No

Representation ID: 86223

Received: 16/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Bill Tempest

More suitable sites available in the district

No

Representation ID: 86577

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

This is encroaching into the recreationally valuable areas of the Dasset Hills

No

Representation ID: 86600

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Darrell Muffitt

This development looks as though it joins up a small rural settlement to the existing and proposed Gaydon development. The SWLP should seek to preserve our rural communities and avoid trying to join them up simply because they are adjacent on a map. There is little correlation between the two communities and the infrastructure between them, particularly the roads, is unsuitable.

No

Representation ID: 87260

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Roger Barratt

I object to this area being included as it is very close to the existing Lighthorne Heath development and the lack of infrastructure in the area will be detrimental to sustainability goals, in particular the lack of rail connections, forcing more vehicle traffic onto the already congested local roads and motorway.

No

Representation ID: 87308

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Dr Helen Buttrick

This area of land is currently farm land and building a large development here works cause significant harm to the character of the landscape. The roads nearby would not be able to for with the volume of additional traffic and there is insufficient infrastructure such as GP surgeries, shops and schools.

No

Representation ID: 87544

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Michaelina Jakala

I absolutely do not support - too much development with too little infrastructure. The roads cannot handle the traffic, the water mains constantly burst, the schools are oversubscribed, the GPs are in desperate need of updating and cannot handle the current number. Lack of other services, etc. No I will never support.

Yes

Representation ID: 87547

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

Suitable site - new settlement gives the opportunity of building all the infrastructure needed for a 10 minute neighbourhood

No

Representation ID: 88122

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Parry

Too close to the Gaydon Lighthorne Heath development, further urbanising area and causing harm to character of landscape, lack of rail connectivity.

No

Representation ID: 88123

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Parry

Significant harm to character of landscape, situated in Flood Zone 2 area, lack of rail connectivity and is the worst performing option for transport and accessibility and ie one of the worst for employment.

No

Representation ID: 88510

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Colin Sanders

Massive encroachment onto the Green Belt.
Destruction of views from the Burton Dassett Hills country Park.
Impact on rural life and loss of farming.
Destruction of wildlife by removal of habitat.
Lack of access to retail outlets and supermarkets.
Lack of access to schools.
Lack of access to doctors and hospitals.
Lack of access to rail and public transport links.
Increase traffic on rural roads posing danger to pedestrians and cyclists.
Infrastructure disruption to water, sewage and electricity.

No

Representation ID: 88517

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anita Sanders

Massive encroachment onto the green belt.
Overdevelopment.
Destruction of wildlife by removal of habitat.
Impact on rural life and farming
Lack of access to retail outlets and supermarket.
Lack of access to schools.
Lack of access to doctors and hospitals.
Lack of access to rail on public transport links.
Increase in traffic on rural roads posing danger to pedestrians and cyclist.
Infrastructure disruption of water sewage and electric
Impact on rural life and loss of farming.

No

Representation ID: 88609

Received: 17/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Ida Marjorie Brown

No. G1 serves as a better location

Other

Representation ID: 88710

Received: 17/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Jerry Corless

N/A

No

Representation ID: 88719

Received: 17/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Darren Quinney

The ongoing developments in an around Knightcote/Lighthorne/Gaydon and Kineton are having a detrimental effect with heavy traffic and delays due to the vast amount of builds over the past 5 years. In typical SDC behaviour its all about the money from land and build house after house. I have seen zero investment on infrastructure to support and no signs the Council will do so moving forwards. It scares me how your constituency wastes local tax payers' money.

No

Representation ID: 88965

Received: 19/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Nigel Rock

We do not agree with this site being included in the plan. We observe that it is annotated as ‘less suitable’ in the consultation. Our reasons are primarily that it is not in conformance with Strategic Objectives of the SWLP, with which we broadly agree.

No

Representation ID: 89465

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Annotated as 'less suitable' in the consultation - not conform with Strategic Objectives - not near a railway station so residents would have continued reliance on cars - existing services sporadic across the area and require a car to access which is not sustainable or within Strategic Objectives - existing infrastructure would be strained when development commences and concern as to how new infrastructure phased and funded - Jacob's Transport Assessment designates the site as "minus 18 red" in both phases - biodiversity is not enhanced by building over open countryside and actively damages environmental assets.

Yes

Representation ID: 89542

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Emily Carleton

Go ahead as this is non green belt land

Yes

Representation ID: 89609

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Smith

existing brownfield site - should be used

Yes

Representation ID: 89613

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Smith

Existing road infrastructure is suitable. good access to key transport routes. not in a protected greenbelt area

Yes

Representation ID: 89789

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Julian Sanders

The new settlements would be more preferable and suitable
Access to good road connections to the north and south of the area.
Local employment opportunities
Good rail links for those commuting further afield - Banbury, Oxford, London, Birmingham
Helps to the pressure off Stratford Upon Avon of increased traffic congestion, pollution and urban sprawl
Gives opportunity to build new schools, amenities and infrastructure

Yes

Representation ID: 89821

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lina Rodriguez

A new settlement would be so much better than adding to already overcrowded towns

Yes

Representation ID: 89823

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Daphne Davis

This development would take the congestion pressure off Stratford. It would also meet all the housing needs preserving green belt land and have least impact on the environment. As a new settlement it would avoid urban sprawl which would put a strain on existing infrastructure.

Yes

Representation ID: 89852

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Holly Whittaker

This location has good existing road connections as well as potential for the new Chiltern line railways station (only 2 miles from the proposed homes). The HS2 could also offer links here to key commuting areas.

This location would alleviate the pressure on Stratford's congestion which is already a problem for local residents, and would avoid urban sprawl which is straining existing infrastructure in Stratford.

This area could contribute to meeting the housing needs required in Stratford District with the least environmental impact and help to preserve other greenbelt land that has more ecological or historical significance.

Yes

Representation ID: 89855

Received: 21/02/2025

Respondent: Dr Stephen Browett

Due to the proximity to the SG13&14 locations, I believe the same arguments for building there, also apply here.

The local road infrastructure has much more capacity which could handle increased demand from new homes. As well as the road infrastructure, there is potential for new railway station to be introduced on the existing Chiltern line which would only be 2 miles from the development site.

Development on this land would satisfy housing needs while not needing to develop on green belt land.

Yes

Representation ID: 90005

Received: 22/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Macvie

The infrastructure of this area is relatively well placed to support new housing developments. As well as jobs in the local area existing road networks and potential rail network developments would cope better with an increase in population than the Stratford town infrastructure. Development here would result in less loss of greenbelt land and less urban sprawl.

Yes

Representation ID: 90142

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Maria Giblin

New developments can be driven strategically not just on land availability. Meet the housing needs. Good links to HS2

Yes

Representation ID: 90182

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Fox

Clearly a separated locations from existing settlements. Easy links to M40 corridor on the A423 or at Gaydon junction. along with a potential for a new Parkway station on the North / South Chiltern line - akin to Warwick parkway. This also enables the development of G1 located in a strategic commercial centre for South Warwickshire, as well as being part of the M40 commerce corridor.

Yes

Representation ID: 90209

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Williams

Better infrastructure already in place.

Yes

Representation ID: 90229

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Dean Giblin

new settlements are more preferable and the same points as above for SG13 & SG14

No

Representation ID: 90302

Received: 23/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Liz Stone

The proposed developments will have severe consequences for local wildlife habitats, particularly in designated greenbelt and countryside areas. The loss of hedgerows, woodlands, and meadows will threaten native species such as hedgehogs, bats, and birds. Increased human activity will disrupt existing wildlife corridors, leading to a decline in biodiversity.

Development has a very significant impact on the environment and will lead to a rise in air pollution, from construction and vehicle emissions. Loss of green spaces will exacerbate climate change and increase the risk of flooding.

Proposals place unrealistic strains on existing infrastructure, roads, public transport, healthcare, and schools.