No

Representation ID: 99753

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Robin Hanick

Stratford Upon Avon and Tiddington is already congested at times and the historical feature of Clopton Bridge and the approach roads are too narrow. Safety is also a concern along Tiddington Road and at Clopton Bridge with inadequate facilities for pedestrian's and cyclists. It is obvious to see that existing infrastructure cannot be improved to cater for a significant increase in housing in SG19.

No

Representation ID: 99803

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Stephany Morris

I do not agree, with the Proposed plan for more Houses in SG19.
There isn't the Infra structure to support more housing in this area.
The Traffic on the b486 into Stratford is congested enough in the mornings and weekends and there is more traffic from the New Housing in Tiddington and Wellesbourne.
Also increased risk of flooding
The strategic gap needs to be kept to keep Tiddington as a village and not joined up to Stratford.
I think a new settlement would be moresuitable in one of the proposed areas.

No

Representation ID: 99845

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Gemma Gnych

Removes definition of tiddington and stratford and Tiddington will lose its identity which it has strived to keep with support from Stratford DC. Loss of wellbeing areas - We use the fields around tiddington and the top of loxley road for wellbeing and the area really benefits fron the outdoor space. The road infrastructure is not good and lack of rail system not condusive with expansion of this area of Tiddington or Stratford means that all additional houses will be heavily reliant on car usage.

No

Representation ID: 99848

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jane Hanick

Historic Tiddington and Stratford cannot take anymore traffic and there is no space to improve roads and facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. Traffic from the M40 and along the Wellesbourne Road is already busy and dangerous with winding rural roads especially in the dark and in poor weather conditions. Travelling through Stratford is slow and the existing junctions at Clopton Bridge are inadequate with no room to improve without demolishing historical and private buildings.

No

Representation ID: 99875

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Cooper

Stratford already choked with traffic, destroying character of the town, which must deter some tourists from returning. New ring road avoiding town centre is overdue and essential prior to any new development.

Yes

Representation ID: 99920

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neil Eaton

Support required development on non green belt land

No

Representation ID: 99990

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jade Lomasney

Significant harm to the character of the landscape.
Overdevelopment of the area.
Lack of rail connectivity, lack of road infrastructure,
Significant increase in traffic movements, impacting local roads (B4086) also Alveston, Loxley, Charlote and Hampton Lucy as well as Wellesbourne and (A429)
Local schools, doctors, dentists are already at capacity.

No

Representation ID: 100038

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

This area is bighted by a lack of a river crossing causing severe congestion getting through town.
Not against further development of housing per se, but constraints due to deficiencies in existing infrastructure.

Yes

Representation ID: 100133

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Wall

Development should prioritise brownfield sites over Green Belt land. Urban and previously developed areas already have infrastructure in place, reducing pressure on roads, schools, and healthcare. These sites are closer to transport links and jobs, making them more sustainable. Using brownfield land prevents environmental damage, protects biodiversity, and preserves historic landscapes. It also helps maintain community identity by preventing urban sprawl. Additionally, brownfield areas are often better suited for flood mitigation. By focusing on these locations, new housing can be delivered responsibly without harming the countryside or overburdening local services.

Yes

Representation ID: 100138

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Wall

Development should prioritise brownfield sites over Green Belt land. Urban and previously developed areas already have infrastructure in place, reducing pressure on roads, schools, and healthcare. These sites are closer to transport links and jobs, making them more sustainable. Using brownfield land prevents environmental damage, protects biodiversity, and preserves historic landscapes. It also helps maintain community identity by preventing urban sprawl. Additionally, brownfield areas are often better suited for flood mitigation. By focusing on these locations, new housing can be delivered responsibly without harming the countryside or overburdening local services.

No

Representation ID: 100175

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Victoria Simmons

Significant harm to the character of the landscape, wildlife in particular a thriving Bat area.
Overdevelopment of the area.
Lack of rail connectivity, lack of road infrastructure,
Significant increase in traffic movements, impacting local roads (B4086) also Alveston, Loxley, Charlcote and Hampton Lucy as well as Wellesbourne and (A429)
Local schools, doctors, dentists are already at capacity.
The village of Tiddington has retained a separate identity from Stratford upon Avon
through the establishment of a ‘strategic gap’ of un-developed land, which SDC has
taken into consideration when assessing planning applications.

No

Representation ID: 100177

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rosemary Hyde

SG19 defeats the objectives of New Settlements. Transport infrastructure in SE Stratford is poor, and would result in more people needing to drive through the centre of Stratford, over Clopton Bridge, which is already highly congested. If a new relief road were to be built between Alveston and Tiddington it would be highly intrusive and detrimental to the natural environment as well as being prohibitively expensive. The plans threaten the independence of Alveston and Tiddington (conservation areas) which would be subsumed into a greater Stratford.

No

Representation ID: 100201

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lesley Upton

Development here would be a further erosion of Stratford's identity as an attractive rural town. Unattractive commercial development in the approaches to the town along the A3400 has already undermined any sense of its historicity for which it is famous. Furthermore, expansion of housing provision would only contribute to the already severe problem of congestion, paticularly in regard to the river crossing.

No

Representation ID: 100293

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Rachel Fielden

This is regarding wilmcote and Bearley -
There will be a detrimental affect on wildlife & protected species in this part of Warwickshire - they are being squeezed and squeezed into a smaller land mass that is not sustainable for them
* The irreversible impact on the open landscape enjoyed from the Nature reserve
* The greenbelt land & special landscape area is a key asset to the community & turning the area into an urban one takes this away.

Yes

Representation ID: 100299

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Carter

New development should focus on previously developed sites, not destroy protected Green Belt land. Urban and repurposed areas already have infrastructure in place, preventing additional strain on roads, schools, and healthcare. These locations are also closer to transport links and jobs, making them more sustainable. Using non-Green Belt land prevents irreversible environmental harm, safeguards biodiversity, and preserves important landscapes. It also protects communities from urban sprawl and helps to prevent flooding. By focusing on these sites, new housing can be delivered in a responsible way—without sacrificing the countryside or placing unbearable pressure on already stretched local services.

Yes

Representation ID: 100386

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Aimee Carter

New housing should be developed on land that has already been built on, not on protected Green Belt land. Urban areas and brownfield sites already have the infrastructure to support new developments, reducing the pressure on roads, schools, and healthcare.
Building in non-Green Belt areas also means:
• Less environmental damage and better protection for wildlife.
• More sustainable transport options, reducing long commutes and carbon emissions.
• Preventing towns and villages from merging and losing their unique identities.
• Reducing flood risks caused by overdevelopment.
Destroying the Green Belt isn’t the answer—there are much better options available.

No

Representation ID: 100397

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Carl Austin

I object to any kind of development in this area.

Yes

Representation ID: 100597

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Residents Concerned for Kenilworth South

Support housing development on non-green belt land.

No

Representation ID: 100653

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Currie

A] The site is not acceptable under the Local Nature Recovery Strategy.
B] There is a lack of local public transport which will result in local and atmospheric air pollution.
C] It is a site for growing local food and should be considered essential for food security in forthcoming climate change.
D] It defeats the New Settlements objective.

No

Representation ID: 100781

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Mills-Baker

The proposal would impose excessive strain on existing infrastructure on the edge of the historic tourist town, already subject to extensive growth in new housing developments and related negative impacts (e.g. roads, education and health services) for residents. The land highlighted as part of SG19, between the new development on Loxley Road/Knights Lane and the football club/Townsend Road, has been designated in the Neighbourhood Development Plan as being the strategic gap between Tiddington village and Stratford. In addition, any proposed housing in Tiddington could also exacerbate flooding, due to the proximity to the River Avon.

No

Representation ID: 100806

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Taylor

We moved to Tiddington precisely because of the strategic and the fact is not Stratford in order to have a more rural surrounding which supports our mental wellbeing. SG19 lacks the resources and infrastructure to support development, and little room for growth. Traffic is already problematic, causing pollution and delays. We have limited public transport, no doctors, and only one small primary school. This proposal threatens our family plans and Tiddington’s identity. A new settlement with proper infrastructure would be a more sensible choice, where properly considered infrastructure can be utilised to create a thriving community and jobs.

Yes

Representation ID: 101616

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Nixon

Stratford is a thriving town with growing employment opportunities. Wholly non Green Belt site. Would provide sustainable housing to support growth of businesses.

No

Representation ID: 101688

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Dominic O'Reirdan

I do not believe the proposed locations in SG19 are a good idea. There infrastructure in this area is lacking. Traffic in this area is already high with a bottle neck into Stratford-upon-Avon. Public transport is more or less non-existent. On top of that there are poor amenities with a low number of shops (Spar in Tiddington only and a petrol station on the Clopton Bridge end). Access to these sites, particularly in the region of the Home Guards Club is very poor. Additionally telecommunications provision is particularly lacking and the area would require upgrade.

Yes

Representation ID: 101726

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford-on-Avon Town Council

STC supports the principle of focusing greenfield development into fewer, larger areas and considers parts of SG19 suitable. Work has begun on a new Neighbourhood Development Plan to refine proposals, ensuring development respects the town’s landscape, preserves the distinct identities of Tiddington and Alveston, and prevents coalescence. Infrastructure must be developed in parallel, particularly in relation to traffic impacts from SG19 and E1-Long Marston. Essential community facilities, including schools, healthcare, shops, parks, and transport links, must be incorporated. An initial map outlining SG19’s potential has been submitted separately as part of STC’s consultation response.

Yes

Representation ID: 101746

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford-on-Avon Town Council

STC supports the principle of concentrating greenfield development into fewer, larger areas and considers parts of SG19 suitable. A new Neighbourhood Development Plan is being proposed alongside the South Warwickshire Local Plan to refine proposals. Key priorities include preserving the town’s landscape, maintaining separation between Tiddington, Alveston, and Stratford-upon-Avon, and ensuring infrastructure keeps pace with development, particularly in relation to SG19 and E1-Long Marston’s traffic impact. Essential community facilities such as schools, healthcare, shops, parks, and transport links must be incorporated. An initial map outlining SG19’s potential has been submitted separately as part of STC’s consultation response.

Other

Representation ID: 101819

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Thijs Bos

Development only if appropriate active travel infrastructure gets upgraded. Continuous(!) cycle lanes and widening of footpaths (outside this area) to Stratford towncentre would be required as the distance and current infrastructure heavily incentivises car usage. Parts around Rush Brook supplement the Bridgetown nature reserve and would be a true loss to the area.

Boundry Lane/Alveston Hill is not fit for purpose as it is and would not be suitable for more traffic. If anything with two dangerous junctions on either end, it would already be better off turned in cycle/pedestrian path.

No

Representation ID: 101923

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Andrea J Cox

There is not the infrastructure or jobs to support this number of houses. Traffic in and out of Stratford is currently overburdened and this would merely exacerbate the issue especially south of the river. Until there is another bridge crossing across the Avon, and a Stratford Southern relief road in place, then more housing on this side of the river is just madness. Also building housing estates in green belt and destroying the stunning Warwickshire countryside is hideous.

No

Representation ID: 101996

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Simon Quick

Further development in this area without accompanying road and, crucially, river bridge construction will lead to unacceptable traffic congestion and dangerous deterioration of air quality along the Shipston and Banbury roads.
These routes are already blighted by extensive idling traffic and are an inappropriate route for trucks - such traffic congestion / pollution contradicts other strategic goals of this plan.

No

Representation ID: 102059

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Alan Nash

I do not agree with the proposed SG19 location being considered for inclusion because there are more suitable sites within the plan.
SG19 is already struggling to cope with the existing infastructure - road/rail links and structures, schools, health care, shopping, etc.
SG19 will lead to coalescence and urbanisation. Neighbourhood Plan was adopted with two strategic gaps in this area. Planning Appeal Inspectors have, in recent history, deemed it unacceptable to build here.
SG19 will positively promote traffic density, polution and noise. Reduce access to local green spaces, leading to increase in health risks (air quality, mental health issues).

Yes

Representation ID: 102131

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land

Agent: LRM Planning

Hallam Land are promoting future development within Strategic Growth Area 19. Having regard to the Sustainability Appraisal, SG19 is the best performing location at Stratford-upon-Avon. This is a notably important conclusion given the pre-eminent role of this main town in the plan area as a whole and in the Stratford-on-Avon District. The land south of Trinity Way is a discreet parcel of land that can be developed independently from the tracts of land south west of the disused railway line and north east of Banbury Road.