Mod PM21 - Policies Map 21 Hatton Park

Object

Representation ID: 68106

Received: 17/03/2016

Respondent: Mr Michael Daniel

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

This plan is unsound, as it is proposed on green belt land. The land is also for the larger site on a flood plain.
The road infrastructure is also not suitable for further houses, and already congested at peak hours, there needs to be more remedial works at the turn of the the Shell garage and nearby bridge. Also there is no communal infrastructure in terms of shops and hence this proposal is seriously flawed and a blatant disregard of the status of the surrounding land.

Object

Representation ID: 68847

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: 69134

Received: 13/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. June Morgan

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The location of H53 is totally unsustainable / unsound.
The special circumstances for this green belt release have not been proven.
There are huge infrastructure issues - the road network, and local services are insufficient.
There has been insufficient consultation and it will put a blight on existing properties.
The additional housing need has arisen from Coventry and it should be met at sites nearer the source of the need.
Brownfield sites have not been utilised appropriately.

Object

Representation ID: 69149

Received: 15/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. John Wilkinson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

H53 is an area under threat of flooding due to water draining off the fields.
Access will be difficult to achieve and additional vehicle movements will further compromise access / traffic congestion and safe passage along Barcheston Drive.
The area has insufficient services to support additional development, Hatton Park is not a village , it is a housing estate with limited facilities and is therefore wholly unsuitable for additional growth.
The road network is already congested and access to Hatton Park and main roads is under strain from exisiting traffic flows (particularly in peak periods).

Object

Representation ID: 69201

Received: 15/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Helen Tindall

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

No comments made

Object

Representation ID: 69215

Received: 14/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Jeff Porter

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The playground will become dangerous with the additional cars the allocation of H53 will create. There is a very steep incline / change of levels that will make access difficult / potentially dangerous. Birmingham Rd will become worse it is already jammed in the mornings.

Object

Representation ID: 69221

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Barbara Perkins

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposals: -
- roads too narrow for construction traffic
- adverse impact on local facilities e.g. village hall, parking, play areas and orchard
- children's play areas would become dangerous
- additional congestion would be generated
- serious road safety problems would be exacerbated
- Housing need projections based on a data blip and not necessarily accurate
- loss of green belt not justified by special circumstances
- environmentally unsustainable - lacks public transport
- additional local infrastructure and services requirements not identified

Object

Representation ID: 69233

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Gary Mays

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposals: -
- roads too narrow for construction traffic
- adverse impact on local facilities e.g. village hall, parking, play areas and orchard
- children's play areas would become dangerous
- additional congestion would be generated
- serious road safety problems would be exacerbated
- Housing need projections based on a data blip and not necessarily accurate
- loss of green belt not justified by special circumstances
- environmentally unsustainable - lacks public transport
- additional local infrastructure and services requirements not identified

Object

Representation ID: 69282

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Edward Walpole-Brown

Agent: Brown and Co

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Again to omit reference to sites proposed to be allocated at Hatton Park.

Object

Representation ID: 69311

Received: 13/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Paul Atkinson

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposals: -
- roads too narrow for construction traffic
- adverse impact on local facilities e.g. village hall, parking, play areas and orchard
- children's play areas would become dangerous
- additional congestion would be generated
- serious road safety problems would be exacerbated
- Housing need projections based on a data blip and not necessarily accurate
- loss of green belt not justified by special circumstances
- environmentally unsustainable - lacks public transport
- additional local infrastructure and services requirements not identified

Object

Representation ID: 69450

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Robert Lewin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Access from Barcheston Drive will have detrimental impact on village hall. Topography issues and potential requirement for new parking area and sports facility where these have just been enhanced.
Attached photos demonstrate vehicular access issues.
Interaction of people and vehicles ill conceived with risk to children play area and orchard.

Object

Representation ID: 69451

Received: 18/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Brenda Lewin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Access from Barcheston Drive will have detrimental impact on village hall. Topography issues and potential requirement for new parking area and sports facility where these have just been enhanced.
Attached photos demonstrate vehicular access issues.
Interaction of people and vehicles ill conceived with risk to children play area and orchard.

Object

Representation ID: 69498

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Christopher Cresswell

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to H53. The H53 should be removed for the following reasons:
It is in an unsustainable location for the proposed number of units
It contains highways access issues which would affect the operation and sustainability of the village hall/children's play area
This change of use of green belt land will set a precedent for expansion around Hatton Park
The land identified is inappropriate for housing as there is insufficient infrastructure and it would fail to comply with the NPPF. It prevents the countryside from encroachment and would permanently change the open character of Hatton Park.
It is likely that any future development proposal on this land would be considered unsound on the basis that it does not meet the test for 'exceptional circumstances' criteria to be applied when changing the status of green belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 69522

Received: 20/04/2016

Respondent: David Neil Williams

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Access to the proposed development will have a detrimental effect on the viability of the village hall. It is understood that to provide access to the site then large swathes of the car park will be removed. This action will result in loss of usage. Car park needs to be adjacent so that it is convenient for elderly, parents with babies and the disabled

Object

Representation ID: 69590

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. James Aggiss

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The new additions seem a last minute measure to attempt to solve an immediate problem rather than a forward thinking long term strategy. It is only a matter of time before there will be requests for more land for houses. Should start to consider perhaps growing Hatton toward Warwick with Birmingham Road developed and improved access into Warwick and onto the A46.
Hatton doesn't have amenities to operate as self-contained village. Emergency services are already stretched and building more houses is ridiculous. Fire station in Warwick closed; there is no scope to expand the hospital. Need bigger shops, a GP and more school places.
The SA looks at the effects of each site individually. Considering minor effects for lots of sites overlooks wider consequences. No plans for improved amenities attached to H28, resulting in overstretched services.
Best option is to build closer to Warwick to release burden on emergency services. Additional access road from H28 would relieve burden of traffic through estate and in future.

Object

Representation ID: 69594

Received: 23/04/2016

Respondent: Dr Penny - Anne Cullen

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

OAN could be vastly over-estimated resulting in no justification for site H53. Commuting does not depend on the balance between local jobs and housing growth.
Building housing on greenfield sites results in dispersed housing pattern, overburdening services and increasing infrastructure and environmental costs. The sum calculated is insufficient to cover the extent of the proposals. There is a gap between the triad of the OAN, sustainable development and the ability to comply with the NPPF. Developers retain land banks for exploitation when they choose and always choose greenfield land over brownfield.
Access problems in terms of gradient and visibility.
Localism Act - the proposals for H53 do not comply with NPPF with no local decisions made and little consultation by WDC; therefore unsustainable, unsound and undemocratic.
Late decision with little or no thought and detrimental impact on residents, facilities, traffic, public facilities, safety, infrastructure and wild life. Plan should be withdrawn

Object

Representation ID: 69755

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: MR JOSHUA MOORE

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Site 53, Brownley Green Lane:
The use of green belt is against Govt. policy and wrong
The need for more houses is not the 'exceptional circumstances' required. Deviation from policy is irreparable, unacceptable and unsustainable, detrimental to ecological diversity against the sympathetic nature of current development.
Development would contribute to urban sprawl and invade privacy of existing residents.
Barcheston Drive access is poor with traffic calming, on street parking and volume of traffic obscuring views.
Access involves a steep gradient and some of the site area would be required to develop a shallow gradient leading to levels of development.
The proposed access cuts across the extended village hall car park with no suggestion of moving this.
Recreational facilities and community orchard should not be disturbed.
No adequate provision for schooling, highways, amenity provision and flood mitigation has been made.

Support

Representation ID: 69793

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Canal and River Trust

increased housing density next to canal - any development here should not adversely affect integrity of waterway structure, water quality, result in unauthorised discharges and run off or encroachment, adversely affect landscape / heritage / ecological quality / character of the waterway, prevent waterway potential for being unblocked or discourage its use.

Object

Representation ID: 69868

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Hatton Parish Council

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to allocation: -
- adverse impact on local infrastructure including highways, education, health services and broadband
- encroachment on green belt
- adverse impact on character of Warwick district from increased population
- speculative nature of housing figures
- increased congestion, loss of open countryside, impacts on infrastructure and changes to character of district do not represent sustainable development
- Exceptional circumstances for loss of green belt have not been demonstrated

Object

Representation ID: 70018

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Richard Hickman

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

OAN could be vastly over-estimated resulting in no justification for site H53. Commuting does not depend on the balance between local jobs and housing growth.
Building housing on greenfield sites results in dispersed housing pattern, overburdening services and increasing infrastructure and environmental costs. The sum calculated is insufficient to cover the extent of the proposals. There is a gap between the triad of the OAN, sustainable development and the ability to comply with the NPPF. Developers retain land banks for exploitation when they choose and always choose greenfield land over brownfield.
Access problems in terms of gradient and visibility.
Localism Act - the proposals for H53 do not comply with NPPF with no local decisions made and little consultation by WDC; therefore unsustainable, unsound and undemocratic.
Late decision with little or no thought and detrimental impact on residents, facilities, traffic, public facilities, safety, infrastructure and wild life. Plan should be withdrawn

Object

Representation ID: 70089

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Jennifer Instone

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The level of development proposed in this area is too much. More brownfield sites should be developed and utilised for flats.

Object

Representation ID: 70149

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Dr James Wilkie

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Proposed development is not sustainable as new residents will have to drive to amenities such as schools/GP. Traffic is already a problem on A4177 and access to Hatton Park estate.
Access to site will significantly reduce the attractiveness of the community hall and its economic potential.
It will pose road safety hazard to children.
Does not meet the exceptional circumstances test for removing land from the green belt.
There are brownfield sites available elsewhere.
Site does not support regeneration and is not in a deprived area.
Site cannot support facilities and services for rural area.
Not a sustainable pattern of development.
Bus service is intermittent, residents will have to drive to schools and medical services. Cycle paths are not continuous.
No mention of upgrading road infrastructure.
New development should respect the integrity of existing settlements and protect/enhance high quality landscapes.
Where greenfield sites are required for housing, they should generally be located on the edge of built up areas in sustainable locations.
Access will; reduce the attractiveness of the community hall and its economic potential, displace parking into the surrounding congested streets and create a road hazard for children using the play area during construction in particular.

Object

Representation ID: 70243

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Andrew Instone

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Do not like development on green belt