No

Representation ID: 103732

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anna-Marie Hlustik

I don’t agree with E1’s inclusion.

If this development goes ahead, there is significant increased risk of flooding to existing homes at Milcote from the Marchfont Brook.

Traffic has increased dramatically in the 27yrs we’ve lived here impacting our quality of life - noise, congestion, pollution and biodiversity are all areas of concern. The suggested development will also significantly increase light pollution.

The two Stratford bridges and Bidford bridge are already congested. Another development to the south of the river will just add to this problem as employment, schools and transport links are to the North of the river.

Yes

Representation ID: 103742

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Carter

Already large industrial units, rail development centre and housing development with good transport network

Yes

Representation ID: 103767

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Micheal Dylan

As there is already a large amount of new houses in this area it makes sense to add to these as this will attract more infrastructure and amenities.

Yes

Representation ID: 103800

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carol Jones

A new settlement on non-green belt land should be the first consideration for development.
New Settlements are preferable to spatial growth areas, as the appropriate infrastructure and amenities will be provided, rather than adding additional volume to already over stretched existing facilities in spatial growth areas.
Development without the removal of greenbelt should be the priority.

No

Representation ID: 103824

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Miss sue cook

B4632 unable to cope with traffic, a viable and deliverable route must be found

No

Representation ID: 103864

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Estelle Hlustik-Smith

Concerns around flood risk.
Concerns congestion, specifically around bridges to drive to the local towns.
Concerns around rural biodiversity

Yes

Representation ID: 103867

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Nicola Sawle

brown fill site, reducing environmental impact, space to develop infrastructure

Yes

Representation ID: 103887

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Amarjit Gill

This site would impact green belt the least and take pressure off Stratford.

Yes

Representation ID: 103957

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Chris Creighton Thomas

It is a good area for creating the suitable infrastructure which is critical for any new development to be successful and not degrade existing locations

No

Representation ID: 104152

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Deborah Williams

-The highway infrastructure is inadequate for the planned developments at Meon Vale and Long Marston airfield sites, with restrictions in place until improvements are made.
-The New Settlement Assessment highlights transport infrastructure at location E1 as a critical concern, making it less suitable for development without clear improvement plans.
-E1 development on greenfield sites contradicts the previous justification of using developed land.
-It will lead to urban sprawl and loss of countryside.
-This will harm the natural environment and biodiversity.
-A more even distribution of housing across South Warwickshire instead would be more suitable.

Yes

Representation ID: 104238

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Amanda Waters

Absolutely suitable for development. Brownfield land and cannot be used for much else. It is imperative though that the Honeybourne to Stratford line be reinstated to provide transport links through to Oxford and Birmingham for employment, and that Secondary and Primary education, nursery care, doctors surgeries etc should be included, as the roads are entirely inadequate to take additional traffic to Stratford or Alcester.

Yes

Representation ID: 104243

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Campaign to Protect Rural England - Warwickshire

E1 Long Marston: Long Marston already has two half-settlements - Meon Vale and Long Marston Airfield. Confused decisionmaking during the preparation of previous Local Plans has resulted in areas of new housing development in both locations without an overall plan. A single settlement with reopened Stratford-Honeybourne railway line (alignment rewserved in the SWLP) and a station at Long Marston (Depot) should be pursued. Without rail reopening Location E1 is not practicable as it would be unsustainable and dependent on car use.
Long Marston Airfield (area developed) is too far from the line to be served by rail; it needs rethinking.

Other

Representation ID: 104304

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: South Warwickshire Foundation trust

This site does not have close access to an existing community healthcare property and will therefore require more significant infrastructure investment to support sufficient provision of out of hospital services for any significant size of development.

Yes

Representation ID: 104448

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford-on-Avon Town Council

The site has major transport issues, and the accompanying evidence which suggests that an upgrade is not necessary is flawed. Potentially this is a sizeable new settlement, and could provide a well designed setting for homes and employment, if a major transport upgrade and other infrastructure were included and implemented in advance. Of all the proposed sites near Stratford this is most preferred.

No

Representation ID: 104703

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Lesley Lovett

Site is unsuitable as access to main road routes is via Stratford where crossing the river is necessary over two bridges. Campden road is already at capacity with frequent accidents . Inadequate road infrastructure for any future development. Stratford proposed housing sites already cover the next 24 years.

Supposed potential rail line from Long Marston not only unrealistic but would possibly mean loss of Greenway a leisure route into Stratford. Rail links already exist north of the river making those sites more suitable.

Would make one very large sprawling town with lack of any greenspace between Meon Vale and Stratford

No

Representation ID: 104714

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Julien

Any further development near Meon Vale would be a disaster. No employment, a poor road network and no nearby rail network. It would cause further gridlock into an already over congested Stratford.

No

Representation ID: 104739

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Susan Hood

Site inappropriate for such a huge development. Poor transport links - no existing rail links, roads already over capacity. Significant queuing traffic on B4632 experienced frequently. No relief road (or budget for one). Poor links to M40/A46 so poor access to large employment areas. Bridge closures due to accidents and traffic levels, further increasing traffic problems and destroying heritage bridges. Increases pollution and carbon footprint.

Site is very concerningly directly adjoining and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Meon Vale LWS, River Avon LWS and the greenway, dismantled railway, Welford Hill Farm Meadows PLWS, Rumerhill Coppice PLWS and Coxmere Coppice PLWS.

Yes

Representation ID: 104815

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Jean Nixon

Not Green Belt.
Already part developed.
Largest site available.
This would be the earliest New Settlement to develop.

Yes

Representation ID: 104834

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Charlotte Edwards

The proposed housing development at Long Marston Airfield (E1) presents a sustainable and strategic opportunity for South Warwickshire. As a brownfield site, it reduces pressure on the Green Belt and minimises environmental impact. The location benefits from strong transport links, including proximity to the Stratford Greenway, cycle routes, and rail networks, promoting sustainable travel while mitigating congestion. Additionally, the development supports economic growth, fostering local employment through the Long Marston Innovation Centre. With a well-planned infrastructure strategy, this proposal enables housing expansion while protecting rural landscapes, making it a viable and beneficial option for the region

No

Representation ID: 104877

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Baggett

I am against any new housing development, or any form of development south of the river Avon, due to the inadequate transport infrastructure. Transport options for sites south of the river are wholly inadequate. Any development that will result in traffic routing through Stratford upon Avon, from the main traffic routes such as A46 and M40 will inevitably overload the main river crossing in central SOA.

Yes

Representation ID: 104926

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

Broadly in agreement, but infrastructure is the key!

Yes

Representation ID: 105246

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

E1 – Long Marston Airfield – SUPPORT - capacity 9350 homes: proposed new settlement benefits from areas of brownfield, lacks rail connectivity and road capacity connections to Stratford – however, support in principle

Yes

Representation ID: 105473

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Manor Oak Homes Limited

Agent: Jeremy Flawn

MOHL would like to confirm that they support the direction of travel in the emerging Local Plan and in particular the approach to identify locations for new settlements, including the short-listing of the new settlement proposal at Long Marston Airfield (site ref E1)

No

Representation ID: 105492

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Rene Harness

Longmarston/E1

Proposed housing development.

We object strongly to the proposals for thousands of more houses on or around the the Long Marston Site.

We already have an expanding Meon Vale development and another on the old airfield site. The transport system lacks the infrastructure especially south of the river. Whereas proposals for North of Stratford ie: Bearley, would surely be better suited.
Although a better question might be ' why does Stratford need any more new housing developments " We have them on every main road into town and surrounding villages with no increases in the main infrastructures such as Schools, surgeries,
Dentists...the list is endless.

No

Representation ID: 105496

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: John & Helen Hogg

Number of people: 2

We am concerned about the construction of more homes in Long Marston. Having lived in Clifford Chambers for over 40 years, we have witnessed a significant increase in traffic on the B4362, making it difficult to exit our road and raising the risk of accidents. This surge brings more light pollution and exhaust contamination, as well as increased litter, harming the environment. While we understand the need for housing, we believe Long Marston and its surroundings have already seen more than their fair share of development.

Yes

Representation ID: 105567

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Alexander Hargie

E1 is relatively accessible to Stratford-upon-Avon with all the available healthcare, retail, leisure and employment facilities. The site continues the current developments of Meon Vale and Fernleigh Park and I don’t believe the old airfield is an important environment which should be protected.

Yes

Representation ID: 105617

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Cllr Eileen Edwards

E1 – Long Marston Airfield – SUPPORT - capacity 9350 homes: proposed new settlement benefits from areas of brownfield, lacks rail connectivity and road capacity connections to Stratford – however, support in principle

No

Representation ID: 105650

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Jude Higson

I strongly object to the proposed site E1 for several reasons. The B6432 is already at capacity and cannot accommodate more housing or vehicle demand, especially with the linked Airfield proposal limited to 300 due to traffic issues. The site’s location would worsen traffic congestion in Stratford and surrounding villages. There is a significant risk of increased flooding in a prone area, leading to potential damage to local homes, including mine. Additionally, there would be loss of nature and open space, and the poor transport links would exacerbate vehicular traffic. Other preferred sites have much better transport options.

Other

Representation ID: 105748

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: HG Hodges Ltd

Agent: Ridge and Partners LLP

We support the continued allocation of Long Marston Airfield (LMA) within the South Warwickshire Local Plan (SWLP) Part 1, as it is under our control and already designated for 3,500 homes, with a track record of successful development. Further development is feasible despite temporary delays. We advocate for an expansion of LMA, potentially accommodating 9,850 dwellings, enhancing its sustainability and infrastructure capacity. Unlike other proposed sites, LMA is not within the Green Belt, aligning with SWLP priorities. Overall, we believe there is a compelling case for LMA to continue to be a included as a new settlement in the emerging SWLP and there is a strong case for an expanded allocation.

No

Representation ID: 105943

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Melanie Smith

· Inadequate transport infrastructure; noise and light disturbing our environment;
· Transport options suggested for this site are weak, over optimistic
· Congestion will grow to impact the quality of life in these areas even more seriously, including delays, unpredictability, noise and pollution, contravening the CC Neighbourhood Plan.
· The potential rail line to Long Marston/Honeybourne is a red herring. Where is the funding for one and a new station?
· The South Western Relief Road – that planning application has not been determined since 2018. The Long Marston airfield development was not meant to go beyond 400 houses until that Relief Road was IN PLACE. The Relief Road would not help the village in any event – traffic would still come past and through the Parish AND we would have a new ‘lit’ road just north of the business park linking Shipston Rd to Campden Rd.
· Both authorities have more that 5 year housing land supply as per 2023.
I believe the other sites are far more suitable for this size development, for example the wilmcote/Bearly site. Some reasons below;
o Potentially a GOOD location for a new settlement because it is very well connected for potential non-car travel.
o The location is north of the River Avon and its two bottleneck bridges, one of them an Ancient Monument. The M42, M40 and A46 (the strategic road network) are readily accessible from that location to north and south – all 3 are to the north of Stratford/the river, meaning they can all be accessed without crossing town or the river.
o The Park and Ride and Stratford Parkway Rail Station are close by from this site (without the need to cross the town or river)
o All 3 of Stratford’s Secondary Schools are north of the river (Stratford Girls Grammar School, KES and Stratford School) making them more readily accessible from Bearley and Wilmcote without crossing the river. Further, all 3 of Alcester’s secondary schools (Alcester Grammar School, Alcester Academy and St. Benedict’s) and Henley School are readily accessible from the proposed settlement location to west and north respectively, again without having to enter or cross Stratford/the river.
o The Green Belt (within which this site is located) is NOT designated for any landscape, beauty or ecological interest -