No

Representation ID: 85949

Received: 10/01/2025

Respondent: Ms Emma Smailes

I object to the proposed new settlement approach in the SWLP due to the negative environmental impact, strain on infrastructure, and disruption to existing communities. All the proposed sites will harm local wildlife, increase traffic congestion, and alter the village’s character. Additionally, the sustainability of the sites are questionable, as many residents will still need to travel for work and services. I urge the council to reconsider and prioritize alternative approaches.

Yes

Representation ID: 86055

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 86086

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Clive Corrie

I support the principal of new settlements over allocating houses in small existing settlements.

No

Representation ID: 86186

Received: 14/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Freeman

Urban sprawl encroaching on a semi rural area. SHORTSIGHTED !

Yes

Representation ID: 86236

Received: 17/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Mark Brightburn

A new settlement would take time and effort but could potentially lead the way in sustainable development offering the potential to really make a place where people can live lives with the full range of sustainable choices at hand.

No

Representation ID: 86325

Received: 21/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Ashcroft

The SW area includes important greenbelt land given expansion of our neighbours of Solihull and Birmingham in our direction. More importance should therefore be attributed to protecting the greenbelt and the sense of place it creates for all to enjoy

Yes

Representation ID: 86423

Received: 24/01/2025

Respondent: Mr HAYDN REES

New Settlements offer the prospect of high quality infrastructure and sustainable communities if built in the best locations and with the right facilities and design quality. Getting the infrastructure in place early is crucial rather than as an afterthought once residents have moved in.
The alternative of thousands of small developments would leave inadequate infrastructure as the expenditure to improve facilities would not be justifiable for small numbers. That would be a missed opportunity for people and for the environment.

Yes

Representation ID: 86517

Received: 27/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Terry Simmonds

Agree - Provided they are new settlements and not just housing that then has to travel to Stratford or Warwick for shopping, schools, entertainment, hospitality, etc.

Other

Representation ID: 86581

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

Focusing new developments adjacent to existing development, and encouraging shorter travel times and public transport links, is a good way forward.

New Developments MUST focus on affordable housing, and not be Developer led. Developers will try to build larger. less affordable houses as there is more profit there.

No

Representation ID: 86790

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Jacques Ferreira

The approach of suitability crudely identifies areas for new settlements on size of land primarily. The location if that land fails to appreciate surrounding infrastructure capabilities. In BW, supply of freshwater is erratic and fails to meet the standards required from Severn Trent water. Adding an additional 6000 houses around BW will not improvise this shortfall and is not taken into account in the suitability framework outlined. Furthermore, the land proposed for large scale development abuts the Heart of England Forest Trust. This precious Greenbelt is protected and it makes little sense to both parties to build adjacent to this.

No

Representation ID: 86863

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Hopkinson

Our planners have already surrendered to 'diktat' of central governement. Actually you are supposed to be the servants of the council tax payers. Warwickshire is meant to be a rural county. You are betraying us.

Other

Representation ID: 87001

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: S Gardner

Not enough consideration is being given in the integration of these new developments and local communities around them. How is this going to be achieved?

No

Representation ID: 87070

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Reeves

So many factors .

The school can’t cope in the area as it is in 2023 the year 6 children were shipped out to balsall common as no other places in borough. Doctors full to rim infrastructure just not there

The traffic coming in and out the village at rush hour is back to back

And the wildlife and beautiful countryside will be ruined . We bought into village life not town

No

Representation ID: 87164

Received: 05/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Bryan Hay

In general, the approach appears to be one of attempting to appease central government's demand for new housing sites. If there's no logical reason for Warwick and Stratford to provide space for housing because it isn't needed, this should be made abundantly clear to central government.
Specifically with regards C1, your own document (New Settlements Assessment) clearly indicates that C1 is wholly inappropriate, so why include it?

Yes

Representation ID: 87213

Received: 06/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoffrey Morris

A new settlement strategy would delivery the opportunity for developing sustainable neighbourhoods relative to urban or small scale development as they would
– Delivers opportunity to meet differing housing needs as part of a wider community.
– Allow services schooling, medical and Deliver housing alongside employment opportunities.
– Allows services, schooling, medical and retail to develop alongside the emerging popultation
– doesnt add to pressure on existing school and medical services serving existing urban population

Other

Representation ID: 87248

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Katrin Gilbert

Greenbelt and divisions between villages and towns is being eroded unnecessarily when other brown sites could be used.

Yes

Representation ID: 87258

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Stockton Parish Council

Na

Other

Representation ID: 87320

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Patricia Scott

I agree in principle that it makes sense to build complete new settlements rather than piecemeal building but it needs to be done a great deal better than has been done at Meon Vale. Aside from the fact that developers are still being allowed to build homes that are barely suited to the 20th century let alone the 21st (or future centuries) they consistently pay only lip service to environmental and wildlife requirements. Stratford's Planning Enforcement seem to have been unable or unwilling to address the complaints of the new residents about the failures of the developers.

Yes

Representation ID: 87368

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

New settlements provide an opportunity to create new sustainable communities that are not simply extensions of exisiting communities.

No

Representation ID: 87546

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Michaelina Jakala

I absolutely do not support - too much development with too little infrastructure. The roads cannot handle the traffic, the water mains constantly burst, the schools are oversubscribed, the GPs are in desperate need of updating and cannot handle the current number. Lack of other services, etc. No I will never support.

Yes

Representation ID: 87555

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

New settlements allows for the opportunity of building all the infrastructure needed for a 10 minute neighbourhood

No

Representation ID: 87643

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Katrina Whyman

I’m worried about the infrastructure of the Village of Wilmcote. Flooding, wildlife and the canal

No

Representation ID: 87644

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Cummings

There are no needs for the extra housing in the area it will destroy everything that makes this area beautiful, total destruction of wildlife and green belt areas

Other

Representation ID: 87675

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jo Lancashire

'Sustainability Appraisal' should also give weight to the type of housing to be considered in the location. Where you are suggesting Green Belt land this should be a very low density, built at high specification to be in keeping with the location. House builders should have to uphold the planning regulations regarding sustainability for each individual house rather than a blanket approach to the site. The style and specification of housing should be in keeping with the landscape and given more weight if it is appropriately specified.

No

Representation ID: 87704

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mr justin kerridge

i think new settlements are unlikely to provide the same level of amenity, and services within them as carefully developed existing settlements. restaurants, shops, community groups, businesses, industry, everything. Perhaps a way to do it is create satellite towns with excellent active travel and public transport links to a nearby town

No

Representation ID: 87741

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Graham Bamford

The idea of so called desirable new settlements is a myth. Some of the building that has been allowed to the south of Warwick is simply an eyesore. We don't need increased urbanisation. South Warwickshire is a rural area and the interests of everyone are best served that way.

No

Representation ID: 87863

Received: 11/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rachel Beacham

Wilmcote and Bearley was probably chosen for its proximity to the train line from Stratford-upon-Avon to Birmingham but this will need a complete overhaul.
Wilmcote has no car park. Wilmcote station also has a 'listed' pedestrian bridge over the track to be able to access the Stratford direction platform. The is no ramp in place for accessibility. For 6,700 homes to make use of this service there would need to be a separate car park, ramps, charging points etc. Not practical.
Every home will have a car. The pollution will be much higher than it currently is.

No

Representation ID: 87895

Received: 12/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Tracy Pullee

It’s the fact that so many green belt areas are being considered when we have houses already built that lay empty and brownfield sites laying derelict.

No

Representation ID: 87931

Received: 12/02/2025

Respondent: mr mark betker

I object because the SWLP New Settlements are mostly sited in the current Green Belt and a breach of Green Belt policy. These proposed sites will swamp the existing rural communities and destroy the rural nature of the area.
There is no actual current requirement for the number of homes planned for the Warwickshire area.

No

Representation ID: 88188

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rozanne Harris

This approach says it will be the minimum number of houses per area with infrastructure considered but there just isnt the space to increase the major roads to dual carriageways a la milton keynes. I know the council has a quota, but meeting it would completely change what Warwickshire is. We wouldnt be a beautiful green county with spaces to walk and enjoy nature.