There is a major flaw in the process in that Hampton Magna has been designated as a Category 1 Village although no sites appear to have been identified for housing purposes. This means that we are unable to comment on specific sites during the consultation process. By the time the preferred options are known we will be at the draft stage. Although comments can be made at this stage we are sure that it will be more difficult to argue successfully for changes at that time. We will try to mitigate the effects of this flaw by commenting now on the possible sites in the village, although the comments could be made more effectively if they related to identified sites.
Another flaw is that all the sites other than Category 1 and 2 Villages have been identified after careful research and proposals are made for infrastructure improvements to help mitigate their effect. However, the designation of category 1 and 2 villages appear to be arbitrary decisions based on the need to identify sites for a further 850 houses.
These two flaws mean that the Council will be under pressure to identify sites in Hampton Magna to accommodate 100 houses even if the sites would not otherwise be acceptable.
The Old Budbrooke Road, which in reality is just a country lane, is already over used. Not only would additional traffic add to road safety issues but would also make getting out of the village at peak times even more difficult. The amount of traffic exiting the village at the Birmingham Road junction will already be increased by the additional parking at the station. Traffic on the Birmingham Road will be increased if the proposed development at Hatton, Shrewley, Rowington and Lapworth is approved which will further impact on the roundabout over the bypass. Delays on this roundabout are a major cause of tailbacks on the Old Bubrooke Road.
Any suggestion that CIL money could be used to improve the infrastructure would only be acceptable if possible improvements were identified and assessed before the Category 1 definition for the village is confirmed. In our view, because of the particular circumstances of the problems, no amount of road improvements would solve them.
Any increase in the size of the local school to accommodate additional pupils would exacerbate the existing problems caused by parents parking near the school when dropping off and picking up their children. Because of the lack of suitable parking some parents are forced to park in dangerous positions.

All the land to the south of the village should be discounted as any development there would conflict with three separate considerations identified by the Council ie:
1. The document Helping Shape the District under ' providing well designed new developments that are in the right location' provides that the Council will make sure new developments are designed and located to maintain and improve the quality of built and natural environments particularly historic areas and buildings, sensitive wildlife habitats and areas of high landscape value. This is repeated in the Guide to Assessment Tables under potential impact.

The views over this land are incredible and include views of the historic town of Warwick and stretch as far as Brailes Hill at Shipston on Stour. There is no doubt that they come under the definition of 'high landscape value.'

2. Also included in the Guide to Assessment Tables under physical constraints is reference to 'physical aspects directly affecting the site such as flood risk, protected
trees and woodland, public footpaths, ground contamination, access difficulties,
overhead power lines'.

There is a public footpath running from east to west across this land and another one running from Hampton on the Hill to the Hampton Road. In addition to the designated public footpaths local residents have been walking around the fields for at least 30 years and would be able to claim public rights of way over the land.

3. The Guide to Assessment Tables under Environmental conditions also includes reference to aspects of the site's location which may impact on the living conditions of
future residents such as proximity to areas which are the source of noise or atmospheric
pollution or which are of poor environmental quality as well as, for example, the
remoteness of the site in terms of access to public transport, jobs and services

The residents of properties adjoining these fields, in fact residents of most of the village suffer from noise pollution from the bypass and motorway. This is well documented with regular complaints to the Parish Council and the County Council

It is worth mentioning here that, although the public meeting were informed that no sites had been identified in the village, one site to the south of Arras Boulevard is mentioned in the Site Assessment Section. We understand that this site is not the Council's preferred option although it has not been discounted. It would be perverse of the Council to identify this site, or any other site to the south of the village, as a preferred option when they clearly conflict with a number of considerations identified by the Council.
There are other sites adjoining the Old Budbrooke Road/Woodway junction which also has high landscape value.
Discounting all the land to the south of the village and other land with high landscape value considerably reduces the number of possible sites

Conclusion
The process is flawed in that Hampton Magna has been designated as a Category 1 village deemed to be capable of providing sites for 100 houses without any sites being identified. This has the effect of making it difficult to comment at the consultation stage and could also put pressure on the Council to disregard its own criteria and identify inappropriate sites.
The roads in the village are already unable to deal with the current level of traffic. Any additional houses would exacerbate the problem.
Any decision to identify land to the south of the village would be perverse as it would be in direct contravention of criteria set by the Council.