Tag: response

General Overview

Marston Sicca Parish Council recognise the requirement for a plan. We are aligned to the need for sustainable growth in South Warwickshire – including the delivery of housing, employment, infrastructure and green public spaces.

We believe that, whilst SWLP outlines some positive strategic objectives and policies, the proposal to locate ~25% of the SWLP total housing and ~50% of Stratford Upon Avon’s housing requirement to the South of Stratford Upon Avon to be unjustified, unsound and undeliverable.

1. Wrong Locations & Extreme Isolation: The plan locates ~25% of the SWLP total housing and ~50% of Stratford Upon Avon’s housing requirement to the South of the river, contradicting data showing growth corridors that sit to the North. The southern sites are furthest away from motorway junctions, employment hubs (Coventry and Gaydon), Birmingham Airport, and HS2 Interchange. No new rail links are proposed which means reliance on road infrastructure to travel from such a remote area.
2. Severe Landscape & AONB Harm: Expanding Long Marston Airfield (LMA) from its original 205ha footprint to an enormous 697ha consumes vast amounts of productive farmland directly within the Cotswolds AONB 3km buffer zone, destroying rural character and obstructing views of Meon Hill. SWLP strategic objectives include sustainability – the plan does not deliver sustainable growth due to poor site selection and scale.
3. Village Coalescence & Overdevelopment: The sheer scale of LMA and surrounding small-site allocations (such as MEO.1) will physically and visually merge Shackleton Village, Meon Vale, Long Marston, Lower Quinton, and Willicote, destroying local settlement identities. Proposed small sites also bypass current Neighbourhood Development Plans (NDPs).
4. Traffic Gridlock & Flawed Loopholes: Policy DS.4 contains dangerous loopholes allowing development to proceed before the proposed 2035 Stratford Bypass is built. SWLP relies on an unfunded, unproven bypass while ignoring  the fact that 13,714 new homes South of Stratford Upon Avon would likely result in over 26,000 additional cars that will choke rural roads and surrounding village roads. There is no assessment of this impact or improvement plan regarding impact to local villages. The plan lacks a holistic and multidimensional transport assessment and justification.
5. Proven Deliverability Failure: The current 3,500-home garden village at LMA has stalled – with only 400 homes built since 2016 and infrastructure that remains unbuilt despite S106 occupation triggers being met. Scaling this up to 10,300 homes raises serious questions about deliverability. The fundamentals of SWLP and delivery mechanisms are identical to those of the Garden Village.
6. Funding: The SWLP requires significant funding. The proposed bypass. Land costs. Infrastructure capacity improvements (eg. Electricity). The sources of funding have not been explained or detailed in the plan. We recommend that SWLP should identify alternative locations where less funding would be required. We also recommend that a detailed examination of the costs of the bypass is completed, as it is widely understood that the A46 Stoneleigh Bridge is costing in excess of £58m. Using this as a benchmark the cost of the Stratford Upon Avon bypass in the SWLP document is surely too low.
7. Failure to cooperate with Neighbouring Authorities: SWLP does not present evidence or demonstrate that it has considered growth in neighbouring areas, such as Mickleton where there are over 1000 homes proposed in the Cotswolds Local Plan
8. 25 Years of Construction: The proposal for delivery of LMA beyond the year 2050 is totally unjustifiable. The impact on local residents and villages has been ignored and not outlined in SWLP. That would be 25 years of noise and air pollution. 25 years of traffic issues caused by heavy plant movements and construction workers. There is no mitigation for this in SWLP.
9. Traffic modelling does not address the scale of SWLP: Traffic modelling appears to only consider 4000-4500 homes at LMA, rather than the 10,300 homes proposed for the site. It also does not address traffic implications from Local Plans in neighbouring areas, such as the additional traffic generated by over 1000 homes proposed at Mickleton in the Cotswolds.

We believe that the plan could be improved by addressing some of the biggest shortcomings:

1. Scale back the plan from 25 years to 15 years: this is a more reasonable timescale for planning purposes. This does not change the ultimate housing requirement, however it does provide a more reasonable time frame for feedback and assessment of delivery status.
2. Cap LMA: Scale back the LMA allocation to the 3,500-home Garden Village masterplan. Contain the development within the footprint of the airfield brownfield site. Deliver infrastructure in line with the Garden Village masterplan. Focus efforts on delivery. Deliver the vision of a Garden Village that residents and nearby villages bought into.
3. Distribute Growth: Reallocate housing needs to sustainable locations North of Stratford-upon-Avon with convenient major road, rail, and employment access. This inevitably will require farmland and green space to be used. Assess non-brownfield sites using the criteria laid out in SWLP to identify the best locations for growth beyond brownfield options. This would ensure that all villages across the district retain their identities whilst delivering on the housing needs.
4. Avoid merging neighbouring villages: In the case of Lower Quinton, Meon Vale, Willicote, Long Marston and Shackleton Village – remove the sites that create urban sprawl and will lead to these villages losing their individual identities. Small green buffer strips is no sufficient.
5. Focus on Existing Infrastructure: Sites with better access to the motorway network, rail network, Birmingham Airport and HS2 exist but have not been allocated housing in SWLP. HS2 is expected to cost in excess of £87bn – providing housing within easy reach of this infrastructure is vital. These are fundamentally more deliverable, more cost effective and more sustainable.
6. Remove loopholes: SWLP must not contain loopholes relating to the trigger points for infrastructure to be delivered. Delivery timescales and triggers must be clearly laid out, and there must be a zero tolerance approach to deviations. The constant failure to deliver facilities, infrastructure and S106 compliance issues must be stopped.
7. Cooperate with Cotswolds District Council and other neighbouring authorities: For SWLP to be considered sound, a holistic approach with neighbouring authorities is required. This needs to consider housing location, combine infrastructure impact analysis and impact to funding requirements.
8. Ensure smooth maintenance and upkeep of green spaces and public assets: Remove references from SWLP suggesting that Residents Associations can manage assets. Clarify in SWLP the requirements (with no loopholes) of developers to pay commuted sums and CIL money to support maintenance of open spaces. No development should be agreed to without these in place, and funds should be paid & ringfenced prior to construction starting. Parish Councils can’t manage community assets without these funds in place.
9. Identify electrical infrastructure & drainage requirements and costs: Significant development requires significant electrical infrastructure. A detailed examination of the electrical grid is required alongside the electrical requirements of all proposed (and not proposed) sites. The costs of infrastructure upgrades must be listed. These costs must form part of the overall viability assessment against each site. The same assessments must be completed with transparent costs for drainage/sewage/gas works.
10. Traffic modelling needs to be repeated with the SWLP masterplan housing figures: There is a large gap between what has been modelled at LMA (4000-4500 homes) and the masterplan view (10,300 homes). SWLP is seeking to align a plan that will affect generations of the population; the modelling needs to reflect the proposal in it’s entirety.
11. Forecast costs to include inflation and assess viability: There is no reference to the fact that inflation will affect funding requirements for the plan. These should be considered and forecast so that funding viability can be accurately assessed.
12. Build the bypass before any houses: Best practice would be to build the bypass before construction of any houses. This is the only way to guarantee it is in place to relieve Stratford town center of congestion.

We have outlined a series of shortcomings with the SWLP above. Some of these are general points and affect the overall soundness of the plan. Meanwhile, some are specific to LMA and other nearby sites. Fundamentally we believe that the Garden Village masterplan at Long Marston should be delivered within the confines of the brownfield site of the airfield. Development beyond this in a fundamentally remote and unconnected site is not justifiable or sound.

Policy DS.2 – Spatial Development Strategy

• A – New Communities – The proposal at LMA places over approximately 20% of all housing contained within SWLP at a single location on the fringe of the Cotswolds. It is a site without rail links. It is a site far away from strategic employment hubs. It is a site far away from motorway junctions. Considering the scale of development we believe there is insufficient evidence to suggest that this proposal is deliverable or justified. We agree that large scale developments can be positive, and support the 3500 homes masterplan for the Long Marston Garden Village at the airfield. Expanding beyond this size would merge the development with neighbouring local villages. Only 205ha of LMA is brownfield – beyond this is farmland and countryside.
• 5.14 – calls out the importance of the Cotswolds area, meanwhile LMA sits within the 3km buffer zone of the AONB designated area. The proposal outlined at LMA, MEO1 and MEO2 for over 10,300 homes in this controlled area contravenes national and local planning policies.

Policy DS.3 – Meeting our Development Needs to 2050

• 5.21 – Figure 13 outlines road opportunity areas identified within WMSESS (2024). The figure highlights that major deployment opportunities sit to the North of Stratford Upon Avon. Despite this fact, SWLP proposes 13,714 homes across LMA, STR.2 and STR.3 – all South of Stratford Upon Avon. SWLP is placing significant housing development in the wrong locations. Figure 13 highlights that significant employment growth is directly correlated with significant road infrastructure. Developments South of Stratford Upon Avon have poor access to the strategic network (with or without the Stratford Upon Avon Bypass). Alternative sites to the North would be more sustainable (shorter car journeys) and provide better employment opportunities for future residents.

Policy DS.4 – Strategic Site Principles

• Infrastructure (B2) – ensure early delivery of infrastructure – there must be no loopholes or ways to circumvent these requirements. Site 8.2 LMA for example states “Delivery of development across the wider site would commence following opening of the Stratford-upon-Avon Bypass (anticipated in 2035), or sooner if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Highways Authority that additional development can take place in advance of the Bypass being delivered.” – the SWLP is already written in such as way to allow development ahead of infrastructure. These loopholes and allowances must be removed for the plan to be considered sound.

Policy DS.9 – Core Opportunity Area

• The map outlines key employment sites and rail infrastructure. The map does not show Brimingham Airport or the HS2 interchange in Solihull. If we consider the locations of these key infrastructure hubs, what evidence has been collected to outline ease-of-access to them from the full list of proposed SWLP development sites? LMA site is furthest away from Brimingham Airport and HS2 Interchange. LMA is also far away from a motorway junction. There is not sufficient justification to locate 10,300 homes in such a remote and unconnected location. There are more sustainable and connected locations to the North of Stratford upon Avon.

DS.14 – Protecting the Cotswolds National Landscape

• LMA site sits well within the Cotswolds AONB buffer zone. A development of 10,300 homes on the fringe of the Cotswolds AONB is not justifiable. Long Marston Airfield already has a garden village strategy planned of 3500 homes. The scale of the approved 3500 home Garden Village plan is in-keeping with the local surroundings and sensitive to the Cotswolds AONB. The SWLP proposal to grow the development to 10,300 homes is not sound or justified.

DS.15 – Special Landscape Areas

• LMA site sits well within the Cotswolds AONB buffer zone. A development of 10,300 homes on the fringe of the Cotswolds AONB is not justifiable. Long Marston Airfield already has a garden village strategy planned of 3500 homes. The scale of the approved Garden Village plan is in-keeping with the local surroundings and sensitive to the Cotswolds AONB. The SWLP proposal to grow the development to over 10,300 homes is not sound or justified.

DS.16 – Protecting, Enhancing and Restoring Landscape Character

• “Must be sensitive to an area’s capacity for change, acknowledge cumulative effects and guard against the potential for coalescence between existing settlements” – LMA and surrounding proposals effectively merge the site with Long Marston village, Lower Quinton village and Meon Vale. The proposal is therefore in direct conflict with DS.16.A.5 as quoted above. To avoid this from happening LMA site should be contained within the 3500 homes already approved as part of the garden village scheme, and the remaining housing be developed in a more suitable location(s) where access to infrastructure and impact on local villages can be balanced.
• “Must be sensitive to an area’s capacity for change, acknowledge cumulative effects and guard against the potential for coalescence between existing settlements” – Long Marston Airfield sits at 205ha. The LMA site proposal sits at 697ha. The area is in the Cotswolds AONB buffer zone and has clear line of sight of Meon Hill. The proposed site is largely farmland/open countryside, and is located on the Campden Road (a minor B road). There is simply no entitlement to build a new town of 10,300 homes in this location when considering the surrounding landscape and settlements. In line with DS.16.A.2 (quoted above) it could not be considered sound or justified. The scale of LMA should be held at 3500 homes as per the garden village master plan, with any homes above this number built North of Stratford Upon Avon
• “Development that would result in harm to the existing landscape, will only be supported if it can be demonstrated that the harm is unavoidable and outweighed by wider public benefits. Any harm to such features must be clearly justified and shown to be unavoidable, with appropriate mitigation secured.” – DS.16.B.2 – We urge the inspector the review what evidence supports this policy for LMA. Locating 10,300 homes in a remote location, in the buffer zone of Cotswolds AONB and with no rail links indicates that LMA proposal has limited public benefits.

DS.17 – Maintaining Settlement Identity and Areas of Restraint

• “Gaps between settlements play a vital role in maintaining their unique identity, rural character and landscape setting. These gaps must be preserved. Development that would erode the function of a settlement gap will not be supported unless it is demonstrated that no reasonable alternative locations exist outside the gap. – The proposal at LMA is in direct conflict with the statement in DS.17. LMA development of over 10,300 homes merges with Long Marston village, Meon Vale and Willicote. It also is within a few hundred meters of Lower Quinton. SWLP proposal at LMA is therefore not justified or sound. LMA development should be delivered to the scale of 3500 homes which is already approved as part of the Garden Village proposal. Additional homes should be repositioned to the North of Stratford Upon Avon in a location that is closer to motorway links, rail links and employment hubs.

ID.1 – Securing Infrastructure Provision

• The plan does not outline location for a new ‘major’ hospital, so we understand that Warwick Hospital would remain the main facility for all proposed sites. The proposed development at LMA is furthest away from Warwick Hospital, meanwhile capacity constraints at Warwick Hospital have not been assessed.

ID.1 & ID.3 – Securing Infrastructure Provision & Infrastructure Protection

• The policy lays out a number of road network improvements required to support SWLP. We urge the inspector to consider the growth in car journeys generated by LMA, ST2 and ST3 sites. A multi-dimensional transport plan is required to handle vehicle movements from an additional 13,714 homes. Assuming 2.5 cars per household, that would be an additional 34,285 cars across the 3 sites. What evidence is there to suggest that local villages would handle such an increase in traffic? SWLP focuses heavily on the Stratford Upon Avon bypass as an enabler for LMA, ST2 and ST3 but does not outline improvements for local road networks.
• What evidence is there that demonstrates SWLP infrastructure plan has considered neighbouring local plans, such as in the Cotswolds where over 1000 homes are proposed at Mickleton? This is not included in the traffic modelling technical papers.
• Modelling has been perfomed based on 4000-4500 homes, not 10300 for LMA.
• What evidence is there to demonstrate that the increased pressure on local village roads can cope with the proposed scale of development at LMA, ST2 and ST3? Travel into the Cotswolds via Mickleton and Chipping Campden would increase for leisure – is this containable? Travel to Evesham would increase for leisure and employment – is this containable? No improvements are proposed for local roads which carry the burden of these journeys.

ID.4 – Stratford-upon-Avon Bypass

• We urge the inspector the assess if any evidence highlights the impact on traffic at the major roundabouts on the A46 at Bishopton, Shottery and Wildmoor. These locations are already congested and struggle to handle the volume of traffic going from North to South/South to North. The addition of a Stratford Bypass joining Alcester Road would create yet another major bottleneck for traffic and add significant traffic volume onto the single carriageway A46. Considering the significant number of employment sites North of Stratford Upon Avon, positioning over 13,714 homes across LMA, ST2 and ST3 poses a significant risk to the bypass and A46 becoming heavily congested.

ID.5 – Sustainable Transport Accessibility

• Section A states that site proposals must demonstrate that they are in sustainable locations where travel distances can be minimized. All developments South of Stratford Upon Avon, especially LMA and smaller sites in Long Marston and Meon Vale, fail to meet this criteria. These sites are furthest distance away from critical infrastructure such as Birmingham Airport and HS2 Interchange. They are the furthest from a motorway junction. They are furthest away from strategic employment sites in Coventry and Gaydon. There is no railway station nearby. For these reasons we do not believe that LMA, MEO.1, MEO.2, LMV.1 and LMV2 are justified or sound for development at the scale proposed in SWLP. We believe that alternative sites closer to infrastructure hubs offer far more sustainable alternatives that can offer significant reductions travel time and car journeys.

ID.6 – Electric Vehicle Infrastructure

• We urge the inspector to assess the electrical infrastructure requirements to deliver the required vehicle charging at LMA site. We have seen no assessment of electrical network capacity or costs to deliver the required power provision. These will be significant. The current garden village development at Long Marston Airfield has stalled, and one reason given is due to electrical network capacity. It is a critical issue and SWLP has not provided evidence to indicate that 10,300 homes at LMA is deliverable.
• Electrical infrastructure should be upgraded and connected prior to construction commencement.

Site Proposals

8.2 LMA Long Marston Airfield New Community

• For the avoidance of doubt, Long Martson Airfield is 205ha meanwhile the total site size of LMA in SWLP is 697ha. The majority of the site is productive farmland and open countryside that sits with the Cotswolds AONB 3km buffer zone. A development of the scale proposed in SWLP is not justifiable or in line with planning policy.
• Distances to nearest motorway junction: LMA 12 miles from nearest M42 junction. Other previously proposed sites North of Stratford are half of this distance.
• Distances to Birmingham Airport and HS2 Interchange Station: LMA site is over 30 miles away from these critical infrastructure hubs. SWLP has not considered access to HS2 in any of it’s decisions. It is not sound or justifiable to locate 10,300 homes at a site that is furthest away from these infrastructure hubs.
• Distances to SWLP Strategic Employment Sites: LMA is 23 miles away from South Coventry, and 19 miles away from Gaydon. This is significantly further than other sites in SWLP Regulation 19 and significantly further than sites that have been discounted from the plan. LMA therefore can’t be considered a sustainable choice.
• LMA does not have a train station, which will lead to heavy reliance on local road networks. National planning policy recently announced priority approval of sites that are close to railway stations, highlighting the importance of this mode of transport.
• 10,300 homes is likely to mean over 20,000 personal vehicles. SWLP has an unfunded proposal for a Stratford Upon Avon bypass, but what about traffic travelling to/from LMA in other directions? Local roads towards Shipston, Mickleton and Evesham are unable to handle traffic resulting from such large a large scale development. There is no evidence in SWLP to demonstrate this has been considered, nor is there a mitigation plan.
• A key question is whether LMA is deliverable. SWLP puts approximately 20% of the total housing requirement of the plan at LMA. This is not sound or justifiable, and certainly does not feel deliverable.
  • The site does not have a rail link.
  • It sits in the Cotswolds AONB buffer zone.
  • There is no evidence that surrounding local villages or roads can support a development of such scale
  • The proposal effectively merges Shackleton Village (Long Martson Garden Village) with Meon vale, Long Marston, Lower Quinton and Willicote. Villages will lose their identities.
  • SWLP references that the site is dependent on the Stratford Upon Avon bypass. The road is unfunded, unproven and without a plan of it’s own. SWLP also does not recognise or assess vehicle/people movement in all directions. It links the plan solely to infrastructure improvement to the North.
• We urge the planning inspector to review the original Long Marston garden village plan. To date there have been only 400 homes built since 2016, and infrastructure required under S106 agreements are not in place despite trigger points being met. The plan of 3500 homes has proven undeliverable based on the evidence we can see today; the SWLP plan for 10,300 homes therefore is even less deliverable.
• SWLP contains no evidence of cooperation with neighbouring authorities to assess joint impacts on infrastructure. Mickleton, for example, is planned to have over 1000 homes. More homes are planned in the North Cotswolds at other sites. SWLP must recognise and analyse the joint impact, an activity that we do not believe has been completed during the preparation of SWLP. Traffic modelling must include journeys from neighbouring districts.
• We recommend that the original 3500 homes under the Long Marston garden Village plan be prioritised and delivered, along with the associated facilities and infrastructure. The size of this development is appropriate for the location and in-keeping with the local environment. Further homes should be delivered in alternative locations North of Stratford Upon Avon where they will have better access to the strategic road network, rail links (including HS2) and employment.

LMV.1 Land North of Barley Fields, 14 dwellings

Marston Sicca PC have objected to previous applications on this site and SDC have also refused permission several times in the past.

• The site is outside the village built up boundary
• It is outside the built up area in open countryside
• It contravenes the Marston Sicca NDP which is ‘made’ and currently has a more suitable reserved site for around 10 dwellings.
• It exceeds the cap of the villages category 4 classification cap of 32 as 81 dwellings have already been built in the village.
• It is not sustainable due to the lack of bus service frequency so travel must be by car

For all the above reasons the plan for LMV.1 cannot be considered as sound.

LMV.2 Glebe Land east of Welford Road, 22 dwellings

This was not included as a site in previous ‘call for sites’ consultation.

• It is outside the village built up boundary in open countryside
• It is overlooked by several nearby listed buildings.
• It is on ancient ridge and furrow land with a dew pond.
• It contravenes Marston Sicca PC NDP which is ‘made’ and current. It is adjacent to LMV.3, Park House which is a moribund site reserved in the NDP.
• It exceeds the cap of the category 4 classification of 32 as 81 dwellings have already been built in the village, which is 2.5 times more that it should take.

For all the above reasons the plan for LMV.2 cannot be considered as sound.

 LMV.3 On land east of Welford Road and adjacent to LMV.2

This a site identified in the Marston Sicca NDP.

Marston Sicca PC would have no objection to this moribund site being developed.

MEO.1 Farmland adjacent to the Meon Vale development just west of Campden Road and south of Station Road and opposite the emergency exit from Marston Edge Park homes site,111 dwellings.

Site would be dependent on the proposed bypass being built.

• It is outside the physical confines of the village as well as being outside the BUAB which contravenes policy AS.10.
• It is very difficult, given the site’s boundaries, to see how vehicular traffic can access on to either Station Road or Campden Road. On Campden Road it is between the busy junctions of Station Road and Main Road to Quinton. There is insufficient space on Station Road for a junction.
• It would result in the loss of versatile agricultural land, which is a finite resource.
• There would be significant adverse impact on the character and appearance of the location.
• It leads to coalescence between the villages of Long Marston, Meon Vale, Shackleton Village and Quinton.

For all the above reasons the site MEO.1 cannot be considered as sound.

 MEO.2 Land off Station Road opposite Barn Antiques, 12 dwellings

Site is in the curtilage of an existing house.

• It is near the junction into Barn Antiques, resulting in conflictions between the two junctions.
• Station Road is substandard given the amount of development at Meon Vale. Another junction along this road would only exacerbate the situation.
• It is outside the physical confines of the village as well as being outside the BUAB of Long Marston village.
• It leads to coalescence between the villages of Long Marston, Meon Vale, Shackleton Village and Quinton.

For all the above reasons the plan cannot be considered as sound

August 2026