Yes

Representation ID: 98238

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Teed

Does not include green belt land.

No

Representation ID: 98305

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs ROSEMARY FARMER

The development does not make any provision for schools, doctors, dentists, shops which are already badly needed in the area.
Trafiic congestion , which is already considerable, will only increse , particuarly over Clopton Bridge.
However we support the concept of new settlements.

Yes

Representation ID: 98326

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Daine Davis

n/a

No

Representation ID: 98374

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Adam Lucock

The proposed site would ruin the community of both Tiddington and Alveston putting pressure on the local School (already over subscribed) creating more congestion within the Town centre and on the southern side of Clopton bridge, the road infrastructure would not be able to cope and Tiddington would become part of Stratford thus losing The Village appeal.

Yes

Representation ID: 98440

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Wright

Support development on non-green belt land.

No

Representation ID: 98565

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr George Horton

We have done more than enough in Stratford already. This proposal would be very detrimental to the beauty of this area. The increased levels of traffic would not be sustainable.

No

Representation ID: 98707

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Doug Wallace

There must not be any further development in or around Stratford-Upon-Avon until a proper southern by-pass is built. The current inadequate road system can not cope. New developments, north of the River Avon should be the preferred option and it is essential that green spaces and buffer zones be left between further urban development.

No

Representation ID: 98769

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Doug Wallace

This would create a ribbon development linking Stratford with surrounding individual villages. There must be no-build gaps between existing developed areas and green spaces must be preserved. Any development here would add to huge traffic congestion. No development should be allowed in this part of south Warwickshire until a southern by-pass for Stratford has been built.

No

Representation ID: 98823

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Dodgson

SG19 Defeats the object of New Settlements; It would form a collar around the south east of Stratford requiring residents to travel through town to access jobs; It threatens the independence of Tiddington & Alveston & result in coalescence of Tiddington with Stratford; The road infrastructure would not cope (particularly Clopton Bridge) causing more congestion in the town centre & south of the river; If a new relief road and river crossing were built between Tiddington & Alveston, it would be intrusive, require a large expensive structure across the flood plain and impact negatively on both villages.

No

Representation ID: 98852

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Louise Tucker

The prospect of 5,000 houses in this area without massive infrastructure change to provide significant roads to service such a development would not only destroy hundreds of acres of valuable farm land but threaten the independence of the villages of Tiddington and Alveston, which would join to encircle Stratford and place intolerable burdens on the Clopton Bridge and the Town Centre. The suggested relief bridge taking a significant road over one of the widest parts of the flood plain would be totally unaffordable and, indeed, threaten the qualities that makes Stratford such an important tourist destination.

No

Representation ID: 98857

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Tucker

This proposal is equivalent to a new settlement which threatens the independent villages off Tiddington and Alveston with becoming part of Stratford Town
The infrastructure of existing roads would place an intolerable expansion of traffic over Clopton Bridge and cause widespread congestion throughout the environs of the Town
The costs of providing a relief road over the extensive flood plain on the River Avon close to Stratford would be prohibitive
Development of this scale threatens to destroy many of the qualities of Stratford

No

Representation ID: 98878

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms clare watson

Edge of town development - not possible to provide suitable infrastructure. Residents are socially isolated and dependent on cars.
Long Marston or Gaydon sites could deliver the infrastructure needed for large scale development.
Additional pressure on roads into Stratford - gridlock on Clopton Bridge and Town Centre.
New river crossing would be required - very costly to cross the flood plain, and excessive damage to river habitat.
Tiddington has a strategic gap between the village and S-O-A town - this must be maintained

Other

Representation ID: 99017

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevan Russell

Whilst not suggesting that this area should be omitted completely, providing a full allocation of 5,500 would double the number of houses south of the river, surely not sustainable without significant infrastructure improvements.
Tiddington, is treated as a Local Service Village in the current Core Strategy. Further there is a dedicated Neighbourhood Plan for Tiddington contained within the document which includes a specific requirement for a Strategic Gap between Tiddington and Stratford (Loxley Road) a stance supported by a central government planning inspector when dealing with a planning appeal. This requirement should be maintained within the SWLP.

No

Representation ID: 99109

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Harkin

Proposal would impose excessive strain on existing infrastructure on the edge of the historic tourist town, already subject to extensive growth in new housing developments and related negative impacts (e.g. roads, education and health services) for residents. The land highlighted as part of SG19, between the new development on Loxley Road/Knights Lane and the football club/Townsend Road, has been designated in the Neighbourhood Development Plan as being the strategic gap between Tiddington village and Stratford. In addition, any proposed housing in Tiddington could also exacerbate flooding, due to the proximity to the River Avon.

Yes

Representation ID: 99152

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Jones

Development of an area not containing green belt land.
Size of development opportunity.

No

Representation ID: 99157

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Natalie Wride

- SG19 requires significant additional transport infrastructure south of the river for Stratford connectivity which currently there is no clear plan for.
- Coupled with extensive development from SG16 and SG15, this leads to significant increases in traffic whilst providing no additional infrastructure to support this volume of people and placing strain on existing.
- SG19 risks combining the villages of Tiddington and Alveston due to its' size. Much of the area proposed in flood plains and currently floors.
- Land east of Townsend road is a designated strategic gap by the council and cannot be built on.

No

Representation ID: 99171

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Fernando Ortelli

Infrastructure cannot support this level of expansion in SuA and recent new developments have proven that new housing is not accompanied with corresponding infrastructure

No

Representation ID: 99174

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Karen Harkin

Proposal would impose excessive strain on existing infrastructure on the edge of the historic tourist town, already subject to extensive growth in new housing developments and related negative impacts (e.g. roads, education and health services) for residents. The land highlighted as part of SG19, between the new development on Loxley Road/Knights Lane and the football club/Townsend Road, has been designated in the Neighbourhood Development Plan as being the strategic gap between Tiddington village and Stratford. In addition, any proposed housing in Tiddington could also exacerbate flooding, due to the proximity to the River Avon.

No

Representation ID: 99235

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Carole Hodson

5,500 dwellings here aren’t needed if there’s new settlements at LM or BW. Combined with new settlements proposed at Wellesbourne, this would provide over half the total requirement for the SWLP area and fundamentally change the character of the area.
Would put a strain on existing road infrastructure-a new river crossing would be needed.
It threatens the separate identity of Tiddington and a strategic gap should be left to ensure this identity is maintained. In particular, the fields south of the village on either side of Knights Lane should remain to provide this gap.

No

Representation ID: 99257

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Martine Singer

Ensure the strategic gap between Tiddington and Stratford is maintained as highlighted by a Planning Appeal Inspector. Future proposed housing in Tiddington & Alvesto. could also exacerbate flooding, a problem already see with new housing, due to the proximity to the River Avon. Any new developments will need sufficient infrastructure, roads, schools, clinics etc. none of which seem to be provided with new housing estates. Maybe other completely new settlements are a better option

No

Representation ID: 99353

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lisa Ashfield

Infastruture
Need to keep Tiddington separate from Stratford as a village
Loss of farmland
Traffics
School places
Pressure on doctors
Disappearance of community spirit
Tiddington has already had more than its fair share of new builds

No

Representation ID: 99362

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Hawkes

Development in SG 19 would destroy the strategic gap between Stratford town and Tiddington village settlement this has been supported by planning decisions and appeals. This area witnesses regular annual flooding meaning there will be increased risk of surface water flooding in an area already susceptible to run off flooding. There would be an unacceptable increase in traffic flow through the already Tiddington village which is already a bottle neck. The development should be the new settlement around Long Marston linking up to the A46 main road network.

No

Representation ID: 99420

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diane Wilson

See previous comments

Yes

Representation ID: 99481

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Tibbles

Seems OK

No

Representation ID: 99496

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Loades

Developing this area will only be destroying more of this country's beautiful and undisturbed countryside. It will push more traffic through Wellesbourne to the M40, which the B4087 will not be able to cope with. Eventhough that road is a 50mph road, many ignore the speed limit and with more cars, there will be more accidents. It is already dangerous!! There has already been a noticeable increase in lorries (from the solar farm) on this road which is a huge concern. The road cannot be widened and it is a serious issue that cannot be ignored.

No

Representation ID: 99523

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Goodman

Tiddington has a separate identity to Stratford and the proposed over development places this in jeopardy. The distinction needs to be maintained with the Plan making specific reference to it. Furthermore, the proposal will result in an increase in traffic movements on roads that are already jammed at various times during the day. The pressure on the local infrastructure resulting from the proposals will be significant and it should be recognised that local health services, i.e. doctors and dentists, as well as local schools are already at or close to capacity.

Other

Representation ID: 99529

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Hogarth

I do not agree with even more houses being added here (SG19), extending the boundary of the town and creating even more traffic trying to move through the centre. There is no additional industry here to provide jobs. Creating new communities away from towns, like the new builds in Long Marston, which include new schools / facilities / shops, are a much better option. I have lived in two new builds built on the edge of town and no changes were made to the infrastructure to support this, worsening existing issues. Also, it would remove the rural feel of Stratford.

No

Representation ID: 99560

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Martin Grubb

In March 2016 The Planning Inspectorate dismissed appeals to build on land to the south of Tiddington acknowledging that the 'open space surrounding the entrance to the village should be maintained to preserve Tiddington's village setting to prevent creeping urbanisation, coalescence with the town'. This view must be maintained.
Further more 5,500 houses would:
- defeat concept of New Settlements
- require major infrastructure development at prohibitive costs to bridge and cross the wide flood plain east of Stratford, lying north of the river and where all work, business and recreation is .
-

No

Representation ID: 99717

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Graham Smith

The infrastructure on road improvement provision needs to be clearly defined before ANY development plan is approved.
The current road structure is inadequate for the existing traffic volumes, there is much congestion and impact on the environment now. Any development MUST provide CLEAR provision for improving the Infrastructure viz a viz a proper ring road.
The majority of Stratford residents commute to places of employment outwith the local area, causing greater traffic volumes and impact on the environment.

Yes

Representation ID: 99723

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Sabrina Hasnaoui

Support the development of non green belt land. East Stratford has alternative road links that will avoid congestion through Stratford town.