Sites Review

Showing comments and forms 1 to 4 of 4

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61982

Received: 12/12/2013

Respondent: Mr Brian Holt

Representation Summary:

-Alternative options are possibly available.
-No residents have been approached and there are 'large' gardens which may be suitable for providing housing opportunities, but unlikely to be suitable for low cost housing.
-Paddock adjoining respondent's house and gardents could/should be included.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 62021

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Michael Partridge

Representation Summary:

-There are several other parts of land and buildings that could be converted and developed in the settlement without radically changing its agricultural character. .

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 62225

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Cindy Grove

Representation Summary:

There are places in Hill Wootton which would be more suitable for small scale development which could be done sympathetically without changing the character of the hamlet or threatening its rural nature. Many people think of Hill Wootton as a place which they enjoy using or visiting to ride, walk and cycle. If there has to be development it needs to be done more appropriately.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 63149

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Hill Wootton - Petition

Number of people: 34

Representation Summary:

There are more suitable and sensitive opportunities for small scale development in Hill Wootton which would not affect the street scene or change the nature of the hamlet, which have not been explored. A more sensitive alternative would be to invite landowners to offer them so that W.D.C. can assess them for their viability. There is also long term potential for the development of existing buildings which would be more in keeping with the rural nature of Hill Wootton.
A development of 5 or more houses on the field in question would be entirely unworkable, inappropriate and out of character.

Full text:

Hill Wootton Preferred Option for housing development.
Page 50, Warwick District Council Local Plan 2013
OBJECTION
We, the tffidersigned, object to the Green Belt/Green Field preferred option for residential
development in HiLl Wootton on the following grounds;
I. The field in question has a history offailed plarming applications and a rejection at appeal,
all of which state that this field and the lane it is situated on adjoin the hamlet of Hill
Wootton and does not constitute 'infill,. It is not a 'gap'. The opinion ofW.D.C. itself as
stated in Appendix 6 of The Local Plan 2013 is 'The open Character of Hill Wootton
currently makes an important contribution to the openness of the Green Belt. This subparcel
could not easily accommodate a limited infill, without compromising its essential
open character, and the fundamental aim and purpose of the Green Belt'. It is situated in an
agricultm-al area in a lane which leads to a working farm and which adjoins the settlement.
I
2. Any development of this field will seriously compromise the Green Belt and encourage
applications to further encroach upon it which will then be difficult to refuse. Appendix 6
'Long term negative effect on prudent use of Green Belt Land on the edge of the village.'
3. There are no 'special circumstances' which necessitate the use of this piece of Green Belt
land. Serious doubts regarding the suitability of this land for development are raised in
Appendix 6 of The New Local Plan 2013, and echo our own.
4. The Local Plan has identified the potential for 10 houses on a field ofth.is size, scaling down
the number to 5 at the landowner's request. This represents, at worse, a 40% increase on the
cm-rent housing number of25 inhabited houses within the boundary or at best a 20%
increase in this tiny hamlet. This is far in excess of what is being asked of other locations,
excepting Leek Wootton, and will change its nature completely.
5. If the land is adopted and pm-chased by a developer what is to stop 10 houses being built
there? This would be insensitive development of an area which is essentially agricultural
and totally out of keeping with the nature of the hanllet.
6. Importantly, a housing development will negatively affect the working of the farm (whose
farm buildings adjoin it on one side) and the running of the Equine training facility and
livery at the further end of the lane. In fact, the farmer is of the opinion that a development
here could make it impossible to carry on with the effective running of the farm. Heavy farm
machinery, horse boxes and horses constantly use the lane in which the access to the
proposed development is indicated. The lane itself is the only access to the agricultural,
farmed land which runs down to the Avon and additional overspill parked vehicles from a
relatively large development, and general traffic engendered by it will greatly hinder the
fanner's ability to move his vehicles up and down from the fields.
7. Access to a development on the lane involves a dangerous blind crossroads followed by a
right turn across a completely blind bend at the corner of the field in question, over the years
the scene of many accidents where cars coming from the opposite direction end up in the
ditch or against the telegraph pole.
8. Farm buildings in a poor state of repair abutting the land could pose a danger to residents of
any development there.
9. Existing problems with drainage in the area have not been examined. In the corner of the
field on the blind bend opposite the fannhouse are Severn Trent pipes serving at least three
houses opposite.
10. Amenities. There are NONE. There are no street lights, no GAS. Any housing built here
would be dependant on the more expensive forms of heating, oil or electricity. There is no
public transport within reasonable walking distance. A bus stop in Leek Wootton is 1200
metres away (contrary to the 400 metres quoted in App. 6, that is an error, see googlemaps
which gives 1200 metres to the Leek Wootton Bus stop and the same to Kenilworth Road)
and as a consequence Hill Wootton has been identified by W.D.C. as being too far from
public transport to expect children to use it to get to school andfree taxis are provided.
Pensioners applying for bus passes are entitled to taxi vouchers. There are no pavements on
either approach to Hill Wootton, essential drainage ditches prevent them from the Leek
Wootton approach, it is too narrow from the Kenilworth Road, one car width only in places.
Commuters and shoppers in Hill Wootton have to use cars.
11. There is concern about the redrawing of the boundary. Knowledge of the hamlet does not
appear to have been considered. For example, Tower House has been excluded even though
Hilary Farm opposite has been included. The lane, always regarded as the 'agricultural' end
of Hill Wootton has been included.
12. Hill Wootton is essentially rural with a working farm and liveries at either end, and
surrounded on all sides by agricultural land. It is enjoyed by many as a rural retreat in our
already built up area. It is totally inappropriate that it should be 'inset' losing the protective
wash of the Green Belt.
There are more suitable and sensitive opportunities for small scale development in Hill Wootton,
which would not affect the street scene or change the nature of the hamlet, which have not been
explored. A more sensitive alternative would be to invite landowners to offer them so that W.D.C.
can assess them for their viability. There is also potential in the long term for the development of
existing buildings which would be more in keeping with the rural nature of Hill Wootton.
A development of 5 or more houses on the field in question would be entirely unworkable,
inappropriate and out of character.