Yes

Representation ID: 99183

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Natalie Wride

Proximity to areas of business and transport links into Birmingham and Worcester. New infrastructure would be built - unlike with SG areas.

No

Representation ID: 99232

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

I do not agree with Long Marston becoming a new settlement because it has no functioning rail link and it is a long way from employment centres.

Yes

Representation ID: 99276

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Martine Singer

Settlements such as this site will be perfect, as infrastructure can easily be set up and implemented. Hopefully this will mean less pressure on tourist town of Stratford, which already has traffic congestion and flooding issues.

Yes

Representation ID: 99392

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Charlie Craddock

This site evidences strong suitability for a large scale development for the following reasons ;
- Large selection of nearby resources
- Housing developments from Persimmon and Bovis Homes showing the efficiency of the area
- Other developments show wildlife and flooding would not cause any impact
- Large community already present
- Infrastructure matches a development of this size
- Strong transport links
- Closer to the Cotswolds region allowing for more employment within area

Yes

Representation ID: 99413

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Hawkes

This is a good area for potential development as I strongly believe new settlements are preferable to bolting on small extra housing to already over burdened areas. This area has the optimal to accept the necessary infrastructure of health, education and critical transport. This area should be linked up to the A46 road network and without doubt the re-opening of the Stratford to Honeybourne rail line which would be able to take so much traffic off roads and increase tourism

No

Representation ID: 99445

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Des Haddon

The area has already seen developments at Meon vale and in Long Marston. Already traffic noise and volume is increasing and impacting the quality of life for residents. We live in a dark sky area by choice and light pollution is inevitable with such a vast development. Traffic congestion is already very high. Further load traffic to the M40 northbound via Stratford town would be catastrophic and Clopton bridge would struggle. Not to mention the town.

No

Representation ID: 99471

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Howson

development here would reduce the wildlife corridor to the Heart of England woodland areas and there is no plan for the 10% Biodiversity Net Gain.
Also for the bats, which we have many, at night they head over to the proposed development areas and beyond to feed. A worry would be that as development pushes green belt further away, these may not return.

Long Marston has a number of Heritage Grade 2 buildings, and their historic nature would be undermined by more development.

No

Representation ID: 99514

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Welford on Avon Parish Council

Proposal E1 is unsustainable - emplyment is north of the river Avon, this is South. Without a new river crossing this can't proceed. Over £100m is needed.
WCC have already stopped further development in this area due to highwaays restrictions.
Welford on Avon isnt a route to get traffic to the north - the bridge is a listed building and has a GWL of 10t. there are 2 single file traffic points in the village.
We have a dark skys policy INF1
The rail link heads south not north to all the employment - its a red herring

Yes

Representation ID: 99540

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Tibbles

With some expansion of transportation, this seems a reasonable site to expand, with some element of brown field redevelopment of the old airfield

Yes

Representation ID: 99600

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Martin Grubb

I feel strongly that New Settlements must be the way forward as they can be fully developed with thought rather than blistering onto Stratford - or indeed the other towns.
Not withstanding my concerns re river crossings the Long Marston site seems a good site for further development given there is still non agricultural that could be utilised and enhanced.

No

Representation ID: 99622

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Karen Abbotts

Huge adverse effects on Mickleton as follows: increased traffic congestion through the village, and towards Stratford./Evesham. Road through Mickleton is narrow and already very busy.
Increased noise pollution,
Dr surgery can't cope with current population
Already Unable to see a dentist locally
Insufficient employment opportunities
Lack of school placements
Destruction of fields, wildlife habitats,
No shopping facilities locally

leisure facilities insufficient for increased population

Yes

Representation ID: 99702

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Delve

Under the National planning policy framework (NPPF) 2024 (see paragraph 144) it states development on green belt is only permitted where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced are justified. On the basis that 46,500 homes are available via 7 of the proposed new settlement sites (E1, F1, F2, F3, G1, X1 and X2) which aren’t on green belt land. Therefore these should take preference to all other new settlement locations.

Yes

Representation ID: 99819

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Stephany Morris

I think a new settlement would be better than housing on the edge of towns as with a new settlement there can be a good infrastructure built in which will make people feel like they are in a community.

No

Representation ID: 99827

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Thomas Jackson

The whole plan put forward is outrageous. There are already not enough jobs, Stratford upon Avon is in disarray, the infrastructure already can’t handle the amount of traffic…. This plan is just totally unqualified.

Yes

Representation ID: 99894

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Simone Delve

Under the National planning policy framework (NPPF) 2024 (see paragraph 144) states development on green belt is only permitted where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced are justified. On the basis that 46,500 homes are available via 7 of the other proposed new settlement sites (E1, F1, F2, F3, G1, X1 and X2) should be prioritised and supported above all other proposed settlements.

No

Representation ID: 99904

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Helen Allman

The road networks and traffic through Stratford simply won’t cope with the extra vehicles

No

Representation ID: 99976

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Cooper

What seems to be proposed is a new town, currently without any real infrastructure, miles from employment zones.

No

Representation ID: 100026

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Salisbury

Inadequate transport infrastructure, noise and light disturbance. Congestion through Clifford Chambers, already lots of trucks and cars and this will get worse. Speeding already happens through Clifford Chambers, the automatic speed warning signs at either end do not work, even after repeated emails have been sent.
Potential good sites is Bearley - already train station and good road into Stratford.

Yes

Representation ID: 100112

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

This would be a new settlement that could take pressure off Stratford town to provide the new housing numbers required. The housing numbers could be met whilst causing least impact on the environment and greenbelt land.
However the transport infrastructure need to be provided to allow access to this site from M40, etc. Community infrastructure needs to be provided and must be an integral part of this new settlement.

Yes

Representation ID: 100123

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Susan Harrison

Seems sensible to extend current building

Yes

Representation ID: 100180

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anna Taylor

Developing land E1 offers an ideal opportunity to meet housing demand responsibly while preventing further strain on Stratford’s infrastructure. This location allows for sustainable expansion, reducing traffic congestion and safeguarding Green Belt land. Its proximity to a potential rail link via the Rail Innovation Centre and the Honeybourne Line makes it a prime location for transport-oriented growth. The site’s size and capacity allow for essential infrastructure, including schools and medical facilities, fostering a self-sufficient community. Strategic planning should focus on long-term benefits, ensuring housing developments are placed where they enhance, rather than harm, the region’s infrastructure and environment.

Yes

Representation ID: 100205

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lesley Upton

This site offers opportunites for planned and thoughtful development. Necessary infrastructure providing good access, medical facilities, schooling, shops, a community meeting place must be in place before house construction commences. Serious thought should be given to varied and interesting architecture and to the avoidance of placing housing in serried, souless ranks. Planners must ask themselves whether the settlement design renders it a convenient, attractive, and enviable place to live.

Yes

Representation ID: 100309

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kalinski

The proposed development protects the greenbelt of Stratford, while adding valuable housing stock at the south-west border of the district. The distance from other settlements, and substantial space available for development, mean that this site is likely to provide for a sustainable and self-supporting new settlement.

Yes

Representation ID: 100431

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Aimee Carter

This is a highly suitable area for development and supported.

No

Representation ID: 100541

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Ann Simons

B4632 not suitable for amount of traffic that will be generated by such a large development, and transport options noted are unlikely to mitigate this. A Greenway cycle commute will only benefit a few.
A development of this size will require a new build high school and greater nearby shopping facilities.
Access to strategic road and rail network will require journeys through SOA and crossing of the River Avon.
Other sites identified are better located for access to A46, M40 and M42.

No

Representation ID: 100571

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Pauline James

E1 at Long Marston is excessive in size and will ruin the character of the rural area.

Hamlet Way CV370AL has 140 dwellings in 0.86ha: this density could achieve 8000 dwellings in 50 hectares including roads and open spaces. Such huge swathes as E1 are not needed to house 20-40 year olds in their early career, many of whom may not want a whole house and garden to look after- much less afford that! Low rise flats and maisonettes can look like houses. Please build them into rural villages.

Yes

Representation ID: 100609

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Residents Concerned for Kenilworth South

Support the development of a new settlement on non-green belt land, with the space to provide a large number of houses plus additional amenities to support new residents. Rather than extending existing settlements with already overstretched, or at capacity, amenities such as schools, doctors, dentists, etc
Road infrastructure will be designed to manage the increased volume of traffic, rather than putting additional vehicles on roads in existing settlements which haven't been designed to manage the new volume.

Yes

Representation ID: 100625

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Hogarth

Continue to expand on what has been started, but add the relief road and new bridge so traffic can bypass Stratford before more houses are built.

No

Representation ID: 100670

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr David Hawkins

The road and other infrastructure does not exist for this proposed settlement
There are very limited employment opportunities in this settlement area
The settlement area will impose further congestion on already congested road networks, particularly at Stratford upon Avon where there remains a need for an additional river crossing / relief road

No

Representation ID: 100779

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Doug Wallace

While this has some merit as there is already development in this general area, if it went ahead it would hugely add to the traffic problems in Stratford-upon-Avon. This proposal should only be considered if a southern Stratford by-pass was built first.