H53 - Hatton Park - Brownley Green Lane

Object

Representation ID: 69589

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. C. Acquari

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Access via village hall is very steep.
-Children's play area will be dangerous as large lorries and building vehicles movement will be next to that area.
-Bacheston drive is too narrow for heavy vehicles movement while construction.

Object

Representation ID: 69591

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Leslie Austin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Children's play area by the village hall will be dangerous being next to the site.
- Heavy construction traffic will occur - danger for pedestrians.
- In order to mitigate the steepness of the gradient to the site, more land will be needed to provide sufficient road infrastructure which could adversely affect the village hall and surrounding facilities.
- Lack of services / facilities (schools, shops and public transport) will generate additional private car use
- Local plan has not identified necessary infrastructure

Object

Representation ID: 69593

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Jacqui Brown

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Barcheston drive is narrow for lorry and heavy plant movements for constructions.
- Impact on facilities like village hall, sports area, local play area and planted orchard.
- Wider infrastructure will not be able to support the additional traffic.
- Number of accidents will increase because of this additional traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 69597

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Michael Daly

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Barcheston drive is too narrow for lorry and heavy plant movement during the construction.
-Additional infrastructure will be required which is not identified in the proposed plan.
-Children play area would be dangerous.
-Wider infrastructure will struggle to support the additional traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 69606

Received: 16/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Geoff Downie

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Barcheston Drive too narrow for vehicle and heavy plant movements during construction
- adverse impact on road and pedestrian safety
- Proposed site will greatly impact on village hall, neighbouring play areas, planted orchards, sports facilities and hall itself.
- Birmingham road will not be able to support the increase in traffic generated by the new occupiers of the new homes.

Object

Representation ID: 69607

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Sylvia Dugauquier

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Barcheston drive is too narrow for lorry and heavy plant movement during the construction - dangerous for pedestrians.
- Proposed access from village hall car park is steep - to counteract this more land would be required, impact on village hall, playground, car park
- Children play area would be dangerous.
- Wider infrastructure will struggle to support the additional traffic.
- Additional infrastructure will be required to support new residential development.

Object

Representation ID: 69608

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Benjamin Dugauquier

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Barcheston Drive too narrow for lorry and heavy plant movement during the construction - dangerous for pedestrians.
-Proposed access form village hall carpark is steep; to counteract this more land would be required and impact village hall, playground and car park spaces.
-Children play area would be dangerous.
-Wider infrastructure will struggle to support the additional traffic.
-Increase in number of accidents.
-The site is unsuitable environmentally.
-Additional infrastructure will be required.

Object

Representation ID: 69610

Received: 16/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. & Mrs. Gary & Lisa Fleckney

Number of people: 2

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Birmingham Road will struggle to support additional traffic generated by the occupiers of 55 homes.
- Road is already congested during peak times.
- Increase in traffic volume will increase accidents.
- Lack of infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 69613

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Professor Damian Griffin

Number of people: 12

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposal: -
- lack of consultation
- loss of high value green belt
- loss of recreational amenity
- loss of amenity to Hatton Village Hall
- adverse impact on visual and landscape amenity
- adverse impact on orchard and ecology / habitats / wildlife
- poor accessibility of site from local roads
- adverse impacts on safety of children's play areas
- impacts of construction traffic
- no justification of the sustainability of the proposed site
- landscape identified as Arden Parklands, with a distinct character

Object

Representation ID: 69615

Received: 20/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Eleanor Griffin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Proposed plan will interrupt traffic to Barcheston Road / Birmingham Road.
- Construction will create dust, endangering the health of all residents, especially children.
- Unsafe for users of playground
- drives away wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 69617

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Emma Griffin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Proposed plan will add more traffic to Birmingham Road.
- road not capable of accommodating construction traffic
- Proposed entrance is adjacent to village hall which is adjacent to children's playground which is dangerous for the children.
- Pollution from building site would adversely affect children and wildlife habitat.

Object

Representation ID: 69619

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Clarissa Griffin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Currently having inadequate supply of water from water pumping station for the houses already on the estate and building more houses would result in even worse water pressure.

Object

Representation ID: 69620

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Jennifer Hetherington

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Proposed access from the village hall is very steep.
-To provide sufficient road infrastructure to counteract the gradient additional land above that highlighted in the proposal would need to be acquired.
- this will impact on village hall, play area, planted orchard, sports facilities and parking spaces.
-The local plan has not addressed the necessary infrastructure needed to support any level of new residential development .

Object

Representation ID: 69621

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Tim Hetherington

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Proposed access poor - steep gradient, bend in road.
- Safe access to site unachievable
- village hall, car park, children's playground, sports ground, orchard, bus stop affected
- Greenbelt, poor access, drainage, water supply issues
- would require civil engineering and groundworks to resolve
- Nearby water pumping station at capacity.
- Impact on environment, heavy plant will disturb residents.
- Increase in traffic /accidents.
- Shortcomings in local facilities
- No explanation for increase in dwellings.
- Poor analysis of population statistics.
- adverse impact on visual amenity
- impact on wildlife
- loss of Greenbelt

Object

Representation ID: 69626

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Katie Hodgson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Current infrastructure inadequate for additional development.
- Multiple cars and children per house will utilise the roads and schools which is inadequate.
- Increase in risk of child safety due to heavy loads and large trucks.
- Don't spoil the beautiful part of the estate.
- loss of play area

Object

Representation ID: 69630

Received: 20/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Lucy Jenkinson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Barcheston Drive too narrow for lorry and heavy plant machinery
- Access from village car park too steep
- Impact on village hall, play area, sports facilities
- Dangerous children play area and increased traffic
- Dangerous access road on corner of junction
- B'ham road will struggle to support extra traffic during peak times
- Increase in traffic
- Not enough local infrastructure, doesn't comply with NPPF.

Object

Representation ID: 69638

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Rebecca Knott

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Children's play area will be dangerous due to increased traffic.
-Junctions on Birmingham Road will be more busier and dangerous.
-Lack of local infrastructure to support extra housing.
-Barcheston Drive is too narrow for construction process.
-Additional car use means this is unsustainable therefore does not comply with NPPF

Object

Representation ID: 69639

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Sarah Knott

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Children's play area will be dangerous due to increased traffic.
-Junctions on Birmingham Road will be more busier and dangerous.
-Lack of local infrastructure to support extra housing.
-Barcheston Drive is too narrow for construction process.
-Additional use of cars makes this unsustainable and therefore doesn't comply with NPPF

Object

Representation ID: 69643

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Karen Knott

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Children's play area will be dangerous due to increased traffic.
-Junctions on Birmingham Road will be more busier and dangerous.
-Lack of local infrastructure to support extra housing.
-Barcheston Drive is too narrow for construction process.
-Additional use of the car makes this unsustainable and therefore does not comply with NPPF

Object

Representation ID: 69644

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Andrew Knott

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Children's play area will be dangerous due to increased traffic.
-Junctions on Birmingham Road will be busier and dangerous.
-Lack of local infrastructure to support extra housing.
-Barcheston Drive is too narrow for council's construction process.
- access from village hall steep
- green belt should be retained
- lack of local services and facilities
- lack of local infrastructure will generate more car use

Object

Representation ID: 69646

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Merle Mason

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

object to proposal: -
-poor and narrow access unsuitable for additional traffic
- access adjacent to village hall not via Brownley Green Lane
- loss of agricultural field
- refusal of permission for traveller site some years ago (loss of greenfield site) - no difference to H53
- encroachment into countryside
- additional traffic
- lack of infrastructure to support development
- congestion exacerbated

Object

Representation ID: 69651

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Peter Massey

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The proposed access is too steep and will remove valuable car parking for the village hall. This also seriously impacts on the safety of the play area. Birmingham Road is already congested and will become worse

Object

Representation ID: 69652

Received: 15/04/2016

Respondent: Ms. Audra Morgan

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Increase in houses will add more traffic on Birmingham road and also the risk of accidents will increase.
- The proposed plan will have a negative impact on the village hall, play area and sports facilities.
- does not comply with NPPF requirement to secure sustainable development - additional car use will be required to access services and facilities elsewhere.

Object

Representation ID: 69655

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Jacqueline Samuel

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Proposal is unsound
No suitable safe access to the site
Not sustainable and does not accord with NPPF
No exceptional circumstances to justify development in the Green Belt
There are more suitable sites outside the Green Belt

Object

Representation ID: 69658

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Quentin Solt

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

SA
For a detailed analysis and re-classification proposal, see the full text attached.
Objective 1: Site doesn't propose employment therefore people will travel and should be assessed neutral
Objective 2: Insufficient information regarding relocation of bus stop. New access hasn't been assessed. unlikely to deliver sustainable transport mode improvements, nearest station is Warwick Parkway, not Hatton. Development should be assessed as comprising more than 80 dwellings and therefore, major negative
Objective 3: H53 cannot by reasons of it being part of a service village, be assessed as major negative. The site has received the lowest ranking assessment.
Objective 4: Assessment should be at least minor negative given that more waste will be produced and could be major negative if taking substantial earth movements needed in site construction taken into account together with transport and ecological costs.
Objective 5: Assessment failed to take into account impacts of proposed development. Insufficient weight given to major negative assessment.
Objective 6: Assessment indicates low to medium landscape value with low to medium ecological value. Site is in medium to high landscape value. Assessment should be major negative.
Objective 7: Assessment should be at least minor negative taking into account loss of privacy in new homes and overlooking from village hall and sports amenity area and loss of appearance of being in the countryside from existing views.
Objective 8: The historic environment would be materially and irretrievably damaged but assessment only allows a poorer ranking if SM's, LB's and CA's affected.
Objective 9: Agree
Objective 10: No evidence that development will reduce greenhouse gases or increase the proportion of energy generated from renewable/low carbon sources
Objective 11: Site is assessed as having been identified with SW drainage issues and should therefore be minor negative.
Objective 12: Density not in accordance with topography of site which inhibits development and access route reduces developable area. Retention of wildlife corridor reduces area. Ability to develop 55 dwellings whilst ensuring decent affordable housing for all and retaining hedgerow has not been established. No justification given for increase in labour for existing businesses and consumer spending so should be disregarded. Increased demand for services should be negative since they are at capacity. The assessment is the lowest available.
Objective 13: No additional services resulting from development so absurd to conclude that development has potential to support existing services when assessment is predicated on there being no existing services. Minor positive assessment is unjustified.
Sports facility would put new home owners and users of facility in conflict due to noise and disturbance.
Objective 14: Minor positive assessment given as site is within 300m of green space, but has opposite effect as H53 would cease to be within 300m.
Objective 15: Agreed
Objective 16: The effects on crime will be determined by detail of layout and design and therefore uncertain in assessment.
Planning considerations:
Access previously and correctly rejected due to topography and insufficient space without impacting on village hall.
Proposal ill-conceived -
it urbanises area around the village hall
results in children/young people negotiating parked/moving vehicles to access play areas, absorbs community orchard into built environment and could cause danger to cars/people from sports area where ball games occur.
Site not well thought through and is not necessary.
Site is not in compliance with NPPF including green belt policy and landscape value.

Object

Representation ID: 69666

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Patricia Wassall

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The plan has not identified the infrastructure to support the level of growth including schools, health, roads.
The access to Site H53 is steep and addressing this will have a significant impact on the village hall. Barcheston Drove is narrow and will struggle to cope with construction traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 69683

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Melissa Bowden-Williams

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

I strongly believe that the modification to the local plan to include this piece of land (H53) as a proposed side for 55 houses is unsound because it is against the NPPF and need to achieve sustainable development
- No logical access to the site
- detrimental impact on village hall
- impact on users of community spaces next to H53
- lack of local infrastructure

Object

Representation ID: 69867

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Hatton Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Access problems not fully resolved.
Access onto Barcheston Drive will need to negotiate considerable gradient, taking up land and thus increasing density. Transfer some houses to H28.
Proposed access will reduce or eliminate recently extended village hall car park, with no indication of where it might be relocated to.

Object

Representation ID: 69907

Received: 20/04/2016

Respondent: Ms Myra Styles

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The modification plans with increased housing numbers have been issued without proper consultation with the local community and without regard to the burden on the existing infrastructure. No definite assurance of what will be done prior to any development for improving the local road network, safety from increasing accidents in the H28 (A4177), easing the traffic congestion, overcoming the existing poor drainage issues and adding the poor air quality from this main road. No school or health services included and no identification of 'open spaces' in the proposal. No regard for greenbelt or sustainability in the long-term.

Object

Representation ID: 69939

Received: 21/03/2016

Respondent: Mrs Ruth Speczyk

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

-Building 55 number of dwellings will impact on the dynamics of the local community.
-The scenic views across open countryside would be destroyed due to this development.
-Impact on like local schooling, nearby children's recreation area, health clinic - additional facilities will be required which is not stated in the plan.
-Increase in traffic.
-Pleasant village will turn into an urbanised town.
Loss of sense of community.