BASE HEADER
Do you broadly support the proposals in the How to Have Your Say chapter? If you have any additional points to raise with regards to this chapter please include them here.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96062
Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Judith Palmer
The release of this detail has left local residents feeling blind-sided by the scale. It does not feel a strong consultation process when this seems to be the first point many local residents have been aware. As rural areas, documents at libraries is not taking the message to people, it is merely ticking a box that docs were available. When you actively choose to live in a rural area, and work 9-5, accessing libraries is often not a key activity. A calls for sites process only supports those who wish to sell their land, not the people who live there.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96067
Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Wilmcote Parish Council
Wilmcote Parish Council do NOT support the proposals.
Wilmcote Parish Council urges decision-makers to reject this development, as it would cause irreparable harm to our local community, environment and infrastructure. While we acknowledge the need for housing, this proposal is neither sustainable nor responsible.
We call on Stratford-on-Avon District Council and South Warwickshire Local Plan authorities to:
• Prioritise existing communities.
• Protect the green belt from unnecessary development.
• Explore alternative, more sustainable and stainable housing solutions.
If this site is allocated in the Local Plan, local councillors and parish councils must have a role in shaping the design, infrastructure and phasing of the development to minimise harm and secure necessary facilities for residents.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96088
Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Summers Holdings Ltd
Asiant : The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
The Plan is in 2 parts which means that our clients might not find out whether their site forms part of the plan for many years. The distinction between Parts 1 and 2 is unclear. Existing draft plans - such as the Stratford Site Allocations appear to be left 'hanging' in a state where they are not completed.
The plan looking forward 25 years is supported but it is highly unlikely that any significant contribution will be forthcoming from a new settlement for a decade. Site 758 is immediately available and could be assimilated into New Settlement A1.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96180
Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Ms Tracey Mumford
N/A
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96272
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Stuart Hayward-Higham
The plan does not protect the green belt and the biodiversity and social benefits from access to open wild spaces
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96380
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs wendy dean
Like everything else times and situations change according to the Government in place. This new regislation is a serious abuse of individual rights. We live in a quiet village with a wonderful community looking after one another. Had I wanted to live in a big housing estate, then I would have. This Plan is outrageous. The countryside will become a traffic jam with pollution. The traffic noise will be horrendous. The birdsong and wildlife will dissapear. I do not want to live in this environment. Our children/grandchildren can currently play freely in green open areas. They will be gone forever.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96483
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Jeremy bradbeer
No further comment
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96573
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Shipston Town Council
In 2.3 should have had more emphasis made with words such ‘only’ and ‘not accepting any other sites’ italicised and bold.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96597
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs G Wood
The language used to describe the task is not sufficiently plain english as to be suited to a large proportion of local residents and target audience who would like to express their views. Moreover, the depth of content described in this chapter is not proportionate to the knowledge or understanding of said local residents. It is likely to appear overwhelming, demanding and, to many, beyond their capability. Thus it is likely to deter them from responding.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96599
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Mark Griffin
I object to the proposals. The significant growth of 6,000 properties to the south of Leamington will see Barford, Tachbrook and Leamington virtually joined up. The current traffic volumes highlight the negative impact of overdevelopment of the area. The approach into Leamington is comprimised .Traffic delays make it an unpleasant place to visit/live. The impact on Warwick Hospital cannot cope with the demands placed upon it(forcing closeure January 25) is a concern. Village life in Barford will never be the same again. The additional homes proposed in Barford brings more traffic and the school and roads are unable to cope.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96601
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Mark Holland
Space at present so where build more with shortage of Dentists.
And last of all roads with all the extra homes and businesses you will be massively increasing traffic and pollution.
We need to be more efficient in this country and by taking land away to build on so less farming land less food for the country.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96626
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Richard Slatem
I do not support the B1 proposed site because the distruption to access into Warwick would affect our area greatly. The A4177 is a major single carriageway truck road. It can not be wided or improved for the potential new volume of traffic. The other main route, Warwick road, would also be greatly affected. I would say access roads to the south of Leamington would be more suitable and therefore would support their development .
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96631
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Phil Reynolds
It’s concerning how the proposal shows no recognition of brownfield sites that could be build upon rather than ripping up the green belt and putting in a ridiculous number of new houses. Current infrastructure cannot cope and there is no acknowledgement of this. Rather, we will have to accept more traffic, more demand for already overwhelmed medical and school facilities in the area.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96738
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Alcester Town Council
Alcester Town Council, Arrow with Weethley Parish Council, Kinwarton Parish Council, Wixford Parish Council and Great Alne Parish Council (together referred to as Alcester Parishes Group or ‘APG’) supports the consultation process and encourages community participation. It is important that smaller communities are able to access this very detailed information to enable them to make an informed response.
APG considers that the on-line consultation portal has been difficult for councils and residents to use and we believe this has been an obstacle to feedback.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96830
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Margaret Jeffery
This document is not user-friendly for the layman.
Residents directly affected by this plan should have been informed directly.
In correct information on the proposed BW site map, ie property NOT put forward for development coloured in amber on the map, should have been corrected when SDC were informed but even after contacting them more than once this still has not been done.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96881
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Ian Millard
. I cannot see how further development in Great Alne is appropriate. All sites have challenging & problematic access to them & additional infrastructure will only add to the flooding problems in the village. We are already cut off a few times every year & this can only make that worse. We are already dealing with a 160 unit development at Great Alne Park and limited pedestrian access to new sites is also of concern
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97013
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Victoria Alcock
Yes I support the proposals
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97131
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Carl Holloway
By not leafleting all households you are significantly reducing awareness of this scheme. Furthermore by using a convoluted portal as the primary means for collating feedback, you are adding significant friction into the feedback process and discriminating against those who are not tech savvy, such as the elderly. Highly disappointing.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97766
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Gary Jeffery
Notification of the Plan and proposals for settlement sites should have been given directly to specifically affected residents of which I am one. My land at Pasture Barn Cottage, CV37 0ER is totally surrounded by land which has been put forward for the development in BW. Furthermore, my land is shown on the map indicating the proposed settlement at BW as having been put forward. IT HAS NOT. I have contacted SWLP to formally request that an appropriate amendment be made to the map but to date this has not happened. The document is not user-friendly for the layman.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98001
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr John Williams
N/A
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98070
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Anna Inman
The proposed development on site B1 poses significant threats to the Green Belt, local agriculture, traffic conditions, recreational activities, wildlife, and the landscape. I urge the planners to reconsider this proposal in light of these substantial concerns. My main concerns are:
•The proposed development is located within the Green Belt. Developing this site would undermine the Green Belt principles and set a precedent for further encroachment into protected areas.
•The development would significantly increase traffic, leading to congestion. This would increase pollution and noise
•Hatton is home to a variety of wildlife. The development would fragment habitats and threaten them
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98127
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Andrew Cain
No comment
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98150
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr David Adams
The proposals for SG17 are unacceptable.
Sewage facilities are already overstretched, some areas are subject to regular flooding.
Schools are full, GP service is struggling to cope, the hospital re-opening is proposed with reduced services.
Very long journey to hospital 2 hours on buses.
No local employment opportunities, massive increase in car jouneys
Promises to provide facilities eg sports fields for previous development have not been sustained.
Bank is to close, fire station has been removed, no police station.
Removal of Recycling Centre for houses, more fly tipping, more car jouneys
Limited parking for extra cars.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98151
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Michael Tonkin
N A
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98166
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Sue Thomas
I am completely against a new housing estate of such magnitude it will be a small town taking over the countryside effecting wildlife and road links will not support the extra traffic . Far too large a development. What are you thinking ???
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98189
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: MR DENIS BARNFIELD
Infrastructure is lacking, particularly in regards roads, pavements increased access to services etc.
Biodiversity is threatened
Concerned about continuous ribbon development between Lapworth/Hatton/Warwick
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98191
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Holly Farm Business Park
Asiant : The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd
* A single local plan should be produced, rather than a 2-part plan, to provide certainty.
* There is no timescale for Part 2.
* Support for the 25 year time horizon but, given the lengthy timescale for new settlements to come forward the immediately available land at HFBP should be brought forward to meet the shortfall of non-strategic employment land.
* Given the sifting out of the 2 previously submitted Call for Site submissions these are reattached for reconsideration.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98216
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Jonathan Woodward
N/a
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98221
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Ms Belinda Hay
I don't believe green spaces should be sacrificed before all other options to provide housing are exhausted.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98286
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Brailes Hill Farm
The following response to the Overarching Principles and Strategic Objectives for the SWLP will demonstrate that SG17, including the Fell Mill sites (148 & 747) fail to meet the above requirements and those of the SWLP.
I have sent in a longer document on email to swlp@warwickdc.gov.uk