[INCLUDES PHOTOS]
1 Consultation

Warwick District Council did not notify Hampton Magna Parish Council about the new local plan until a briefing on 22nd March 2016. It also failed to allow extra time for the consultation because Easter was in the time period allowed. It, therefore, has failed in its duty to consult on the plan. The documents published by Warwick District Council are incomprehensible, and the form to be returned for objections is difficult to fill in as it is full of jargon and confusing.

2 Size of development

The density of housing on the site off Arras Boulevard, has been increased from 100 houses to 130. This is not in keeping with the rest of the housing in the village. All the houses here were built in the 1960s and, as such, are not built with the same character as housing today. They have also been extended in various ways to accommodate increasing families, so very few are identical, in contrast to the housing developments being built recently in our locality. The new houses will therefore be unlikely to blend in, but also due to the density of the proposed development, be unlikely to have the same propensity for expansion. A large number of residents have been able to remain in their homes here, because of this, and that also means that the housing the village needs, tends to be bungalows, so that the older generation can down size, and first time housing for the children of older residents who would like to stay here. As bungalows tend to need a larger plot, and be less profitable for developers, there is real concern that the village will not get the housing it needs.
The new plan increases the proposed housing in Hampton Magna by 41%, which is a huge increase for a village of any size.

3 Infrastructure issues

There are 3 roads into the Hampton Magna. The main route in is Old Budbrooke Road, which is both height and weight restricted and is traffic lighted under the railway bridge as it is single carriageway there. This is already a traffic problem at rush hour in particular, with traffic to Warwick Parkway railway station, traffic to Warwick, and traffic for the A46, all queuing to get out of the village. This road also floods in heavy rain further towards the village and that means a single lane is then available for traffic there too .
The Ugly Bridge road is also height and weight restricted, due to the hump backed bridge just after the Birmingham Road, and the railway bridge that it passes under. It is a country lane with few road markings, and vehicles have to go on the verges to pass each other.
Hampton Road comes in through Hampton on the Hill, and is mostly down to one carriageway due to traffic calming measures and parking in that village. There is a narrow exit from the village and also a passing place part way along the lane towards Hampton Magna. There are limited road markings.
In addition the Hampton Road and Ugly Bridge Road are used as a cut through to the Birmingham Road by the residents of Chase Meadow, and Hampton Road is a cut through to Warwick Parkway from the Longbridge Island and new A46 island.

To accommodate new housing there would need to be a new road, both in and out of the village, either from the A4189 or the A46. The existing roads could not deal with the predicted 426 vehicles associated with the new houses. The only way to access the proposed developments is via Arras Boulevard, and Daly Avenue, and Minster or Mayne Close, all of which are estate roads or cul de sacs, and were certainly not designed to be thoroughfares.

The plan's only concession to the transport problems, is to make alterations to the roundabout on the A46. Although this is frequently part of the queues into or out of Warwick,this does nothing to help cope with the extra traffic in and around the village, with the existing inadequate roads, and more housing only means more congestion. (Warwick, as a medieval town already has its own traffic problems because the roads were never meant to cope with the volume of traffic there.) There will also be a worsening of public transport as the bus already struggles to get round the narrow roads, and often ends up mounting the verges and pavements to get past other vehicles. The previous Village Sites Appraisal Matrix mentions the major negative transport effects given the site capacity of over 100 dwellings, yet this has been ignored in the new plans.

The water systems in Hampton Magna are already under strain, both the supply and the sewerage, and as above, the surface water drainage; as it was installed when the village was built in the 1960s. There are often complaints to the Parish Council, and although Severn Trent is trying to resolve these issues, it is certain that the drains would feel the strain with even more housing.

In my 30 years of living in the village there have also been substantial alterations to the electricity substations, which used to cut the power off quite frequently before they were altered. I doubt they could cope with the extra consumption of the development.

The plan states we have a primary school, doctor's surgery, shops, a post office, a pub, and village hall. Whilst this is true, the shop is a small Costcutter, with part of the counter used as a post office inside. It has a limited range and it would be difficult to find everything there, as there is a very limited selection of fresh produce, for example. The other shops are a beauty salon which seems to do highly specialised beauty treatments such as permanent mascara, and a church related, volunteer run, coffee shop. The doctor's surgery is completely enclosed by the school, community centre, shops and pub, with a very limited amount of parking behind the shops, which is usually full when they are open. In addition, they have a limited capacity for patients and doctors which would mean increased waiting times for all patients. The primary school has a limited capacity too, and if, as is outlined in the plans, it would have to take pupils from the proposed extra 175 houses at the Hatton development (due to the lack of capacity of Ferncumbe School in Hatton) this would exceed it's capacity. The school is surrounded by the community centre, the doctor's surgery and the shops and houses, and as the school playing field has been deemed unsuitable for building, there is nowhere for it to expand. Parking is already a huge problem in the village, especially at school dropping off and picking up times, when there are cars in every direction parked around the school. In Slade Hill, Cherry Lane, Woodway Avenue, Ryder Close, Field Barn road as well as Styles Close, it is hard to walk past them, as they are parked on the pavements and roads, making crossing the roads very dangerous. The village also struggles with people parking on the other side of the village in Field Barn road and Blandford way, to avoid the parking charges at Warwick Parkway railway station.
4 Land choices

There are a number of problems with the proposed sites, which are all green belt sites. A major drawback for the village is the loss of one of the best views in Warwickshire, over towards Warwick Castle and Northgate church, from the site off Arras Boulevard. This would be a very sad loss for all residents.

The only land that has been considered in the village are 2 plots which the owners wish to sell. They are not joined except by the corner of both sites, and therefore will create twice the amount of disruption to the village, given the limited access.

One of the points made by the plan, is that some of the extra housing is to alleviate Coventry's housing requirements. There is no viable means of public transport to Coventry from Hampton Magna, as the bus journey is over an hour, and the train journey would require a journey into Birmingham, and then catching a different train out again to Coventry, which would also take more than an hour. Therefore, anyone wishing to work in Coventry would be travelling by car on the A46, a 20 minute drive along an already highly congested route at rush hour. There are other areas, much closer to Coventry, such as Bubbenhall, which could be expanded, where there are likely to be more employment prospects than in Hampton Magna. As the train line at Warwick Parkway goes from Birmingham to London, it is much more likely that any new residents would find employment there, and not in Coventry.

During the heavy rains recently, the A46 was restricted to one lane, when water from the field drains flowed straight across the road, causing chaos. One can only imagine what will happen if the new houses are built, as proposed, on the fields above the road. The land south of Lloyd Close is vey poor draining, as it is mostly clay, and as now, when the water table is high, water just sits on the land. This can only add to the water heading down to the A46.

There have been prior notices given to Warwick District Council that there are bats nesting in the area South of Lloyd Close, but this isn't mentioned in the plan, and does not appear to have been investigated.

In addition, there are other green field sites available in Warwick District where a new development could be built as an independent site. This would mean that all the amenities required, such as schools, shops, doctors, pubs and village halls, could be built by the developers as part of their obligations, and this burden would not then come from the public purse. There are clear precedents for this, given that Hampton Magna was originally built and provided for in this way.

Conclusions

The new plan is not sound for Hampton Magna, due to the lack of consultation, the size of the development, the density of the housing, and the multiple problems with infrastructure here. An increase of 235 dwellings, a projected 588 extra people, will strain all local infrastructure beyond it's capacity.

As the air quality is already poor in the village -my doctor referred to it as the sink hole of Britain, because all the pollution sinks to ground level here, meaning high levels of asthma and breathing problems - any increase in traffic is going to cause further health issues. The inevitable outcome of the extra projected 400 odd vehicles, is more congestion, and more pollution.

Coventry is not readily accessible by public transport, so adding extra housing to the plan for their need is pointless. The scale of the increase in the development, 41%, in the village that is least accessible, and only has access to Coventry by car, is disproportionate and unreasonable.

By failing to properly consider other sites, such as the land next to the A46, as well as independent sites within green belt, the plan fails to meet either the needs of the village or of Coventry.