1. During the first consultation exercise we pointed out, by way of on-line submissions, that there was a major flaw in the process of developing the Local Plan in that Hampton Magna had been designated as a Category 1 Village although no sites had been identified for housing purposes and no investigations had been made to identify any traffic problems. This meant that it was not possible to comment on specific sites. It also meant that the Council would be pressured into identifying inappropriate sites in order to meet the stated allocation for the village.

2. We further pointed out that that all the sites other than Category 1 and 2 Villages had been identified after careful research and proposals were made for infrastructure improvements to help mitigate their effect. The designation of category 1 and 2 villages, however, was an arbitrary decision based on the need to identify sites for a further 850 houses somewhere in the District. This was identified as another flaw.

3. These flaws have now been compounded by the Council identifying Hampton Magna as a Primary Service Village based on the services available resulting in an increase in the number of houses allocated for the village to 150. Although the identification of Hampton Magna as a Primary Service Village purports to be based on identifiable data relating to services available it is still only an arbitrary decision to accommodate the 850 houses. No thought has been given to the infrastructure problems or the availability of suitable sites in the village.

4. No account has been taken of the following representations we made during the first consultation:

'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 (has) 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 /Primary Service 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.'


5. Apparently a number of sites in the District have been put forward for development by owners, but as they have not been identified we do not know whether they are in Hampton Magna. One site to the south of Arras Boulevard Hampton Magna has been mentioned but despite contacting the Council we have been unable to ascertain the exact status of this land. We reiterate the point made in our previous representations that it would be perverse of the Council to identify any land to the south of the village because of high landscape value, existence of public footpaths and existing noise nuisance. Other areas of the village also have high landscape value. (see below)

6. The lack of any identified sites in this latest stage of the process means that we are still unable to comment on specific sites. By the time the sites are indentified we will be even further into the process and it will be more difficult to argue successfully for changes

7. The compounding of these two flaws means that the Council will be under even more pressure to identify sites in Hampton Magna to accommodate 150 houses even if roads serving the village are not suitable and/or the sites would not otherwise be acceptable.

8. During the first consultation we tried to mitigate the effects of the lack of identified sites by commenting on the possible sites in the village, although the comments could have been made more effectively if they related to identified sites. These comments were as follows and we resubmit them as part of the current consultation process:

'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:

i. 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.'

ii. 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.

iii. 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

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'


SUMMARY

9. The process is even more flawed because Hampton Magna has now been designated as a Primary Service Village before any sites to take 150 houses have been identified. No investigations have been made into the amount of suitable land available in the Village or infrastructure problems. This will result in the Council being put under pressure to identify sites even if they are unsuitable or the local road network cannot cope with the additional traffic.

10. If the designation is confirmed it would be perverse of the Council to
identify any land to the south of the village because of high
landscape value, existence of public footpaths and existing noise nuisance.
Other areas of the village also have high landscape value.

11. Hampton Magna should be taken out of the list of Primary Service Villages until thorough investigations have been made into the availability of suitable land and the need for and feasibility of improving the road network serving the village.