No

Representation ID: 86892

Received: 31/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs S Sabatowski

Shipston cannot absorb 1600 new builds without significant infrastructure being put in place first. Doctors, schools, beds in hospital, car parking, petrol station, supermarket and improved public transport to name a few. Some suggested sites flood regularly and the bridge and nearby roads are closed due to flooding. Building on these sites will increase flooding elsewhere. Sewage overflow is already a problem where the recently completed new builds are, due to antiquated drainage systems. This will inevitably worsen with more housing. The nature of the town will change for the worse if proposed houses are built.

No

Representation ID: 86918

Received: 31/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jacki Hannah

More doctors and dentists are required, plus better infrastructure planned. We don’t just require houses to make a healthy community. Flood plans should not be used! Car parks are also required and parking for residents.

No

Representation ID: 86982

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Cartwright

Not enough facilities in the town ie. Schools are full, medical centre is snowed under with patients already, no hospital. No supermarket. River floods often, increased housing will cause more flooding, river floods blocking the bridge and causing access issues in and out of town. Additional housing is a bad idea for this small market town.

No

Representation ID: 86987

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: Mr David Hartley

In the past Shipston on-Stour has seen housing allocations well above district plan targets. Infrastructure has not been improved to meet the needs of an increased population, notably medical and educational facilities. Major employers and employment land has been lost such that additional residents will need to travel at least 10 miles to work, almost exclusively by car. The 5ha employment land proposed for Tilemans Lane will make only a modest contribution to address local employment shortfall. The areas to the south-west and east of Shipston are not suited to housing as they are greenfield sites with serious access problems.

No

Representation ID: 87040

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Judith Corless

Due to the amount of housing in the last few years, Shipston is in danger of loosing its identity and its historical significance lost. The Stour floods regularly; part of SG17 is a flood plane. The drainage is outdated and cannot cope with the amount of housing it already has, there have been numerous incidents of sewage spillages into peoples gardens, play areas and roads. The schools are full, with children having to travel outside the town for education. There is no 6th form. The medical centre is under extreme pressure. Transport links are very poor. Dentist lists are full.

No

Representation ID: 87142

Received: 05/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Worthy

I strongly object to the proposed 1,600-house development in Shipston-on-Stour. The town’s infrastructure is already under strain, with traffic congestion, limited services, and flooding concerns. The Neighbourhood Plan highlights a decline in local jobs, meaning more commuting, increased congestion, and pollution. Without significant investment in roads, healthcare, and employment, this development will harm residents’ quality of life. It exceeds Shipston’s sustainable growth capacity and will negatively impact the community. Instead of overwhelming the town, focus should be on improving existing infrastructure with local needs. This proposal is neither practical nor beneficial for Shipston or its residents.

No

Representation ID: 87180

Received: 06/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Heidi Castle

Concerns regarding infrastructure: Flood risk; lack of large retail facilities; no. of school places and no 16-18 education; 3/5 road routes into town are already high crash routes and poorly maintained; medical facilities; town centre access/parking. Etc.
I have lived in Shipston-on-Stour for 25 years and it has changed drastically in terms of property numbers but the services with road improvements, bus services and retail have not. The only gain in town is a small Tesco express but this has caused road hazards due to parking issues and of course this was built in place of a petrol station, so there has actually been no gain at all. The lack if suitable infrastructure means that more houses will mean more cars on the road, also having to commute for jobs, 16+ education out of town. This is not coducive to improvements in a sustainable green future.
On another point, the houses being built are still not affordable to the young people of Shipston. For example, my daughter who has lived in Shipston her whole life, went away to University and now has a good job working remotely from home, but she still cannot afford to buy a house and rents are so high. Therefore, like a number of her local school friends they are back living at home with their parents. Again, this is not sustainable for the future and not a way forward for the adults who are supposed to help leading their communities in the future.

Other

Representation ID: 87239

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Christopher Howarth

Whilst I appreciate that Shipston has to be in the plan the numbers of proposed sites and location is not acceptable for the size of the town and lack of infrastructure that has been forthcoming with developments over the past years.
It is not sustainable for the numbers to be increased given that we have put upon us over and above what we had allocated in the last round.
Since then we have lost our Hospital, Fire Service, Downgraded Police service, GP practices are not sustainable lack of appointments, lack of Sports facilities and open space provision is lacking

No

Representation ID: 87249

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Brian Cooper

Shipston is not a sustainable location. Its infrastructure is inadequate and, in November will lose its last bank. There is no petrol station, the fire station has been downgraded and there's no real supermarket. Primary school is at capacity and there is no 6th form at the High School. Public transport is poor and unreliable. Flooding is a major regular event. The proposals now include a proposed site (Fell Mill Farm) which is on the flood plain and has flooded 4 times so far this year. Shipston has already had more than its target of new housing.

No

Representation ID: 87270

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs S Sabatowski

More sustainable sites are proposed near train lines and larger employment sites than Shipston. Towns population has increased by 20% in last 5 years and exisring infastrucrure is under severe strain. Shipston has a small town centre with no room for expansion or additional car parking. Major employers have left the town in recent years. Shipston has no train station and an inadequate bus service to the nearest major settlement in Stratford. Nearest A&E is 19 miles away, sixth forms & Fire Station 10 miles. There is no more available land in Built up Area Boundary to build on.

No

Representation ID: 87284

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Jodie Noble

We’re a town prone to flooding. Adding more population to a tiny town is ridiculous. This town is already loosing its historic value due to the lack of business staying and people moving out. Please don’t ruin our beautiful shipston to add more housing. Shipston on stour is a family town and should not be over populated brining more crime and less space for people to live in a healthy community and environment.

Other

Representation ID: 87294

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Michaela Davis

The development does not take into account the amount of development that has already taken place in Shipston, the development has not bought any improved services such as another doctors making it extremely difficult to make appointments . Infrastructure particularly local roads, already under strain, will be more congested. Part of the development is on land that regularly floods and that road is regularly cut off with flood waters. Previous development in the area have promised new facilities only for them to be removed later in the planning. drainage and sewerage is pushed into existing infrastructure that cannot cope.

No

Representation ID: 87344

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Bryony Dinnie

Strategic Objective 3. Much of this area subject to flooding. There are inadequate health facilities and schools will soon be at capacity
Strategic Objective 11, The travel links to connect people to jobs, further education and hospitals is woefully inadequate

Yes

Representation ID: 87351

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

Sustainable development

No

Representation ID: 87456

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Gabriela Pasciak

I strongly disagree with the plan to build more houses in Shipston-on-Stour. There is no infrastructure, water keep bursting from the roads, there are limited shops, limited spaces in schools. Area SG17 gets flooded even after little rain. All towns around such as Stratford-upon-Avon and Moreton-in-Marsh get massive traffic which makes it difficult to commute anywhere. By building more houses you destroy beautiful nature and making people's lives difficult. Whole Shipston community is shocked and distressed about this plan. How somebody came back with an idea to build massive development in area that constantly gets flooded. Regards, Gabriela Pasciak

No

Representation ID: 87460

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Mr James Scaysbrook-Lloyd

I strongly disagree with the plans to build 1600 homes on shipston on stour, these homes will come with zero added infrastructure and shipston on stour is already struggling. All the homes already built also came with zero upgrades to infrastructure. Also you have already developed the landscape on three sides of shipston, developing the last area the other side of the river will remove the last pleasant walk out of shipston which will be to the detriment of the mental health of the community. This is also a known flood area which will cause a deluge further down river.

No

Representation ID: 87461

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Mr david cleave

Shipston should only be considered for minor development. No rail link or nearby motorways. Declining employment possibilities leads to long work commutes to major conurbations.. Flooding issues. Single track minor roads and then issues of getting over Shipston and Honington bridges (neither are 2 way). Already busy one way system and minimal parking available. Area of restraint on East side of Shipston. Senior school already over full. Medical and dental facilities already over-stretched.

Yes

Representation ID: 87504

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

On the edge of the Cotswold allowing for village growth and employment

No

Representation ID: 87532

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Michaelina Jakala

I do not support - too much development with too little infrastructure. This is a rural area and this will also disturb the natural habitat and green areas.

No

Representation ID: 87661

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Helen Jane Cleave

148 Fell Mill and 747 Leasow Lane.
Flood plain. Shipston bridge, one lane and fairly unsafe for walkers - flooded 4 times in last year. Honington Bridge listed , one lane. Would need new bridge.
No railway, limited bus services, have to drive to work. Close to boundaries with other counties, hindering transport.
Very small town centre, Bank closing, Fire station closing, limited police presence, doctors and dentists over-whelmed, no hospital.
These parishes are historic, Domesday book villages
Very few jobs, have to drive to main centres eg Warwick, Leamington, Birmingham.
Complete lack of infrastructure
Sewage totally inadequate

No

Representation ID: 87693

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Suzie Foxton

The proposed designation area for housing development is totally unsuitable it resides. with in a flood plane and represents a direct attack on South Warwickshire green spaces existing infrastructure and services are already struggling with to
Many people and funding issues

Other

Representation ID: 87739

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Smith

Object to any additional housing development in Shipston on Stour.

Other

Representation ID: 87839

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: Jane Cussons

Object to more housing in Shipston. Any more housing needs to be delivered on the brownfield sites and accompanied by adequate infrastructure.

No

Representation ID: 87948

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Rose Llewellyn

Shipston-on-Stour lacks infrastructure to support large-scale development. Without substantial investment in services, existing facilities may become overburdened, affecting residents' quality of life. Local schools and the medical center are already at full capacity, and an influx of new residents would strain these resources, reducing access and service quality. The area is at severe risk of flooding due to its proximity to the River Stour, adding more impermeable surfaces would worsen this. Additionally, aging bridges are not built to handle increased traffic, potentially causing safety issues and costly repairs. Limited public transport could lead to more car reliance and traffic congestion.

No

Representation ID: 87963

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sigourney Lee-Smith

Please read my full comments on the following issues: Flooding, lack of infrastructure, erosion of community characters and short-term thinking on the housing crisis.

It would be irresponsible and negligent to build of known flood plains putting lives and homes at risk as well as services under immense, unsustainable, strain.

Yes

Representation ID: 87997

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sharon Quantrill

Not in greenbelt

Yes

Representation ID: 88003

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Quantrill

Yes as not in greenbelt

No

Representation ID: 88142

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Parry

Increased risk to existing flooding issues and drainage infrastructure, lack of rail connectivity and poor public transport system.

No

Representation ID: 88177

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rozanne Harris

From the map it would appear the proposal is to double the size of Shipston, I don't believe this to be a sustainable option.

No

Representation ID: 88199

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Wragg

The amenities such as medical facilities, schools, sewage are already overstretched. Extra traffic generated from development off Fell Mill Rd would put the ancient bridges into Shipston and Honington under even more pressure and ruin a popular walk for many residents of the town as well as the additional traffic accessing the main road at a difficult junction.