Yes

Representation ID: 92408

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Christine Slaughter

Small sites within the vast space suggested only.

No

Representation ID: 92417

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Dr Russell Mayall

1. Education - School places have not been considered. At present there are not enough primary or secondary school places for children from Bidford-on-Avon at local schools. A large expansion proposed would need to include both new primary and secondary schools.
2. Flood plane - large parts of the proposed site routinely flood, and are likely not viable.

No

Representation ID: 92419

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Annette Eden

There are already too many houses for the village with no infrastructure increase. There are not enough local school or leisure provisions for the existing inhabitants and there is already more housing in this village than there is in local towns, including our major towns of Alcester and nearby Studley but without the same level of facilities available.
It is unsustainable growth and appears that the intention is to make it a dormer area for Birmingham.

No

Representation ID: 92451

Received: 28/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Russell Keyte

There is no infrastructure is too small (Schools, roads, shops, doctors, etc) to accommodate anymore housing in the area. Some of that proposed for housing will need to be used for the above facilities

No

Representation ID: 92536

Received: 04/02/2025

Respondent: Max Bright

Moved to Salford Priors and have witnessed its destruction with excess building programmes. Changing the area completely. I am against any development in any area let alone Salford Priors.

We are overpopulated. Useless governments have failed to stop the influx of migrants. [Redacted] !

[Redacted] .

Here at Salford Priors there is a [Redacted] on the Evesham Road towards Abbots Salford. I have notified you of it to no avail. Surly its illegal?

However as the nation has a [Redacted] . We have nothing to look forwarded to accept [Redacted]! No doubt there will be [Redacted].

Yes

Representation ID: 92914

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Ed Molloy

Not Green Belt.

No

Representation ID: 93077

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Julia Hall

Housing in this area is inappropriate because there is very little public transport and the roads are quite busy with no footpaths. New housing needs to have good access to public transport and/or to cycle lanes or footpaths to reach local amenities such as schools and shops.

No

Representation ID: 93101

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Josephine Sawtell

Bidford-on-Avon-is-predominately-a-rural-area-and-in-the-past-was-well-known-for-its-market-gardening-produce-which-tons-of-fruit-and-vegetables-were-sent-to-Birmingham-Coventry-London-each-year. Many-acres-of-this-good-productive-land-(Grade 2)-has-already-been-built-on. The-agricultural-land-surrounding-the-built-up-area-of-Bidford-should-be-protected-from-development-and-kept-solely-for-agricultural-use. With-the-UK-population-growing-considerably-each-year-this-land-will-be-needed-more-than-ever-for-feeding-the-country. If-built-on-it-would-be-yet-further-encroachment-into-open-countryside-and-thus-impact-on-the-ecosystem.
26% of native mammals are at risk of disappearing altogether and 41% of our insects are at risk of extinction so it is very important we don't destroy any more of their habitat.
Any further development would have significant impact on the water supply and the sewerage system.
Any future development should be focused on brown field sites.

Yes

Representation ID: 93117

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Naomi McAinsh

I think this site makes sense as it is not using greenbelt land

No

Representation ID: 93381

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Stephanie Rawding

I support the need for more affordable housing, but I do not believe Bidford on Avon is capable of additional homes without addressing many needs:
Lack of Schools - primary and secondary
Traffic including south access to village via single track medieval bridge
Flooding increased risk of run off due to new building particularly on good farm land on gradient closest to Avon
Including risk to conservation area, listed buildings
Few established town centre amenities, compared to similar sized settlements, including healthcare
Employment - few jobs in village requiring commuting, adding to traffic problems
Inadequate public transport (including school transport)

No

Representation ID: 93412

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Cheffings

BIDFORD on Avon is already well developed and there are areas already allocated to house building, there is therefore no call or demand on greenfield sites beyond the village boundaries.

Yes

Representation ID: 93447

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Bernard Davis

n/a

Yes

Representation ID: 93657

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Christopher Bennett

This site is a convenient extension to the already dense area of housing and thriving town of Bidford-on-Avon. It is in direct proximity to all the existing community services and facilities available there and feels appropriate in size to the existing settlement.

No

Representation ID: 93874

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Mark McClenahan

I do not believe Bidford on Avon is capable of supporting additional homes without addressing many needs: Lack of Schools - primary and secondary. Traffic including south access to village via single track medieval bridge. Flooding increased risk of run off due to new building particularly on good farm land on gradient closest to Avon, including risk to conservation area and listed buildings. Few established town centre amenities, compared to similar sized settlements, including healthcare. Employment - few jobs in village so residents required to commute, adding to traffic problems and pollution. Inadequate public transport (including school transport).

No

Representation ID: 93878

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Abi McClenahan

I do not believe Bidford on Avon is capable of supporting additional homes without addressing many needs: Lack of Schools - primary and secondary. Traffic including south access to village via single track medieval bridge. Flooding increased risk of run off due to new building particularly on good farm land on gradient closest to Avon, including risk to conservation area and listed buildings. Few established town centre amenities, compared to similar sized settlements, including healthcare. Employment - few jobs in village so residents required to commute, adding to traffic problems and pollution. Inadequate public transport (including school transport).

Other

Representation ID: 94283

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Andrew Close

Given the context constraints and opportunities, it would seem appropriate to consider a masterplan approach for Bidford to ensure that some (housing) development, if needed, could be designed to add value to the town and be visually appropriate in character/form/layout.

Yes

Representation ID: 94442

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Belinda Brown

This is non-green belt land and therefore a much more appropriate potential development site. No homes should be being built on green belt land as a part of this SWLP, when there are other sites, including this one, available!

Yes

Representation ID: 94557

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Steen

Not Green Belt

Other

Representation ID: 94735

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Kineton Parish Council

We have insufficient knowledge of the location from which to make an informed comment

Yes

Representation ID: 94899

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: mr william tansey

appropriate development contributing to the sustainable neighbourhood ideology

No

Representation ID: 95135

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Johnson

Not providing for the needs of South Warks but is catering for overspill from Cov and Birmingham thus creating more commuters and stretching the already at capacity local services (Schools - no secondary school and Primary at capacity , Medical -one doctors surgery ) there is insufficient local employment opportunities. Bidford has already grown substantially over recent years with no improvements to local transport, school provison or ameneties. Plus some areas of the proposals are in flood plains. Road passage is insufficient already with severe restrictions via the Bidford Bridge which often floods. Large areas of farmland instead of Brownfield

Yes

Representation ID: 95151

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Hill

I support the small scale sustainable development north mill lane broom within sg20.
I believe that the site would preserve and complement the surrounding landscape character and has mature hedgerow shielding the site from view. It
would not adversely impact upon heritage assets;
would benefit from safe vehicular access; remain in keeping with the local surroundings and meets local needs.
The site is not subject to flood risk and is available now. As a small site not in green belt it seems in keeping with the village, preserves its rural feel and is in easy distance of alcester and bidford

Yes

Representation ID: 95442

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Hannah Molloy

Not Green Belt. Better for sustainability as close to village.

No

Representation ID: 95507

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr stuart bond

Poor Infrastructure
Poor rail access
Bus connections to rail infrastructure poor - reliance on private cars
Limited employment in village - reliance on commuting
1 junior school to serve the whole village. Many residents of the village are struggling to remain in catchment for Junior school - more reliance on car travel to outlying villages
No high school. Residents already complaining that they cant access the academy, studley and stratford schools
Development is proposed beyond 'Small Brook' a strong geological feature defined from Ice age fluvial flo. This is a defining boundary to open countryside.

Yes

Representation ID: 95516

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Rose

I disagree that Bidford should be included based on the lack of school places and amenities for families. There is no secondary school in the area and children are struggling to get places in good quality schools in Alcester. The primary school also requires expansion. There are no leisure facilities for children in the village to use and the flooding at The Big Meadow means that the park and sports clubs are often out of bounds outside of summer.

Yes

Representation ID: 95610

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Clarke

Development in this location is adjacent to pre-existing development and can be served by existing local facilities

No

Representation ID: 95683

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs J Waterhouse

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 95751

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sue Hewitt

No objection

Other

Representation ID: 95821

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr M Waterhouse

Any proposed development in Area SG20 that runs up to the Wixford Road would effectively conjoin the village of Ardens Grafton to Bidford. As Ardens Grafton in on a hill and in a conservation area, the visual impact of new buildings would have significant impact on the visual aspect of the landscape. It is important also, to allow villages to keep their communities intact, so green spaces between Bidford's expansion and surrounding villages would allow this to be maintained.

Other

Representation ID: 95867

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr M Waterhouse

Bidford on Avon. There is no Rail Station. Bus provision is poor. Almost non-existent in surrounding villages. Access to M40/Coventry/Birmingham by the A46 trunk road either via Alcester A46 (longer route/more CO2) or by 'rat-run through Ardens Grafton/Temple Grafton.
Crossing River Avon is a huge bottleneck as Bidford bridge is single file traffic and often closed due to damage. Next crossing is Welford. Often flooded. New developments would require new bridge.
No ambulance provision. Hospitals, High Schools and Major Business Centres have to be accessed by road or to be provided.