As mentioned under 4.3 RDS4 the Green Belt must not be eroded further and should be protected in line with central government policy to only use green belt land in "exceptional circumstances".

The plan does not reflect this last resort position given the continuing uncertainty over housing needs. The Green Belt open character of the village should not be compromised which a 25% expansion would do

The plan is contradictory. It portrays a want to consider Green Belt and protect the open spaces and countryside yet villages "washed over" by green belt may have their village envelopes re drawn. That contradiction cannot be allowed to happen otherwise what is the point in having such protected areas

Hampton Magna has suffered more than its share of green belt erosion and growth/development on all sides in recent years. Warwick Parkway Station (built on green belt land and subsequently expanded considerably) , Hatton Park Estate to the North , Chase Meadow to the South, IBM site development to the East. Further erosion of green belt and the village character must stop.

The scale of development is inappropriate in relation to the existing village population.

Contrary to the plan services in the village are fully utilised and do not need further "sustaining" through population growth. Budbrooke school is expanding but this is needed to resolve current stretched classroom numbers. The train station and its facilities are fully utilised. Therefore existing infrastructure capacity should not be stretched further.

Another large influx of families will create more traffic congestion particularly given the single file traffic light controlled road under the bridge being the main access to/from the village. There will be more dangers with traffic volumes through the village day to day and more rat running through country roads and other neighbouring villages. Houses will draw in more London commuters creating pressure to expand Warwick Parkway even further.