Yes

Representation ID: 88644

Received: 17/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Jerry Corless

N/A

No

Representation ID: 88648

Received: 17/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Ida Marjorie Brown

Green belt, poor strategic location and transport links. Protect Historic Towns. Henley poorly developed with in-town infilling and has poor parking and limited access in and out. Not against developing Henley, but should seek to build infill in the areas around Henley and preserve the town heritage, e.g. infill In Buckley Green, on the former Garden Centre (north of Henley and it is a brownfield site!), expand in Claverdon, Ullenhall and Wootton Wawen. Business Hubs should be located near to accessible motorway and good road infrastructure (Blythe Valley an excellent example). Could easily build 600 homes around Henley by infill

No

Representation ID: 88834

Received: 18/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Helen Thomas

I moved to Henley in Arden to enjoy the lifestyle afforded by our small semi rural community, with recent developments we now have around 1500 dwellings. We have a strong, friendly community with thriving small businesses and already enough traffic. SG23 will almost double the number of existing dwellings and it will destroy the existing town community we all love. The schools, roads, doctors and other services will not be able to cope with the additional population. Increased road pollution, light pollution and extra strain on public services will all significantly diminish our quality of life. NO TO SG23 please.

No

Representation ID: 88880

Received: 18/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Helena Flisowski

Roads in Henley and surrounding areas are already congested and not suitable to take further traffic, additionally not suitable for lorries and other construction vehicles ( narrow roads ) and looking to the future lorries taking goods towards Stratford to cater for new settlement proposed Wilmcote and Bearley , too much overload, noise and air pollution close to houses . Potential structural damage to historical buildings in Henley due to vibrations from lorries. There is already flooding in Henley and surrounding areas and when vehicles go through this pushes the water over the pavement into houses.

No

Representation ID: 88890

Received: 18/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Coughlan

Roads through Henley/surrounding lanes are not able to cater for additional traffic created by this development , especially if the settlement Bearly to Wilmcote goes ahead as well, construction vehicles/thousands more cars passing through Henley may impact the structural integrity of grade 2 listed buildings , additionally flood and surface water washing into homes , concerns regarding noise/air pollution impacting houses along Henley high street. Tourists will be put off Henley and Stratford due to congestion and no longer attractive places to visit, many visiting Henley, Mary Ardens house and Stratford as a package, insentive will be reduced or gone.

No

Representation ID: 89005

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Tanworth Residents Association

Our neighbouring local authorities have already built up to the county line. They are relying on Warwickshire to avoid urban sprawl through us maintaining our Green Belt protection. None of the Northern cluster of proposed sites SG22, 23 or 24 should be developed until other options outside Green Belt have been exhausted elsewhere in South Warwickshire.

Other

Representation ID: 89056

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sara Bird

I feel some development would make sense here due to the good access to the A3400 and M40, however I do feel it should be limited to not overwhelm the green spaces in this area

No

Representation ID: 89348

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Fraiser Watts

The plan is disproportionate to the size of the town (increasing the households by 150%) and will have a significant detrimental impact upon the greenbelt surrounding this town that attracts significant tourism. The impact on traffic through the two centre, which is already frequently clogged during commuter hours would also be very harmful.

No

Representation ID: 89532

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Emily Carleton

Do not build on green belt land - especially when there's so many other options!

No

Representation ID: 89684

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Denise Woods

The amount of housing that this proposal includes would produce a population increase that Henley does not have the infrastructure to cater for. This is disproportionate to the existing number of homes. Whilst I appreciate the need to build new homes I am concerned at the number of high priced houses that would be built, out weighing the amount of affordable housing that Henley needs to allow local people to stay living here.

No

Representation ID: 89691

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Craig Mander

There are other more suitable areas to select. The additional houses are not viable simply in terms of drainage (flood risk already).

Yes

Representation ID: 89738

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Compton Verney

n/a

Other

Representation ID: 89950

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Christine Rouse

I am happy for this site to be considered for proportional housing in keeping with the current population, conservation area and greenbelt and sufficient infrastructure put in place to accommodate the new houses. Henley only has a population of 2,000 people so adding another 2,500 is unrealistic and would ruin our community and cause issues with our infrastructure/cause flooding etc

No

Representation ID: 89952

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Lisa Read

We don't have the infrastructure, need our greenbelt for mental health and wellbeing. We're a small community and this would more than double our size, affecting the conservation area, natural beauty and the surrounding countryside

No

Representation ID: 89953

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Ernest Petrie

Henley-in-Arden is a long established country village and to have any substantial increase in housing would overtake the character of the village and lead to major traffic complications. Parking in Henley is constantly at stress point and it is important that the village remains a similar size to retain its character and facilities.

No

Representation ID: 89958

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Burns

This will lead to overpopulation, increase traffic and will cause major disruption to the community. Totally disagree with it. Any social housing will go to people who aren't necessarily from Henley and working. We want to save the greenbelt, we don't want a concrete jungle.

Other

Representation ID: 89968

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Patty Holloway

Appreciate that we need to have some development but this is too many houses. we don't have the infrastructure, we need to maintain Henley's rural setting and the conservation area. I live close to the Golf Club, so will my access by impacted? The additional cars will also potentially cause noise and pollution. Any housing that is built needs to be proportionate to the town, of good quality and built in a way that complements the surrounding area. Presently enjoy easy access to the surrounding rural area and would be very sad to see that go.

Other

Representation ID: 89970

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mr David Rodger

2500 is too many. Infrastructure must be put in first including a bypass around Henley and at least 50% must be affordable. Good access to station required. Need to retain rural setting and protect the High Street which is a conservation area and already has an excess of traffic as it's the A34.

No

Representation ID: 89972

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Laurence Marshall

The plan should be driven by the emerging neighbourhood plan rather than by this method i.e. th e other way round.

No

Representation ID: 89982

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Blaynee

There will be too much pressure on local amenities such as GP surgeries; flooding; traffic issues; too much pressure on the local environment.

Brownfield sites should be utilised instead as these are more sustainable.

No

Representation ID: 89988

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jane Blayne

There will be too much pressure on local amenities such as GP surgeries. The local environment won't be able to cope, with flooding and traffic issues.

Brownfield sites should be utilised instead as these are more sustainable.

No

Representation ID: 90019

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diane Jacobs

The size of the development will overwhelm the existing town . Infrastructure such as schools, medical facilities won’t be sufficient to cope with extra homes. Public travel options are extremely limited (1 unreliable train/bus to Birmingham/solihull).
Flooding is also a big issue here the current drains are unable to cope with increasing heavy rainfall causing frequent disruption . The location on the very edge of Warwickshire is also dubious being of more benefit to Solihull borough than Warwickshire.

Other

Representation ID: 90041

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Ingrid Stroop

I agree with the principle of building on this site - but there are major concerns about infrastructure, accessibility, drainage. Number of proposed houses is far too large for the town. Proportional increased housing is certainly acceptable, where schooling, GP surgeries, shops, banks and other facilities are taking into account. Access to the site is difficult - railway line in the way. Public transport is poor. Risk of creating a separate town from Henley. If building here, get the town to agree on what is reasonable, proportional and acceptable - what to include etc.

Yes

Representation ID: 90106

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Hewitt

Support

No

Representation ID: 90151

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Joanna Garstang

I am concerned about the proposed additional site adjacent to SG23 by little hallend farm. The only access to this site is along a single lane road at Blunts Green. The road frequently floods. There is no public transport and limited school transport. There is no gas supply nor mains sewerage. Several new houses at hallend farm would cause significant congestion at Blunts Green as driving would be the only way to access properties due to the remote location.

I do not object to the remaining SG23 proposal

No

Representation ID: 90405

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Dr Louise Stewart

Whilst this area has access to the M42 and A3400 to Hockley Health and onwards, there is no public transport infrastructure to support an increase in population. There are also no opportunities for any useful or meaningful commercial or industrial job creation, meaning this would add to commuter traffic and therefore go against all the points made in the principles around sustainable development, reducing pollution., creating employment, protection of the environment.

No

Representation ID: 90412

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Mr David Shaw

I am not against some development in Henley, especially within the more affordable price bracket, however the enormous scale of the proposed development would completely alter the character of the town. The existing infrastructure, notably (but not exclusively), the already overloaded, historic High St, simply could not cope with a development of this scale. It would be a non-starter unless a relief road was incorporated that bypassed the High St.
I am also vehemently against the use of green belt unless there is absolutely no alternative.

Yes

Representation ID: 90701

Received: 24/02/2025

Respondent: Averil Stewart

ideal - has its own motorway junction, we should be keeping cars out of local roads and this sit fulfills that requirement properly

No

Representation ID: 91043

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Julian Brown

Green belt, poor strategic location and transport links. Protect Historic Towns. Henley poorly developed with in-town infilling and has poor parking and limited access in and out. Not against developing Henley, but should seek to build infill in the areas around Henley and preserve the town heritage, e.g. infill In Buckley Green, on the former Garden Centre (north of Henley and it is a brownfield site!), expand in Claverdon, Ullenhall and Wootton Wawen. Business Hubs should be located near to accessible motorway and good road infrastructure (Blythe Valley an excellent example). Could easily build 600 homes around Henley by infill

Other

Representation ID: 91048

Received: 25/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Steven Hanson

The area designated 737 is accessed down a single track road off Tamworth Lane. The access is under a low railway bridge - unsuitable for earthmoving equipment or other high sided vehicles. The road through Blunts Green was resurfaced but is already in bad repair due to heavy horse vehicles and farm machinery along with flood damage. The road acts as a storm drain at times of heavy rain. Additional traffic is not possible without a new access road directly off the Birmingham Road into the area.