Preferred sites 1 and 4 are the only ones that do not extend the village envelope. Previously these sites would have been referred to as infilling.
By approving any kind of development on sites 2 and 3 will inevitably lead to further applications to build in an easterly direction. There is also the real threat of exacerbating the risk of flooding in the Valley and Valley Road by building on site 2 as the natural slope of the land drains into the stream at the bottom of the site. The access to the Southam Road from sites 2 and 3 is far worse than that from site 1. I would propose that the number of dwellings proposed for site 1 is reduced by a number that could easily be contained on site 4.
The mail shot that we have received from Messrs. Gladman showing a site access opposite the White Lion is totally ill conceived.
A road re-alignment and traffic lights/roundabout at the junction of School Lane/ Southam Road and Church Lane would solve many traffic flow problems. It would also slow down the traffic that consistently persists on travelling through the village at speeds in excess of 30mph. This would also cater for extra traffic from site 4.
In reply to a letter that I sent to Chris Elliott, Chief Executive, WDC, in part he states that, "It is understood that that the Cedar, (miss-spelt Ceder) Tree Farm site, is located some distance from the main village (with no supporting services) and is not perceived to be a suitable location for supporting a sustainable approach to delivering housing". This site has, on more than one occasion, been proposed by the Parish Council as a suitable site for a new settlement. On each occasion it has been dismissed out of hand.
It is strange, therefore, that not more than a few hundred yards away is a WDC's proposed travellers site. Strange how the "supporting a sustainable approach to delivering housing" can change from one side of the A425 to the other.