

No

Representation ID: 90785

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Maxine Mayer

Part of his site (University Campus) for growth has previously been earmarked for an Innovation Centre and is welcomed. The University vision for the site is that of rural aesthetics, 25% of the site has b wen assessed as unsuitable for development due to the flood risk. This proposal suggests a big development opposite it and would ruin the university's vision. Also the University has concerns about traffic on the A429 and the site area across the road would be seriously impactful.

Yes

Representation ID: 91019

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Julian Brown

Agree as per comments with SG15

No

Representation ID: 91059

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Linda Drury

Infra structure already struggling would have difficulty supporting this - roads, parking, medical facilities, schools, public transport, few local job opportunities, green spaces not included. Flooding risk increased and our Conservation areas.

Yes

Representation ID: 91122

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs liz jackson

outside of greenbelt

No

Representation ID: 91319

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Dr Caitlin Imray

I object to the houses being built in Barford. We already struggle with traffic, congestion and difficulties getting in and out of the village at busy times. There is not the infrastructure to support this! We are running out of green spaces which will affect the beautiful environment and there also a lot of flooding.

No

Representation ID: 91426

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Lucia Restall Orr

The proposal will impact the following Local Wildlife Sites: River Avon and tributaries LWS and Hampton Wood LWS, Grove Fields Lane LWS, Wasperton Manor Farm LWS, Hampton Lucy Escarpment LWS, Charlescote gravel pits and Thelsford brook LWS

No

Representation ID: 91502

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Barry Saunders

1. There is significant harm to the character of the landscape.
2. There is a significant increase in flood risk.
3. There is a lack of rail connectivity.
4. There is a loss of the best and most versatile farmland.
5. There is overdevelopment of Wellesbourne, which threatens its village status.
6. There is a lack of educational and health facilities.

No

Representation ID: 91510

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Wellesbourne and Walton Parish Council

Loss of landscape character. Lack of transport connectivity. The airfield development is contrary to other objectives in the SWLP. The proposed areas push the boundary of the village outwards and is contrary to the NP where development is preferred in north of the Dene. It is also contrary to the concept of a 20minute neighbourhood. Loss of recycling and gritting are to the detriment of whole of South Warwickshire. The parish has had a disproportionate amount of development over the last 12 years with no infrastructure provided to support it.

No

Representation ID: 91808

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Maxine Mayer

Part of this group is the airfield. Current submitted plans have been assessed and show that if the runway is moved for warehousing then the flying operation won't be safe. It is also considered by the National Trust as having a detrimental impact on the listed grounds and house. This group will completely dominate the village and 'hem' in many residential properties. The A429/M40 J15 are severely congested at peak times. It is not near rail transport. Please see the statutory responses to the airfield planning application 24/03281/OUT

No

Representation ID: 91886

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs J Harrison

Infrastructure is already creaking - thousands more houses with quarry plans and HRI developments are going to make a horrendous collective impact

No

Representation ID: 91915

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Naomi Williams

My main objection to this plan is that Wellesbourne does not have the infrastructure to deal with this massive increase in people and buildings. Also The council already has 25 years worth of housing already approved, why is more needed?! To also add the following points:
Significant harm to the character of the landscape
Destruction of Green Belt land and Local Wildlife Sites
Flood risk
Loss of best farmland
Overdevelopment, threatening village status
Lack of educational and health facilities
Increased pollution from vehicles​
Irreversible damage to the area's natural beauty
Significant threat to local wildlife and natural habitats

Yes

Representation ID: 91940

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr James OShea

This is a growing suitable and sustainable location which has the relevant infrastructure to work with. It is close to other infrastructure and road network links are within a short distance

No

Representation ID: 91986

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Laura Bader

I am objecting as a current resident of Hammond Green. We moved to Wellesbourne 2 years ago for the village character, this proposed development will destroy the current village landscape, threatening the community identity.
The Green belt land surrounding the village has a massive impact on quality of life and mental health for our family and for all villagers. Increased traffic congestion through the village and the pollution increase will have a negetive affect on all residents in addition the current infrastructure in the village is under pressure already for the schools and medical facilties.

No

Representation ID: 91989

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Georgina Hicks

There are plenty of other areas of green land you can build on

No

Representation ID: 91996

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Hobbs

Lack of rail connectivity. Lack of schools, doctors, dentists. Impact on the historic airfield. Depletion of good agricultural land. Impact on Wellesbourne village would affect its village status and it would become an urbanised sprawl. Wellesbourne has already taken more houses than necessary in the past few years.

No

Representation ID: 92004

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Brown

This area has now been developed to a point where the local infrastructure can barely cope. The local school is oversubscribed, as is the dentist. The doctor is already struggling with the significantly increased local population. Road traffic is already a problem and will be exacerbated by development already planned for the Warwick University HRI facility and Wellesbourne airfield.

No

Representation ID: 92031

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Terence Hobbs

Lack of rail connectivity. Lack of schools doctors and dentists. Impact on the historic airfield. Depletion of good agricultural land. Impact on Wellesbourne village status, it would become an urbanised sprawl. Wellesbourne has taken more houses in recent years than was necessary. The SDC can demonstrate 24.65 years of housing land supply on developments that have already been approved, which is nearly five times the current 5 year requirement.

No

Representation ID: 92052

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Harrison

The development will have a detrimental impact on the existing environment and communities. It will stretch existing facilities and infrastructure and negatively impact existing residents.

No

Representation ID: 92084

Received: 05/02/2025

Respondent: mrs angela watkins

This suggested distribution park would create more traffic. The local traffic is already horrendous particularly in the mornings and afternoons. The Longbridge roundabout is frequently gridlocked as is the A429 going North and the M40 slipway up to Longbridge.

No

Representation ID: 92131

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jill Wilson

SG16 is currently a working viable airfield and should be kept that way.

No

Representation ID: 92177

Received: 27/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Edward Wilson

The infrastructure will not match the schooling, medical, transport,etc needs which are already under immense pressure.