Preferred Options 2025

Yes

Representation ID: 89425

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Broadly supportive - new settlements require infrastructure and phasing of developments to ensure this important - climate change and wider environmental concerns must be considered - any new settlement without a viable rail link should be ruled out due to climate change and environmental considerations as would generate further road traffic.

No

Representation ID: 89430

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Southam has has unprecedented growth in the last few years - no rail access and growth has been overwhelmingly dependent on car and road - infrastructure has been lacking - Wood Street car park as development is unacceptable and would affect the vibrancy of the town.

No

Representation ID: 89432

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Various flooding, listed building and ancient monument factors - sites perform very badly on objective scoring system and should be eliminated - not in conformance with Strategic Objective - sites promote car use and no public transport - biodiversity is not increased by building over open countryside but actively damages environmental assets

No

Representation ID: 89439

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Various flooding factors - sites perform very badly on the objective scoring system and are not in conformance with Strategic Objectives - adjacent to motorway junction and therefore promote car use and reliance on fossil fuels which clashes with overarching aim of the plan - biodiversity is not increased by building over open countryside and actively damages environmental assets.

No

Representation ID: 89450

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Annotated as 'less suitable' in the consultation - non-conformance with Strategic Objectives - new railway station would be required to avoid residents travelling to existing railway station by road and continued reliance on motor vehicles - Jacob's Transport Assessment scores Phase 1 minus 15 red and Phase 2 minus 12 red - infrastructure sporadic across the area and a car trip would be required to access these as no existing infrastructure and therefore new infrastructure would be required at significant financial and environmental cost - biodiversity is not increased by building over open countryside and actively damages existing environmental assets.

No

Representation ID: 89462

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Annotated as 'less suitable' in consultation - not in conformance with Strategic Objectives - not a sustainable location - new railway station would be required - not realistic and therefore residents continue to rely on cars - services are sporadic and require a car to access during development which would be a long period over the plan period placing pressure on existing services - Jacob's Transport Assessment designates the site as "minus 18 red" in both phases - biodiversity not increased by building over open countryside and actively damages environmental assets

No

Representation ID: 89465

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Annotated as 'less suitable' in the consultation - not conform with Strategic Objectives - not near a railway station so residents would have continued reliance on cars - existing services sporadic across the area and require a car to access which is not sustainable or within Strategic Objectives - existing infrastructure would be strained when development commences and concern as to how new infrastructure phased and funded - Jacob's Transport Assessment designates the site as "minus 18 red" in both phases - biodiversity is not enhanced by building over open countryside and actively damages environmental assets.

No

Representation ID: 89469

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Annotated as 'less suitable' in the consultation - not conform with strategic objectives - no prospect of railway travel and therefore promotes car use - existing infrastructure is sporadic and requires access by a car - would also be strained during the long life of the plan and concerns about funding and phasing of new infrastructure - Jacob's Transport Assessment scores site "minus 18 red" in both phases - biodiversity not increased by building over open countryside and actively damages existing environmental assets.

Other

Representation ID: 89473

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Broadly agree approach - disagree on some details - robust controls needed to prevent creep into open countryside where development would otherwise not be permitted - additional guidance regarding 'suitable' required - plots should be expected to be adjacent to BUAB - 'small scale' requires numerical guidance - welcome policy to require effective remarketing after twelve months but precision and safeguards needed to ensure compliance

Yes

Representation ID: 89509

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Liberal Democrat Group (Stratford District councillors)

Broadly agree - coastal areas appear to be more effective than inland - concern for hilly landscapes comprising Special Landscape Areas and therefore causing visual harm - needs to be balanced and therefore single masts may be more suitable