BASE HEADER
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy- K- Multifunctional Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS)?
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 95008
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: David Gosling
no further comment
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 95024
Derbyniwyd: 03/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Tracey Grimes
In the 18 months living in Stratford there have been multiple examples of the Birmingham Road flooding following heavy rain etc as the drainage is not sufficient. Allowing for all these extra houses with a suggested drainage plan doesn't fill me with any hope that it will elminate surface water.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 95744
Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Bloor Homes Western
Asiant : Marrons
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 95810
Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Shelagh Marshall
A good strategy.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 95945
Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Paul Tesh
There are a number of recent SuDs installations which have been designed to be off-line and should only start to fill once a maximum flow in the site’s surface water network exceeds a specified threshold. Even in high rainfall periods these SuDs installations have not filled. Apart from the need to check that they have been built correctly consideration should be given to making all SuDs installations on-line.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96340
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Southam Town Council
Southam Town, District and County elected representatives support this draft Policy.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96552
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Shipston Town Council
There are a number of recent SuDs installations which have been designed to be off-line and should only start to fill once a maximum flow in the site’s surface water network exceeds a threshold. Even in high rainfall periods these SuDs installations have not filled. Apart from the need to check that they have been built correctly consideration should be given to making all SuDs installations on-line.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96906
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Margaret Jeffery
Surrounding areas should not be put at increased risk of flooding
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96993
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: John Dinnie
SuDS Systems should be on line only. thus ensuring there is no flow above the maximum runoff permitted.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 96995
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Alcester Town Council
This is agreed by 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’). All SuDS, new and existing, should be owned and maintained by Severn Trent in perpetuity. In some developments local to Alcester, SuDS are maintained by residents which we consider to be inappropriate.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97183
Derbyniwyd: 26/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Tysoe Parish Council
Yes
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97257
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Squab Hall Farm
Asiant : Mr Jack Barnes
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97392
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Godwin Developments
Godwin Developments acknowledge that all development should include high quality sustainable drainage systems.
With regards to Land at Aylesbury Road, the Vison Document states that the site would benefit from a site specific surface water drainage strategy which follows the principles of sustainable drainage. This strategy will ensure that all the surface water falling onto the site is managed and controlled, including the use of an attenuation basin, before being discharged to the environment at a controlled rate. As noted previously Severn Trent Water have already confirmed that there is suitable connection point to serve this site.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97788
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Gary Jeffery
" development should not be permitted where there is an increase in flood risk to the site or surrounding area. SDC Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment April 2021 map p. 47 shows the area surrounding proposed site BW as RED ie. HIGH. Therefore, proposed site BW should not be a preferred location for settlement.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 97981
Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Simon Fox
SUDs are often dangerous areas for small children and should be away from the development. What is not clear is how these work in area of high water table, and there should be clear indication of how the SUDs will then drain and where they will drain to, and how this then affects the flood risk further downstream. It is about protecting all properties in South Warwickshire, not just the houses on the new settlement area. It is clear this policy has not been considered in the site selection ratings.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98108
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: William Davis Limited
Asiant : Marrons
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 98655
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: X2 New Settlement Consortium
Asiant : Mr Jack Barnes
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 99566
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr John Howson
Draft K - Re: Long Marston:
The brook at the back of Long Marston (Nowell Brook), can barely cope, and with farms and fields sometimes not clearing ditches and the local authority seemingly never clearing culverts, any extra water caused by development will not be manageable.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 99649
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Ms Gillian Padgham
yes
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 100130
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Stratford upon Avon District Council
Good policy.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 100370
Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Lorraine Grocott
NA
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 100993
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Rowington Landowner Consortium
Asiant : Knight Frank LLP
The policy requires all developments incorporate SuDS to manage surface water runoff effectively, aligning with the National Planning Policy Framework 2024, which requires major developments to include sustainable drainage systems unless there is clear evidence that this would be inappropriate.
The site C1 would seek to integrate multifunctional SuDS to manage surface water runoff and utilise these areas to enhance biodiversity, improve water quality, and provide recreational spaces. This approach would ensure that the development contributes positively to the local environment and community, aligning with sustainable development principles.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 101116
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mac Mic Group
Asiant : Marrons
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 101181
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Hallam Land Management Limited
Asiant : Mr Jack Barnes
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 101431
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Alderley Holdings Trust
Asiant : Mr Jack Barnes
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 101453
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Hallam Land
Asiant : Marrons
Planning Practice Guidance quotes the NPPF as stating that SuDS should be used in development unless this would be inappropriate for the site. It is considered that this exception should be included in any policy requiring SuDS in the SWLP, as Draft Policy K does not currently allow for the exception, therefore meaning that the current policy is ‘unsound’.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 101562
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Ms Zoe Leventhal
Essential for net zero challenges to be met and to protect nature
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 101686
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Vincent Rollason
This development is not good for the area
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 101931
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council
Agree with reservations
SuDS pools are obviously necessary but should be placed inside the boundary of new development, not outside, therefore using more land. Any new SuDS ponds close to Tachbrook Country Park should not be included in the Country Park land but in the development land.
SuDs pools should also be placed well away from children’s play areas, unlike the developments off Europa Way, including the Sandpit Boulevard development, where the play equipment is located next to the SuDS pools.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 102121
Derbyniwyd: 07/03/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Joseph Dimambro-Denson
NGL I just wanna see more rain gardens, I think they're pretty.