Weddington and St. Nicolas (Speaking As a Resident of Plan to Deliver a Choice of High Quality Homes, Widen Bulkington Lane

Weddington & St. Nicolas

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 625/1 A & R N/A Concerned about the Borough Plan: See response 592/1 Hughes 1. Traffic Flow/Congestion - surrounding roads, including A5 and town centre already congested at peak times. Accidents on M6, M69 and M1 can cause gridlock. Extra 3000 homes will add 5000+ cars onto the already congested road system. Extra traffic will impact on town centre, the railway bridge and south and east of Nuneaton where residents and commuters attempt to travel to work/school. 2. Extra traffic will impact on air quality and so health. The Plan fails to show what measures will be taken to reduce the traffic impact on air quality and so the increasing air pollution caused by the housing proposal. 3. Schools - local primary and secondary schools are successful, so full to capacity. Some have to travel across the Borough to other schools. Adding 3000 homes will mean overcrowded amenities, limited education choice and an increase in traffic taking children to schools outside the area. 4. Greenfields - housing proposed on farmland. The country imports food so makes no sense to build over farmland when there are brownfield sites, empty offices and vacant industrial units. 5. Flood Risk - land surrounding Weddington and St Nicholas is predominantly underlain by clay which is poorly drained. This with natural drainage from higher ground, e.g. Higham on the Hill, has led to surface water flooding locally. Environment Agency Flood map for Surface Water shows this as an area likely to flood after rainfall. Builders of St Nicholas Park included flood risk measures for the Change Brook and Buttermere Park. Development, along with increases in rainfall due to climate change, will increase the risk of flooding at St Nicholas Park.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 6. Drainage - If sewer network is unable to cope with the extra demand of rainfall and run-off then flooding is inevitable - Severn Trent has no spare drainage capacity and no plans to expand the infrastructure. 7. Business - Makes no sense to concentrate the majority of new housing to the north of the Borough when business activity and employment opportunities are elsewhere. 8. Health - access to childcare, doctors and dentists will become more difficult. George Eliot Hospital is contracting. How will the health care needs of the Borough be met with the influx of outsider tenants. 9. How does the Borough Plan address the needs of residents in the Borough and specifically the CV11 area? 265/3 A. Marston The suggestion of a new ring road from Weddington to See response 94/1 The Long Shoot would direct traffic to an already congested area, where it is already almost impossible to make a right hand turn back towards the town centre. 265/5 A. Marston 3000 new homes to the north of the Borough will See response 592/1 exacerbate air quality issues, particularly on the gyratory system around Old Hinckley Road. This would have an adverse effect on the health of the people living in that area. The planning committee have already ignored this issue when granting planning permission for 510 homes in this area. It will also add to road safety issues.

We only have one doctors' surgery to the north of Nuneaton and this is inadequate for the existing population. 265/6 A. Marston The area from The Long Shoot through to Weddington is See response 93/1 already prone to flooding. Local residents of Buttermere Avenue, Pallet Drive, Cleaver Gardens, Weddington Road and The Long Shoot were greatly concerned, and many experienced flooding during the winter of 2012/13. So far the solution has been to install attenuation tanks

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent when building new homes, rather than an overhaul of the drainage system. If any further new homes were to be built to the north of Nuneaton, a massively costly overhaul of the whole drainage system would be necessary, since NBBC has a duty of care to existing residents not to increase their risk of flooding. 59/5 AF Cook N/A Environmental impact of roads is purely theoretical and The S-Paramics transport modelling considers typical takes no account of the impact when there are local weekday conditions (factoring in the proposed growth). motorway diversions due to crashes and breakdowns. It would be extremely difficult to mitigate against such The logic seems to be everything will be OK because we irregular events or reasonably request funding for such say it will. Shows remote disinterest of consultants who schemes. The Highways Agency has committed plans compile the reports. to deliver SMART motorways (formerly Managed Accept there should be new homes but some should be Motorways and ATM) on the M6. This is similar to the in Nuneaton Town Centre, e.g. former police station, M42 ATM gantries and hard shoulder running. The magistrates court, former employment exchange land. Government considers that this is the solution to Use of the town centre as a shopping centre has capacity constraints on the motorway network. declined due to internet trading. Residential Conditions on the motorway are much safer with these development would bring life into the town centre interventions, and lane use when dealing with an instead of the neglected place it has become. accident is much more efficient. Apartments must replace empty shops. See responses 592/1 and 229/2 (section 5) on retail growth. 421 Alison Butler N/A Do not understand why there is a need for a further 3000 See response 592/1 homes around the Weddington/St Nicolas area. Surely there aren't enough jobs within the area to meet that demand? I feel that the estimations on business growth have been massively blown out of proportion. I haven't really seen any convincing evidence so far that makes me feel as though that many houses are needed. If there is a need for more housing I feel that suitable sites across the Borough should be investigated first as there are definitely other sites that are more suitable and should be used first before destroying the surrounding countryside. Once that land has gone it will be gone forever.

Another concern I have is for the air quality. Most home 3

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent owners have at least one car nowadays and many have 2 cars. If 3000 homes are to be built then that could be a further 4000+ cars which will be using the local roads. There are already areas within Nuneaton that have bad air quality and in my opinion we should be doing more to improve this, not adding to the issue.

The sheer amount of extra traffic around the A5 and Weddington area is also a great concern. We currently live on Weddington Road. If I leave for work around 7.30am, the traffic is manageable. It takes me around 20 minutes to get to Walsgrave in Coventry. If I drop my children off at school before setting off to work it can take me nearly 50 minutes on a bad day. The Weddington Road and other surrounding roads are so congested. Sometimes I cannot even get off my drive due to the back up of traffic. People have the same issue when trying to get onto the A5 via the Weddington Road. 326 houses are already going to be built by St James Church and the island which will be built for those people is going to be on the end of Weddington Lane, so this is already going to have a big impact on traffic, let alone a further 3000 being built. A KFC has stupidly been given the go ahead (and is currently being built) in the residential area by the train station and this will also not help the traffic flow!

I believe that more thought should be given to the existing residents not only in Weddington but in other areas too and the Borough Plan should not go ahead as it is. I have only lived in Nuneaton for 7 years and already we have lost the Church Fields to developers, a KFC has been given the go ahead in a built up residential area with no thought about the residents and the issues they may now have with traffic flow and the constant smell of fast food, and the Fox and Crane pub has been left to perish in the elements and has been left

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent an eye sore.

Finally, I feel that if the Borough Council are interested in the views of the Nuneaton people then they should make sure that everyone is aware of what is happening. We are lucky in Weddington that Keith actually tries to get the community involved and keeps people up to date, but I don't believe that all areas are being supported the same way (such as the residents of Arbury!). Information should be being sent to every household by the council outlining what is being proposed and what people should do. I've read information on Facebook support group pages and on the internet but not everyone has access or understands how to use technology. It was only by going to a meeting at St James Church Hall that I heard that the equivalent of 2 more ropewalks may also go ahead. Has anyone from the council even walked around Nuneaton Town Centre recently? It's full of pound shops and charity shops!!! I don't use the Town Centre anymore for this reason. Surely more work should be done to improve what we already have? 382/1 Ann and Roy N/A Traffic Flow/Congestion/Air Quality in the areas 1. See 94/1 re transport Hughes surrounding Weddington/St Nicolas Park and the Town 2. See 179/1 re wider infrastructure matters and town Centre centres. 1. The surrounding roads are already congested at 3. The Council has assessed the urban area and other peak rush hour times. suitable non-urban area sites. It is still necessary to 2. The congestion often rises to gridlock when there are develop on greenfield sites. See site selection accidents/hold-ups on the M6, M69 and M1, as traffic background paper for further information. struggles to find alternative routes. 4. It is acknowledged that the proposal will lead to the 3. The proposed major housing development of 3000+ loss of agricultural land. However, the Plan has to homes will mean an estimated extra 5000+ vehicles balance a number of factors in selecting sites. needing to use the already congested road system. 5. The SFRA 1 and 2 identifies surface water issues. 4. Any increase in traffic will impact the town centre These will need to be considered further at the (where the railway bridge struggles to cope with morning planning application stage but this will not prevent and evening traffic) and areas to the south and east of development. Discussions with EA and STW will be Nuneaton, as residents and commuters from outside the ongoing as part of the development of the IDP.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent area attempt to travel to work/school-run, etc. 6. Existing vacant industrial units are not necessarily fit 5. This in turn will affect the quality of air, which will for purpose. The Plan seeks to provide a diverse have detrimental effect on health. This issue is raised in portfolio of sites. Evidence does indicate that where the Borough Plan Preferred Options: ". . . development there is a range of sites, investment is more likely to will include measures to reduce traffic impact on air occur. It is accepted that SHS4 is not closely linked to quality . . .". However, it fails to show how this will be other employment allocations within the Borough, achieved, given the obvious future increase in air however it is located in close proximity to employment pollution caused from future development growth. sites in neighbouring authorities, e.g. MIRA. The S Paramics will assess the links between housing and Schools employment outside the Borough. Our local primary and secondary schools are very successful and therefore are full to capacity. Currently some local children who live in the catchment area are unable to secure places at their neighbourhood school and have to travel across the Borough to other schools. Adding another 3000+ homes with more children will mean overcrowded amenities, limited educational choice, and an increase in traffic taking children to schools outside the area.

Greenfields Currently the area around St. Nicolas Park and Weddington is blessed on three sides with farmland. As a country we are importing more of our food, so it makes little sense to concrete over precious farmland when brownfield sites/empty and derelict houses/empty office space and units on local industrial estates remain vacant.

Flood Risk The land surrounding Weddington / St Nicolas Park is predominately underlain with clay, which is poorly drained. This, together with natural drainage from higher ground, e.g. Higham on the Hill, has led to some surrounding areas becoming flooded by surface water. 1. The Flood Map for surface water, supplied by the Environment Agency, clearly shows the areas likely to

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent be flooded following rainfall. 2. On St. Nicolas Park the original builders were obviously aware of the flood risk by ensuring that Change Brook drained into a planned and constructed water meadow, which adequately holds excess water in its basin, thereby allowing the gradual/measured escape of water into the culvert system. A drain was engineered on the Buttermere Park to enable water to drain into the basin. During the winter rainy months, Buttermere Park was under water for approximately 2 months and the water meadow was often full. 3. If the development goes ahead, and with the probable increase in rainfall due to climate change, the risk of flooding on St Nicolas Park Estate will increase significantly. 4. If the existing sewer network is unable to cope with the extra demand of rainfall and run-off then flooding is even more inevitable.

Business The proposed Plan states that 75ha of land are needed for employment. Whilst we appreciate the need for economic growth, it seems to make little sense to earmark fresh sites when the Plan states we ". . . need to support and strengthen business activity at existing employment sites . . .". The Borough contains a large number of industrial parks which contain spare capacity and are adjacent land which could be developed further. It makes little sense to concentrate the majority of new housing on the north side of the Borough, when much of the business activity and employment opportunities are elsewhere.

The Plan states that 43750 sqm of space is required for non-food retail mostly located in the town centre. It begs the question: why are more retail outlets required in the town centre when many shops/units are already vacant?

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

Social Infrastructure Access to childcare, doctors and dentists will become more difficult, not to mention the already contracting services at George Eliot Hospital, which is currently struggling to meet the health care needs of the Borough without the additional increase of the Borough population. 88/2 Anthony N/A The distribution of new housing is disproportionately See responses 592/1 and 291/3 (Comments on Sanderson biased to St Nicolas Park/Weddington. I would like a true Consultation process) on options. choice of options - not just what the Council wants. This is not a choice. 231/29 Arbury Estate Smiths Gore Locality 6: comments in respect of SHS4 – North See response 592/1 Nuneaton Strategic Housing Site SHS4 Notwithstanding any final decision on site selection, the Council will work with landowners and developers to • For reasons stated above, we object to the scale of ensure delivery of the site or whether other options are housing proposed in this location, which represents a required. very significant proportion of the planned housing land supply for the Borough; • The location is distant from both existing and proposed employment areas, meaning that increased travel patterns will emerge via an already-congested town centre to places of work and the M6 to the south; • The main access route to the town centre and employment areas rests on a single route over the railway line near Nuneaton Station; • There are significant risks of so much of the planned housing land supply being concentrated in a single location. Is there a fall-back position in the event of this site not being delivered or delivering less housing or over a longer time period?; • We are unsure whether the housing market will support such a large level of housing in a single location and this concentration offers limited choice to those that do wish to buy a new house in Nuneaton; • We understand this site is in multiple ownership and requires significant infrastructure provision in the form of 8

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent a northern bypass. These factors will not assist viability or delivery; and • We believe this proposed allocation should be significantly reduced in scale. 584/1 B. & D. Boote Object to the number of houses proposed in the See response 592/1 Weddington / St Nicolas Park area of Nuneaton. The huge scale of the development will have an enormous impact on everyone in the area and also the owners of the new properties. 584/2 B. & D. Boote Motorists driving through our town will also face chaos See response 94/1 as the already busy roads will be swamped with extra traffic. The new roads and islands proposed will not deal with the chaos of a possible 3000 extra vehicles. Anyone who lives in or commutes through the area at present will testify to the already overcrowded road network. 584/5 B. & D. Boote Please reconsider the size of the development before it See response 592/1 is too late and you destroy our town. 620/2 B. Vernon My main concern is the increase in traffic that would be See response 94/1 generated with such a large housing development in the Weddington area. At certain times of the day the road system is currently unable to cope; Leicester Road bridge is the only access into the town for people from Hinckley Road, Weddington and St Nicolas Park Estate, and when they converge, traffic comes to a standstill. How can the system be expected to cope with further traffic? 702 Barry Grant N Housing See responses 592/1 and 229/2 (section 5) on retail There is great discrepancy between the Locality Areas. growth. Weddington and St Nicolas has been illogically chosen for most of the development. Most of the employment prospects are on the other side of the Leicester Road Bridge. Weddington already has 500 homes approved, and it would be better if the extra homes were provided in another location. I know that there are jobs planned at MIRA, but Hinckley is planning development to cover this.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

Farming The amount of food produced in this country is dropping, and the world market is increasing in price due to various reasons. It is wrong to ignore this fact, but there is no mention of this in the Plan.

Transport There is very little public transport in the Borough. I am sure the Council will not subsidise bus services to enable workers to get to the station. I had to walk 1.5 miles each way to get to Nuneaton Station for twenty years. If I had worked on one of the other industrial areas it would have been impossible. There should be a footpath between Nuneaton and Bermuda.

Community Facilities Where is the provision of public houses and sports facilities within walking distance of Weddington.

Nuneaton Town Centre We already have enough charity shops. Another two Rope Walks will not help. It would be better to maintain the entertainment facilities. I was not able to park near enough for long enough for a charity concert. Please open up the town centre for cars in the evening.

Schools Why is the school development in a different location to the housing development? 87/2 Bobbins N/A Expect that some houses will be built in these areas. To See responses 592/1 and 291/3 (Comments on Weddington build 3326 extra homes north of Nuneaton is completely Consultation process) in options. ward out of scale with what is already there. Effectively doubles the size of Weddington and St Nicolas Park. Quality of life in these areas will suffer due to noise, pollution, traffic, distance from open spaces. No other options proposed.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 101/1 Brian & N/A Strongly object to Borough Plan. Volume of traffic See response 592/1 Margaret travelling on the Hinckley Road in and out of Nuneaton Morgans is atrocious with long queues and exasperated motorists, particularly at peak times. The road becomes totally gridlocked. The road and rail infrastructure for this area is already under tremendous pressure and so completely inadequate to cater for extra traffic due to new housing in the area. Building 3,000 homes means sacrificing valuable Green Belt resulting in catastrophic impact on flora and wildlife, and depriving children from play areas which are very limited in this vicinity. 35/1 C. Bradbury N/A Too much land has been allocated in this area for See response 592/1 proposed new dwellings. Agree that some will be required, but 3000 new homes is excessive, and I would like to see a reduction of new dwellings, and the area allocated to it. Concerned about the traffic. Appreciate road capacity is set to be increased, but do not believe this to be sufficient to support so many extra vehicles. Traffic problems in this area are mainly caused by the knock-on effect of motorway incidents on the A5/M6, where traffic diverts through Nuneaton. New road infrastructure will make little difference to these common-place incidents. 3000 new dwellings will make the problem worse, as the volume of traffic will increase significantly. 621/3 C. Burrows N/A 3000 houses, by far the largest of any site, on land North See response 592/1 of Nuneaton will destroy the rural aspect and identity of the area and quickly lead to the joining of Nuneaton and Hinckley. What evidence is there that these houses are needed? Travel into town will involve the Leicester Road Bridge and approach routes - at gridlock now at many times of the day. Need for housing to support the MIRA development has been hugely exaggerated. Many workers will not want to live in Nuneaton as there is nothing to attract them. Industrial scale housing does not create sustainable 11

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent communities. 400/1 C. Elkerton Disagree with the proposal of allocating what seems a See response 94/1 large percentage of new houses being built in the Weddington area. I understand they need to be built somewhere but Weddington's road network can barely support the traffic as it is. I also have environmental concerns regarding the surrounding area. I feel that as Weddington is a desirable area, the decision to allocate housing there may be a financial one. Any houses built in this area would be worth considerably more than if they were built in a less desirable part of the town. I am not saying do not build any houses in Weddington, what I am saying is the proposed amount seems disproportionate compared to other areas. 232/1 C. French N/A Excessive amount of housing proposed for this area. See response 592/1 Weddington Road and Higham Lane are already gridlocked at rush hour times. To rely heavily on the MIRA development would be rash. 411/1 C. Perkins N/A Object to North of Nuneaton housing development: See response 94/1 Cause additional traffic congestion to Hinckley Road and the Long Shoot; Residents of Hinckley Road already suffer heavy traffic congestion during peak hours, sometimes takes several minutes to turn right out of my drive; adding 3000 potential users onto this stretch of road will result in lengthy traffic jams and increase the risk of accidents. 207/1 C. Saunders n/a The plan is far away from what the people of The Council has a strategy for bringing back into use Weddington want and need, there are currently enough empty homes, but these properties cannot be empty homes in the District. discounted from the housing target. 573/1 C. Wain N/A Proposed housing development at North of Nuneaton See response 94/1 will almost double the amount of traffic coming into Nuneaton. Roads already at capacity with traffic jams on Weddington Road, Higham Lane and Hinckley Road. At times cannot get out of our drive onto the main road. All 3 roads use Leicester Road Bridge and no improvements are part of the Plan. Air quality in this

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent area will worsen, especially for those with respiratory problems and affect children. 397/2 C. Whitmore Selection of SHS4 North Nuneaton for up to 3000 See responses 592/1 and 09/1 (Section 11 Whitestone homes is an unrealistic target for the following reasons: and Bulkington) on Eastern Relief Road. 1. The majority of identified employment opportunities are in the south of Nuneaton.

2. Any increase in Housing in this location will put strain on the existing road infrastructure, of particular concern would be Weddington Road, Higham Lane, The Long Shoot/ Hinckley Road , Eastboro Way. All of these routes at peak time are heavily congested and some are busy all of the time. The worst congestion, however, occurs around the Leicester Road Gyratory, at times causing “grid-lock” conditions through town and along the feeder roads.

3. Increased traffic congestion around the Leicester Road Gyratory will worsen air quality in that area. a. Mitigation attempts to improve this problem can only be a partial success. The proposal of an Eastern Relief Road may handle some of the additional traffic but there will inevitably be increased flows from the SHS4 development as people drive into Nuneaton for shopping and entertainment. Of course flows will also exist as a result of commuter traffic as people journey south for work. b. An Eastern Relief road will worsen traffic congestion for people in that area and as indicated above will not solve the fundamental problem of the Leicester Road Gyratory. 397/3 C. Whitmore The selection of SHS4 is not consistent with the Taking account of the NPPF, the evidence base “Evidence Based Recommendations for Allocation studies and previous consultation, the content of the Preferred Options document was informed by the cross 1. Referring to “Strategic Housing Site Selection party Member Working Group with Cabinet approving Summary Background Paper” the document for consultation. 2. Referring to “Agenda Item NO. 6 (Report to: Cabinet – 13

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Wednesday 22nd May 2013)

Use evidence to support allocation of Housing rather than the working party’s “view” on how allocation should be distributed. If the working party believes that the evidential allocation is incorrect, then support that “view” with contrary evidence of equal or greater probity to the original evidence. 391 Carol Strip N/A Feel strongly that the new housing development north of See response 592/1 St Nicolas Park & Weddington should not go ahead on this valuable farmland. Other sites which seem to be ignored are available within the Borough, within easy reach of the existing infrastructure, enabling people to commute to their place of work without putting unnecessary traffic on our local roads.

Families living on this new development would not be able to place their children in the local school; these are already full to capacity. This would force parents with their children to travel to schools in other parts of the Borough.

The Leicester Road Bridge does not cope with existing traffic; any increase would make it far worst, with many families having to travel to schools and place of work outside their area.

Air quality around The Leicester Road Bridge is already above the safe levels; any increase of traffic would make this situation worse.

It would also have an impact on this valuable farmland no longer taking the existing increase of surface rain water due to climate change, causing possible flooding problems for existing house holders.

We would no long have control of our local area by not

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent addressing the above problems in a sensible way, and building these houses in an area that would have less impact on our environment. 253 Charlotte Currently Nuneaton is not the best to travel in. During See responses 379/1 (Comments on consultation Littlehales rush hour, cars sit bumper to bumper along Weddington process) and 592/1. Road, Leicester Road bridge, Old Hinckley Road and The calculations for how much new housing is needed Coton Road. Frequently when accidents happen on the to be found on greenfield sites take account of A444, M6, or A5, Nuneaton becomes grid locked. You continuing projects such as those at Camp Hill and cannot travel down Higham Lane, The Long Shoot, other sites with planning permission. Eastboro Way, or the usual trouble hot spots. If we are to put an extra 7000 homes in Nuneaton (lets predict that most homes have 2 cars) and an extra 14,000 cars on the road at peak times, how on earth will we cope with this?!

The housing plan to plonk 3326 homes within St Nicolas area doesn't add up. The plan expects employment to increase, yet the only areas put forward for warehousing and development are on the other side of town at Bermuda? So low paid earners (because the houses will be affordable) are expecting to commute across a gridlocked town to work.

My big concern is at the moment, the outside of Milby School, Higham Lane, etc. are vey dangerous. There is not enough parking for parents/carers dropping off children. If we are to build a relief road that runs parallel to the A5 from The Long Shoot to Weddington Road, this will increase the problem. I fear that we will have another deadly junction as we have near the Redgate Pub where the A5 meets Higham Lane. If we are packing in so many more homes, we expect these roads to be safe. Children need to be able to walk to school safely.

Schools within the St Nic area are packed to capacity. Is there really a primary and secondary school planned, or

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent will this die once you start building, and its too late to stop development?

I live on Milby Drive and my garden backs onto the land which will be developed on. Currently during wet months my garden is prone to flooding. Whilst this isn't too much of a problem as it doesn't reach the back door, I'm concerned that with the housing planned my garden will be flooded more, or indeed flood my home. I also know that the fields are often under water; are sufficient plans in place to stop flooding?

Currently there are some old trees in the fields at the bottom of my garden, will the plans consider these, or will they be killed? There is a patch of conservation land which is home to multiple wildlife at the end of Milby Drive, Higham Lane end. What are the plans for this area?

With such an increase in population, a park / playing fields must be put there for children/walkers, etc.

I believe that the home owners whose property is on the boundaries of the NBBC plans should be consulted directly. Once building starts there, homes will be vulnerable to crime. Also it would be unfair to put high fences, etc., at the bottom of their gardens. We need to know if public footpaths will be there.

Public transport needs to be improved.

Camp Hill developments don't appear to be finished. Why are we starting new projects and leaving areas unfinished.

I'm concerned that Nuneaton has 1000's of homes planned, when Bedworth only has a few 100. Why is

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent there such inequality between the two, is there inequality on the NBBC?

Historically plans to build on the St Nicolas / Weddington area land were declined. What has changed to override the original plans?

On speaking with friends / neighbours, I have not spoken with one person that approves of the plans. I'm horrified to discover that many friends plan to leave Nuneaton in the future as the plans will destroy the town.

I'm unhappy with how information has been shared. I have only learnt about NBBCs plans from opposing councillors. I have had to seek the information to be able to form my own opinions. I have found the NBBC website information difficult to understand, and not easy to use. I can't help but think that this is the NBBC intention so that the people of Nuneaton and Bedworth are not informed, before it is too late to oppose the plans.

Nuneaton has beautiful countryside; it looks as though the council plan to build on every patch of land available. I was born in Nuneaton 34 years ago. During my twenties I lived in Northampton and London. However, I chose to come back to Nuneaton to raise my family. I'm concerned that NBBC council are ruining my home, my town, and I will no longer wish to raise my family here. 349/2 Cllr Jeff Warwickshire The consultation is flawed. Not least the number of See response 592/1 Clarke County houses proposed for East Nuneaton and the minimal Council amount of information on infrastructure to serve them. Current highway problems at The Long Shoot / A5 area junctions (long queues), Hinckley Road / Leicester Road Bridge area (AQMA) and access to Town Centre services is a problem many residents face on a daily basis. None of the proposals address the current issues

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent and will create further gridlock in the North Nuneaton area for long periods of the day. The roads that are proposed have a link road status for joining the estates together and will inevitably become rat runs for traffic trying to travel through the town. 350 - Section Cllr Keith The massive transport problems in this locality are See response 94/1. C Kondakor produced by the constrained gyratory system of Old The land opposite Horeston Grange shopping centre Hinckley Road, Leicester Road & Weddington Road, was considered for housing but was ruled out. The land along with the Leicester Road bridge being the only way meets four of the five purposes of Green Belt and is across the West Coast mainline to the town centre. important for providing sepration between Nuneaton and Hinckley. This is also an Air Quality Monitoring Area (AQMA) that There is no evidence to support a railway station at is only keeping below EU limits for Nox due to the Horeston Grange. recession. The addition of 3000 homes on top of those It is recognised that Whitacre Road Industrial Estate is approved but not built would clearly produce an in need of investment. The Council is working with unacceptable and immoral increase in pollution in the WCC to identify, amongst other things, road AQMA and wider area. Even without any additional improvements. However, an assessment of viability will allocations in the locality, the plan should be attempting also need to be undertaken. to reduce the traffic in the AQMA. We need a stronger Circumstances have changed since the existing policy requiring any development within the Borough to employment sites were initially assessed. It is fully mitigate for its impact on the two AQMAs. suggested that Policy ECON1 is changed. If there is information to confirm that the site is no longer suitable District centre for employment use it will not continue to be allocated The only sensible location to allocate a small amount of for employment land. It is proposed that an additional housing in the locality is the field opposite the employment land review will trigger this. district centre (site H95 on my map). This is the only Policies INF2 Green Infrastructure and INF3 location with more than 5 buses each way from the Sustainable Transport support improving the walking, town. Any development should be small scale and cycling and public transport networks. These are issues include significant provision for people over 65 years. that will continue to be discussed with service providers through the development of the IDP and Locality based The plan should also protect land to build a new railway policies. station for Horeston Grange (T3 on Map).

Employment The Whitacre Road industrial estate needs a rear exit onto Attleborough Fields so that traffic can avoid residential streets and the AQMA.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

The site of Abbey Metal finishing and other nearby waste grounds need to be re-used.

Green Infrastructure Work on upgrading green track in Weddington is already happening as part of MIRA project. We need an extensive cycling network and access to the north east side of the main railway station. This should be an interchange point for bus services through the locality. 350 - Section Cllr Keith Housing See response 592/1 C Kondakor In terms of infrastructure, it is agreed that without a Plans to allocate an additional 3,000 homes to the plan in place, it is difficult to collect contributions for locality are totally unsound. This plan would produce strategic infrastructure requirements. unacceptable levels on pollution in the AQMA. The The site selection process was based on the best allocation ignores recent outline permissions for a total information available at the time of writing. The Council of 510 homes north of Nuneaton. This would be more is continuing to work with service delivery partners to than enough for any local impact of MIRA expansion. identify supporting infrastructure requirements based on the most up to date information. Homes north of Nuneaton need significantly more The accessibility measures by walking and public infrastructure than any other options. Other locations are transport are average measures for a range of close to major bus routes and new railway stations. services. The Council will review the measures and Building new roads to support SHS4 would be very consider whether further work is required. This was one expensive and unsustainable. By the time the plan could of a number of criteria used to select sites. possibly be adopted, there will not be enough development without permission to support the vast cost.

All employment and new rail station focused on Bermuda, which is therefore the best location for new housing.

The site selection process was dishonest. The doctors' surgery on St Nicolas Park no longer exists, and time to locations such as the hospital were far too quick. 122/1 Colette n/a My initial concern is that there only seems to be one See response 591/2. Rushton proposed option, which is to build over 3,000 homes in a 19

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent relatively small area. Surely a range of options should be The content of the Preferred Options document was presented for people to comment on? informed by the cross party Member Working Group, Secondly, living in the Weddington area where the with Cabinet approving the document for consultation. majority of the new homes are supposedly being built, I have significant concerns about the negative impact this will have on residents in this area, especially those of us with young families. Traffic is obviously a major concern. Crossing Higham Lane in the morning is already extremely hazardous as there is no pedestrian crossing or a lollipop man/lady. The thought of the traffic increasing in volume is highly concerning, and I believe that there will be an increase in road traffic accidents in the area, especially at these busy times of the day. Also, traffic is continually queuing along Weddington Road and onto the one way system into town, and traffic is also heavy along the Long Shoot, through the St Nicolas Park Estate and into the Crowhill/Whitestone area. Adding such a vast number of new properties into this area is going to completely cease up the traffic situation in an area that is already congested. My next major concern is regarding schools in the area. Both the primary and secondary schools are well attended and most years are over subscribed. However from looking at school admissions, it appears that there are many infant and primary schools in the Bedworth area that are consistently failing to fill their school places, and numbers on role in this area are reducing year on year. Therefore it would surely make sense to look at building some houses in this area, rather than clumping them all together in a very small area of Nuneaton? Finally, I have to say I find it very concerning that those councillors who are part of the Borough Plan working group are not councillors who represent the residents of the areas that are due to be affected. This makes me wonder how transparent and fair this process is.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 334/1 Colin Orchard Steel Pro Increased traffic will exacerbate the problems facing See response 94/1 & Heather businesses on Whitacre Road, Oaston Road and Pennington Weddington Terrace due to daily gridlock from the one- way system at the Leicester Road bridge. 334/1 Colin Orchard Steel Pro Plan should not propose building on valuable farmland See responses 592/1 and 208/1 & Heather as future food shortages are predicted and home grown Pennington produce will be required. People want to buy locally produced food which would disappear if land was developed. There are still a number of brownfield sites such as NB14 near Judkins Quarry that have not been allocated for housing, which should be built on before any farmland. 334/1 Colin Orchard Steel Pro Objection to the improvements to Buttermere Recreation One of the aims of the Plan (and the Open Space & Heather Ground and Change Brook Open Space. A few years Strategy) is that every resident has access to a Pennington back the play equipment and greenery were removed Community Park. To ensure that this standard is met it because of anti-social behaviour issues, reinstatement is necessary to improve Buttermere Recreation Ground would be a step backwards. and Change Brook Open Space so that they meet the standards in terms of quality and types of facilties required to be defined as a Community Park. 334/1 Colin Orchard Steel Pro Many new roads would be required in this option, none See response 94/1 & Heather of which would help with the existing congestion when Consider getting access into Nuneaton station from the Pennington attempting to get off the St nicolas Park Road onto Weddington side as part of the measures to be Leicester Road/Long Shoot. No plan to get into the included in the sustainable transport package. railway station from the Weddington side without going over Leicester Road Bridge. The additional traffic will undoubtedly increase air pollution; already above the national guidelines/levels. 334/1 Colin Orchard Steel Pro Includes a suitable landscaping approach to reduce See response 592/1. & Heather prominence of building developments. The mass of new Investigate foot and mouth claims at Top Farm. Pennington homes would highlight the detriment to Nuneaton, not improvement. Suggested road developments would add to the volume that already exists and blights the people of the area. Leicester Road, M69 motorway and A5 trunk road are already in close proximity.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent We should reduce traffic, not increase it. The health of the community in my opinion hasn't been considered. In conclusion, the proposed area is prone to flooding and new development could make flooding even worse. There are a number of homes built on shale, that with ground changes could lead to subsidence issues. Top Farm had cattle buried in unlined pit during foot and mouth epidemic. A number of cattle were later found to be over 5 years old and should not have been buried due to BSE risks. Confirming we feel fewer new homes are needed in the area, and all brownfield sites should be used before any other developments take place. 158/1 D. Lucas Object to the town plan as it unfairly discriminates See response 94/1 against Weddington & St Nicolas in as much as almost all the proposed housing developments will be in this one area of the Borough. The Town Plan is unfairly biased towards the southern area of the Borough. The extra houses that are claimed to be needed should be spread more evenly throughout the Borough. 158/4 D. Lucas I also object to the vast amount of traffic that will be See response 94/1 generated on the A47 Long Shoot, a road that is already gridlocked during the morning and evening periods of commuting.

The Long Shoot is not as wide as claimed at the proposed junctions into the new housing estates; HGVs use the Longshoot to go to and from the local industrial estates and supermarkets. There is insufficient room for a right turn lane into these proposed developments. Serious accidents will occur.

The Long Shoot cannot take the extra traffic that the proposed developments will produce, nor can the single route into the town centre. People will shop and work in Hinckley instead. The Long Shoot must be made wider to allow for a turning lane, or traffic islands installed. The 22

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent current speed of traffic on The Long Shoot will create an extremely dangerous situation. The local police cannot control the speeding currently; reducing the speed limit to 30mph will have no effect as the current 40mph limit is generally ignored. 402/2 D. Quinn My concerns are for locality 6: Weddington and St The Issues and Options document did not make any Nicolas. I object to the proposal. specific proposals for Weddington and St Nicolas, Arbury or Bedworth Woodlands. Building 3000 homes. The evidence based See response 94/1 recommendation of the previous Borough Plan in 2009 did not include this number; it appears you have moved all building from Arbury and The Woodlands to locality 6. You should return some of this number to utilise job opportunities and existing services as well as road and public transport links. 402/6 D. Quinn I walk my dogs on land leading onto Weddington fields See response 592/1 and walkways back to Higham Lane. The loss of green space does not allow the Borough to utilise brownfield space, for example the land left by the chemical plant on the A444. You will be taking the outskirts of the Borough and making it more of a built up area than Abbey and Wembrook. The people living in the homes adjacent to the new wider A5 will not have sufficient protection from noise as the road is at the highest point and the wind will make a 12 foot high bank of little consequence. 402/7 D. Quinn You will be taking the outskirts of the Borough and See response 592/1. making it more of a built up area than Abbey and The Council has worked with service delivery partners Wembrook. to identify suitable local infrastructure, such as schools, healthcare and roads, required to support the new I want to see more of the new infrastructure go in before development proposed. This information, as was house building starts, not after it’s completed. known at the time of writing, was provided in the Locality policies and in more detail in the Infrastructure More development could take place on brownfield sites, Delivery Plan. The Council is continuing to work with i.e. the old chemical works on the A444. The council service delivery partners to update this information and needs to look into clearing and making safe that land. to identify where it will be located and when it will be Move Higham Lane School out onto a bigger purpose- delivered. This work will inform the Pre-Submission

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent built site higher up Higham Lane, appropriate for future version of the Borough Plan. generations and 1500 plus pupils possible; even amalgamate Etone School. Then you would have a large brownfield area suitable for house building on bus routes and roads and not far from the town centre to use the services, shops, clubs, roads, etc. already in place. 591/1 D. Wilcox It makes more sense to either spread any development See response 94/1 evenly around existing areas of town or join up Bedworth and Nuneaton - they are one Borough anyway. 591/2 D. Wilcox Spreading development makes more sense for the road See responses 94/1, 592/1 and 402/7 system. The bridge into town cannot cope with at least 4,500 cars. It is already difficult getting to town in morning for work; Higham Lane, Weddington Road and Hinckley Road especially, as all jobs and infrastructure are on the other side of town.

Doctors surgery on Leics. Road is one example. It takes 2-3 weeks to get an appointment already. 591/3 D. Wilcox Look to develop brownfield sites in and around town See responses 233/1 and 418/1. centre. Young people would live in flats like the ones in the centre of Leics. by the House of Fraser which are surrounded by restaurants and cafes. 591/4 D. Wilcox We cannot keep building on our farmland, should we See response 592/1 have an international catastrophe how would we feed our overpopulated nation without sufficient farms and means to support ourselves. 98/1 David N/A Putting 3000 homes into Weddington and St Nicolas is See response 592/1 Bloodworth disproportionate: - It destroys the vast majority of green space in the area. What is the point of more walk and cycleways if there is no countryside left to enjoy in the area. - Despite the planned measures to reduce traffic impact, adding 5000 more cars must exacerbate the existing peak hour congestion problems on The Long Shoot and A5. How will the northern relief road link to Eastboro Way, and what impact will improvements to the A5 do to

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent help congestion, given that works done in the 1990s did little to improve the situation? 276/1 David n/a So much of the prime farmland will be lost, despite the See response 592/1 Johnson need for extra food production due a rising population. The number of dwellings should be reduced by 2/3rds. The number of homes will give a huge traffic increase and the road system seems very optimistic in terms of flow, i.e. congestion and safety. With little employment in the Borough, the prospect of a large population increase concentrated in a small area can only lead to traffic, safety and pollution problems. Is Nuneaton capable of coping with the increase in requirements for medical and educational services? 313/1 Derrick n/a Extensive damage on the green area. There is no See response 592/1 Raybould reliable evidence to support the suggested number of homes, and the area is currently very depressed with few job opportunities. There is insufficient infrastructure in the plan to support the proposed development. There are already substantial delays in the area, especially in peak hours. There is also a bottle neck at the railway bridge which is often gridlocked. 540/3 Dr Alan N/A Consider the comments made in 2009 are still relevant See response 592/1 Srbljanin and wishes these also to be considered.

This whole section on spatial options contains little information upon which any reasonable person might rationally chose between options. There appears to be no explanation of the potential impacts of the different options and how these might be prioritised. If citizens accept the need to accomodatethe levels of growth in the RSS, we need to understand what are the trade-offs in the various locations. Are we interested in optimising the impacts of climate change; reducing congestion; improving air quality; enhancing civic welfare; job creation, etc. In the absence of any robust information to inform such a debate, any choice must be subjective

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent and arbitrary. In the absence of robust data my sentiment would be to support small urban extensions 540/4 Dr Alan N/A Recent housing growth nationally and locally has seen a The joint SHMA and work on viability for specifying the Srbljanin proliferation of flats. We need to ensure a more type, size and tenure of new housing required has balanced pattern of housing stock and tenure. This been used. This will be set out in the Affordable pattern of flat building combined with the growth of HMO Housing (HOU1) and Range and Mix (HOU2) policies. when it occurs in small areas, has in some cases Policy ENV3 Urban Character and Design Quality, fundamentally altered the character of neighbourhoods requires the design and layout of new development to and reduced the quality of life for many communities as take account of local character and distinctiveness. they adjust to transient populations not rooted in their The purpose of the structural landscape buffer is to local communities. retain the existing landscape character within the design and layout of the new development. In this The insensitive building of flats as 'infill' has negatively case, it includes retaining and reinforcing hedgerows transfigured the character of the built environment when and hedgerow trees to filter views of the new urban the form and mass of the building does not edge. The Land Use Designations Study also makes it sympathetically sit in the urban landscape. Good clear that a farmland buffer should be retained. The sympathetic design improves the profile of Pre-Submission document will make this clear. Also, neighbourhoods. We should be more sympathetic to the consider specific walking and cycling routes. existing street scene.

The boundary of NBBC runs directly up to the A5 and Hinckley where massive development is taking place. The council should consider creating a green 'tree corridor' running parallel to the A5 to make a physical separation barrier between the two settlements. Designed well this could provide a walking/cycling corridor linking into existing green paths and provide landscape and environmental benefits for both settlements. 223 E. & J. Key points from YouTube video: See response 592/1 Johnson This is first and last time we will see hay being bailed

It's wrong to build houses on farmland

The farmer will lose his job

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent We don't need more houses; lots of people have homes

We need more farms for animals

Wildlife in area = magpies, bats, foxes

Will have to knock down bushes

Destroying wildlife; have no place for breeding

Council are idiots

Building homes is mean 107/2 E. Morris N/A Overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of See response 94/1 development in Locality 6. Of the 5,437 new houses specified, 4,781 (about 90%) are in Nuneaton and 3000 of those are in Locality 6. Even excluding the already agreed development of 326 homes to the west of the A444 at Church Fields, Weddington and omitted from the Plan. Suggest a more proportionate division of development between Nuneaton and Bedworth and within Nuneaton. 107/3 E. Morris N/A The plan is misleading. 326 houses at Church Fields, The maps focuses on the Borough Plan proposals Weddington are not shown on the map, giving a rather than permissions already granted which are not misleading impression that the amount of development subject to consultation. Supporting documents provide in Locality 6 is not as massively disproportionate as it details about sites with valid planning permissions, e.g. really is. Map - The colour used to show development in 5 year land supply statement. Locality 6 is not the same as used in other locality areas The similar colours for allotments and proposed and is closer to the colour used for allotments strategic housing sites was a technical issue that will elsewhere. Re-do the consultation showing the true be resolved for the Pre-submission version. It is not the situation of all proposed and already agreed intention to develop allotment sites. developments in locality 6 and to amend the map to show correct and consistent colouring throughout all locality areas. 619/1 E. Vernon Very concerned about the impact the Borough Plan will See response 592/1 have on the local wildlife. Currently much of the land in

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the Weddington Area is agricultural land and is home to many birds and mammals, including foxes, pheasants, rabbits and partridges, as well as birds of prey. 619/2 E. Vernon As a child I often walked along the public path with my See response 592/1 parents and Cub Scout leaders. How do we expect the next generation to experience the wonders of nature? We criticize the destruction of the rainforest yet this plan is Nuneaton's equivalent. I truly believe a child that is brought up caring for nature develops into a caring individual. 619/3 E. Vernon I am sure there are brownfield sites that could be used See response 233/1 for development. Question the numbers and type of houses required. This needs to be reconsidered. 341/1 Elizabeth n/a The proposal to plan 3000 homes north of St Nicolas See responses 592/1 and 418/1. Pope Park and Weddington is unrealistic. The area is already suffering from long delays with traffic at peak times and especially when the schools are open. The Long Shoot, Milby Drive, Higham Lane and Weddington Lane all are terribly congested already. When the M6 motorway has an accident, all traffic is then also diverted into and around the A5, and also around or through Nuneaton Town Centre. This backlog then results in further delays. Realistically how could an extra 3000 homes with at least one car each (but more likely two per house), have any chance of moving their vehicles anywhere? The ongoing air pollution and air quality must be closely monitored for the benefit of all that live here. Everybody is important, but for those that are young, elderly and those already with health needs, do deserve the right to enjoy better and improved health. Air quality will be seriously affected by the impact of such an expanse of housing and resulting traffic. There will be added pressure on local schools, health centres and GP surgeries. Has this also been taken into account? Are there plans to build new schools, a health centre and a GP surgery to accommodate all the

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent new housing? Will there be a local shop or shops? If not, how will they access the town centre easily? Has there been a discussion about alternative plans? Has there been a thought that there may be brownfield sites to build on? Has thought been given to revitalising the town and using some of the closed, run down shops for housing? 86/1 F. Williams Object to the proposal of an extra 3000 houses north of See response 592/1 St Nicolas Park and Weddington. These are my reasons: 1) The planning process seems to have been handled in a very under-hand way that has not taken on board local residents objections. 2) I do not feel that Nuneaton's infrastructure can take all these extra houses, transport, children into existing schools, etc. For example the ring road in Nuneaton Town Centre cannot cope now at rush hour with the existing level of traffic, nor the A5 heading towards Hinckley. Just imagine the chaos with even more cars! 3) Building on farmland is a real shame and will have a big impact on local ecology. 4) Further pollution will be caused due to an increase in traffic. 672/7 G. Mitchell AR Cartwright No objection in principle to a strategic housing site to the See response 592/1 Ltd North of Nuneaton, but object to the scale of development, i.e. 3000 dwellings. Inadequate Bedworth Woodlands is ruled out because, in April consideration has been given to the infrastructure 2012, Full Council confirmed its commitment to requirements for this location, in particular sustainable designate Bedworth Woodlands as Green Belt. links into Nuneaton Town Centre. The scale of development is at odds with the proposals for Gipsy Lane is ruled out as the land meets 4 of the 5 employment which are broadly focused to the south. The purposes of Green Belt and is important for retaining largest employment location is Coventry, and North of separation between Nuneaton and Bedworth. Nuneaton is the most remote location from this. Reduce this allocation to a maximum of about 1200- Galley Common is ruled out as the sites identified 1400 dwellings and redistribute the balance to other through the SHLAA were not of a sufficient size for a sustainable locations such as Bedworth Woodlands, strategic urban extension, the location is relatively 29

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Gipsy Lane, Galley Common and Gipsy Lane, peripheral or isloated, and poorly located in terms of Nuneaton. services and facilities, it is less likley to support a step change in public transport along a north/south corridor, and it is not in close proximity to existing or future employment sites.

Further details are set out in the Site Selection and Green Belt Background Papers. 60/1 G. Oseland N/A Building 3000 new homes in Locality 6 is excessive. Too See response 592/1 and 208/1 much development concentrated in one small area of the Borough. Will cause excessive disturbance over a long period and is unfair to existing residents. Residential development should be more spread around the town, e.g. at Whitestone off Wentworth Drive, behind Oberon Close and around Bulkington. Allocate brownfield land around Judkins landfill site for housing. 701 Gary N/A The plan appears to be ill-conceived at best, and a See responses 592/1, 229/2 (section 5) on retail growth Edmonds complete farce at worst! The prediction of the and 291/3 (Comments on Consultation process) on employment growth is impossible to achieve, and is only options. included within the plan to support the overestimation of the number of houses which the council claim need to be built. To place virtually all the new houses in one area, i.e. north of Weddington, defies belief, and cannot be supported by the 'evidence' provided by the council.

With the proposal of over 3,000 new houses in this area, it is not an exaggeration to predict that the number of new cars will be in the region of 4,000 to 5,000. The majority of these vehicles will no doubt need to use Leicester Road bridge and the surrounding roads. The current infrastructure CANNOT cope during peak times at the present time, let alone with the additional influx. There have been many areas within the Borough that have been identified as potential sites for development; it is these sites which should be utilised, and not greenfield sites!

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent The proposed plan needs to be re-thought, even scrapped, and the process started again, but this time with the involvement all the residents of the Borough. The residents have a right to be consulted on ALL possible options, and it is an insult for us to be shown only one plan, the plan that the council prefers. There are so many 'holes' in the Borough Plan, flaws that the council chooses to conveniently ignore. It really does defy belief. It chooses to ignore air quality, the lack of housing in and around the town centre, the development of 2 new shopping centres when the existing Ropewalk is an unmitigated disaster. The list goes on and on.

The council can prove to the residents of the Borough that it acknowledges the fact that 'They' are our representatives by listening to and accepting the many concerns we all have, and throws out this ludicrous plan, and implements other workable options. 388/2 Gerard Gray N/A The land between Weddington Road/Lane, the A5 and The Borough Plan will replace the current adopted local The Long Shoot is covered by a restrictive policy - Env3 plan (including policy ENV 3). Given the need to plan of the local plan. In such areas, there is a general for the economic, social and environmental needs of presumption against development that would change the the Borough, it is necessary to develop some general character and openness of the area. When I greenfield sites. sought to develop a site in one such area by the See response 94/1 regarding transport matters demolition of two dwellings and the rebuilding of three See response 382/1 regarding linkages with new dwellings, I presented a feasibility report outlining employment sites. my development plans. I received a reply which states See response 179/1 regarding wider infrastructure that in the planning officer's opinion planning permission matters. is not likely to be granted as this would change the general character of the area from being countryside. The Planning Officer further went on to say that only replacement of the existing dwellings is likely to be acceptable and that the massing and scale of the properties should be kept to a low level and should not be overly high. The Officer expressed that SPECIAL attention should be made in respect of the design which should be high quality, reflecting the position in OPEN

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent COUNTRYSIDE. When is open countryside not considered or covered by a restrictive policy Env3 ?

If the above Borough planned proposal is implemented, these houses shall be too remote from places of work, and the existing or proposed infrastructure will be unable to cope with the additional volume of traffic. This additional traffic will cause unnecessary misery when commuting, which in turn will create much more air pollution on all the main routes through and around Nuneaton. I and many more people of the Borough appreciate that you have a difficult task ahead to provide for the shortfall in housing. Show a duty of care to the people of the Borough by spreading the additional housing stocks evenly between the two areas that are: Nuneaton and Bedworth. 366/1 Graham n/a The proposed massive increase in housing numbers will, See response 592/1 Hinton without doubt, result in a large number of vehicles adding to the existing havoc caused by the huge volume of traffic already using the roads in the immediate area, ie. the A5, Longshoot, Hinckley Road and Eastboro Way, causing even worse gridlock at certain times of the day. The railway bridge is also a pinch point which comes to a standstill at peak times. As for the suggestion that such housing is for people working in the area, it seems inconceivable that building houses north of the town will be of any help at all when most employment opportunities are at industrial estates and Coventry which are south of the town. The proposed sites off the Long Shoot are prone to flooding, and as the definition of a pond is somewhere where water accumulates for more than 4 months then the field behind Callendar Close would qualify. One wonders how all the services such as schools and doctors surgeries, already grossly oversubscribed, will cope with a further influx of people. As for support for the Horeston Grange shopping area, the car park is

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent almost always near full during business hours already, and there doesn't seem to be any room for expansion. We all know that at some time greenfield sites will be required for building but that should only happen when all brownfield sites have been used and then it should be land that is basically scrubland and of no practical use for food production. 261 H. Ralfe The loss of substantial amounts of countryside, in one of See response 592/1 the very few remaining areas in Nuneaton to have a reasonable balance of housing, will deny future generations the chance to enjoy living in a well-balanced environment.

Proposed number of houses to be built in the Weddington area are far too many to be sustained, even with the planned changes to roads/infrastructure, plus, will result in the loss of a substantial amount of countryside. Suggested that proposed number of new houses are reduced to ensure there is a far better balance in houses v. countryside, plus changes in infrastructure that do not have a detrimental impact on the area. 247 I Miskin Referring to the Borough Plan for Weddington and St See responses 94/1, 406/1 and 233/1 Nicolas, I feel that the idea to place 3000 homes in this area is ill thought out. The area has extreme road congestion presently, and adding this quantity of housing will only exacerbate the problem. I feel that there are other areas in Nuneaton and Bedworth that could accommodate some of this housing, and I suggest that the planners rethink this policy decision. 92/1 Iain Pailing N/A Object to Borough Plan. Little investigation has been See response 94/1 done about the congestion the plan would cause to roads around Nuneaton. To avoid chaos, massive investment is needed on the A5 between M42 and M69, a complete ring road built well away from the town centre, complete redesign of A4254 between Hinckley

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Road and Attleborough Fields industrial estate, major improvements around George Eliot Hospital and rebuilding the road between Attleborough and Five Arches bridge. Those making decisions have not seriously considered the impact of a development of this size, as they have pencilled in one new road and given no consideration to where all the school run vehicles will join the existing traffic system. Members have clearly not been on the roads between 7.30am to 9.30am or 3pm to 5pm when traffic is near gridlock at present without adding 3300 new homes in one place. 378 Ian Crewe N/A The number of homes planned for Weddington and St See response 592/1 Nicolas is out of proportion to the number of jobs The purpose of the structural landscape buffer is to indicated. retain the existing landscape character within the The roads in the area are already over capacity (your design and layout of the new development. In this road plan is at best out of date and numbers quoted do case, it includes retaining and reinforcing hedgerows not tie up with facts). and hedgerow trees to filter views of the new urban The bottlenecks that already exist you will make worse: edge. Leicester Road, Hinckley Road, The Long Shoot and It is accepted that SHS4 is not closely linked to the new The Long Shoot / A5 junction, Weddington Road/ A5. employment allocations within the Borough, however it Air quality in these areas is already poor and well above is located in close proximity to employment sites in health threatening levels. neighbouring authorities, e.g. MIRA. It is also well The employment figures quoted, if you can deliver them, located for existing and new employment opportunities need rethinking. Why are you only working at local in the town centre. council level. I think they are flawed and we need to The Plan encourages improvements to public transport, revisit them in a proper way. walking and cycling. Taking your figures as flawed, then the housing figures must be flawed - not so many required. Your plan requires a barrier between a housing estate and the A5, because of noise and nuisance. Can we in this day and age actually sanction building that is already classed as requiring barriers of whatever sort next to a housing estate? As most of the employment is on the Bedworth side of the Borough would it not make more sense to build houses over that side, encourage public transport usage , cycle paths, etc. to get to work, rather than making

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent people travel across the Borough. You have failed to give numbers on the rise in numbers of Fire, Police, Ambulance and A@E .

I object to this plan in its entirety. 713 Ian Grubb N/A I understand that the plan assumes growth of 4.5% per The level of growth is based on an assumption of 1.5% annum. I would be most interested to receive details for jobs growth per year creating an additional 12,000 jobs the basis of that figure as it sounds totally unrealistic. over the plan period. The approach taken towards economic growth is ambitious. Land has been The job creation forecast seems to be built on a sand allocated within the Preferred Option to meet this foundation, as it is based on the growth figure. growth level.

Can you please tell me the logic in locating the new See response 592/1. housing plan beside St Nicolas Park, when the 'new jobs' will be in the Bermuda area? Surely new housing should be closer to the jobs, consistent with them being environmentally positioned. Surely the Woodlands or Arbury would be far more appropriate to reduce road miles, congestion and pollution.

The most polluted location in Nuneaton is reported to be Hinckley Road by The Grange Health Centre. The new plan would significantly increase traffic past this spot, exacerbating the environmental problem already existing.

How will the single rail bridge into Nuneaton cope with the traffic increase plus the general increases forecast?

When will the road system in Nuneaton need updating due to increased road traffic?

With an additional 3000 houses, I understand at least 25% of them will be social housing. In view of the difficulty in selling new houses, what is the probable resulting percentage of social housing?

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent The proposed housing will require services. Has the Borough Plan taken into account the effect on schools, roads, drainage, sewers, bus services, health services, traffic pressure, rail services, bus services, fire services, pollution levels, waste disposal, etc. Which of these services have confirmed they can handle the increased load? 291/1 J & E Walker N/A Increased traffic congestion is inevitable given that the See response 592/1 Northern Relief Road connects to the frequently gridlocked Long Shoot and crosses Higham Lane and Weddington Lane, both also suffering from extreme traffic problems - all unlikely to improve air quality as claimed. Number of houses for St Nicolas / Weddington is disproportionate to the rest of the Borough, with near elimination of Green Belt to A5. 617/1 J. Cooper N/A Object to housing at North of Nuneaton: more homes See responses 592/1 and 207/1 are needed in the area but other sites are more suitable - town centre, brownfield and other areas that are not farmland or flood areas; concerned about effect on traffic - already a problem at peak times; building new homes and shops and resulting extra traffic will have a devastating impact on air quality; there is high unemployment in this area so who will live in these houses. Use unoccupied houses to accommodate people. 715/1 J. Foster The only solution to the problem of the Air Quality See response 94/1 Monitoring Zone would be the provision of a proper North/South by-pass to keep through traffic from the north away from the Leicester Road bridge.

Any building of homes north of the Leicester Road rail crossing, without significant expenditure on Highway Infrastructure, would only further add to this serious problem. 600 J. Gartland Prologis UK The SHS4 allocation is a suitable and sustainable Noted. Ltd location for residential development, with no technical

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent barriers to delivery and that the Council is correct in concluding that the site represents a location with the greatest potential to meet future housing needs in the Borough. The site should therefore come forward as a housing allocation for the Publication Draft of the Borough Plan

The site promoted by Prologis UK Ltd for residential development is available and could accomodate up to 400 new dwellings as well as delivering important new infrastructure to help unlock other adjoing sites as part of the wider Strategic Allocation. Therefore, it has the potetenial to make a significant contribution to meeting the Borough's Local Plan housing requirement. 600 J. Gartland Prologis UK Based on the freely available information and site Noted. Ltd specific documentation, it is considered that there would be a low risk of flooding posed to the site. Appropriate mitigation measures would address any low residual risk posed to future development and appropriate management of surface water run-off from development drainage, to include the use of SuDS, would ensure there would be no adverse impacts on flood risk elsewhere.

A formal planning application would need to be accompanied by a site specific Flood Risk Assessment to consider the latest National Planning Policy Framework guidance and latest available flood risk data. However, based on available information, the site would be considered suitable for promotion for development. 600 J. Gartland Prologis UK There is a report on the ecology of the site. It has Noted. Ltd identified the potential for protected species to be present as well as the presence of habitats of relatively greater ecological interest. Recommednations for further survery work to establish the presence or absence of these species, and hence the need for any mitigation 37

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent measures have been made.

It is considered that with good design, any need for mitigation measures could be accounted for, such that the development would be in line with relevant national and local planning policy. There is no evidence to suggest that there would be any overriding ecological constraints in relation to the development of the site. 600 J. Gartland Prologis UK There is a report on the traffic and transport feasibility Noted. The Council is working with the County Council Ltd study. Due to the sites location on the fringe of to determine transport requirements for the entire established residential areas, the range of education, strategic housing site at the North of Nuneaton. community, leisure and employment facilities within walking and cycling distance is considered to be extensive. Furthermore, the existing infrastructure to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians is of a good standard and enhanced linkages connecting to the site should be achievable as part of the development proposals

Bus facilities within the vicinity of the site are considered to be less than ideal, although the developer is aware that there is an opportunity to enhance provision to the site as part of the proposals. Nuneaton railway station is a feasible alternative to the car for residents who are prepared to walk, or for cyclists as part of a multi modal journey.

The most suitable location for access into the proposed development is via a new priority controlled junction on Higham Lane. An access solution has been designed which is in accordance with design criteria set out by Warwickshire County Council and the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges.

The predicted increases in traffic associated with the development are likely to result in the Local Highway Authority and Highways Agency requesting a full

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Transport Assessment as part of any Planning Application that is to be submitted.

In conclusion, based on site observations and the information available at this time, it is considered that there are no traffic and transportation issues that could not be overcome in relation to the proposed development. 600 J. Gartland Prologis UK A site promotion document summarises the policy Noted. Ltd context, the local context, strategic constraints, the site, deliverability, the vision, social and economic benefits, and conclusions and next steps.

The site promotion document demonstrates how the land at Higham Lane, to the north east of the Nuneaton urban area can be an appropiate location to accomodate a proportion of the required growth in the Borough, potentially delivering up to 400 dwellings, with the potential to integrate with development on adjacent land. 79 J. Hardwick Strongly object to strategic housing for 3000 homes at See response 592/1 North Nuneaton & Northern Relief Road and Eastern Relief Road

The planned relief roads will cause even more congestion onto already congested roads.

Do not believe that the Nuneaton Area needs such a huge number of houses. 687/12 J. Hedgley Callendar Support the northern extension site including the Noted. Farm Ltd Callendar Farm land. The inclusion of land at North of Nuneaton within the Preferred Options is appropriate, justified, effective, deliverable, consistent with national policy and soundly based. Callendar Farm Ltd control a large part of the eastern section of the site as shown on the Indicative Development Framework Plan supplied. The Callendar Farm land can be delivered in a manner

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent envisaged by the Preferred Options, incorporating housing, attendant infrastructure and extensive open space. The Callendar Farm land can be brought forward for development in a manner that works with the land to the south, and also does not prejudice the land located to the immediate west. Callendar Farm Ltd are happy to work with the Council and adjoining landowners / developers to bring forward the Preferred Options proposal in a comprehensive manner. The allocation of the site north of Nuneaton as an urban extension to the settlement is supported by Callendar Farm Limited as sound. The site can deliver a considerable number of positive impacts in environmental, social and economic terms. Economic - provides land of the right type in the right place, and development that can assist in delivering infrastructure, locates development within and adjoining the edge of the principal sustainable settlement of Nuneaton, with good access to facilities and services, and provision of local community (potentially including new local shopping) provision. Social - provides housing in a location that is accessible to services and can support strong, vibrant and healthy communities, will improve availability of sustainable transport to jobs and services, allows for mixed and balanced communities to be delivered, encourages cultural activity, improved service provision, and enables positive enhancement for improving community participation through providing facilities. Environmental - able to maintain and enhance landscape and townscape quality, reducing the pressure on Green Belt land to be released for development and promotes biodiversity by enhancing connectivity and diversity of habitats and wildlife corridors and postively encouraging energy efficiency. 687/13 J. Hedgley Callendar Paragraph 11.58 requirements for the northern Local Infrastructure - The Council has worked with

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Farm Ltd extension. Acknowledge this is an initial list based on service delivery partners to identify suitable local available evidence and that further detail will need to be infrastructure, such as schools, health care, roads, worked up. A number of the bullet points are noted and sustainable transport, green infrastructure, etc., accepted but provide observations about: number of required to support the new development proposed. homes, landscape and green infrastructure and This information, as was known at the time of writing, transport infrastructure. was provided in the Locality policies, and in more detail (i) Number of Homes - the dwelling total of 3,000 homes in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan. The Council is can and should be increased. Do not consider that 7,900 continuing to work with service delivery partners to dwellings over the plan period will be sufficient, update this information and to identify where it will be particularly given the Coventry factor and likely need for located, and when it will be delivered. Further work is Nuneaton and Bedworth to accommodate some of also being undertaken on viability in terms of Coventry’s overspill; Concerns about the quantum of infrastructure and other policy requirements of the supply that is likely to come from the urban area; The Plan. This work will inform the Pre-Submission version northern extension is not in the Green Belt. It is of the Borough Plan. consistent with the NPPF to maximise the potential for developing this urban extension before other sites. The Number of homes - The total number of homes will Borough Council acknowledges that the site is capable take account of the evidence set out in the joint SHMA of delivering in excess of 3000 dwellings. The and any further discussions concerning the Duty to Co- Infrastructure Delivery Plan suggests a crude capacity of operate. The capacity of the strategic sites was based 4,866 dwellings based on a rather high density on the information available at the time of writing the assumption of 40 dwellings per hectare. Further work Borough Plan Preferred Options. Taking account of needs to be done to ascertain, more precisely, the housing requirements and the scale and land-take of quantum of housing and the attendant infrastructure the infrastructure needed to support the development, it provision that can be delivered across the northern site. will be possible to identify a suitable capacity for the An artificial 3000 dwelling total constraint imposed at this site for inclusion in the Pre-Submission version of the point in time may not be appropriate. Plan. (ii) Landscape and Green Infrastructure Approach - An Indicative Development Framework supplied proposes a Landscape and Green Infrastructure - The northern larger development envelope than the Borough Plan. An edge of the development boundary is restricted, as the initial broad idea of where development can be Land Use Designations Study indicates that a farmland accommodated on the eastern Callendar Farm land buffer should be retained, and a structural landscape taking account of landscape evidence - Nuneaton and buffer is required to retain the existing landscape Bedworth Landscape Character Assessment 2011, character within the design and layout of the new Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines, Stage 2 of TEP development. In this case, it includes retaining and landscape and visual work. The overall ‘development reinforcing hedgerows and hedgerow trees to filter envelope’ is defined and justified in landscape and visual views of the new urban edge. Green Infrastructure terms on the basis of two key elements: 1. The existing requirements will take account of landscape, open

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent pattern (or grain of the agricultural landscape that is space, biodiversity and flood risk. considered to be an important part of the local landscape character); and 2. The introduction of a series Transport Infrastructure - Road infrastructure is not of additional characteristic landscape resources (or currently adequate to support the growth. For this features) that are considered to be missing or lacking in reason, the Council has been working with the County the area, and which could not only provide enhancement Council on this issue. S-Paramics modelling has taken but also serve to positively address some of the place. It identifies the necessary improvements to the recommendations as part of an overall Green road network. It is anticipated that there will also need Infrastructure (GI) Strategy. to be sustainable transport improvements to assist with This is reflected in particular along the northern edge of reducing the negative impact of the development. The the proposed development envelope. Compared to the S Paramics modelling also assesses impact on alignment identified for development at Map 13, suggest AQMAs. The results of this work will feed into the extending slightly further towards the A5 corridor across development of the pre-submission document and two additional field enclosures. Whilst this reduces the update of the IDP. In addition, the Highways Agency's physical gap retained between the proposed response does not support creating access onto the development and the A5, the introduction in this area of A5, except in exceptional circumstances. not only small linear woodland belts, but also two small rectangular woodlands (or coverts), will serve to extend Ecological Survey - Noted. this element of character from the wider area north of the A5 to give this important ‘buffer’ zone greater strength and enhanced character, thus reinforcing the perceived gap. Therefore, an overall reduction in physical distance is balanced by a greater strength of landscape character that will also provide the visual containment and enclosure of the urban edge that is recommended. The southern edge of the development envelope similarly follows the grain of the local landscape pattern, with a ‘swathe’ of open space extending through the envelope to link with that extending around the north of the proposed development. This open space strategy will incorporate a number of pedestrian/cycle links which will combine with the retained existing public right of way to create a fully accessible and permeable masterplan. The development cells will be laid out to follow the grain of the landscape with all hedgerow infrastructure retained as a design

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent principle. (iii) Transport Infrastructure - Callendar Farm Ltd are happy to work with the Council and other parties to ensure the necessary infrastructure is delivered. Callendar Farm Ltd will continue to work with and assist the highway authority in relation to the transport strategy for the northern extension. The Indicative Development Framework incorporates the indicative new transport route passing through the site as envisaged by the Plan. It also shows the potential for an access point onto the A5 to the north. I think that this would have several benefits including, in particular; relieving capacity issues at The Long Shoot / A5, where there is limited scope for major improvements, potentially reducing turning movements at Long Shoot A5, and introducing bus priority and the potential to reduce traffic flows along the residential frontage of the A5 (west of The Long Shoot) and The Long Shoot. As the evidence base for the Plan develops, we consider it should allow for the potential for a link onto the A5, and we are discussing this with the highway authorities. A Phase 1 Ecological Survey supplied demonstrates that the site is of low ecological value and its development provides opportunity for enhancement in terms of incorporating new habitats of wildlife value, particularly within the open space / green infrastructure. 689/2 J. King N/A Investigate brownfield sites, as there are many derelict See response 233/1 areas that should be considered for housing. Green spaces around St Nicolas and Weddington are the reason why people chose to live here. Removing these areas will take away the reason for living here. The plan is flawed. 585/1 J. L. Holmes The local population is not expected to rise in the Disagree. The latest government population projections foreseeable. Does the Borough of Nuneaton need 3000 indicate that the population of the Borough will grow by new houses in one area in future? at least 16,000 up to 2031. The Council must plan for this future population growth in terms of new homes, 43

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent If the 3000 houses development is adopted as indicated jobs and supporting infrastructure. in the structure plan, the road infrastructure indicated is See responses 592/1, 94/1 and 09/1 (Section 11 totally inadequate (3000 houses x2 cars per house = Whitestone and Bulkington). 6000 journeys). All these vehicles trying to get over Leicester Road bridge or through the already built up proposed Golf Drive extension. There are 7 minor roads and a school coming onto it from its junction with Marston Lane to the end of Golf Drive. 585/2 J. L. Holmes What Nuneaton really needs is a bypass. Atherstone, The Borough Plan must include proposals that are Bedworth, Coventry, Kenilworth, Leamington, Warwick, deliverable. Stratford, Hinckley all have bypasses but Nuneaton does Road infrastructure is not currently adequate to support not. It is time Nuneaton stopped being the poor relation the growth. For this reason, the Council has been in Warwickshire and stood up for its rights. Strongly urge working with the County Council on this issue. S- you to adopt into the structure plan a completely new Paramics transport modelling has taken place. It road from the junction with the A444 at Griff down Gipsy identifies the necessary improvements to the road Lane completely skirting Whitestone linking with network. It is anticipated that there will also need to be Eastboro Way, using Hinckley Road to its junction with sustainable transport improvements to assist with the old avoiding line using the track bed picking up reducing the negative impact of the development. The Higham Lane and Weddington Road on the way, results of this work will feed into the development of the terminating with the bottom of Tuttle Hill. See maps pre-submission document and update of the IDP. included in submission. 159/1 J. Lucas N/A Object to proposed houses and any future development See response 592/1 being proposed on locality 6: Roads are not adequate to take the amount of traffic that will be generated by the houses proposed; No one seems interested in the amount of traffic that will increase because of the proposals. Must consider the amount of traffic going into Nuneaton and the congestion and pollution it will cause to people living in this area. A47 The Long Shoot is not wide enough to allow for a right turn lane into the proposed developments, although the planning committee and road traffic department claim it is. The road is used by numerous HGVs and their width is too great for a central or turning lane. Current planning applications off The Long Shoot are for small quantities of houses and do not need to consider the need for schools, doctors or dentists, etc. If 44

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent applications continue to be applied for in this piecemeal way, the Borough planning committee will be unable to insist on these neccesities being provided. Does not seem to be any substantial amount of houses elsewhere in the Borough, including Bedworth - Please reconsider the plan and if we have to have more houses, share them more equally around the Borough. 167/1 J. McMullen We write to register our strong objections to the Borough See responses 592/1 and 291/3 (Comments on Plan and the way in which the ‘preferred option’ (no Consultation process) in options. alternative options) has been arrived at. The fact that it has been seen fit to include 3,326 houses to the North of Nuneaton is nothing short of ridiculous. There are more sites in and around Nuneaton & Bedworth that could be used to avoid surrounding the whole of St Nicolas and Weddington Wards.

There is just not the infrastructure to allow for the equivalent of 9,000 people and say 6,000 vehicles, and the environment will also suffer terribly from the extra pollution. 569/3 J. Morson N/A Number of houses proposed for North of Nuneaton will See responses 592/1 and 93/1. make it difficult to get into Nuneaton as Leicester Road Bridge cannot cope with increased volumes of traffic. Whichever other roundabout route, traffic flow is very restrictive and can only get worse due to the poor design of the ring road through Nuneaton. Weddington had flooding problems only this winter. Develop the many pockets of brownfield sites, e.g. Abbey Metals, Weddington, Leekes, Bedworth, Blockbuster site, Nuneaton and adjacent to Griff Way, Nuneaton. 636/2 J. Russell Bellway Support policy and supporting text in principle but have District Centres - The Council is developing work in Homes Ltd comments and amendments to request: terms of accessibility distances to local and district - Acknowledge role of the District Centre at Horeston centres. This work will feed into determining whether or Grange. The Centre is within walking and cycling not new centres will be required to support strategic distance of the Bellway controlled land and provides a housing sites.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent convenient local centre for everyday needs. The eastern part of the draft strategic housing site is therefore served Infrastructure - The Council has worked with service well by local shops, located at this Centre, and by more delivery partners to identify suitable local infrastructure, local shops and the health centre on St Nicolas Park such as schools, health care, roads, sustainable Drive. transport, green infrastructurere, etc., required to - Consider opportunities for green infrastructure within support the new development proposed. This the draft allocation. Within the Bellway controlled land information, as was known at the time of writing, was we have begun to identify where these improvements provided in the Locality policies, and in more detail in could be made. Some are already part of the Phase 1 the Infrastructure Delivery Plan. The Council is permission, including pedestrian and cycle links through continuing to work with service delivery partners to the proposals and the enhancement of existing update this information, and to identify where it will be hedgerows on site. Potential green infrastructure located and when it will be delivered. Further work is opportunities are also identified within our accompanying also being undertaken on viability in terms of Delivery Document supplied for Phase 2. infrastructure and other policy requirements of the - Walking and cycling routes feature in Phase 1 and will Plan. This work will inform the Pre-Submission version be extended into Phase 2, as our Delivery Document of the Borough Plan. See also response 402/7. illustrates could happen. The opportunity to improve the approved access to Phase 1, so it can accommodate Eastern Relief Road - see response 09/1 (Section 11 Phase 2 traffic and potential further vehicles too, is being Whitestone and Bulkington) discussed with County Council officers. - Eastern Relief Road - Concerned about the viability of 3000 homes - this figure was based on the information providing this infrastructure. In addition to the Northern available at the time of writing the Borough Plan Relief Road that passes through the allocation, it is not Preferred Options. Taking account of housing possible to support this eastern road link. Yet to see requirements and the scale and land-take of the evidence that supports why this road should be infrastructure needed to support the development, it will attributed to the northern SUE and are unclear on the be possible to identify a suitable capacity for the site for benefits of this Eastern Relief Road. It appears to take inclusion in the Pre-Submission version of the Plan. traffic from the Eastboro Way (the original eastern relief road for Nuneaton) and divert the cars through open Affordable Housing - the level of affordable housing will agricultural land, for them to be deposited at the head of be determined from the evidence set in the Joint SHMA Golf Drive/Shakespeare Drive in Whitestone. The cars 2013 and viability work. are then presumably left to navigate through that residential estate to find a suitable onward road for their Buttermere Recreation Ground - this is identified for journey. improvement as it has potential to provide a - The proposal for North Nuneaton is for up to 3000 new Community Park. The Council's Open Spaces Strategy homes. Given the list of requirements stated in para aims that all residents of the Borough have access to a 11.58, it may be more appropriate to say 'approximately Community Park within 600m (or 10-12 minutes

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 3,000 homes, with potential for further dwellings beyond walking time). The comments on Bellway's potential the Plan period,'. This could give some context to the improvements are noted. bullet points that follow in that paragraph, and allow some flexibilty in terms of what might be delivered and Schools - The location of new schools will be when. determined through the work with service delivery - Agree a percentage of affordable homes is a realistic partners referred to above. requirement but should be considered in the context of the evidence base also, and the need for executive Northern Relief Road and other off-site road homes. The two are difficult to locate within the same improvements - The Council is continuing to work with layout. the County Council on transport issues. S-Paramics - There are opportunities for green infrastructure and modelling has taken place. It identifies the necessary improvements to Buttermere Recreation Ground, and improvements to the road network. It is anticipated that these relate potentially more to the Bellway controlled there will also need to be sustainable transport land than the requirement for a new District Centre improvements to assist with reducing the negative perhaps, given our comments above. impact of the development. The results of this work will - Given location of existing schools to the Bellway land, feed into the development of the pre-submission and the location of the land compared to the rest of the document and update of the IDP. draft allocation, we do not consider that locating the new primary or secondary school on the Bellway controlled Decentralised energy facility - The Council is land is conducive to facilitating walking to school for new considering the feasbility and viability of decentralised residents that might be living more centrally or over to energy and alternative renewable/low carbon options. the west of the draft allocation. Consider the County This information will be fed into the Pre-Submission Council land is potentially more appropriate for these Borough Plan. uses and is of a scale that can provide for the necessary sports pitches and playing fields required. - Northern relief road - Await findings of the Infrastructure Planning and Delivery Group in terms of the cost and delivery of that road. Bellway provide one of potentially two or three access points onto The Long Shoot for this road connection. Do not envisage there being only one point of connection and suggest that traffic will use routes through the Bellway controlled land, and land owned by Mr Pallet and others. Bellway are liaising with the County Council to establish what improved junction could be made with The Long Shoot and their Phase 1 land. In addition to this, and in terms of contributing towards the relief road, Bellway Homes

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Ltd foresee delivering road links within their site to the northern edges of their Phase 2 land, to enable the next developer on adjacent land to take up the relief road from there and take this forwards. - Other off-site road improvements - will consider the findings of the Infrastructure Planning and Delivery Group and Bellway's Transport Assessment/Modelling, to balance what proportion of these improvements is attributable to Bellway's Phase 2 site and what is attributable to the wider draft allocation. - Decentralised energy facility - do not consider that the location (or planned early delivery) of Bellway land lends itself to the provision of such a facility. The infrastructure to connect the other 2,700 (approx) dwellings within the draft allocation to this location (if the facility were to be located on Bellway land) is so considerable in terms of distance to be covered by underground pipes. etc., that the costs to other builders would not make it a viable solution. Similarly, the Strategy for Bellway is focused on an early delivery of this site to assist in 'kick starting' the road connections associated with the relief road, and hence, there will not be a decentralised energy facility available within the wider draft allocation for the Bellway proposals to connect into. - Potential for the Bellway Phase 2 land to contribute towards upgrading of Buttermere Recreation Ground, and potentially explore the provision of allotments on site too. However, these will need to be offset against other contributions sought within the Policy to ensure that the overall viability of the proposals are maintained. 567/1 J. Sowerby N/A Object to Borough Plan and Weddington area proposals: See response 592/1 floodplain; taking Green Belt in Nuneaton that is fast disappearing; Weddington Road does not need extra traffic that new houses will bring - always a busy road, particularly at peak times; Worse when incidents on M6 and traffic diverts onto A444 and A5 through Weddington.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 383 Jackie N/A We have attended a locality meeting at Weddington See response 94/1 regarding transport matters Albrighton Social Club on 1st August, perused the plans for the See response 382/1 regarding flooding matters whole area, discussed the proposals with members of See response 179/1 regarding wider infrastructure your department and communicated with the local matters. Specifically in relation to the Hospital, George councillor, Keith Kondakor and the MP Marcus Jones. Eliot officers are part of the Infrastructure Planning and We understand that there is a need for extra housing Delivery Group as service delivery partners and are and facilities, but totally oppose the proposed plans that engaged throughout the development of the Borough have been submitted without previous consultation. Plan. Greenfields - The Council has assessed the urban area Our reasons are primarily that the present road and its suitability. It is still necessary to develop on infrastructure cannot support the existing volume of greenfield sites. See site selection background paper traffic which has to go through Nuneaton in order to go for further information. to Coventry, Leicester or Burton. The roads that have Public Footpaths will be protected. The Green been proposed only take the traffic back to the 3 most Infrastructure Plan seeks to enhance and/or create congested roads, namely Weddington Road, Higham recreational spaces and routes. Lane and The Long Shoot. These roads are busy from The Plan contains policies to protect, mitigate or offset 7.45am and congested by 8am, similarly the whole of biodiversity and habitat losses. Further work on Nuneaton Town Centre is virtually at a standstill in the ecology will be undertaken. mornings, afternoons and into the evening. To add over 3,000 vehicles to the area will exacerbate a difficult endurance motorists face daily. Surely a Ring Road which diverts traffic away from the town centre, not through it, is the only sensible solution before building even commences. Bedworth has had one for 40+ years.

Weddington floods every winter and there is strong evidence to support this fact, so the building of over 300 houses will only exacerbate the situation.

Our other concern is that the main hospital for the area is in special measures, has reduced the existing bed capacity and increased numbers of patients now go to Coventry for their specialist treatments. With a huge increase in the population how will these people be catered for when they need hospital care? The lady we spoke to from the Planning Department said that as patients spend less time in the acute section, there is

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent adequate Community Care. As a retired nurse I beg to differ. The only rehabilitation hospital we had was Bramcote which has been closed for some years now. There is nowhere for patients to go who need care after hospital discharge. Compared to Leicestershire who have several Community hospitals (Hinckley& Bosworth, Lutterworth, Loughborough), North Warwickshire fares badly for Secondary Care.

Church Fields is a beautiful area which will be destroyed by building, we will lose a lovely area for walking, playing and even more tragically the loss of wildlife, flora and fauna which should be preserved for future generations is devastating.

We urge you to reconsider your plans, consult with the general public, MPs and Councillors, and listen to us before you embark on such drastic measures. 418/1 Jacqui Evans N/A The proposal to build so many houses within the See response 592/1 Borough between 2010-28 is misguided. Nuneaton and Much of Nuneaton Town Centre lies in Flood Zones 2 Bedworth are the poorest towns in Warwickshire, with and 3. In line with NPPF policy on flood risk, residential the highest rates of unemployment. I don't believe that development is restricted in such areas, particularly we need 3000 new homes in the Weddington/St Nicolas when there are suitable alternative locations available. Park Area. The road system and bridge into town Elsewhere, in Nuneaton Town Centre, proposals couldn't possibly cope with the extra 4500 cars from the should be in line with Policy ECON3 Nature of Town 3000 proposed houses. Also, all the jobs and Centre Growth. This policy breaks the town centre into infrastructure needed to cope with the extra population a number of quarters and describes the types of use and traffic are all in the Bermuda Park side of town. suitable for each quarter. Even though MIRA is planning to expand and create jobs, that doesn't mean that those workers would want to move to Nuneaton if they live elsewhere; people would rather travel to work than move house these days, as it's the cheapest option.

It makes more sense to either spread any development evenly around existing areas of the town or even join up Bedworth and Nuneaton as they are one Borough

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent anyway. The doctors' surgery on Leicester Road is really oversubscribed now; it takes 2-3 weeks to get to see a doctor. We can't keep building on our farmland and consuming everything in our path. If we suffer any kind of national or international disaster, as a nation we won't be able to feed ourselves. Look to develop brownfield sites in and around the town centre where young people would prefer to live in flats, like the ones in the centre of Leicester by the Highcross shopping centre. 14/1 Jayne Allen N/A Too many houses proposed in one place. There is toxic See response 592/1 waste land that needs to be cleaned up. Our virgin land should be kept green. Listen to the locals that know the area and the detriment you will cause. The devastation of people living in a crowded area will give locals more problems than we have ever had. Social, environmental and congestion of vehicles in an already cluttered environment. 187/1 Jean Wilson N/A My wife and I wish to register our outspoken opposition See response 592/1 to the Borough Plan and the building of large estates in the Weddington and St Nicolas area of Nuneaton. Expansion on this scale will have a detrimental effect on the whole area and spoil the existing charm and attraction of the area. It will also create massive traffic problems. 389 Jeff Crosby N/A The foreword to the National Planning Policy Framework The Council must prepare the Plan in line with national states that “Sustainable means ensuring that better lives planning policy and evidence as set out in the NPPF. It for ourselves doesn’t mean worse lives for future must balance these issues with the views of those that generations” and that “Sustainable development is about make comments on the Plan. change for the better….”. Neither of these principles is Taking account of these, the content of the Preferred embodied in the Nuneaton and Bedworth Local Plan Options document was informed by the cross party currently out for consultation. It has the look of a plan Member Working Group with Cabinet approving the where areas for development were decided at the document for consultation. beginning and the supporting evidence sought See response 592/1. afterwards. Having worked through many background documents I am sure the evidence within them does not lead to the current preferred options. I would like to

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent know the reasons for the decisions contained in the Local Plan, but this information is not forthcoming. Apparently we should be concentrating solely on the proposals presented—not asking for them to be justified.

I note that there is no Highways Agency document relating to the proposals currently on offer; but am told that “this will be fed in to the next stage of the process.” In view of this, comments can only be made on a best guess basis arising from the Highways Agency report on an even worse set of proposals.

My primary concern is for the effect of 3000+ additional houses on the road network. Those of us living to the North and Northeast of Nuneaton do not need a Highways Agency report to tell us that there is a serious problem now, never mind the effect of this level of new development. The report talks about peak times but residents know that, while peak times are a nightmare, the traffic can be heavy at all times of the day.

I understood from the Highways report that a relief road connecting A47 to B4114 would be a prerequisite for all sites north of Nuneaton. At no point does it specify that it is tied to PDA2. Now I am told that it was tied to PDA2 and, as the total number of houses has been reduced and that little of PDA2 remains, it is not required. It was when I asked for the report on this change that I was told it would be fed into the next stage.

I have been assured that 3,000 will be the absolute maximum number of houses. I am sceptical. The total of houses which could be built on PDA1 and PDA10 is 3,600. There is a planning application coming in, if not already in, for something over half of the PDA2 remnant for 400 houses, so say 700 in total for PDA2. So there is potential for 4,300 houses, and I believe that they will

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent be built if this land is allocated. With the current attitude to planning for the areas north of Nuneaton, it is conceivable that a number of developments in this area will already have planning consent before an Inspector gets to see the Plan. Even with the much lower level of 3,000 houses, which equates to 60.3% of the original figure when you add the ‘extras’ already granted planning permission, but with no relief road there will still be a large detrimental impact on the A47 and A444. It was projected that 1000 vehicles would use the relief road at peak times, so traffic which would have used that will want to move south, thus adding around 600 extra vehicles to the existing problem areas. Therefore, it seems likely that without the relief road AQMA1 will suffer considerably– together with AQMA2 and the rest of the network.

I accept the Highway Agency's comment that this is worst case scenario, but even so it is a long way from what is expressed in the National Policy Framework, Achieving Sustainable Development, and in my view fails to deliver:-

4. Promoting sustainable transport 30, 32,34,36,37 and 38

For 37 and 38 it should be noted that the Highway Agency suggests that some employment development should be moved to the original PDA2 to reduce journeys. This has been ignored. The Local Plan actually quotes the NPPF 4. 37 and then quite deliberately focuses the bulk of the housing about as far away as it can be from employment areas. This is unacceptable and cannot be shown to be sustainable. Also, the area of PDA2 which is about to have a plan submitted for 400 houses shows land for a school. This would be well above walking distance from PDA1 and

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent eastern parts of PDA10. The site at Weddington which already has outline planning shows space for a GP surgery - same comments apply. . It is claimed by both NBBC and the Highways Agency that PDA1 is within walking distance of the Town Centre. For an Olympic-grade walker this may be true, but for the vast majority of the population it is a ludicrous suggestion. ‘Averages’ given within various NBBC documents for the time to walk or use public transport to various facilities are quite ridiculous. If a member of the Planning staff would care to accompany me I can show them the quickest routes to the Town Centre and the Hospital as I have walked them many times. I live much closer to them than the ‘eastern edge’ of PDA1 is, and I can assure you that your figures are incorrect. Also, let us not forget that the ‘eastern edge’ of PDA1 is 3.5 to 4 km from its western edge.

The times given for public transport seem to be more in hope than anything else. They are certainly not ‘averages’ of anything. Again, try it!

While on the subject of walking - you wish to promote walking and cycling. How does this equate with the acknowledged serious problem with air quality along the routes which would have to be used? A great deal of lip service has been paid to sorting out the air-quality problem over many years but nothing meaningful has been done. I am one of the many people who cannot walk along the Hinckley Road/ Leicester Road because of the effects from the pollution. As the only GP surgery in this area is on Leicester Road (right by the AQMA!) this does present problems. It seems that ‘spreading’ of peak times is seen to be a ‘good thing’. This philosophy would seem to be unarguable. However, it fails to take account of people who cannot change their working

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent hours, jobs or homes, and those who have to attend fixed appointments, e.g. a cancer sufferer having to attend University Hospital in Coventry for radiotherapy. There are many such examples, including access for the emergency services, and the term ‘spreading’ draws a very thin veil over the individual misery involved. Sustainable? Better solutions should be actively pursued before falling back to this.

I note that the Sustainability Appraisal (Appendix E) says for each of PDA1, PDA2 and PDA10 “The PDA will result in the loss of high quality agricultural land and also has poor accessibility to existing employment, health facilities, education facilities and the Town Centre. The dispersed location would tend to discourage modal shift away from the car which in turn will increase traffic movements through the designated AQMA. The development of the PDA will result in an adverse effect on these factors which cannot be mitigated against.”

NPPF 8 Promoting Healthy Communities, talks about ‘strong neighbourhood centres’ (69) and in 70 specifically refers to meeting places. Although NBBC clearly believes in this policy, it has to date only been implemented in politically acceptable areas. It is noticeable that in its comments on local centres meeting places are not mentioned. The areas north of Nuneaton have a dearth of such facilities; what exists cannot be claimed to be due to NBBC. There is no reason to believe the Council will change its attitude. So, it is proposed to build 3000 houses (at least!) and there will be no real focus to enable that community to meld into something positive. A fairly perfunctory check on Community Centres throughout the Borough will confirm this imbalance in provision.

I expect that guarantees will be given, it will appear in

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the detailed plan, etc., etc., but we know that it will not happen. Developers are going to be hit with high levies for the infrastructure costs and I suspect that they would resist any contribution towards a community centre. I repeat, it will not happen. We shall have a huge concentration of houses with no focus to build a community. On a similar theme, it is worth noting that the Local Plan, Section 11.52, talks about protecting and enhancing the vitality and viability of Horeston Grange shopping centre and will provide leisure opportunities. Really? I asked exactly what leisure opportunities and was fed what I described as ‘gobbledegook’. Anyone who knows and/or uses Horeston Grange shopping centre knows this area is what it is, and talking about enhancing it and providing leisure opportunities is indeed pure gobbledegook. The remarks are included as window dressing for the Local Plan and nothing will happen.

In conclusion I would say that this Local Plan is certainly not evidence led. It is clearly motivated by short-term political gain without a thought for the long-term implications. Had you fully understood what the Highway Agency’s report had to say, you would realise that many areas of Nuneaton would feel the adverse effects of your proposals - even some of the areas you are seeking to protect! The simple fact that the Highways Agency produced a report in 2012 with roughly three quarters of the perceived housing requirements located in the North indicates you were minded to do this from the beginning. I assume this was scaled back to try to obviate the need for a link road to B4114 (Tuttle Hill), as this was not acceptable politically.

The Planning Officers’ recommendations were not accepted. The Highways Agency’s suggestion of relocating some employment areas to the North of

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Nuneaton was not accepted. Both were, and are, based on credible evidence. To date there has been no effort to explain the reasons behind these vexatious decisions. 360/1 Jill & Alan n/a If employment growth has been over-calculated then so See response 599/1 (section 1) Herbert have the number of homes required within the Borough. 360/1 Jill & Alan n/a Would like to know how the employment growth figure See response 599/1 (section 1) and background paper Herbert has been calculated, does not appear to reflect previous on scale of growth. trends. An employment growth under 1% would appear much more realistic. 360/1 Jill & Alan n/a If employment was to rise as suggested the main See response 592/1 Herbert employment sites and proposed new rail station at Bermuda are to the south of the town centre. Why then are the majority of home proposed to the north of Nuneaton? Even if MIRA is extended, there is no guarantee that new employees there would want to live in Nuneaton rather than the surrounding pleasant villages. 360/1 Jill & Alan n/a The infrastructure of Leicester Road Bridge, Weddington See response 94/1 Herbert Road, Higham Lane, The Long Shoot and Hinckley Road already have problems with the volumes of traffic at rush hour, as does the town centre generally. If the present plan goes ahead, traffic volume in this area will increase dramatically, causing even worse congestion and adding to the already unacceptable levels of pollution in the Leicester Rd bridge area, including the area of Etone School. The proposed Northern Relief Road will have no bearing on the volume of traffic heading in and out of town. It will merely funnel more vehicles onto the main roads into town. 360/1 Jill & Alan n/a Where will the money for the two new schools and Service delivery partners, section 106 and Community Herbert Northern Relief Road be found. Infrastructure Levy. 360/1 Jill & Alan n/a Why is the proposed housing development so skewed to See response 592/1 Herbert Weddington and St nicolas? The greenfields in this area provide residents with a pleasing environment. Is it really necessary to cover the whole area with housing/why are other suitable sites within the Borough that are closer to

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the employment areas not being considered for some of the proposed new housing? A lot of the proposed new building land in this northern area of Nuneaton is also active farm land. With a rising population generally within the country as a whole, production of food will become even more important. Once farmland is lost it will never be replaced. 362/1 John n/a Having inspected the Borough Plan in detail, I believe See response 94/1 Goodyer too great a burden is being put on the areas of The NPPF is clear that Local Planning authorities must Weddington and St. Nicolas (speaking as a resident of plan to deliver a choice of high quality homes, widen Bulkington Lane. Whitestone). Agree that there is opportunities for home ownership and create certainly room for houses in these areas, but not as sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities. many as planned. I also feel these are the wrong areas for affordable housing. There seems to be a lot of white space to the North and West of Arbury Hall on the plan (Galley Common/ Camp Hill/ Arbury/ Stockingford). Seeing as the Camp Hill area will benefit from even more money being thrown at it, surely they should take some of the housing in the space mentioned above. The plan appears to be politically motivated as opposed to being based on logic. 338/1 John Waine n/a I am especially concerned about the likely effect of the See response 94/1. large area of St Nicolas & Weddington wards (SHS4) which has been designated for housing development. That, of course, is in addition to the 300+ houses which are already approved for Weddington. Although I do not live in the immediate area, I do use frequently the A47, A444 and A5 roads which border this area. At peak times, they are already severely congested, and such a large development is certain to exacerbate the situation. I can see no evidence of adequate planned infrastructure improvements to avoid that. 394 Julia Lucas N/A My main concerns are the increased traffic around an See response 592/1 already heavily congested area. I live on St Nicolas Park and making any journey around peak time is already a frustrating experience, and if there are any incidents on

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the A5 or M6 the area is completely gridlocked.

Another concern is the increased risk of flooding, should these developments go ahead I feel that the area where I live will be extremely vulnerable to flooding. I have been to many meetings with developers regarding the development off the Long Shoot and surrounding sty Nicolas Park, and they seem blinkered to the threat. Yet once they have built and gone and the area floods it's residents like myself whose concerns have fallen on deaf ears, that are left to pick up the pieces.

There are numerous brown and undeveloped areas in the Borough or even equally distributing development in Nuneaton and Bedworth, instead of all in one area. 111/1 Julie King N/A I am writing to comment on the proposed building of See responses 592/1 and 291/3 (Comments on over 3000 houses to the area between The Long Shoot, Consultation process) in options. north St nicolas, and all across to Weddington. I have The Borough Plan, Infrastructure Delivery Plan, lived in the Weddington area all my life and strongly Sustainability Appraisal, evidence documents and object to these proposals and wish my concerns to be background papers are all available on the Council's noted. website. Key documents were available to view at the I cannot believe the necessary infrastructure will be Town Hall, libraries, community centres and the implemented to accommodate the extra level of people Bedworth Area Office during the consultation period. and vehicles to this area. I dispute the necessity of the volume of homes required and feel if Nuneaton were to spread the character would disappear along with many residents! I do not believe true alternatives have been offered and therefore it is not a true consultation of the people. We need to be given access to clear documentation regarding required numbers. Objections will become very strong if not. 623/1 K & A Smith N/A Object to Borough Plan, particularly Weddington and St See response 592/1, 93/1 and 208/1 Nicolas area proposals: Unbalanced proportion of housing on greenfield sites - impact of over 3500 extra cars on traffic congestion, already stretched at peak times, on Weddington Road 59

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent and over Leicester Road Bridge, and on air and noise pollution (already above accepted levels) with no proposals to deal with the existing situation. Improving and extending local recreation areas will not address this issue. Use brownfield land, e.g. at Tuttle Hill near Judkins Quarry to avoid encroaching on countryside. Inadequate infrastructure - Northern relief road starts on a blind bend on Weddington Road outside properties that suffered major flood damage from surface water due to inadequate drainage and maintenance by landowners (2000, 2007 and 2012). Drainage systems for new properties should be extensive and well planned to address this issue. No proposals for new sewage treatment facilities (some properties on Weddington Road are not on mains drainage) - capacity will be an issue due to ageing Hartshill Sewage works and a new sewer network needed for a development of 3000 houses. Existing water mains along Weddington Road are not suitable for extension due to age and low pressure. A new supply will be needed. Shopping and other facilities - No proposals to increase Horeston Grange or provide new shopping facilities - already inadequate for surrounding housing due to variety and car parking. Will not cope with 3000 new houses, some of which will be 4 miles away. Those without a vehicle / elderly will need access to a more local range of shops than those at Horeston Grange. No provision for new doctors or chemists. Schools - Conflicting information in the Borough Plan - new primary and secondary schools - and the Infrastructure Delivery Plan, para 11.5 about new school provision in Weddington and St Nicholas. The children from 3000 extra homes will need to be accommodated in schools. Siting the majority of new houses in one area is unbalanced, unacceptable and unworkable. There is lack of consideration for infrastructure, the environment

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent and daily needs of the people who will live there. 626/1 K. Brown I write to object about the Borough Plan. The proposed See response 592/1 housing developments in Weddington, St Nicolas and Whitestone areas will undoubtedly have long lasting and far reaching effects on the quality of life for a significant part of the Nuneaton population. The creation of this housing will further reduce the quality of air by forcing even more traffic through the bottlenecks created by the main exit to reach the south of the Borough, over a single railway bridge, and the erosion of the green lung created by the open fields. 626/2 K. Brown I understand from the Environment Agency that my See response 93/1 property will also become more liable to flooding if housing is built on land off The Long Shoot. Flooding on this farmland happens on a regular basis and will undoubtedly increase if housing is built. The suggested timescale of this building means I will be living on a building site for the remainder of my life! As I'm not yet of retirement age this is a depressing prospect. 11/3 K. Price N/A Disagree with the calculation re the scale of growth for See response 592/1 the town and in particular to the need for 3000 plus homes to the north of the town. Building 3000 plus homes on the northern periphery of the town will have a detrimental effect on amenities, environment and infrastructure. Anyone who lives in this part of the Borough knows [on at least a twice daily basis] the issues of congestion along The Long Shoot, Hinckley Road, Eastboro Way, St Nicolas Park Drive, Weddington Lane and the section of the A5 from The Long Shoot to Dodwell roundabout. Creating additional housing in this area with the likelyhood of two vehicles per family is only likely to cause significant problems to health and well- being, as well as economic growth, as delivery vehicles will waste valuable time and money stuck in traffic jams. A further road to the north of the development linking The Long Shoot with Weddington Lane will not alleviate

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the situation as the area of the A5 between those two sites is not the cause of the congestion along these routes. I understand the need for new housing, but the need is for new 'affordable' housing, for single people and couples which is located close to any employment opportunities, i.e. within Nuneaton and Bedworth Town Centres and close to established sites such as Bermuda, Exhall and Attleborough. Make use of existing brownfield sites and target homeowners whose property is empty. Some new housing could be built along the frontage of The Long Shoot [in the current gap between existing housing] with minimal effect on the built and natural environment. Similarly, building [in line with the current Weddington boundary] up to Higham Lane, possibly including a new Higham Lane School, thus releasing the former school site for housing in keeping with the area. 392/1 K.E. & E.S. Prefer not to see green fields and farmland built on. The See response 592/1 Mills position that the central government planning changes and the council has brought about by not having a current Borough Plan, not bringing brownfield sites forward and not being able to demonstrate a 5 year supply, makes the situation troubling.

The council should not have been put in a position of having to raise funds from the house building premium while having its own income slashed by central government; however, this creates tension between councillors and constituents, and does little to build community harmony. 392/3 K.E. & E.S. This is a speculative proposal with no thought to quality See response 94/1 Mills of life, and raises issues regarding air quality, traffic volume and safety and travel times, especially at peak travel times. The situation regarding traffic flow at peak times is dreadful. The current volume of traffic means long queues as it is. The existing roads were not built for even current traffic flow – and now you are proposing to 62

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent add to the problem. The A5, The Long Shoot, St Nicolas Park Drive and Higham Lane are already subject to long delays. Averaging it out over a 24 hr period does not tell the real tale. 392/4 K.E. & E.S. Do consider the impact that 3000 new homes would See response 94/1 Mills have in Area 6; between 3000-6000 more vehicles each day travelling on already overcrowded infrastructure... especially the peak hours impact. Are you ready to sit in those jams when recent traffic surveys have pointed out the delays already being experienced locally? 392/7 K.E. & E.S. During recent storms, the existing Buttermere Park relief The Council has prepared Strategic Flood Risk Mills failed and the surrounding roads became flooded. The Assessments for the Borough in line with the NPPF. area of farmland the proposals relate to is prone to The proposals of the Borough Plan do not plan to flooding, so new homes built on this land could cause develop areas of Flood Zone 2 or 3. However, it is existing homes to flood. If Bedworth (at the end of recognised that there are some existing areas where Smorral Lane) can have a reeded lake that is a real flash and other types of localised flooding occur. The environmental improvement, why not in St Nicolas too, Strategic Flood Risk Assessment makes rather than grassed-over attenuation tanks that no one recommendations about how to reduce the risk of wants, nor wants to take responsibility for. flooding, i.e. as a result of increase run-off due to the More loss of absorbent land will lead to more flooding. increase in hard surfaces. At the planning application Who will pay for that mistake? Will those that gloriously stage, the developer will have to prepare a site specific took the decisions be personally surcharged? We live in flood risk assessment to identify any potential flood such a litigious society... risk, and the measures to be put in place to ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere. Priority is given to sustainable drainage systems. The Council will continue to raise specific issues with the Environment Agency and Severn Trent Water through the work on the IDP. 647/1 Keith and N/A They oppose the development for several reasons: See response 592/1 Yvonne Lee 1. It is the only green land that is available to go onto where there is open countryside where peace can be enjoyed and nature can be seen. 2. Historically it is the land where the original Weddington Village used to be before the Black Death closed it down. 3. The area is in the flood plain. Last year the flood

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent plain spread across to the opposite side of the A444 and damaged houses. 4. The volume of traffic coming from the A5 now seems to be increasing. In the mornings trying to get out of Weddington Lane through the line of vehicles, you have to wait until someone will let you in. The situation will worsen with all the additional cars from the extra households in the area. Mr and Mrs Lee also state that the Plan proposes to build an island on Weddington Lane to slow it down. They point out that unless NBBC intend to build an island on the A5 junction they can see a queue holding up both sides of the A5 waiting to get into the Town. They state this will be further exacerbated by similar things happening on other arterial roads (such as The Long Shoot) into the Town centre. Such congestion will increase air pollution above safety levels. 395 Keith N/A This proposal is deeply flawed. The only access to the See response 592/1 Harrison new developments would be via The Long Shoot, Weddington Road and Higham Lane. These road are already congested most days. The proposed development will also gridlock the already congested Hinckley Road and the town centre.

The proposed sites are at certain times of the year major flooding concerns. Over the last year alone, 6 houses in the area have been completely flooded, and one home owner has still not been able to return to his home.

In my opinion a development of this size would be a complete disaster for the future of Nuneaton. It would make more sense to build pockets of houses on the outskirts of Nuneaton and Bedworth making access easier for everyone. 350E/18 Keith's N/A Leicester Road Bridge - This is the only accessible See response 94/1 and independent crossing point between the Locality and the Town Consider getting access into Nuneaton station from the consultation Centre/Railway Station. Would you support an entrance Weddington side as part of the measures to be 64

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent on the north side of the Railway Station? Of 116 included in the sustainable transport package. answers: Yes 75% (87 responses) No 24.14% (28 responses) Summary of Comments: Pedestrian access makes sense as well as parking, e.g. on the demolished Graziers Arms. Subject to considering the impact on residents. It would encourage people to walk or cycle to the station. Consider using the underpass that was previously closed. The Bridge cannot support any more traffic. Would cause more congestion. Any improvement to town centre congestion will be supported by residents and businesses - this is needed without any extra housing A more realistic bypass around Nuneaton is suggested No point in adding an extra bridge when the current road network cannot cope with the existing traffic - 3000 new houses will make traffic congestion and pollution worse. May lead to people commuting from the train station who are from Leicestershire and potential to be used as a rat run to bypass the A444 and so lead to congestion. 350E/19 Keith's N/A Is there anything to add about Locality 6 Weddington See reponses 592/1, 208/1, 379/1 (Comments on independent and St Nicolas in the Borough Plan? consultation process), 04/2 (section 5) on Bedworth consultation Summary of Comments: Woodlands. 3000 homes is excessive and disproportionate. Spread The land south of the Long Shoot is proposed to be the new homes more evenly across the Borough. New designated as Green Belt. This does not automatically homes and employment should be located close make the land publicly accessible. The fundamental together - Weddington Road and Higham Lane are not aim of Green Belt is to prevent urban sprawl by suited to such large scale development. What is the keeping land permanently open. However, certain evidence for these figures? Build less homes and make types of uses are allowed, for example, outdoor sport use of homes currently sitting empty. and recreation. Protect Green Belt/farmland/countryside for the enjoyment and well-being of future generations. Consider developing brownfield sites and sites within/close to the town centre, e.g. Judkins Quarry. Need to address the fact that the area has no affordable

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent housing. It is a preferred area to live so it should be made available to others. Impact of 3000 new homes on traffic congestion in town centre, Leicester Road Bridge, Weddington and St Nicolas, the Longshoot and Eastboro Way. The road proposals will not solve the problems. The relief road is an access road. Major improvements are needed for a proper ring road through Nuneaton as well as improvements to A5 which struggles at times between the Long Shoot and M69 junctions. School traffic is also a problem around schools. Impact on pollution and air quality on Leicester Road but also on the Longshoot and Hinckley Road. Impact on health of young people walking to Etone and Higham Lane School. 3000 new homes will make this worse - what proposals are there to address this? Impact on wildlife and environment Impact on the local community, local infrastructure and well-being. New development will add to problems of lack of school places and health care, shops and green areas. Infrastructure planning is required for this side of town. No information about how traffic, schools, open spaces, environmental impact, flooding and other infrastructure issues will be dealt with. Supermarkets are located on other side of traffic bottlenecks. Loss of green space Farmland is needed for food production, a national priority. Flooding in Weddington, north of St Nicolas Park and on the Long Shoot is a problem. New development will increase flooding due to loss of farmland. What is being proposed to solve this and who will maintain these? Such a large number of homes will add to poor levels of employment especially for unskilled workers. The decision is political. The information provided is poor and deliberately vague. No effort to consult with residents.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Concerned about who the new residents will be - will they steal from, terrorise, be rude, bring drugs and alcohol, litter, leave behind dog droppings, vandalise the existing community? Will the new houses sell or be left empty, e.g. the apartments at the Fox and Crane. Houses will be sold to people living outside the Borough and so having no benefit to our residents. Develop a sustainable travel plan with both housing and employment in mind. Placing new jobs on the opposite side of town to new houses is counter productive - there is already considerable traffic congestion through Nuneaton Town Centre. Do not cut corners - make sure you and the developers deliver what is promised. Do not leave the residents feeling let down and unsupported, e.g. the Fox and Crane. Do not trust the Council. Ignoring local people who chose to live in peaceful surroundings, a tight-knit community, open spaces for children and pets and to watch wildlife and enjoy the open farmland. Need assurance that the buffer zone adjacent to A5 is not being earmarked for industrial development. Will large earth bunds and afforested areas be parallel to the new wider A5? The Plan does not give us any other options to consider and appears that there is no choice. Speculative developers are hounding the Council as there is no plan in place. Properties will be devalued and become unsellable. These are distressing plans and will make the area a less desirable place to live - creating problems for the Council in future. Undemocratic process for preparing plan - secret meetings and minutes, Green Party member prevented from presenting alternative plans. Council not listening to majority view. Involve local people in the decisions.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Is the proposed Green Belt at land south of the Long Shoot available for public access. The Plan will create a bigger divide between more affluent areas and the more economically depressed areas of town. Bedworth Woodlands would make a better site due to its access to commercial sites and motorway networks. The Plan has not been given sufficient thought. 350E/16 Keith's N/A SHS4 North of Nuneaton Strategic Housing Site - The See responses 592/1 and 208/1 independent Council wants to allocate a strategic 3000 housing site consultation on farmland North of Weddington and St Nicolas Park. The area is in addition to a 326 home development at Church Lane, Weddington, but does include the 66 and 120 home developments with outline planning permission of the Long Shoot. Of 119 answers: It should be used for 3000 new Homes 5.04% (6 responses) It should remain mostly as farmland 77.31% (92 responses) Other - develop part of the site, smaller scale development, no more than 1500 homes 17.65% ( 21 responses) Summary of Comments: Area provides a lung between Nuneaton and Hinckley. retain the break between Nuneaton and Hinckley so as to stop being a conurbation like Birmingham. Worsen existing traffic congestion around Leicester Road and major routes in/out of Nuneaton - Weddington Road, Higham Lane and the Long Shoot to the A5 and towards Coventry in the south. Pinch points in road structure in town due to rail lines, canal and river. The roads will not cope as most people work on the other side of town. Traffic flow along the A5 is a problem when there are incidents on local motorways. Query how will the roads cope with 3000 new homes (6000 extra cars). New road proposals are promised but what are they? The new roads will make no difference to journey time.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Get out of your office and take a look at the traffic at key junctions along the A5 from Redgates to M69. Bus routes over longer service hours an incentive to ditch the car seem unsuitable. Query how the Eastern Relief Road will support any new and existing residential areas and deal with existing congestion. Adverse impact on air quality. Check the air quality on the Long Shoot as there is far too much traffic on this route. No infrastructure to support this level of new build - schools, GPs, town centre, waste and sewage treatment, libraries and swimming pools, meeting places. Community infrastructure has never been well developed and requires public money to build new schools, medical centres, etc. in an advantaged area rather than spending money is a disadvantaged area. New school proposed for Horeston Grange but did not happen. Good quality farmland, important to food production and a Warwickshire way of life. Do not develop lovely countryside. Reclassify as Green Belt. This many homes not needed, so should remain as farmland. Query the number of homeless in Nuneaton. Develop brownfield sites (eg. Bermuda, Hill Top / Griff, Judkins), empty buildings and town centres to revitalise the core areas and bring life back into towns. Clean up toxic waste sites and build on them rather than building on countryside. Quality of life for taxpayers is being reduced. No consideration of how these developments will impact on current infrastructure. The land is an important buffer between the existing housing and A5. These homes are not needed - local estate agents have many homes that can be purchased. Do not build on the back of a jobs boom at MIRA that may not happen. Consider other sites in Warwickshire for new homes -

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Warwick and Stratford. Wildlife will be affected - owls, kestrels, bats, ground creatures. Farmland and countryside are important for wildlife and ultimately our heath and well-being. Proven that restorative power of nature lifts mood and can have a positive influence on people's mental state. Access to countryside is essential, especially given the pressures of modern lifestyles. Do not fill in green areas of town. Open spaces and greenery for walking and play is vital. Plan for a mix of housing, recreation and farming, offering visionary environmental improvements. Must plan and build new, and improve existing cycle, pedestrian and vehicle infrastructure that provides safe access to the town, station and schools. It is a nice area to live - give other people the chance to live there. The area has good infrastructure and is ideally placed to service the MIRA expansion. There should be a fairer distribution of new homes across the Borough. Proposal is short-sighted, out of scale, unnecessary and unsustainable. Complete development of infrastructure is needed not just tacking on to existing education, health, water and sewage, etc. Council should make fair and equitable decisions for all constituents; not make decisions on a party political basis. Developing this land will cause greater problems with flooding. Query what flood relief will be provided. New homes will place greater stress on the sewage and rain drainage systems. Surface water will be a problem due to take-up of farmland. Homes should be self-sustaining eco-homes. Put effort and money into generating employment for those out of work. Area will become a vast characterless sprawl of suburban houses similar to Coventry and risks losing its special character. Massive oversupply will threaten local house prices.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Do not accept this level of demand by local people, or incomers, with jobs to justify this sprawling development of high density homes. Homes will not be realistically affordable to have a significant impact on local people on the housing list. Build homes for first time buyers, not the usual faceless houses on anonymous estates. Seems an easy option as the land is County Council owned. 408/1 KJ. Poyner N/A Object to proposed building project in this area: See response 408/1 Immensity of the site and its location on greenfield areas. Traffic and pollution - the size of the area serviced and fed by one major road and serviced by two existing major roads which at peak times are already overstretched. The culminating spot at the junction of Weddington Road and Hinckley Road are already at a standstill during peak periods due to the funnelling down process over the Leicester Road Railway Bridge. The increased traffic volumes can only serve to increase the pollution levels by standing traffic. Schools, shops and medical facilities and the already over stretched George Eliot Hospital will be required to service the needs of the inflated population. Consider it would be more appropriate to make any increased housing somewhere midway between Nuneaton and Bedworth, e.g. The Woodlands and surrounding areas, where the land has already been scarred by industry and the like, and since the two towns are mainly serviced by work provided in the Coventry area, the infrastructure and proximity to the Bedworth bypass would service the needs of commuters. 229/1 L. Johnson N/A Plan does not meet the stated Vision and will not See response 592/1. improve the quaity of life for people in the Borough or The land identified as a structural landscape buffer is the natural environment. not suitable to be designated as Green Belt as it does Too many houses, over 57%, being built on greenfield not meet 4 of the 5 purposes of Green Belt. The land at land - Borough does not currently have enough green MIRA is not Green Belt, and is located in Hinckley and spaces. Look at all possibilities and not just take the Bosworth where there is no Green Belt. 71

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent easy way of building on greenfields. Not a fair or balanced Plan - 38% of new houses being built on greenfields in Weddington and St Nicolas. Reduce the number to 1000, as 3000 houses will ruin the area. There needs to be a balance of greenery, trees, etc. Development will mean the loss of a lovely entrance to Nuneaton from the A5. Loss of prime agricultural land - an increasing UK population means that we will need food to eat. The land currently produces milk for superstores and worried about importing milk in the future. Structured landscape buffer - designate as Green Belt and make larger. Query whether MIRA is being considered in terms of Green Belt. Include the copse where foxes live and extend to footpath by Calcot Farm. Walkers use this footpath to Weddington and this activity must continue for locals and from a wider area. Also use as a nature area to learn from and include as part of walking network for Borough. Infrastructure - the Plan does not go far enough in terms of improving traffic flows. The journey into Nuneaton is horrendous, so I shop elsewhere. Need another road with a bridge over the railway for better access into the town, otherwise it will be dreadful. New Roads - Build a link road between Weddington and Stockingford/Camp Hill to take traffic from the town centre and help relieve traffic queues from Stockingford/Camp Hill into town. Improvements to A5 - Build a new road into Nuneaton avoiding the Dodwell roundabout. Traffic pollution - will result from excessive number of houses planned, particularly near Etone School. Puts at risk the health of future generations. Wildlife - will be affected, including barn owls, tawny owls, swallows and redstarts. Is a wildlife survey being undertaken? 213/1 L. Rymell N/A Object to building 3000+ houses on the fields between See responses 592/1, 04/2 (section 5) on Bedworth

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent St Nicolas Park & Weddington: Would devastate one of Woodlands and 208/1 on Judkins Quarry. the few remaining beautiful areas of this town, replacing fields, meadows & hedgerows with brick & concrete; No need to build on Green Belt land as there are plenty of brownfield sites throughout the Borough; Houses should be evenly spread throughout the Borough; Houses should be close to employment creation areas highlighted in the plan; Air pollution will increase due to the additional cars; Access in and out of the town will be worse than it is now - Leicester Road Bridge is currently unable to cope with existing traffic at peak times. Preserve public footpaths (formerly promoted by NBBC as "My Green Track") used for recreation by my family weekly and is a haven for wildlife; Local infrastructure cannot support a development of this scale, especially education. The plan ignores the recommendations made by the council's own planning experts. Suggest looking at Woodlands in Bedworth, areas between Nuneaton & Bedworth near Bermuda or the land near to Judkins. These areas have more employment & better roads & links to the M6, etc. Weddington has had it's share of new houses so look at other areas of the town. Proposals appear to be politically motivated. 5/45 L. Webster Excess development in North Nuneaton. It would be See response 94/1 better to balance the spread of new developments across the whole of the Borough to build it into a more cohesive unit. 381 Les Kirkland N/A 1. I read in the Nuneaton News that only 200 people 1. It was not the intention to discourage people from have sent comments about the Borough Plan to the responding. council. After having spent some time on the council 2. See response 178/1 website I am not surprised. I found it almost impossible to find a link that would enable me to make any comment by email on the plan and this just confirms my impression that the council doesn't want to hear from the residents of the town, but just want to push their plan through irrespective of the fact that the vast majority of the townsfolk are against the proposals. 73

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

2. The idea of building 3000 new homes north of St. Nicolas Park and Weddington is just insane and is totally against the interests of the all of the local population. The plan to build this vast new estate all the way up to the A5 is straight out of the world of Monty Python. The council is supposed to carry out the wishes of the people who voted them in, and pay their expenses and salaries, but they behave as though they always know best and seem to carry out most of their deliberations under a cloak of secrecy as if they are working for MI5. What are the council so afraid of? The public actually finding out what is going on and what is being proposed. The council behave like the Politburo in Soviet Russia or Communist China and no one it seems is allowed to express any opposition to their plans.

Well I for one do oppose their Borough Plan and believe that it should be scrapped, and so I believe do most of the population of Nuneaton, if only they were allowed to find out about it and make their opinions heard. 352/1 M. Bruce Weddington Plans to build 400 houses in Weddington are The Council must plan for the growing population and Primary devastating for Weddington people and should be so the long term needs for new homes for newly School burned. Stop the plans: There could be lots more cars, forming households to live in. up to 800 on Weddington Road, and it's already a very busy road and gets traffic jams. People or children might The existing urban areas have been assessed for get run over and there will be pollution. In 2013, the field potential housing sites but there is not enough land for and beautiful houses were flooded. People were the amount of new housing needed. This means that devastated and had to pay thousands to repair their greenfields will have to be developed. houses. More houses mean there will be nowhere for the rain to go so it will flood again and again. The homes Road infrastructure is not currently adequate to support will upset the wildlife by destroying their beautiful habitat. the growth. So, the Council have been working with the Awesome hedgehogs, beautiful bees and fantastic County Council on this issue. Transport modelling purple hairstreakie butterflies will become extinct as called S-Paramics has taken place. This identifies the there will be no food in the field. Wildlife will be shocked necessary improvements to the road network, and that by the noise. Bees are needed to pollinate the flowers. there will also need to be sustainable transport Building 400 homes will take up more space and destroy improvements (for walking, cycling and public

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the village of Weddington. transport) to help to reduce the negative impact of the development. Further work is also taking place to model the impact of the growth on air quality and to identify measures to help reduce the negative impact of development. The results of this work will feed into the next version of the Plan and the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP).

Flood risk has been assessed in line with national policy. No built development is planned in flood zones. Further assessment will take place at the planning application stage to assess flood risk for the specific site. This will consider all types of flood risk and where relevant will also identify suitable mitigation and sustainable drainage measures.

In terms of impact on wildlife, when selecting the sites for development, this was a factor to consider. Important wildlife sites will be protected from new development. It is recognised that any site can contain wildlife and the Plan contains policies to protect, mitigate or offset biodiversity and habitat losses. Further work on wildlife will take place.

New development will contain supporting infrastructure such as open spaces and green corridors. 352/2 M. Bruce Weddington Dismiss the heartbreaking plans to build 400 houses on See 352/1 Primary the field in Weddington. Constructing 400 houses will be School busy and loud, and Nuneaton will not be peaceful anymore. Wildlife will be upset. Animals are in decline and should be protected. Building 400 houses will be noisy and frightening for the animals. The fascinating butterflies will no longer have leaves on which to lay their eggs. In 2013, there was flooding, and building 400 houses in the field, it might flood again. Imagine being trapped in a dangerous house that was flooding. It could be a danger to life and it costs a lot of money to repair

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the houses. Please stop the plans to build houses on the fields. 352/3 M. Bruce Weddington Take immediate action to get rid of plans to build 400 See 352/1 Primary houses in Weddington. There will be lots of cars lined up School stopping people from getting to places and work. Poison will come out of the exhaust and get into the air so there is no more sun, just rain. There will be more floods. People, especially old people, and animals will get run over easily and die. In 2013, the fields and houses were dreadfully flooded. It costs money to repair the houses and people were very upset. More houses will mean nowhere for the water to go, and so more floods will happen again and again. Building the houses will upset the animals, as trees will be cut down and their habitat will be destroyed. The wonderful hedgehogs, beautiful butterflies and helpful bees cannot lay their eggs in the air, and need somewhere to live. In conclusion, building 400 houses in Weddington will be awful, it will destroy plants, destroy the filed, destroy Green Belt. Halt now. 352/4 M. Bruce Weddington Stop the stupid plans to build 400 houses in See 352/1 Primary Weddington. Wildlife will be destroyed. Butterflies need School fields for food and to lay eggs. The purple hairstreak butterfly has declined and should be saved before it becomes extinct. In 2013, the fields and houses were flooded. People had to pay hundreds of pounds to repair the damage. There will be more cars on Weddington Road. Now in Weddington there are lots of traffic jams and 400 more cars will be on the road making it busier. People, children and wildlife will get run over and suffer due to more pollution. 352/5 M. Bruce Weddington Halt the plans to build 400 houses in Weddington. We See 352/1 Primary do not want these houses. In 2013, the field was flooded School and the people's houses have not been repaired. It costs lots of money to repair the houses. More cars will be on Weddington Road. It will get busy and traffic jams will make people late for school, meetings and work. People,

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent precious children and wonderful wildlife will get run over. More pollution will poison the air. Building 400 houses will upset wildlife - the habitats, food and homes of cute hedgehogs, interesting purple hairstreak butterflies and helpful bees will be devastated. It will ruin fields and Green Belt. 61/1 M. Chetwynd N/A Against building of so many houses on greenfield land See response 592/1 between Weddington and The Long Shoot: Spoil land needed in future to feed the growing population of UK; Little development planned for other areas of Nuneaton and hardly any in Bedworth; Brownfield sites should be developed first and then if necessary other areas in Nuneaton and Bedworth, preferably joining them at that point rather than your choice; Proposed employment sites mainly to the west of Nuneaton at Bermuda, so makes no sense to put the majority of housing on the other side of town; be chaos when schools are open with 1000s of cars using Leicester Road Bridge to get into or through Nuneaton; where there is already poor air quality, which will be worsened when KFC open on the Graziers Inn site despite opposition. Please don't spoil Nuneaton any more. 322/1 M. King N/A Flaws in the Plan: will have most impact on the people of See 592/1 and 229/2 (Section 5) on retail growth. Weddington as much of the proposed new housing is in or close to Weddington; put tremendous pressure on the transport system - roads are gridlocked at peak times; air quality at Leicester Road is already the most polluted due to traffic congestion, treacherous turning right out of Shawe Avenue onto Weddington Road as traffic comes over the brow of the hill at over 30mph. Will become worse with 3000 more houses in the area. Precious countryside will be lost forever. Area of restraint and countryside will be torn up. Suggest developing brownfield sites. Use sites in the town centre for housing not shopping centres. Already too many shops in the town centre, and several major retailers have closed their branches in Nuneaton. 77

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Focus on housing for the over 65s who are increasing in number, while the working population remains static. If the town really needs 3000 extra houses, distribute them more evenly throughout the Borough. 409/6 M. Kondakor N/A The area North of Nuneaton is unsuitable: Taking account the NPPF, evidence base studies and The sustainability assessments indicate that the site will previous consultation, the content of the Preferred not make full use of public transport, walking and Options document was informed by the cross party cycling; North of Nuneaton is PDA 1 and 10 together, Member Working Group, with Cabinet approving the but these have not been modelled together. The document for consultation. Sustainability Report raises serious issues about these See response 592/1 sites individually on traffic, air quality, poor use of existing infrastructure and loss of good agricultural land. Added together the impact will be horrendous. As it is, Leicester Road bridge is about at capacity during term time. It is not evidence based - Para 60 of the Strategic house site selection paper makes recommendations about the potential development areas to be taken forward. The area seems to have been included on the basis that MIRA, located on the A5, is hoping to expand to create 2000 jobs. But if such jobs are created, many of these people will already have homes and will commute or choose to live outside the Borough. So there is no justification to expand this area of Nuneaton on this basis. Existing open space deficiencies will be compounded by new housing. Any new housing needs to have provision for true wildlife areas, parks and countryside. Green space alone is not a substitute for genuine countryside. The small areas at Buttermere recreation ground and Change Brook open space would be wholly inadequate for the development proposed. Loss/lack of green space has impacts on physical and mental health; important in the Borough which has relatively poor health. Loss of prime agricultural land has impacts on sustainability in terms of local food production. Food security is also a serious long term issue for the Country.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Climate change will impact crop growing in other parts of the world so we cannot rely on importing food. Growing food locally will be necessary to survive. Focusing development in one area of the Borough will mean the overall spatial objectives of the Plan will not be achieved. Having 85% of the potential development will only affect Nuneaton and not help the rest of the Borough. It is not fair and will not serve Bedworth or Bulkington for the future. 665/4 M. Kondakor Nuneaton & The sustainability of the proposed development in See response 592/1 District Friends Weddington and St. Nicolas is appalling. There is huge of the Earth loss of prime agricultural land, which is needed for food growing. Food is even more important than providing housing. Good agricultural land needs to be conserved and protected. The existing infrastructure (including roads, public transport, schools, drainage, etc.) cannot support this option. 406/1 M. Poyer N/A Concerned air quality in this area will suffer See response 592/1 tremendously due to the increased high volume of traffic The Plan proposes strategic housing sites at Arbury development would bring; Leicester Road Bridge and and on Gipsy Lane and employment sites at Bermuda. approach roads will not cope; they are almost gridlocked The remaining land between Nuneaton and Bedworth with just the traffic at present; why build on farmland was ruled out because it meets four of the five when more homes are needed in town centres and purposes of Green Belt, and because it is important for brownfield sites; there are more suitable sites to build maintaining separation between the two towns. houses where employment and traffic congestion would Bedworth Woodlands was ruled out because, in April not be an issue, i.e. Bermuda where a new rail station is 2012, Full Council confirmed its commitment to to be built. designate Bedworth Woodlands as Green Belt. 557/1 M. Reynolds The proposed site does not show the quantity, type or See responses 592/1 and 402/7 where the proposed schools will be built. These to be in place when the houses are built allowing for the fact that even IF only half of the properties have only one child there will be 1500 children needing education facilities, doctors and dentists.

These schools will preferably be within walking distance,

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent to encourage a healthy lifestyle and to reduce car emissions, or at least be within the new local community.

The existing roads are already heavily congested at rush hour and busy periods in the day like school times, which increases the risk to children of road accidents.

I am not a NITBY (NIMBY?) but this scheme need to be properly considered with infrastructure in place before the houses are built, not after. 557/2 M. Reynolds Local shops, chemist, dentist and doctors need to be in See responses 592/1 and 402/7 place before such a large number of new properties are built. Once the land is used for housing it will be too late.

Horeston Grange was built without any additional facilities, apart from a small parade of shops which are well used, and often the car park is full. These numbers added to the community with no improved infrastructure. This needs to be taken into consideration. 557/3 M. Reynolds The proposed relief road through the new housing area See response 94/1. exits onto existing roads and shows no improvements to The S-Paramics transport modelling takes account of those roads to accommodate the increased volumes of the new development proposed in this Borough and traffic. development proposed in Hinckley and Bosworth, including that at MIRA. When the traffic gets to the two mini-roundabouts in Whitestone, what options are there for relief to the Town Centre - NONE - because the only option is to go along the Lutterworth Road into Attleborough and back into the Town Centre or Coton Arches

Have the increases and impact on the A5 by MIRA been taken into consideration? 717/7 M. Sullivan CPRE The proposal for Strategic Housing Site 4 is strongly See response 592/1 Warwickshire opposed. At 3,000 dwellings, this is is a huge scale of housing, in excess of local need, and would be a car- based development with little connection to the town

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent centre.

• SHS4 would be likely to attract in-migration of residents who would not work in Nuneaton but drive long distances via A5 and M69 to work in other major urban areas. • It is not a development that would enhance Nuneaton or assist its development as a centre of employment. • It would use high-quality agricultural land. • The separation between Nuneaton and the A5 would be largely removed, except for a landscape buffer along the A5.

Scale down SHS4 to a much more limited development which would relate to the existing urban area, and allow movement by cycle and bus to and from the town centre. Alternatives should be reviewed and further public consultation undertaken. 331/1 Margaret n/a Do not oppose the increase in housing but concerned See response 94/1 Osbourne that it is not justified why the majority of development is within Nuneaton. 172/1 Marian Gunn N/A My objections are as follows: See responses 592/1, 04/2 (section 5) on Bedworth 1 The rate of growth of jobs is flawed; a growth of Woodlands and 229/2 (section 5) on retail growth. 1.5% per annum from 2010 is pie in the sky, we have not even achieved 0.5% from 2010, so the actual rate of growth will need to be even higher from this year, and we are still no nearer achieving anything like 1.5%.

2 The infrastructure of the town will not be able to cope with the thousands of new homes proposed in Weddington and Higham Lane areas. The morning traffic into town is already a nightmare. I dread to think what it will be like if this plan goes ahead. There is also the potential threat of flooding in the Weddington area.

3 There is plenty of space between Nuneaton and Bedworth. Why cannot this be used and make the 81

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Borough become what it is named: Nuneaton and Bedworth? Originally, 1610 homes were planned for Bedworth Woodlands; it appears that this was scrapped to make this area Green Belt, which clearly it doesn’t qualify for, so please reinstate this part of the plan. There is also space in the Tuttle Hill area, which at present appears to be wasteland. Why is this not being considered? I seem to recall that a few years ago there was a plan to erect a waste disposal plant in this area; thankfully common sense prevailed. Let’s hope it prevails once more.

4 There is space in the Town Centre for houses/flats to be built, thus bringing more people into the shopping area. As it is, there are shops in Ropewalk which have closed down, and some that have never been opened (e.g. opposite the Sycamore Tree/Jailhouse). There are several other empty premises (e.g. Bridge Street, where Mothercare and Early Learning used to be, as well as the Starbucks shop which wasn’t open for long).

5 There is a sizeable chunk of space in Clarence Street where O’Neill Joinery used to be. I am aware of how large this is as I worked for the company for nine years. Plenty of flats could be built there.

6 The air quality in the monitoring zone around Back Street, Regent Street, Leicester Road, already exceeds European regulations. The air quality will surely be adversely affected by the enormous increase in traffic. This is a huge concern for everyone.

When I first came to Nuneaton in 1956, it was a nice little town with quaint houses and shops in Bond Street/Bondgate, which were torn down to make way for Powell House, itself ready for demolition by the look of it.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent The Newdegate Hotel was demolished, Griff House (which could have become a tourist-pulling George Eliot museum) was sold to a brewery. Is there no end to the soulless planning by successive Borough Councils?

I do urge the Planning Group to THINK AGAIN, and get advice from experienced Town & Country Planners so that a disaster can be averted. 93/1 Martin n/a Lived in the area since 1974 and teach hydrology and The SFRA 1 & 2 have assessed strategic flooding risk Rhodes hydrogeology, and been involved in flood events over within the Borough in line with the NPPF. The recent years. Alarmed at proposals. The extent of the proposals of the Borough Plan do not plan to develop built up area and the lie of the land mean that severe areas of Flood Zone 2 or 3. Localised risks of flooding flooding will be hard to avoid on a regular basis. New will be assessed on a site by site basis through a site building at Burbage near the A5/M69 junction resulted in specific flood risk assessment. This will consider all serious flooding in Hinckley's rail station/Sketchley types of flood risk and where relevant will also identify Brook area. The same underlying geology applies in this suitable mitigation and sustainable drainage measures. location and is deeply worrying. The Canons Brook, The Council will continue to raise specific issues with Harlow example is the best documented to learn from. the Environment Agency and Severn Trent Water What research have the planners done? Putting more through the work on the IDP. drains means that water will go twice as fast into the River Anker which is already shown to be an insufficient drain. Doubling the built-up area north of Nuneaton and only half the amount of water can sink into the ground - the resulting discharge cannot be met by the River Anker or the flood relief cut, or both added together. An engineered solution may be found, at an incredible cost like the one at York, but it is hard when Knightsbridge Road is already subject to flooding and the area from Nuneaton Ford to Anker Filling station/ Weddington Post Office and to Higham Lane School would be at significant risk of inundation. This requires an answer from a fully qualified hydrologist. 200/1 Maurice N/A As a resident of St Nicolas Park Estate I feel it is totally See response 592/1 Jacques out of the question to build the amount of houses proposed in the St Nicolas and Weddington area. If you live in the St Nicolas Park Drive or Higham Lane area on most school mornings, the traffic builds up due to a 83

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent bottleneck going into the town via the only road over the railway.

Additional building in the area will make matters worse and increase local air pollution, and overload the present overloaded services. Why not look at the main road land bordering Bedworth and Nuneaton. Ok, so the councils may not own this land. 301/1 Michael n/a I oppose the plan as it stands. It is poorly thought out, It is recognised that we need to plan for objectively Burnett and impractical. assessed housing needs and to maintain a five year The plan as it stands is lopsided, and seeks to place the housing land supply. There are not enough brownfield new housing away from the infrastructure - major roads sites to meet the Borough's objectively assessed and motorways, sites of employment, housing needs. Consequently we need to identify the hospitals/healthcare. most sustainable greenfield/Green Belt sites to have The implications for traffic are appalling. Leicester Road sufficient land to meet the Borough's growth needs for Bridge will become even more congested, with resulting the future. The PO housing target was based on unacceptable air pollution, particularly given that the Oxford Economics Forecast Modelling, the details of pollution is likely to affect Etone School, which will be which are set out in the Scale of Growth Background along the traffic jam site. Paper. However, more recent evidence in the 2013 More resources would be required to build new Joint Strategic Housing Market Area will need to be infrastructure and more roads. This would make the cost factored into the Draft Submission, which may trigger a prohibitive. need to review policies in light of the new evidence. The plan appears to be based on a wildly overinflated guess at an employment growth target of 12,000. From The Housing Selection Background Papers provide what is this fanciful figure fabricated? I doubt that MIRA detailed information as to how the sites were selected. will absorb the numbers you seem to predict, nor that new employees will all want to live on its doorstep. The infrastructure requirements for each of the In contrast to the overestimate of working households, strategic sites are being identified through the IDP. This there is not enough focus on housing for the over 65s. process includes ongoing discussions with service The population is ageing, therefore, it is more important delivery partners. The purpose of the IDP is to identify than ever that new houses include enough provision for the appropriate infrastructure needed to support the elderly, including excellent access to healthcare, proposals in the Plan as well as the timing of delivery. including the hospital, and easy access to the town The IDP will continue to be updated as the Plan centre for shopping and community. Your plan appears develops. to attempt to dislocate elderly people out of their existing communities into a new ghetto bereft of health care, The S Paramics transport modelling work has community or transport. investigated different mitigation measures to address

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Why are the council wanting to destroy their greenfield the transport impacts of the proposed development. sites when there are brownfield sites that would benefit Further work will be undertaken to investigate the from being developed (for example near Judkins)? In viability and deliverability of options available. The doing this you are failing your young people, for whom modelling also considers transport issues beyond the open spaces will be increasingly important (and rare). Borough boundary and therefore provides Increasing shops away from the town centre would likely comprehensive analysis. As the Plan progresses, the hasten the demise of the town centre, so adding these to actual details such as road layout, will be further the proposed infrastructure is ill thought out. refined. I remember a 2009 "Issues & Options" consultation. Why has it been ignored in this plan? It is envisaged that the Plan will provide opportunities North Nuneaton has already had permission for a for up to 12000 jobs within, broadly speaking, the B1 development of more than 500 homes, including 326 off (Business), B2 (General Industry) and B8 (Storage and Church Lane. This will strain the local infrastructure. Distribution) sectors. One of the reasons the Borough Why are those with responsibility for the future of our Plan is aspirational is to give market confidence to Borough wanting to push it past breaking point? This businesses and entrepreneurs so that they want to plan appears to be designed as the worst possible invest in the Borough. Such investment could lead to scenario in terms of cost, pollution, and provision of the dynamic, highly skilled sectors that will drive the 21st Borough's needs. century economy. Please start again. In particular consider the other options raised in your own consultation, and reduce your excessive estimates of population growth, then look for opportunities to restore and improve brownfield sites for housing to diminish your destructive environmental impact. 425 Michael John N/A We object to the proposed Borough Plan with the St See response 94/1 Young Nicolas Park area. The local infrastructure in our opinion will not support this development. Leicester Road Bridge and approach routes will not cope with the increased traffic. This increased traffic will also give very poor air quality in the area. 642/1 Miss S B N/A 1. Weddington Road into town at certain times is nose- See response 592/1 Barden to-tail traffic, and a roundabout is not going to solve the There is no land designated as Green Belt around problem with around an extra 3000 cars on the road Weddington. network. 2. Doctors and dentists will not want to set up surgeries for new estates, and where are the increased number of children going to find decent schools? 85

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 3. The area is a flood plain and what is proposed to cope with the floods. There is an underground stream at the bottom of Glenfield Avenue and when there is heavy rain the road gets flooded. This needs sorting. The cottages by the Weddington Walk are regularly flooded following heavy rain and during the downpours last November (2012) the floods reached the Church even though it stands on slightly higher ground. 4. Weddington is the last area of Green Belt in Nuneaton. It is a popular place for people from all over Nuneaton. Soon there will be no open spaces for Nuneaton people to enjoy.

674 Miss Vivienne N/A 1. Weddington and St Nicolas Park already suffer from a See response 592/1 Parish high volume of traffic onto the A5 and into Nuneaton town. Particularly congested roads include the Long The WCC comments within the STA transport shoot, Hinckley Road (into the town centre), Leicester addendum refer to a scenario that tested all the Road, Eastboro Way and the top of Milby Drive and housing to the north (test related to 5620 dwellings at Higham Lane (especially around school times). The Weddington and St. Nicolas). The Preferred Options additional 3000 houses will further increase the demand did not allocate all this housing to the north. In on these roads, resulting in delays, an increase in road developing the plan work will be undertaken with traffic accidents (especially by the schools) and noise, Warwickshire County Council regarding transport which will reduce the health and well-being of current matters. Specfically a S-Paramics modelling and future residents. The proposed relief road is unlikely assessment is being undertaken which will asses the to relieve these issues and may exasperate the problem necessary road improvements to support growth. In by encouraging lorries and articulated vehicles to divert addition a viability assessment will be required to away from the A5 through residential areas. assess whether these schemes can be delivered.

2. Warwickshire County Council do NOT support the proposed 3000 homes in the North of Nuneaton due to the significant impact on the highways network. WCC state ‘with the latest set of proposals allocating all housing developments to the north of Nuneaton, WCC believe there will be severe impacts on network performance which cannot all be mitigated. As clearly stated in the original STA, Options with housing sites located north of Nuneaton have the most significant

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent effect on the highway network as a whole. WCC would therefore not recommend the allocation of all housing development north of Nuneaton as tested within this addendum report’ (Page 43, WCC, 2012). Therefore there is a mismatch in the position of current and future employment (i.e. in the Town Centre, Coventry and the South of the region on the map in page 7) and the proposed new housing developments. (Reference http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm =1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDoQFjAA&url= http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nuneatonandbedworth.gov.uk%2 Fdownload%2Fdownloads%2Fid%2F995%2Fstrategic_t ransport_assessment_addendum_and_appendices_201 2&ei=5JAgUrjkC5Dn7AbD5YGgBg&usg=AFQjCNFFZ7u oaDATJVe__tb1mUMLL3lZnA)

3. Weddington and St Nicolas already have some of the worst air quality issues in the Borough. The additional 3000 houses and consequent traffic would further decrease the air quality in the area to approaching illegal levels. This will increase the levels of pollutants and carcinogens in the local air, which impact on health, including increased prevalence of asthma, lung disease/cancer, eye and throat irritation/infections and damage to the nervous system. (Reference http://www.air-quality.org.uk/18.php).

4. Current local facilities (schools, GP practices, dentists, shops, etc.) cannot meet the demand of the additional housing. There are long waiting lists for accessing the Grange GP practice and local dentist. These are unlikely to be able to expand from their current sites. Local schools especially primary schools would not be able to cope with the additional demand. Therefore could we ensure that any new developments are agreed as part of the wider strategy to ensure facilities are calculated for. (Unlike the current piecemeal

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent approach used with the Church Lane and Long Shoot developments.)

5. Do we need an additional 7,900 homes to be built in the next 15 years? (This equates to 1 house per 2.01 additional people.) Looking at the ONS midyear projections, NBBC population for 2011 was 125400. The Warwickshire population predictions suggest that by 2030 there will be 149000 people living in NBBC, i.e. an additional 16500 residents. 2011 census indicated that the average number of people per house is 2.4 in NBBC, this would suggest that only 6875 new homes would be needed. Also consideration must be given to an ageing population who may need additional care and nursing homes rather than additional housing. (Reference, Warwickshire Observatory, data from ONS http://www.warwickshireobservatory.org/observatory/obs ervatorywcc.nsf/RefDocs/EBSH- 72CKAF?OpenDocument and http://www.warwickshireobservatory.org/observatory/obs ervatorywcc.nsf/0/564F4491F9BD888E80257B030030D 501/$file/Nuneaton%20&%20Bedworth.pdf)

6. St Nicolas Park and Weddington are aspirational estates to live on. Please can we keep it this way to ensure people do not migrate out of Nuneaton, which would damage the local economy. The current residents of St Nicolas Park and Weddington will host some of the most affluent communities in NBBC. This group are likely to have more disposable income and are therefore able to support the local economy and spend in local shops, services, restaurants, pubs, etc. They are also likely to work outside of NBBC in Coventry, Birmingham and Leicester, and be able to afford to move from the area if the new developments negatively impact on the current estates. This would have a negative effect on local businesses.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes 1. A Health Impact Assessment should be carried out to assess the impact of the 3000 proposed homes on the current residents of St Nicolas and Weddington. This will highlight the need for additional primary schools, doctors surgeries, dentists and other health care facilities (such as the George Elliot).

2. A Traffic Assessment should be carried out to assess the impact of the additional 3000 homes on the main roads in the area (Long Shoot, Hinckley Road, Leicester Road, Eastboro Way, Higham Lane, Milby Drive (near school) and Weddington Road)? Previous evidence has shown that Coventry and Birmingham are key areas for Nuneaton and Bedworth residents to commute to work. Therefore it would it be more advisable to develop the South of the region, (i.e. areas such as 3&4 in Bedworth that have disproportionately low housing developments, the Woodlands (an area previously highlighted for development) or Whitestone and Bulkington (again who have disproportionately low proposed housing development.) Although I acknowledge some housing developments will occur in St Nicolas and Weddington (such as the Long Shoot and Church Lane developments) a more equitable distribution of houses to need would be advantageous for the whole of NBBC.

3. Rather than building a new relief road through the residential estates, could the A5 be increased to a dual carriageway from Higham Lane to the Long Shoot? This would extend the work MIRA is completing in North Warwickshire (i.e. making the A5 a dual carriageway from the Redgate to the little hump bridge just after MIRA.) Again could a traffic and health impact assessment be completed on this?

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 4. Have the housing development figures been reviewed since the 2011 census data has been released? My calculations above suggest less houses may be needed.

5. With any agreed new developments could the local residents be actively involved in the planning process? If the new houses enhance the current estates, increasing current house prices, the residents are less likely to object. For example instead of strict social housing quota (25%?) could agreement be made with the builders to reduce the proportion of housing association properties or use the scheme where residents buy a % and rent a % of their house? Also can we ensure that there are lots of green spaces in the new developments? (As there are a lot of people that regularly use them currently in these areas. Green space also is linked to good health and well-being.) Other suggestions include ensuring there are enough car parking spaces allocated to each new house to avoid congestion on the roads (such as on the new Bermuda Estate). Also a key area to reduce anxiety of current residents would be to keep new developments isolated from the current estates. (I.e. don’t join up the roads to Pallet Drive, etc.) This would reduce the likelihood of increased traffic on the current estates. 632/1 MJ Richards N/A Query what other options/visions were considered for The Borough Plan sets out what other options were this area or other sites in the Borough - going back to considered for each policy. The site selection the 2009 Plan; No clear measures for reducing traffic background papers set out what other options were noise and pollution; The Plan mentions new local routes considered for the strategic housing sites. and schools but does not say where; Approach routes See responses 592/1 and 402/7 into Nuneaton are already congested with traffic causing chaos - it can only get worse; Loss of Green Belt; Part of the area is floodplain; The Plan will not improve my quality of life; New employment will be south of the town. 297/1 Mr & Mrs E. n/a Local residents should be engaged more. The See response 592/1 and 379/1 (Comments on G. Thought development will lead to increased congestion around consultation process). The Long Shoot and railway station. Should seek to 90

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent protect Green Belt land and the town in general. 99/1 Mr & Mrs Object to the proposed building of 3000 homes north of See response 592/1. Garvie St Nicolas Park and Weddington. The Council's evidence base documents and background papers were published on the Council's Disagree with the basis on which you are proposing to website during the consultation. build these homes. We do not agree the area requires this amount of new properties, and do not agree with the employment forecasts and growth forecast for the town. Why is it that all the housing is proposed by digging up greenfields around St Nicolas Park and Weddington, when there are plenty of more suitable infill sites that could be done, without the need to reduce the countryside. This appears to have been ignored and the simple option of a "big clear space" being the best option.

Feel the process has been secretive, with information not being shared with residents. Indeed my "former" conservative MP when electioneering at the last election said that no houses would be built in that area in his lifetime; now we see the land is in the proposed Borough Plan..? 667 Mr & Mrs N/A Disagree with the overall “business” case for so many See response 592/1 Mclean homes and accordingly oppose the proposals. In particular we disagree with the merging of Hinckley and Nuneaton through the developments at and around St. Nicolas Park.

Reasons for Comment and Preferred Changes Firstly the figures that make up the business case that underpin so many additional homes are based on assumptions that are at best delusional, and at worst are deliberately misleading. The data that the assumptions are based on are time-dated and do not seem robust in the economy of 2013. Secondly the town's communication infrastructure is crippled due to 3 separate railway lines, one river and 1 canal causing 91

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent traffic chicaning issues under normal circumstances. When under stress (accident, problems on M6,M1,M69,M45,A46,A5) the town's traffic flow becomes really bad. In comparison to other nearby towns (Rugby, Hinckley, Atherstone) Nuneaton is the least preferred option of choice for new businesses, professionals and commuters due in part to these embedded traffic issues. Other infrastructure issues such as lack/quality of schools, doctors, dentists, hospitals are due to the town having the highest population per square mile figure in the County. Air quality, higher levels of crime when compared to the county, higher levels of unemployment (short and long term) have all contributed to the county image of Nuneaton being badly managed, badly led and a sink town for the County.

We would also oppose the St. Nicolas development on the grounds of merging the town with Hinckley is not a desirable feature.

I would like the assumptions and data in the report that have persuaded the council for such an increase in the town's population (assuming the case for town growth is economic and not political) to be independently revisited before an appropriate Plan is drawn up. 412/1 Mr & Mrs N/A The recent approval for 330 houses to be built on See response 382/1 regarding flooding Morson farmland between Church Lane and the Weddington Walk, on land that was flooded completely earlier this In developing the Preferred Option the Council year is totally illogical. Housing in this area caught by the undertook Development Forecasting work in floods are still not yet fit for habitation. developing its housing figures. This evidence was considered more up to date than the evidence used to The recently released Borough Plan now states that a inform the RSS. However, following completion of the total of 12000 new homes are needed in our Borough. sub-regional SHMA, LPA's will be working together This is 'a figure plucked out of the air', there being no under the DTC to ensure the objectively assessed proven reason or logic given. housing needs of the HMA are met. This study supersedes information contained in the abolished

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent In the Plan a total housing development of around 4000 RSS. The Council is undertaking an update of the new builds, covering farmland between Weddington Oxford Economics modelling to inform the pre- Lane, Watling Street and The Long Shoot is totally submission version of the Plan. The scale of growth unreal. Again there is no published evidence that this paper explains the target set out in the Borough Plan number of housing is needed. No consideration has been given to the increased traffic volumes and The approach taken towards economic growth is associated increase in pollution levels. The ring road ambitious. It adopts a 1.5% jobs growth per annum around Etone School is already perilously close to EU creating 12,000 additional jobs over the Plan period. permitted levels. NBBC claim to have the ability to Land has been allocated within the Preferred Option to attract 12000 new jobs to the Borough; I have never meet this growth level. heard or seen factual evidence on how this will be achieved. Nuneaton is now a dormitory town, with little See response 179/1 regarding Town Centre manufacturing industry, simply a hub for logistics requirements. Free car parking is not a matter that is companies moving imported goods around our country. considered through the Borough Plan.

The Plan reveals a development idea of 2 further retail The pre-submission BP will take account of the sites similar to the Ropewalk; this has never been fully responses to the PO Consultation as well as being occupied. Our town centre is now packed with based on sound up to date evidence. ”Poundland” type shops, charity shops and banks. Our weekly street markets being only a shadow of its former glory. The internet is now the High Street for many of our purchases. The Tesco Superstore in Bedworth has killed off many of the few remaining retail outlets in this area; this will have the same impact in Nuneaton if we allow more superstore developments to enter.

A good Borough Plan should include ideas on how to improve the look and image of our town centres. The use of available space above retail outlets for flats needs to be utilised; let’s bring some life back to our town after 6.00pm. Good quality entertainment facilities and free car parking is what's needed.

NBBC state that they will only consider “sound and robust evidence” from residents who wish to state their views. Ironic really when considering that this Plan contains nothing of the sort.

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

For the sake of future generations our views must be considered. 588/1 Mr & Mrs We don’t want more houses in Weddington. We have See response 592/1 West enough houses here. Have you seen the traffic on Weddington Road? What about the ambulance and fire service; how are they going to get to the A5 and back?

Why are you out to destroy the lovely countryside. All the people that come to Weddington to walk in the fields. We know and understand people need houses but you have other land and places you can build on. 343/1 Mr & Mrs n/a Firstly, it is important to take into account the impact of See responses 93/1 and 592/1 Wright further building on land which is currently at risk of flooding (and indeed does flood at the moment during prolonged heavy rain). If building were to commence at the edge of Glenfield Avenue (registered as a flood plain), adjacent to Coronation Walk as planned, then the flood risk to current homes would be significantly increased. Insurances would be more difficult to secure than they are at the moment, as the threat would increase significantly. Flooding is clearly also a risk where Hallam's have proposed to build off Church Lane. The costly measures individual residents like ourselves have taken to protect their homes already would become woefully inadequate without the additional surface drainage currently provided by the farmland alongside the Anker flood relief system. How does this align with the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework guidance to ‘direct new development towards areas with the lowest probability of flooding? Neither does proposing to build on beautiful, high quality agricultural land and public space in these areas demonstrate a keenness to protect one of the Borough’s ‘natural assets’. Nor does it demonstrate a ‘commitment to enhance the environment’. It will almost certainly not represent a minimised impact ‘on biodiversity and’ 94

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent provide ’net gains in biodiversity where possible’ either. In fact ‘the Preferred Option’ will ‘result in an overall adverse effect on material assets’ in the Borough. ‘It is considered that all development proposals will result in some changes to landscape character. Moreover, all options’ which ‘involve Green Belt and/ or Greenfield development have potential adverse impacts on biodiversity and landscape.’ Once lost, valuable, high quality farmland of this nature and the net gains it provides to the surrounding community will be lost forever. How is this ‘prudent use of land and resources’ or even ‘the protection and improvement of soil quality’? 343/1 Mr & Mrs n/a Aside from the increased flood-risk to local residents’ See responses 93/1 and 592/1. Wright homes, the level of infrastructure necessary to service The Borough Plan has to take account of all the all of these additional homes would be vast. Drainage, policies set out in the NPPF. One of the reasons for an sewerage, road networks, schools, medical facilities examination of the Plan by an independent Inspector is would all be impacted and are not designed to cope with to judge how the Plan has taken account of the NPPF. such a huge population influx. The increase in traffic alone would undoubtedly create complete gridlock at peak times, in an area already struggling to cope with traffic cutting through residential areas, creating a variety of rat-runs in an effort to reach the A5. Additionally, air quality would suffer, and the quality of life for current residents would be further substantially reduced because of noise pollution. How does this support NPPF guidance that any plan should be designed to prevent ‘both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution’? How will this ‘minimise the contribution to climate change’? 343/1 Mr & Mrs n/a The ‘employment land’ which is planned for Bermuda The Plan directs development to Nuneaton as a Wright and Pro-Logis would mean that employees working priority. Whilst it is recognised that a large proportion of there and living in the proposed new homes would be development is proposed for North of Nuneaton, the required to drive/travel by public transport to the other Borough Plan proposes a number of sites across the side of the town centre, exacerbating traffic issues Borough and recognises that development will take around an already over-pressured one-way system. This place in the existing urban areas. It is too simplistic to 95

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent would indicate that the proposed additional housing assume that all newly forming households will would add to the Borough’s current traffic issues, and is automatically be accommodated in new build housing therefore being located in the wrong place. How on earth or that they will find jobs on the new employment land. does this demonstrate ‘the careful and sustainable The housing and jobs markets are more complex than location of development in order to minimise the need this. for travel’ or ‘reduce pollution’? 343/1 Mr & Mrs n/a Surely it would be more appropriate to source and See response 592/1 and 229/2 (Section 5) on retail Wright secure brownfield sites for any additional building? We growth. think that in the current economic climate, when our local area is perhaps not recovering as quickly as other towns across Warwickshire, that the demand for new homes is incredibly over-estimated considering our statistically lower rate of population compared with the rest of the county. The fact that shops in the town centre are closing down or re-locating and being replaced by pound stores and pawn-brokers, demonstrates the reality of this opinion. Ploughing on with a plan for so many new homes, based on an ‘estimate’ of the number of ‘potential’ jobs available at some point far into the future is considerably flawed. 121/1 Mr and Mrs n/a There is no proper infrastructure to cope with the See response 94/1 Dewell increased amount of traffic from all the proposed new houses; the air quality will suffer greatly. We live in Church Lane and struggle now to get onto the Weddington Road at certain times of the day. The new proposed relief road will have to go over 2 bridges, which will have to be rebuilt to cope with the extra traffic, so where is the money coming from? Another white elephant like the ring road which goes through the town centre. 582 Mr and Mrs N/A 1. There were no Preferred Options presented to us. See response 592/1 Lavington 2. There are far more houses being planned for than will ever be needed. 3. No regard has been given to the Green Belt. 4. All building is directed to St Nicolas Park and Weddington, none elsewhere. This means traffic will

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent have to go through the town centre. Traffic mayhem. 641/1 Mr and Mrs R N/A The development proposed for Weddington & St Nicolas See response 591/2. G Aston is out of proportion to the rest of that proposed for the The Plan is aspirational and seeks to address the Borough. Based on current figures the maximum environmental, social and economic issues in the number of houses for this area should be around 600 Borough. In particular, the plan is economically driven new houses. and seeks to diversify the economy and improve job opportunities for residents. Alongside the Borough This side of Nuneaton, due to significant housing Plan, an Economic Development Strategy will be development over the years, traffic is often gridlocked. prepared to address the non-planning elements of The proposed road network will do nothing to relieve the economic growth. situation. The A5 serves Leicestershire, Warwickshire, None of the relevant service delivery partners have Staffordshire and Northamptonshire, all of which have expressed a concern about noise from the A5. We will new housing and business developments. Hinckley and continue to work with them to identify any relevant Bosworth, for example, will build 4500 houses over its issues. Plan period, of which many occupants will use both the A5 and A47 to travel to and from work.

The relief road will not work for traffic going into Nuneaton Town Centre. The Long Shoot part of the A47 needs a bypass to remove transit traffic. This should be by the Dodwell Island and improvement could include a dual carriageway adjoining the proposed development which could increase the noise problem.

The A5 is heavily trafficked between Nuneaton and Hinckley during both the day and the night. On average 16000 vehicles per day pass between The Longshoot Pub and Dodwell Island. Along another stretch of the A5 facing the proposed development, an average of 10000 vehicles pass per day. If the proposed development takes place it will significantly increase the amount of traffic along both the the A5 and A47. Moreover, between 2007 and 2009 there were 100 accidents in this area.

Increased traffic along A5 and A47 will also increase traffic noise levels. A report by the British Heart

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Foundation (10.7.13) states that traffic noise seriously impacts on people's lives, disturbing sleep patterns, affects cognitive functions and contributes to cardiovascular diseases.

The road congestion on the Old Hinckley Road and A47 will cause people to shop further afield in Hinckley, Tamworth and Fosse Park (where there is free parking) rather than go to Nuneaton Town Centre.

The stated 40 houses per hectare is far too high as schools, doctors' surgeries, religious buildings, community centres and roads are included in this as well as public and green spaces, and is not in-keeping with the adjoining residential housing. This is likely to store up problems for the future by limiting the space for households to grow, such as frequent changes in ownership/renting and giving the neighbourhood a transient feeling. Additionally, the suggested road through the proposed development will become a rat- run.

There are flaws in the hierarchy system. The scoring system will result in the Nuneaton side of the Borough becoming a concrete jungle. Trying to mix different types of housing in this area will result in people not purchasing homes in this area. Social engineering is not the solution. What is needed is education and highly paid local employment for all people so that they can advance and have a goal.

Bedworth has the least amount of greenfield sites allocated for new housing. The greenfield sites in the Woodlands should be allocated for housing and not Green Belt

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Conclusions: 1. The Plan does not address the highways infrastructure 2. The Plan does not address the need for better schools 3. There is no ambition for the people. What about a concept to attract bigger companies i.e. Jaguar Land Rover 4. Public services such as water, sewerage, electricity, gas provision and refuse collection 5. The Plan does not take into consideration the detrimental effect it has for the settled community in all preferred areas 6. The Preferred Plan needs a complete rethink and a new plan with options and consultation with the public 7. 8. Some of the sites on the Plan do not address flood plains 205/1 Mr Charles n/a Present road network is unable to cope, the A47/A5 See responses 23/1, 152/1, 350E/9, point 1 (A & S), Marshall crossing causes serve congestion; proposals will 430/1, points 2 & 3 (A & S). excerbate this. Will double the number of residents within the area without road network improvements. Will make the current situation much worse. On days when the M6 is closed or congested the A5 is used as a relief road, leading to long traffic ques. 205/1 Mr Charles n/a The large number of homes will place demands on local See response 592/1 Marshall schools. Increasing after-school traffic, when the bus services already have to alter their routes at these times around Milby Drive Infant School. 205/1 Mr Charles n/a Before allowing building on greenfield sites, all other See response 592/1 Marshall sites should have been used to accommodate as many homes as possible. Land use in both Nuneaton and Bedworth Town Centre is poor. The plan is untenable. 245/1 Mr Chris n/a Object to your plan to build 3000 houses on precious See response 592/1 Humphrey greenfields in the Weddington/St Nicolas area. The plan is flawed because these fields will be lost forever

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent affecting the environment for both wildlife and the local residents; local roads are already gridlocked at peak times and this can only get worse if your plan is approved; I don't believe that you are listening to local people and their views on the subject. You seem only keen to push you plan through at all costs for political reasons. I would like to see far less houses in the area, at most one third of your proposal, and that they only be built when you have taken steps to relieve the already congested local roads, in particular by making better access to the A5 and preferably making it a dual carriageway. 610 Mr David N/A The proposal for 3000 homes in the north of Nuneaton See response 94/1 Baker does not take account of the additional traffic. The new proposed roads and ring roads do not take traffic around Nuneaton, leaving The Long Shoot, Higham Lane and Weddington Road taking significant additional traffic.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes I would like to see a major new ring road around the whole of Nuneaton. In the east this would go from the A444 to Dodwell's roundabout. In the west and north, it would go around Stockingford and create a new crossing for the railway line in North Nuneaton. 299/1 Mr David n/a Having lived on St Nicolas Park Drive since 1987 we See response 592/1 Chetwynd have seen considerable increases in the volume of The responses to the Issues and Options have been traffic using St Nicolas Park Drive to the point that it has taken into account in preparing the Borough Plan become a main arterial road linking the A5, Hinckley Preferred Options. However, these have to be Road, Eastboro Way and Nuneaton Town Centre. At balanced against the evidence base which may not times during each day of the week the road is log always be compatible with the responses to jammed with commuters on a rat run, parents going to consultation. and from schools, and in the event of delays/accidents on the A5 or M6 more vehicles adding to the congestion along this stretch of road. The proposed addition of 3000 homes to be added to this area is totally unsubstantiated and unacceptable for 100

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the following reasons :- 1) There is no evidence to justify 3000 homes in this area, or indeed the 7900 indicated for the total Borough. Local papers are filled every week with both homes for sale or rent which indicates that there is no immediate shortage, or likely to be for the foreseeable future. I suspect that as there is a waiting list for council homes that the housing forecast has been deliberately inflated to create the 20/25% allocation of new developments. 2) It does not make any sense to put such a large concentration of housing on this side of Nuneaton with the access to and through Nuneaton badly restricted by the 3 railway bridges, ie: Leicester Road, the Arches and Attleborough, all contributing to the restricted access to the town centre and other areas, especially at peak times. Most industry is on the opposite side of the town in Coventry, Birmingham and the M6, and the relatively small forecast of 500+ jobs at MIRA cannot justify the considerable projected need for housing in this area. 3)The existing road network cannot support the addition of a further 8000 cars in the area (est. 2 to 3 per home) with the vaguely indicated possible additional relief road being proposed. This will not relieve the current road systems in any way and will only add to the currently congested eastern relief road. I cannot see how the proposed "relief road" to Golf Drive will help, it will just add to the current chaos. 4) Existing schools in the area are already oversubscribed, as are GP surgeries and dental surgeries. Thought must be given to these important issues, prior to any decisions being made. 5) Any new housing must be supported by the appropriate infrastructure for the area, taking account of the current circumstances and all the above mentioned issues. To summarise: *The projected housing forecast is deeply flawed and

101

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent needs to be revisited and scaled down. *Any proposed new homes should be spread evenly around Nuneaton and Bedworth with the emphasis being based on avoiding transport "bottlenecks", and already congested road systems. *Top priority should be to place homes closer to industry on the south of Nuneaton within easy reach and access to the new railway station, Coventry and the motorway network. *History has taught us that homes should always be planned and developed in and around easy reach of industry. *There is no clear evidence to support the Council's current plans, which although mentioned, does not take account of the 2009 consultation on housing site allocations "issues and options" - why? I would urge Members of the Planning Committee to reconsider their plans and come up with a more constructive thought through Borough Plan for Nuneaton and Bedworth, looking at a more realistic plan and using brownfield sites, rather than using more greenfield sites. 592/1 Mr David N/A 1. Why are the majority of the proposed new homes Flood Risk - The SFRA 1 & 2 have assessed strategic Jeanes located in north Nuneaton when other areas were flooding risk within the Borough. The proposals of the identified by the Council's own policy officers? Borough Plan do not plan to develop areas of Flood 2. Why do we have to lose perfectly good agricultural Zone 2 or 3. Localised risks of flooding will be land? assessed on a site by site basis through a site specific 3. Traffic congestion over the railway bridge is already flood risk assessment. This will consider all types of dreadful. A further 3000+ households requiring access flood risk and where relevant will also identify suitable to and through the town will be a nightmare. mitigation and sustainable drainage measures. 4. Any new road will only move the problems from The Long Shoot to the A5 further along to Higham Lane and Number and spread of houses - The Council must plan Weddington Lane junctions. for the objectively assessed housing needs for the 5. No infrastructure proposals are shown for schools, housing market area in line with the NPPF. An doctors, shops, etc. objective of the Plan is to direct development towards 6. The target figure of 12000 additional jobs in Nuneaton. It is noted that a large allocation to the Nuneaton cannot be realistic. The only significant north results in disproportionate growth across the number of jobs will be at MIRA, but nowhere near your Borough. However, it is of the view of the Council that

102

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent figure. the development will result in positive benefits. In 7. No alternative options were provided. addition, the allocation of large scale strategic sites is more likely to accrue larger infrastructure benefits.

Inadequate road network and traffic congestion problems – Road infrastructure is not currently adequate to support the growth. For this reason, the Council has been working with the County Council on this issue. S-Paramics modelling has taken place. It identifies the necessary improvements to the road network. It is anticipated that there will also need to be sustainable transport improvements to assist with reducing the negative impact of the development. The S Paramics modelling also assesses impact on AQMAs. The results of this work will feed into the development of the pre-submission document and update of the IDP.

Impact on air quality - The S Paramics modelling also assesses impact on AQMAs. Further detailed work on the impact of development, taking account of the proposed road improvements and sustainable transport measures, is also being carried out. The results of this work will feed into the development of the pre- submission document and update of the IDP.

Development of Greenfield land - The Council has assessed the urban area to identify suitable brownfield sites within the existing urban area. However, there are not enough sites to meet the required figure and so it is necessary to develop on greenfield sites. See site selection background papers for further information.

Loss of productive farmland – It is acknowledged that the proposal will lead to the loss of agricultural land. This is one of a number of issues that the Council has to balance in terms of identifying suitable sites. See site

103

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent selection background papers for further information.

Loss of footpaths, recreation space and countryside – The routes of Public Footpaths will be protected. It is acknowledged that the proposals will lead to loss of countryside. However, the Green Infrastructure policy, supported by the Green Infrastructure Plan, seeks to enhance and/or create new recreational spaces and routes.

Impact on wildlife - The Plan contains policies to protect, mitigate or offset biodiversity and habitat losses. Further work on ecology will be undertaken.

Impact on schools, doctors, hospital and other local infrastructure – The Council, through an Infrastructure Planning and Delivery Group, is working with a range of service providers to identify what infrastructure – schools, doctors, utilities, public transport, etc. - is required to support the development proposals. This information will included in the IDP and inform the policy requirements. The IDP is an ongoing piece of work. Upon completion it should be read in conjunction with the Borough Plan because it will not be possible to illustrate every scheme on the maps.

Location of development in relation to new employment proposals – The employment proposals are located in the most suitable locations for employment. It is accepted that SHS4 is not closely linked to other employment allocations within the Borough. However, it is located in close proximity to employment opportunities in neighbouring authorities.

False assumption that new houses will bring jobs growth to the Borough – The Borough Plan does not make the assumption that new homes will bring jobs.

104

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent The Borough Plan is aspirational and seeks to address the economic issues facing the Borough in a positive way by planning for economic growth. It recognises that jobs growth will boost demand for housing but also that the demographic needs of the Borough will also need to be met. The Council must plan for the objectively assessed housing needs for the housing market area in line with the NPPF.

See response 291/3 (Comments on Consultation process) in options. 364/3 Mr David n/a I do not agree with the policy that takes population As a point of fact the north east of the Borough is Pinks increase as a given that must be accommodated. We countryside and does not come under the designation must not encroach on Green Belt land to satisfy this of Green Belt. Nonetheless, the National Planning social attitude. Both nationally and locally we must find Policy Framework states that the Green Belt should a way of stemming the population increase. It is like the only be altered in exceptional circumstances, such as transport network. We invest more to relieve congestion when preparing a new Plan (para 83). with faster services / roads only to find that the passenger/traffic volumes increase by taking advantage It is recognised that we need to plan for objectively of the extra/improved capacity, and the congestion assessed housing needs and to maintain a five year returns. Housing and population are in danger of housing land supply. There are not enough brownfield continuing in a similar upward spiral. sites to meet the Borough's objectively assessed You make the observation that too many developments housing needs. Consequently we need to identify the in the past have not added positively to the character of most sustainable greenfield / Green Belt sites to have the area. How can a great swathe of Green Belt being sufficient land to meet the Borough's growth needs for replaced by thousands of houses be making a positive the future. The PO housing target was based on impact on the character of the north east of the town. Oxford Economics Forecast Modelling, the details of Your proposals seem to contradict the objectives. which are set out in the Scale of Growth Background Paper. However, more recent evidence in the 2013 Joint Strategic Housing Market Area will need to be factored into the Draft Submission, which may trigger a need to review policies in light of the new evidence.

The Housing Selection Background Papers provide detailed information as to how the sites were selected. 364/4 Mr David n/a The bulk of the additional housing in the Borough will be See response 592/1 Pinks on the north east side of Nuneaton, whilst all of the It is accepted that SHS4 is not closely linked to the new 105

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent employment within the Borough is in either the town employment allocations within the Borough, however it centre or on the opposite side of town. This forces is located in close proximity to employment sites in commuting across town. I can't see how the Leicester neighbouring authorities, e.g. MIRA. It is also well Road bridge will cope. We already experience serious located for existing and new employment opportunities bottlenecks when the M6 has a problem. How will the in the town centre. town's infrastructure cope with these situations on top of The Plan must provide for affordable housing including the additional cross-town commuting. We should also social rented and intermediate housing such as shared be adopting a policy of reducing travel (commuting) ownership. The level of affordable housing will be costs. How are the 50% who can't afford entry level determined by the need identified in the Strategic property going to afford both the property and the travel Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) and work on costs? Viability. The position of the bulk of the additional housing in the north east will, alternatively, encourage people from outside the Borough to move in to take advantage of the commuting links via the A5, etc. It is also likely to satisfy the housing needs of the expansion of MIRA rather than those of exisiting Borough residents. I cannot see how it will attract people from within the Borough. This will not solve the Borough's apparent existing shortfall in housing stock amongst its exisiting residents even though it would not worsen the traffic situation in that scenario. 300/1 Mr Graham N/A Given that I have already questioned the basis of the See responses 592/1 on scale of growth and 09/1 on Stout growth projection and therefore the need for 3000 Eastern Relief Road (section 11 Whitestone and houses to be built, it follows that the infrastructure Bulkington). required also needs to be reviewed. There is no further detail given in the document to explain how an Eastern Relief Road would support any new and existing residential areas, and deal with existing congestion. 551 Mr Howard N/A The proposals within the Plan in my view do not fully See responses 592/1 and 642/1. Taylor take into consideration other brownfield sites which are spread throughout the Borough. It is morally wrong to place large scale developments in Weddington/St Nicolas Park within what I deem to be "Green Belt", when clearly we do not have the infrastructure to cope with such vast developments. Please look again at these proposals and do not rush into any hasty decisions that 106

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent we will regret for decades to come. We have a duty of care to our children/grandchildren to protect our heritage and our environment. Protect our shrinking "Green Belt areas" and utilise the brownfield sites that are spread across the Borough. 423/1 Mr Jan N The amount of land for housing is far too much. It will See response 592/1 Bentley lead to a huge loss of countryside, mostly mixed The purpose of the structural landscape buffer is to farmland, with miles of hedgerows lost. It will mean that retain the existing landscape character within the the Weddington Country Walk (on the line of the former design and layout of the new development. In this Ashby railway) will look over built-up land to the south. case, it includes retaining and reinforcing hedgerows There should simply be far less land allocated for and hedgerow trees to filter views of the new urban housing. The huge development would also cause edge. much traffic congestion and consequently pollution. 651/1 Mr Jeremy N/A Strongly objects to the proposed plan to build 3000 See response 592/1. Brown houses in the north of Nuneaton. Has great concerns See response 04/2 on Bedworth Woodlands. The over traffic movement down the 3 arterial roads into the remaining land between Nuneaton and Bedworth was town centre, namely Weddington/Higham/Hinckley ruled out because it meets four of the five purposes of Roads. Mr Brown has tried to understand the various Green Belt, and because it is important for maintaining studies carried out but WCC Transportation Dept and all separation between the two towns. have constraints regarding traffic flow, air quality and environmental issues.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes Mr Brown states that a limited number of houses (500- 700) could be built on land behind Milby Drive. Mr Brown believes that the Council is biased towards Bedworth in relation to house building. He would like to see house building in The Woodlands area of Bedworth to join up the two towns. 132/1 Mr Jon n/a The proposed North of Nuneaton Strategic Housing Site See response 592/1 McDevitt is detrimental to the quality of the environment of Weddington and St Nicolas Park localities, and will negatively impact the residents of these areas. The allocation of 3000 homes is excessive, I don't believe there is demand for this many homes given the amount of employment opportunities in the Borough.

107

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

Given the current strain on public finances, what assurances are there that health and education infrastructure will be invested in? I.e. is there a guarantee that GP services and schools will be able to cope with the potential population rise? There are already 326 houses proposed for the Weddington Church Fields site. This is outside the designated area of SHS4. Therefore, the North of Weddington and St Nicolas Park will see 3326 new homes. I would like to see the number of homes reduced to a sustainable number that reflects demand within the Borough. I would like to see the Church Fields development allocated into this reduced number. Or, if there is evidence that there is this much demand for housing on this scale, it should be spread equitably throughout the Borough, as this proposal currently has a disproportionate bias towards the Weddington and St Nicolas Park.

This proposed amount of development will change the hydrology of Change Brook due to the amount of lost farmland that will no longer be available for infiltration by rainwater. This will lead to increased run-off, which will increase the chance of flooding downstream.

The development of the North of Nuneaton Strategic Housing Site will eradicate much of the green space in the north of the Borough. This means loss of habitat as well as diminishing the amenity value of the area. It will also give the impression that Nuneaton and Hinckley are conjoined.

The traffic on Weddington Road, Higham Lane and Leicester Road is already heavy at peak times. This causes long delays for anyone trying to use the A444 south. The impact of 3000 more homes will make this worse. I would like to see a proposal to bypass the town

108

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent centre with a relief road running from The Long Shoot to Griff roundabout. Otherwise, all traffic using this route will still have to cross over the Leicester Road railway bridge. This is already a bottleneck. 358/1 Mr K. Brown n/a I write to object in the strongest possible terms about the See response 592/1 proposed Borough Plan. The proposed housing developments in Weddington, St Nicolas Park and Whitestone areas will undoubtedly have long lasting and far reaching effects on the quality of life for a significant part of the Nuneaton population. The creation of this housing will further reduce the quality of air by forcing even more traffic through the bottlenecks created by the main exit to reach the south of the Borough over a single railway bridge, and the erosion of the green lung created by the open fields. I understand from the Environmental Agency that my property will also become more liable to flooding if housing is built on land off The Long Shoot. Flooding on this farmland happens on a regular basis and will undoubtedly increase if housing is built. The suggested timescale of this building means I will be living on a building site for the remainder of my life. As I’m not yet of retirement age this is a depressing prospect. 303/1 Mr Ken n/a Question the ability of the area to attract new business See responses 592/1, 412/1, 229/2 and 319/4 (section Williams given that this has not been a trend during recent years. 5) on retail growth. Even with the slight upturn in job expansion in the Midlands and the hoped for future expansion at MIRA, this will create some jobs for Nuneaton people, but as a whole it seems wildly over calculated. Do not understand the proposed housing number for the north of the Borough, even considering the amount of jobs you are expecting to encourage here. Potentially you are talking of 3000 new homes in this area of Nuneaton alone, meaning many more facilities will be needed including schools, dentists, clinics and doctors. Currently there is a two week wait for doctors at our surgery alone! This could also potentially mean 6000 109

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent extra cars in the area, bearing in mind that many families now own two cars. Really concerned about the impact of traffic in the area considering the existing congestion along the Old Hinckley Road, Higham Lane, Weddington Road and of course the Leicester Road Bridge, which is always a bottleneck at peak times. This is not to mention the extra air pollution of course!! Traffic along the A5 is again always congested at much of the day, including of course peak hours, and the thought of more lorries along this and smaller roads beggars belief. I see that you are proposing a new relief road linking to Golf Drive which as far as I can see would be extremely costly (where does all the extra money come from?) and would maybe lead to further congestion in a different part of town. Could this have echoes of the Nuneaton Ring Road, shifting problems from one place to another? It must be the smallest ring road in the UK and the closest to the town centre. Maybe if that had been better thought out initially we wouldn't need to be thinking of more road building now. With all this massive amount of extra road usage then surely more of some of these houses could be built along the A444, which is considerably better for work and transport links. If 7900 homes are deemed to be really necessary, surely some of the land standing empty and brown sites could be used for some of these homes. Indeed there is a lovely development over the Cock and Bear bridge, and surely there are many similar places where we could have smaller projects nearer to the town centre to bring the town alive. We also need to bear in mind the need for low rise housing and further facilities for the ageing population. We already have many people in the Borough over 65, and I believe long term this could mean an awful lot of investment. People love the thought of a bustling market town with

110

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent cafes, shops, etc., and I see you are proposing that two new shopping centres may be needed for the future size of the town. However, the Ropewalk has never been properly filled and we are having ( along with the rest of the country) more and more shops closing as their tenancies expire, and more charity and pound shops opening. I would always prefer to shop locally and support my local shops, but will go further afield to Leicester or Birmingham, etc. for a better choice. Until we can attract the likes of an M & S (or in my dreams a John Lewis) then no matter how many houses you build on whatever assumption of future business expansion and influx of people into the town, you will still not bring extra venues into the Borough. Why would people be attracted to move here with the existing shops and few amenities. I appreciate many more people now shop online but not everyone wants to shop this way.

I ask that you put much more thought into this project. We do not oppose some building along the proposed sites as that is forward looking, but we do object to some of the plans as we see them at the moment. 233/1 Mr Kevin King N/A I would like the houses to be moved closer to The Borough Plan must plan to meet objectively Birmingham, as there is greater need for housing there. assessed housing needs. The Plan seeks to maximise Building here on greenfield sites will open up more the use of brownfield land in the existing urban areas. reasons to carry on building in rural areas and Nuneaton However there isn't enough land in the urban areas to will not be recognised as a town again. meet all of the housing requirements. As a result greenfield sites will have to be developed. 177/1 Mr M North N/A As a resident of the St Nicolas Park Ward I am writing to See responses 592/1 and 208/1 on Judkins Quarry. express my concerns regarding the proposed Borough Plan which are as follows: - the building of 3000 new homes to the north of the town is not necessary, as most of the jobs in the area are to the south of the town. This would mean workers would have to travel through the town, using the Leicester Road bridge. This bridge is always congested at peak times and could not cope with extra traffic. It 111

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent would also add to the air pollution in the area which is already reaching critical levels. Any further increase would reach illegal levels. - houses could be built south of the town between Nuneaton and Bedworth, and on derelict land at south of Parcel NB14 near Judkins. - the Plan would require significantly more infrastructure, including new roads, schools and medical facilities. 428/1 Mr Malcolm K N/A How can it be justified to build on farmland where crops See response 592/1 Johnson are grown and cattle graze? What does the Green Policy do?

Farmland should be protected because future generations will have to contend with food shortages due to climate change and population explosion. 428/2 Mr Malcolm K N/A Due to future increase in traffic from the proposed See response 94/1 Johnson housing plan document, there should be provision to drive from Weddington/St Nicolas Park: a. Into town b. Across town to Stockingford c. Across to Bedworth by-pass

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes At present Leicester Road Bridge is the only route into town without increasing my mileage and causing further pollution. If the proposed Plan goes ahead it will be OK to travel from St Nicolas Park to Weddington, but how will anybody be able to travel into the town centre with such an increase in traffic? This will result in: a. Residents shopping out of town b. The town centre becoming a no-go area. Local public transport could be used but not for weekly or monthly shopping.

You need to find a route for a ring road that does not go through built-up areas.

112

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 255 Mr P Comment on the proposed Borough Plan and in See responses 94/1, 406/1 and 233/1 Hetherington particular the houses planned to the north of St Nicolas Park.

The houses if built in this area will put an additional load on the existing roads which are already heavily loaded, and there are long queues and delays in the morning and evenings. Roads that will be affected will include The Long Shoot, Higham Lane, Hinckley Road and Weddington Lane.

The existing facilities in the area such as schools and shops are also inadequate to support the 3000 homes now proposed.

The Borough Plan generally seems imbalanced, as the majority of new homes are planned for the north of the Borough, and little are planned for other areas. In my opinion the homes should be spread throughout the Borough to lessen the impact of new developments, and to spread the load of traffic and use of existing facilities throughout the Borough. 586 Mr Peter N/A 1. Agrees with the objectives but states that the 1. Noted. Vickery Preferred Options contradict the objectives, in particular the proposed housing developments. The Plan states 2. The highest levels of deprivation are in Nuneaton. that over 50% of people cannot afford entry level Of the 10% most deprived super output areas (SOAs) housing to buy or rent. in the county, all of them are in Nuneaton. There are three SOAs in Bedworth that are in the 10%-20% most 2. The highest levels of deprivation are in Bedworth and deprived in the county, compared with 4 SOAs in Bulkington, but the Preferred Option outlines 3000 new Nuneaton, whilst in the 20%-30% most deprived SOAs properties in North Nuneaton, whilst all the main in the county there are 6 in Bedworth and 7 in development areas are in the central and southern parts Nuneaton (IMD 2010). of the Borough. 3. The 2013 Joint Strategic Housing Market Area 3. Objective 4 refers "to provid[ing] the size, type and identifies the size, type, tenure and mix of housing to mix of housing that meets the specific needs of the meet the sub-regional, and the Borough's, housing Borough". This should mean smaller properties in needs. This information will be incorporated into the

113

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Nuneaton, family housing in Bedworth and regeneration Draft Submission Plan. and investment in areas of poor housing stock. 4.The Borough Plan Working Party Group and 4. Question 4 asks if the location for the strategic Planning Policy Officers' interpretation of the evidence housing sites are the most sustainable. Well the answer differed slightly, and so Officers' original to that is No. The scale of the housing proposal for recommendations are not fully reflected in the North Nuneaton is completely disproportionate and Preferred Options document (further details are inappropriate when linked to question 5, in relation to the available in the May 2013 Cabinet Report). delivery of houses being linked to the delivery of employment in the Borough, as well as being linked to 5.From a landscape perspective much of the proposed objectives 6 & 7. housing allocation is of lower value and would benefit from development in terms of receiving planning 5. The Plan also indicates its intention to enhance Anker obligations to enhance the intensely farmed landscape Valley Estate Farmland. Quite how a proposal to build that currently exist. The proposed landscape 3000 houses across North Nuneaton is consistent with enhancement north of the allocation and south of the enhancing the Anker Valley defies logic and A5 is a way of screening the development from view, comprehension. This surely contradicts with objective as it is on higher ground. 6a, which aims to protect and enhance the landscape, amongst other historic and natural features. 6. To encourage sustainable communities, planning policies for housing are meant to encourage mixed 6. I note that business leaders bemoan the lack of tenures and varied housing types to meet the needs of executive housing in the Borough to help drive the the Borough rather than being one dimensional to economy locally. What little amount of executive serve the purposes of those living in a certain area. housing currently exists in Nuneaton is located on For example, the National Planning Policy Framework Lutterworth Road, Whitestone and North Nuneaton. requires Councils to put in place opportunities to Proposals to build 3000 dwellings in these areas can "create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities" only further the damage the prospect of attracting (para 50). dynamic entrepreneurs to help drive the economy. Currently, much of North Nuneaton is good quality agricultural land.. The country is struggling to provide 7. As housing growth moves ever closer to the A5, the enough food to feed its population. The loss of yet more likely the blurring of boundaries will be between more farmland will only serve to drive up imports and Nuneaton and Hinckley, as Hinckley's development lead to loss of livelihood and displacement of families continues along the A5 Corridor, encroaching closer to who have farmed the land for generations. Nuneaton. 7. Noted. 8. All three town centres are struggling, and Nuneaton has no residential accommodation in its town centre. This is one of the reasons that the land east of The

114

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Surely, affordable accommodation for young/single Long Shoot is proposed to be designated as Green people could help regenerate a dying town centre. Belt

9. The Plan asks "should growth be economically driven" 8. The Towns Centres policy advocates a Residential and proposes just 75ha of additional employment sites, Ring for Nuneaton and a Residential Arc for Bedworth. growth of 1.5% and 7900 new dwellings to accommodate this growth. The overall vision "of a robust 9. Noted economy" based on and boosted by (economic) development at Bermuda, Prologis, Attleborough, 10. The Council has undertaken two flood risk studies, Bayton Road Industrial Estate, etc., is one which I wholly Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Levels 1 & 2, which endorse. identify areas of flood risk and surface water issues. The SFRA studies were supported by the Environment 10. North Nuneaton historically experiences problems Agency. In particular the Level 2 Study was closely with localised flooding. Further large scale housing guided by input from the Environment Agency, from development can only exacerbate this problem. inception to completion. It was felt that where there are issues of flood risk these areas can be easily avoided, 11. Pollution and air quality is already subject to scrutiny and where there are issues arising from drainage or due to the convergence of large volumes of traffic along surface water, development would help to ensure these Leicester Road Gyratory. Increased traffic as a result of are properly addressed through new drainage schemes housing growth in North Nuneaton will only worsen the and Greenfield Rates. Furthermore, developers will be current situation. required to include a Site Specific FRA with their planning application. In Summary There is no logic to building housing if it is going to be 11. In relation to matters such as additional pollution unsustainable, unaffordable, located in areas of least and new roads, this is considered through the S- need, causes air pollution and traffic congestion, puts Paramics modelling. Suitable mitigation proposals will added pressure on schools, public and health services, be developed through the IDP. Proposals contained and results in the loss of amenity and recreation places. within the Preferred Option, such as the distributor Extensive housing development in North Nuneaton will roads are also considered through the S-Paramics also detract interest in visiting Nuneaton Town Centre modelling. The S Paramics transport modelling work (as it will become inaccessible) and serve to exacerbate, has investigated different mitigation measures to further, its decline, as people will rather travel to address the transport impacts of the proposed Hinckley, Leicester or Tamworth. development. Further work will be undertaken to investigate the viability and deliverability of options available. The modelling also considers transport issues beyond the Borough boundary and therefore provides comprehensive analysis. As the Plan

115

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent progresses, the actual details such as road layout, will be further refined. 193/1 Mr R Stretton n/a Towns roads can't cope; there is already gridlock from See response 592/1 Weddington Road and Hinckley Road right from the A5 in all directions. There are no jobs for people living in Nuneaton and no activities for children. There is currently very little green space and none shown in the housing allocation sites. Increased housing will put added pressure on hospitals and housing. Schools are at full capacity; children are having to travel long distances as some catchments are full; more housing will make this worse. Flood relief will not cope with all the additional housing. Where will food come from if we use up all the good agricultural land. Where will the people come from to fill these houses, as there is already enough in Nuneaton, evidenced through the number of houses for sale. Why not use all brownfield land before Green Belt. 129/1 Mr Ralph n/a Concern relating to flooding in the Change Brook, Top See response 592/1 Sullivan Farm and Long Shoot area; assume redesign of draininage in this area has been included. How will the additional 3,000 be managed in terms of drainage. Based on the Bellway application, the site would require 75 attenunation tanks. The existing drainage network could not cope, the area would undoubtedly experience an accumulated measure of flooding. The plan is discriminatory and lop sided in regard to the whole Borough. There is no alternative open for choice. There are currently issues with flooding in the north which will be exacerbated. The roads are inadequate for the amount of traffic that will occur due to the high occupancy proposed. The proposed relief road cuts across a major access road and leads to an area where there is no obvious way of distributing traffic. The extra traffic will add to poor air quality. The plan does not appear to have attempted to use brownfield sites; there is an existing lack of greenspace to the north of 116

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Nuneaton. We shall loose very good farmland through this plan. 695 Mr Rod Lowe N/A Such a large development will change the nature of the See response 592/1 area beyond recognition. The area is currently a pleasant suburb with good amenities and local schools. A massive development, such as that proposed, will require additional schools and shops, and will create a new town in its own right.

It will not create jobs other than short term ones for building the dwellings. It will make Nuneaton even more of a dormitory town for Coventry, Birmingham and Leicester.

There needs to be a scaling down of the development in this area. 635 Mr Ronald N/A The vast predominance of new housing appears to be See response 94/1 regarding location of growth. Lyall focussed on greenfield land around Weddington or St We are required to plan for the amount, size, tenure Nicolas, even though the figures justifying the need for and type of housing as identified through the SHMA. At housing expansion appear to be derived from the the time of preparing the Preferred Options there was perceived needs of the Borough as a whole. No not suitable evidence to identify affordbale housing reasoning for this is given; no indication of other options requirements. However, the joint SHMA and viability considered and why they were dismissed. It must assessment will assist in identifying affordable housing therefore be assumed that housing type mix in this ward requirements. The NPPF says that we should deliver a is likely to reflect the overall mix outlined in the Borough wide choice of high quality homes, widen opportunities document, “Affordable Housing and Range and Mix for home ownership and create sustainable and Background Paper”. The substantial focus of the inclusive mixed communities. Borough Plan into this one area is unjustified, with The Lifetime Homes concept recognises the need for consequential adverse effects for existing housing, for homes to be adaptable to the changing needs of the new “affordable” housing and for new privately-funded occupant, for example disability and ageing. The housing of the type needed to attract and retain concept is considered sustainable. “aspirational” people of the type the Borough seriously needs and would benefit from.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes In the “Affordable Housing and Range and Mix” document, para 49: 117

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent • You state there is “insufficient evidence to justify a variable approach” (to range and mix) • Yet you say that in the absence of a “robustly evidenced” policy the market will decide to the contrary. In other words, the market (i.e. people) will not like what the council is proposing • So assuming the council is at least right on the macro- assessment of the Borough’s needs, why is it focussing the attention and implementation in one area, against market trends and needs?

If indeed there is a need to increase the number of smaller, more affordable houses, this needs to be achieved cost-effectively, without continuing the downward spiral of actual house sizes, not in terms of the numbers of rooms, but the sizes of the rooms themselves. These are becoming ever smaller and what we build now will set the scene for decades to come. For a given amount of spend, the more that is spent on land, the less is available for bricks and mortar, so it seems unwise to propose to build affordable houses in areas where land is relatively expensive such as the Weddington & St Nicolas Ward. If indeed there is a need to build some larger, non-subsidised houses, then surely it makes sense for these to occupy higher-priced sites where there will be a better balance of costs to market appeal.

In addition you mention the need to attract and retain “aspirational” people – those who do not need subsidies and who bring revenue and spending into the Borough to the benefit of all. Indeed many such people will also bring the businesses needed to support other residents of the Borough. They will not come if the Borough makes itself universally and uniformly unattractive and unappealing across all wards. As said before, you say there is “insufficient evidence to justify a variable

118

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent approach” in terms of the “Affordable Housing and Range and Mix” and that therefore you plan to apply a standard mix across all relevant areas. But for evidence all you have to do is look at the current spread of housing types across the Borough! Grouping of housing types in terms of affordability and type is extremely natural in the absence of artificial tinkering by planners. If the statistics given in support of the types and mix of housing required are indeed accurate, then this surely applies across the Borough and not necessarily in each area of proposed development? Surely it is better to locate “affordable” housing where land is most affordable and to attract and retain “aspirational” residents by making suitable provision for them too, recognising they can afford it?

I also find it difficult to accept your figure of 35% of homes needing to be “Lifetime Homes”, and your intention to perpetuate this into your future planning, whilst recognising the Borough has the highest level of such requirements already. Surely your aspiration should be based on reducing this over time, rather than to plan its perpetuation?

In summary: 1. You come up with a somewhat questionable macro plan.

2. For some reason, you focus it predominantly in one geographic area rather than distribute it widely across the Borough.

3. This probably has an impact on land costs for affordable homes, making them either less affordable or smaller, while at the same time impacting on the ability to attract and retain “aspirational” people who bring revenue and prospects to the Borough.

119

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

4. You fail to show any logic for the actual implementation of the plan, in terms of geographic distribution and impact. You don’t appear to give any visibility of other options considered, if any, and why they were rejected. 678 Mr Roy N/A There are too many unanswered questions left and I See response 592/1 Taylor don’t understand why such major and significant gaps The Plan, particularly in relation to the infrastructure can lead to a credible long term Borough Plan for the requirements set out to support new development, is next 15 years. based on the information available at the time of writing. The Council is continuing to work with service This Plan strategically affects not only the next 15 years, delivery partners to identify the scale and general but also sets the scene for the longer-term future of the location of new infrastructure required to support Borough, so why was it not considered by the Full development. This information will inform development Council? I also find it difficult to believe that this Plan is of the IDP and Locality based policies. the best and optimum that could have been put forward It is noted that the IDP does make reference to the by professional planners after years of consideration. need for new primary and secondary school provision for the strategic housing site at North of Nuneaton. 1. Education The suggested routes for green infrastructure are noted The Government has already indicated that there is a and will be taken into account when working with very significant population rise in under 5s. Yet the Plan service delivery partners to identify suitable routes. only mentions increasing the capacity of some schools Several of these are identified in the Green and does not include any new schools. Infrastructure Plan. S-Paramics transport modelling takes account of Surely if 3000 homes are to be built North of Nuneaton, existing traffic conditions and proposed new at least a new primary school should be planned. It says developments in Hinckley and Bosworth, including some consideration will be given as the homes are MIRA. developed, but within the existing proposed development. Why not consider a new primary south of the A47 in the Horeston Grange area, or near the industrial estate next to where the new Green Walk is set to be established. This would alleviate parents and children crossing the A47 every school day, reducing road hazards, traffic congestion, etc. [There are already 3 primary schools north of the A47 and this should be considered with a growing population of children even if the new housing does not go ahead].

120

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

This would leave room north of the A47 for more green/leisure space and not housing.

The Infrastructure Plan states no new schools and the Borough Plan summary states there is a new school planned – why the difference?

2. New Green Walks Green Walks are always welcome, however the Weddington Walk already exists and the only new one (Horeston Grange) has serious flaws: a. it appears that this part of the ‘old railway line’ has already been annexed by the industrial units and no longer exists. b. if a very narrow trail outside the fencing is used, there is no access from the east end without building a bridge over the River Anker flood relief.

A far better Green Walk would be to link up this proposed route with the Weddington Green Walk by utilising the ‘old railway line’, which still exists and crosses the A47 by an existing bridge. Unfortunately the Weddington Road bridge has just been removed, but I’m sure it would be straightforward to bridge this road and provide an uninterrupted route to the Weddington Green Walk.

Access points along this new Green Walk would improve non-motorised access to the town centre and railway station.

If a bridge is built surely it is also worth considering a new Green Walk by the side of the existing Leicester- Nuneaton railway line to the A5, maybe at Dodwells roundabout for access to Hinckley and beyond.

121

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent A new Green Walk should also be installed as part of the landscaping from Weddington Road to the Longshoot, and hopefully the other new Green Walk to the A5.

3. Nuneaton Railway Station In order to improve traffic congestion why not have access from the Weddington side of the station and not just the town centre.

4. New Railway Halt For passengers on the Nuneaton-Leicester line near the A5 for commuters from Hinckley and North Nuneaton to improve traffic congestion.

5. The Oaston Road pedestrian tunnel The tunnel under the mainline railway would also benefit from making it more user friendly for disabled access.

6. Work v Homes Surely these days it is better to site homes closer to where the work is sited. It appears that the Borough Plan does the complete opposite i.e. homes in the North and work, both in and out of the Borough “mainly Coventry”, to the south.

7. Traffic Congestion It has been recognised that improvements will be needed to the M6 Junction 3 with the A444, but only very minor road improvements to accommodate 3,000 new homes are in the Plan for the Nuneaton area.

A new road route parallel with the A5 would only go East to West out of the development and does not alleviate existing congestion along The Longshoot or Weddington areas.

The new road from The Longshoot to Golf Drive ignores

122

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent what happens around traffic entering or leaving Golf Drive. Again existing congestion in the Whitestone area is not being addressed and only made worse.

I would have thought the Planners would have considered urgent plans on how routes through, or around Nuneaton Town Centre, would be managed with all these new homes, and most residents going to work to the south of Nuneaton.

The methodology for the IDP is based on a Steps approach to Infrastructure Planning (PAS 2009). I’m not sure how this works but I would have thought a plan would be needed to ensure any problem does not arise. This Plan does not present any solutions for very, very likely traffic congestion - since it already happens at peak times without any new homes.

Has the Plan taken into account the new MIRA development on the A5.

Has the Plan taken into account existing road traffic environmental/pollution considerations around Nuneaton. 645/1 Mr S Miller N/A 1. Too many homes in the same area of Nuneaton--the See response 592/1 number should be greatly reduced. 2. The Plan is too concentrated in one area and should be more evenly spread out across the Borough. 3. Loss of visual amenity due to development. 4. Current road infrastructure will not be able to cope, i.e. The Long Shoot and Midland Road, which already have slow moving traffic at peak times. 5. Increased congestion and traffic noise. 6. Reduced highway safety due to above factors. 7. Increased noise levels (on main routes into Nuneaton Town Centre). 8. Loss of habitats and species.

123

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 9. Insufficient school places to support the number of new homes. 10. Insufficient Doctors to cope with extra people moving into the Borough. 11. Inadequate parking in town centre to cope with additional cars from those moving into the Borough. 302/1 Mr S. Miller n/a Too many new homes all in the same area; the number See 592/1 should be greatly reduced Density - the plan is too concentrated in this area and should be more evenly spread out over Nuneaton and Bedworth Visual amenity as the fields are then built on Road infrastructure will not cope - many roads (for example the Long Shoot, those near the Dandelion roundabout, etc.) already have slow moving traffic at peak times Increased congestion and traffic generation, reduced highways safety because of the above, increased noise Nature conservation - for example, loss of habitats Insufficent school places to support the number of homes, insufficent doctors to cope with all the extra people Inadequate parking in town centre to cope with all these new homes/people. 286/1 Mr Stanley n/a 3,000 additional homes will make the area over- See response 592/1 Emery populated. The local services will not be able to cope with increased demand, and proposed mitigation is not sufficient. Development should be more evenly distributed. 390 Mr Stephen N/A 1. The locality already suffers from high traffic usage, See response 94/1 regarding transport matters Robbins particularly around The Long Shoot junction, which is a See response 382/1 regarding linkages with constant source of delays and potential accidents. employment sites. Adding further traffic to this will only increase delays and See response 179/1 regarding wider infrastructure the risk of accidents. The proposed relief road will only matters. result in lorries and articulated vehicles being diverted In April 2012, Full Council confirmed its commitment to through residential areas, which in itself raises safety designate Bedworth Woodlands as Green Belt.

124

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent concerns.

2. The locality has some of the worst air quality levels in the Borough. Adding further traffic to this area will only heighten this, to the point where air quality levels will be approaching illegal levels.

3. No account has been taken of the impact on the roads into Nuneaton Town Centre (along Higham Lane) which is the main route into town, but will now have to cater for vehicles from the new houses.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes In the Borough Plan many of the proposed new jobs to be created in the Borough are based around the Town Centre, and are situated more towards the middle of the Borough. Placing all the jobs in the middle/south of the Borough does not make logical sense.

2. The assumption that these 3,000 houses will bring greater employment to the region is also based on an assumption (falsely) that all of these people will then work in Nuneaton & Bedworth. In fact, many of those people situated in the north of the Borough would be more likely to commute out of the Borough to work in Leicestershire, North Warwickshire, Birmingham and other surrounding regions. Likewise, assuming that the expansion of MIRA on the A5 will lead to a positive impact on the Borough is foolhardy.

3. Build some of the required houses around the Woodlands area, identified in Locality 4 - Bedworth North and West, where I understand, Planning Officers initially identified as a preferred site for new homes. Unclear why this was then removed from the proposed Borough Plan. This option would provide homes nearer where the bulk of the jobs would be created and would

125

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent link with transport routes into and out of Coventry, where a large proportion of Nuneaton and Bedworth residents commute. 427 Mr Steven N/A The proposed development in this locality will damage See response 592/1 Bentley open countryside. The existing infrastructure will not be able to cope. I live on The Long Shoot and it becomes gridlocked at rush hour. Thousands of extra homes will make life very difficult and spoil a lovely part of the town. Weddington Fields is a very special place and should not be spoilt with a sprawling housing estate, as it has very diverse wildlife and is used by lots of people. The Council should be seeking to protect it.

The proposed development is too close to Arbury Hall Estate. This area should be protected at all costs as it is one of the nicest parts of the town. It is full of wildlife, has lots of historic connections and is world famous. Why spoil the outlook of this area?

I also object to the development of Locality 7, as it again has some beautiful countryside that should be protected, not spoilt.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes The Town Plan has a total disregard for what the local people of Nuneaton both think and want. This is very evident with the recent public outcry over the proposed Weddington Fields development and The Long Shoot permissions. The jobs forecast of 12000 is flawed due to the ongoing recession. The retail forecast is also wrong. The Town has seen quite a few national retailers such as M&S and Starbucks closing. We've also had empty units in the Ropewalk since it was built. We need to ensure the existing capacity is used before any other development is allowed. The Plan focus should be on the regeneration of brownfield sites, and any unused industrial sites should be reclassified for house building.

126

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

The way forward should be more regeneration schemes, such as Tuttle Hill/Camp Hill developments. The so- called destination parks in Camp Hill should be re- examined. Some of the open space could be used to provide a great setting for some limited building. Any major development should be centred in the Bede and Poplar locality, as this would be on the right side of town for good communication links to Coventry and the M6. This is also excellent for commuters and would save congestion across town. 611/3 Mr Steven N/A Increased housing capacity east of Trent Valley Railway See response 94/1 Nestoruk line will increase traffic congestion and will affect the quality of life for residents on the main routes to the two crossing points at Leicester Road and Eastboro Way bridges, as well as increase air and noise pollution. On average, 3000 houses represents an average of an additional 7200 people which further equates to around 5000 additional cars. 611/4 Mr Steven N/A The proposed structural landscape buffer adjacent to the The Borough Plan will replace the current adopted local Nestoruk A5 is laughable. There is already a landscape buffer plan (including policy ENV 3). Given the need to plan between St Nicolas Parish and the A5 and is already a for the economic, social and environmental needs of protected space. However, it seems that the Council the Borough it is necessary to develop some greenfield can arbitrarily overrule and/or ignore this protection. The sites. only defence is to not allow the existing buffer to be diminished. 611/7 Mr Steven N/A States that the rationale for increasing retail capacity in See response 592/1 and 229/2 (Section 5) on retail Nestoruk Nuneaton is flawed, since residents east of the Trent growth. Valley Railway line will be impeded in reaching the town centre due to traffic congestion.

The Plan states that 3000 houses will be built in Weddington/St Nicolas (38% of the proposal). The railway bridges at Leicester Road and Eastboro Way represent significant bottlenecks which will create traffic congestion at rush hours and weekends. Residents east

127

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent of the railway are likely, then, to shop in Hinckley, undermining the Council's argument that new homes will regenerate commerce in Nuneaton 184 Mr Stuart N/A The proposed housing allocation for Weddington/St See response 94/1 Lane Nicolas is too heavy, especially when compared to the rest of the Borough. It will cause huge pressure on facilities and the travel network. The proposed road will not alleviate the massive traffic problems already existing in these areas, let alone the additional 3000 homes with its occupants also wanting to travel to school and work, etc.

There is not sufficient detail on the provision of facilities and roads to satisfy me that this is a sensible suggestion.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes I would like to see the additional houses required split evenly across the Borough to avoid overloading one area. This way the pressure will be spread evenly across the Borough.

Your comments on green areas and parks seem at odds with the Weddington Fields and Seeswood Pool planned development.

Normally the poorest areas in the Borough get investment in leisure and parks. This approach should be applied across the Borough fairly and every area will have the same level of quality facilities. St Nicolas Park, however, has the poorest leisure and park facilities, so there is nothing to engage children in productive activities such as physical exercise. 279/3 Mr Tony Birch n/a Proposals are contrary to & incompatible with other See response 592/1 stated aims of NBBC: a. “Housing site[s] for 3000 houses” b. “New primary & secondary schools” Q. Where? 128

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent c. “Reduce traffic impacts on air quality” Really? How? We do not support proposals a. & b. above NBBC should press the government for improvements/upgrade to the A5 which would improve traffic flow passing north of Nuneaton & negate the need for a ‘Northern Relief Road’. The number of new houses proposed (3,000) in the north of Nuneaton is excessive, because projected economic growth will not happen. 555 Mr William N/A Object to the proposal to build 3000 houses in north See response 592/1 Clarke Nuneaton. The plan takes little account of the real reasons for any development of this area, but is based mainly on local political considerations.

If I am to believe the politicians, I'm told that the infrastructure will be a major factor in the development. Exactly the same was said when Horeston Grange was developed. Where is the school, surgery or dentist on that estate, only the shops exist? That was more to do with commercial considerations, rather than council involvement. I'd suggest the same could happen again.

3000 houses would suggest a population increase of at least 10000 people, with probably 3000 children of school age. Where are the proposals to increase school capacity for this number?

Are all these additional people expected to work at the new MIRA?

Local roads throughout the area are already insufficient for traffic at peak times. Where is the plan for improvements to the road structure?

It is my opinion that the plan is ill thought-out. Without more firm plans in place (they are not at the moment), it is my belief that such a large estate, when finished, could lead to many more problems for the whole town.

129

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent 84/1 Mr. and Mrs. Very disappointed that the Planning committee at NBBC See responses 94/1 and 592/1. R Dagnan is pursuing a 'preferred option' involving a The content of the Preferred Options document was disproportionate share of the houses envisaged being informed by the cross party Member Working Group sited in the Weddington and St Nicolas areas, with scant with Cabinet approving the document for consultation. disreguard to the concerns of the residents of these areas regarding an overburdening of the infrastructure, traffic and pollution concerns. Also feel the plans overplay the development of MIRA and a need for more houses to be provided for an increased workforce at this site, as we are confident that Hinckley & Bosworth Council and North Warwickshire Council will be using the same strategy in their plans, and in any case a fair few of the increased employees would probably choose to commute from outside of the area. Also the manner in which this plan is being devised is totally undemocratic, as the committee that is presenting it is predominantly made up of members of one political party, and decisions have been taken in closed meetings with other council representatives not allowed to attend nor being given the opportunity to question decisions on behalf of the residents they represent. Totally disgusted. 82/2 Mr. B. Mayne N/A Why is the majority of new housing (which is not needed See responses 592/1 and 207/1. as there are endless unoccupied houses in the Nuneaton and Bedworth area) being dumped in the Weddington ward on the town edge up to the A5? The town has limited green areas as it is, so why are plans in place to lose even more of it? The peaceful areas of Weddington fields and the Weddington walk, all the way up to Higham on the Hill, will be destroyed.

The increase in the population of the town will add even more strain onto local facilities such as schools and doctors. Look at the figures for the oversubscribed doctors and how this will just continue to rise. You may say, well, we will add a further surgery to the area? Well I'm sure there are vacancies at other surgeries that can't

130

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent be filled to try and decrease the strain on their resources already.

What is the reason for building all these new homes? The houses for sale with our local estate agents are there for new people who may want to move to Nuneaton. You build 3000 new homes and people already living within the Borough may want to move to a new home but then that means we will have even more empty houses left (that's if the new build company's offer part exchanges). The housing market is slow moving as it is, so how are they going to sell all these houses in a suitable time. This is a bit different from a small bit of land being developed for 10 or 12 houses.

I understand the pressure the council would be under from a property developer to get this home as they will no doubt earn millions for it. The council need to look at themselves and ask if the further strain on a heavily populated town already (with lots of vacant houses) really need so much housing being built mainly in Nuneaton and the Weddington area. If it was to go ahead, spread it out in smaller developments around not just Nuneaton, but Bedworth. 51/1 Mr. M.J. N/A Oppose Borough Plan. In particular, the proposal to See response 592/1 Duncan locate the bulk of new housing in the Borough north of Weddington and St Nicolas park. It is ill-judged and poorly thought out for the following reasons:

1) Traffic congestion and road networking. The current volume of traffic around the proposed locations and on main arterial routes from these locations into the town centre is already high, and subject to heavy traffic jams during peak times. Without a full reworking of the road network into and out of Nuneaton from the St Nicolas Park and Weddington area, the proposed volume of additional housing would be too much for the current

131

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent road system

2) Schools. The current schools in the area of Weddington and St Nicolas Park are already oversubscribed, yet there are considerable other areas of the Borough where there are places in the school system. I am personally aware of several primary schools in Bedworth where there are considerable school places available. Locating an additional 3000 homes in the St Nicolas and Weddington area would place undue load and stress on the school system.

3) I also have concerns regarding the use of countryside land for such housing when brownfield sites exist within the Borough on which additional houses could be located.

4) Finally, I would also like to register my dismay that the council appears to have poorly considered the well- being and quality of life of all of the residents within the Borough when proposing the plan. In suggesting so many houses to be built in one particular area of the Borough, it is clear that the council do not have the well- being of the whole Borough in mind when making such judgements. 81/1 Mr. R Parker Reside in St Nicolas Park Drive (45 years) & during that See responses 94/1 and 592/1. time have seen many changes, not all bad, but have never taken into account the necessity to improve traffic flow in the area.

Our main concern is that although most Councillors are aware of the current problems of traffic back-up at peak periods they appear to completely wash their hands of it & hope it will go away.

When I had the opportunity of speaking at one of the public meetings it was clear that although those on the

132

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Planning Committee appreciated my concerns regarding traffic, they voted in favour of development in The Long Shoot/St Nicolas.

One Councillor agreed that the problem was acute but voted in favour as I suspect that the problem was ‘not on his doorstep’ & represents Bedworth.

He stated that the ‘traffic snake’ at peak periods starts at the George Eliot island right the way through to the A5 via Eastboro Way, but still he voted in favour of basically allowing another 250 cars to enter The Long Shoot. I wonder why!

Here in St Nicolas we have become a ‘rat run’ for traffic from Higham Lane through to Eastboro Way, especially in the morning & evening periods when not all motorists observe the speed limits.

No traffic flow measurement has been appreciated or given the time necessary to gain a clear view of the future.

Drainage (have a look at photographs of past flooding on west side of The Long Shoot); schools, access to medical facilities, are all additional issues which have been overshadowed by the commercial aspects of what is an ill thought out plan.

Think again Planning Committee & make sure you honestly represent those who vote for you. 55/1 Mr. S. Merrick N/A Have a fairer development plan. Looks like you are See response 94/1. trying to develop all new homes on farmland North of Weddington & St. Nicolas Park. It appears obvious that you are trying to develop on this side of our Town just to reach out to the proposed and planned developments for MIRA.

133

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent

Many think the Borough Plan is wrong and needs revising. It may well make sense to build some new homes North of St Nicolas Park, but let's also see proposals to build new homes in Bedworth and other areas of Nuneaton.

Building this many new homes will add enormous pressure to our road network on this side of Town.

Please, reconsider the Borough Plan, and I welcome a revised plan that considers new developments in more areas of Bedworth and Nuneaton and not just on one side. 101/1 Mr.B & Mrs.M Living on the Hinckley Road, Nuneaton, my wife and I See response 592/1 Morgans find the proposed Borough Plan ill-conceived and totally impractical. The volume of traffic which already travels along this road in and out of Nuneaton is atrocious with long queues and exasperated motorists, particularly at peak times. The road becomes totally gridlocked. It is obvious that the infrastructure of road and rail provision for this area is already under tremendous pressure and therefore would be completely inadequate to cater for extra traffic, which would be expected, coming from further housing development in the area. Furthermore, the building of 3,000 homes will mean sacrificing valuable Green Belt resulting in a catastrophic impact on the flora and wildlife. Also it deprives the children from play areas which are already very limited in this vicinity. This plan requires urgent re-evaluation and further realistic proposals need to be made for consideration. Strongly object to the existing Borough Plan. 105/1 Mr.D. Lawrie Proposed housing development in the Weddington area. See response 592/1

Dear Sirs, I am not only concerned about the planning process, where the planning officers' recommendations have been overturned, but by the problematic and 134

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent inappropriate developments being put forward.

The sheer number of houses appears far too high considering population growth. Their type is inappropriate for an ageing population. Justification for this number being based on prospective MIRA jobs is simply misleading, given houses being built outside Nuneaton.

The protected status of the Weddington/A5 green area has also been set aside.

On these and many other grounds I wish to oppose both the scale and placement of the development given the lack of need, and the biased placement of the majority of these on greenfield sites in the Weddington/St Nicolas area. 104/1 Mr.J.Millen I am writing to convey my concern regarding the impact See responses 592/1 and 423/1 on hedgerows. of the Borough Plan on the area where I live The Council has a strategy for bringing back into use (Weddington/St. Nicolas Park). In my view, building on empty homes but these properties cannot be the farmland would create a number of problems: discounted from the housing target.

1. Reduced quality of life for residents who would no longer have a local green space of any significance. 2. Resultant high density of housing that would change the character of the area and transform it into one, homogenous, suburban sprawl. 3. Removal of the hedges and uncultivated areas of the farmland will lead to the further erosion of local biodiversity. 4. An intolerable strain would be placed on local amenities.

It seems to me far more sensible to develop housing capacity by ensuring that unoccupied houses are returned to occupancy, brownfield sites are redeveloped and more employment forecasts are used as a basis for

135

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent developing a housing strategy. 29/1 Mr.T.Rowley Object to major developments of up to 3000 homes in See response 592/1 the Weddington and St. Nicolas area. The development in this area appears to be more than all the other areas put together. The Long Shoot is already a fast busy road. Already there is difficulty getting off our drive in car, and crossing on foot. A lot of extra vehicles will be using the road, heightening danger for old people and children trying to access the facilities and schools on St. Nicolas and surrounding areas. Cars trying to exit the new development and turn onto the Long Shoot to get into town and other areas of Nuneaton, etc. will have to turn right. It is impossible now to turn right when pulling out of homes on the Long Shoot. New development home owners will turn left for ease and do a U turn in the bus stop pull in that is located on the bend of the Long Shoot. Home owners between the bus pull in & the Harvester roundabout will see a constant stream of traffic, making pulling out impossible. It will also be dangerous when trying to turn into my own drive when returning home. Proposed new roads from Weddington and Whitestone are funnelling extra traffic onto the Long Shoot, particularly between the Harvester roundabout and the exit/access of the new development. No traffic calming along this road. The air quality will decrease and noise will increase. Crashes and fatalities are not unknown on this road. Flooding has been known on the Long Shoot; all this development is preventing draining away of any excess rainfall. A road from the A5, joining up to the roundabout by the new crematorium would be a better option. Cars, and more importantly, lorries from the M69 would by-pass the Long Shoot and would have ready access to Attleborough Fields Industrial Estate, also, providing another route into town. All this excess traffic will be funnelled down The Long Shoot, Hinckley Road, (an area of families and children walking to school, etc.) and hit that bottleneck at Leicester Road

136

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Bridge, which is extremely busy now. Not enough Green Belt land in area. No cycle routes; would not dare cycle along these roads now, never mind with increase in traffic. I am very worried about the massive increase in traffic along the Long Shoot. I would like to see the development dramatically reduced in size and spread fairly through out the Borough, with promises of no new developments. A road bypassing the Long Shoot from the A5 and joining up the new crematorium by Attleborough fields would help some of the heavy traffic, but ensuring it is well away from homes. Have some traffic calming measures on the Long Shoot. Access roads from the new developments straight onto the A5, so everything doesn't have to be funnelled down the Long Shoot. Increase Green Belt land. More cycle routes and easier routes for walkers. 295/1 Mrs Christine n/a The development should be more evenly distributed. See response 592/1 Rose The Leicester Road bridge will be unable to cope with the proposed scale of development; more road infrastructure is required and brownfield sites should be used in the first instance. 109/1 Mrs D Newitt Concern regarding plans for building numerous houses See responses 592/1 and 379/1 (Comments on off the Long Shoot. Reasons for concern : Loss of consultation process) precious green fields, local roads are gridlocked already, chaos during construction period, lack of facilities: doctors, dentists, schools, etc., working "full out" to accommodate the present population. I am not anti- development; a growing population needs to be accommodated, but as council tax payers we should have been consulted prior to this arrangement. Trust that our objections will be listened to. 208/1 Mrs Diane n/a The requirement for 7900 new homes is excessive and See responses 599/1 (section 1) on scale of growth, Oseland relates to an over-optimistic growth forecast. A more 04/2 (section 5) on Bedworth Woodlands. realistic figure based on Town growth of say 0.5% would be around 4000 homes in total (of which around 2000 on The land at Judkins Quarry was considered through the Green Belt land). There is inadequate use of brownfield site selection process as part of PDA2a. This whole

137

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent that is available; for example land around Judkins parcel of land was ruled out due to the impact on the Quarry and beyond which should be developed first. I landscape character. The Council will reconsider understand this point was already recognised by specifically the land at Judkins Quarry which would not officers, who recommended that most new housing be have an impact on the landscape character. placed in Bedworth Woodlands - but this was overruled by councillors on the steering committee, who may represent that area. The preferred option document is poorly thought out, relying on excessive growth forecasts, which in turn allocate more housing land than needed. Also there is too much emphasis on using Green Belt land to the north of the town. 208/2 Mrs Diane n/a Additional employment is directed largely to the south of See response 94/1 Oseland Nuneaton Centre. However, the majority of residential development has been allocated around the St Nicolas Park and Weddington areas to the extreme north of the Borough. This will cause additional heavy congestion at key traffic points such as the Leicester Road railway bridge and the Long Shoot, which cannot be sustained. This would also result in a reduction of air quality in these areas. 208/3 Mrs Diane n/a Previous consultations with the public have stated that a The allocation of large scale sites is more likely to Oseland preferred view is to spread new houses in a greater accrue larger infrastructure benefits. Some of the number of sites around all areas of the town, including respondents to the Issues and Options supported the Bedworth, Bulkington, Arbury and Galley Common. As development of strategic sites. The Council has to such I feel the 3,300 around Weddington should be balance the views of residents with those of its reduced to around 500 (particularly as 300/400 have evidence base. recently been approved in St James field off the Long Shoot) 208/1 Mrs Diane n/a The plans shown at the various planning viewings have The format of the summary document reflected Oseland been poor, no recognisable major roads seemed to been previous feedback. Comments made during this clearly named and the proposed new roads included on consultation will feed into a review of future them looked like a scrawl and not a serious proposal at consultation documents. all. The brochure the council issued is not well It was necessary to read the Borough Plan Preferred presented, as it is difficult to recognise the Policy Options document to get a full understanding of the numbers you need to enter on the Response Form. plan and its proposals. The brochure is a summary to

138

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent raise awareness. The maps provide the appropriate level of detail for a Borough Plan. As a strategic document it is not intended that every road name should be legible on the map. 208/4 Mrs Diane n/a There is mention of landscape improvements needed to Noted. Oseland reduce the impact of the built development at St Nicolas Park and Weddington; this shows in itself that the impact of so many houses being built will be immense on this area and will need to be banked so it cannot be seen. 545 Mrs Dulcie N/A The roads are not built to take the volume of traffic, and See response 592/1. Marilyn Bailey despite you stating there will be additional relief roads, The Borough Plan and IDP identify the local this will not address the issues. I have lived in Nuneaton infrastructure to support development. Work on viability all my life and the traffic has increased to such an extent will assess whether such infrastructure is viable and that massive delays are inevitable, causing people to be deliverable. late for work despite leaving home within what should be There is no evidence that there is a greater demand for an acceptable time frame for the journeys. The homes in Bedworth as opposed to other areas of the decisions on Nuneaton's infrastructure are unfortunately Borough. made by people who have no concept of the detrimental An updated Employment Land Review will consider impact on the whole road systems in and around whether any existing employment land is not suited to Nuneaton. Weddington Lane and Weddington Road are employment uses, and so would be better redeveloped always busy, and when construction on the housing for other uses. As yet, land opposite Bermuda Park has estates begins, people using these roads will not be able not been promoted for housing. to get through Nuneaton to their destinations. There has been other building work done in Nuneaton and there is always a promise of community centres, health centres, shops, playgrounds and schools. However, they never materialise, and the builders get away with this 'scott free'. There is housing available in Nuneaton which no one wants to purchase or rent, so I cannot understand why housing is being built in the Weddington/St. Nicolas Park or Long Shoot areas, as the Council should be able to confirm that people do not want to move to Nuneaton, they want to live in Bedworth, so why not use the industrial estate opposite Bermuda Park where there is ample space for building homes which are near all the routes to the A444 and M6. This would be a logical 139

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent solution, however, logic doesn't seem to come into play, only politics.

Reasons for Comments and Preferred Changes All reasons are highlighted above and I would like to see the building work happen in Bedworth where people genuinely want to live. Also, the areas in Weddington pinpointed for building, flood on a regular basis and current property owners have had to vacate their homes due to the devastation caused by the last flood. I cannot foresee that this would be a good idea to build in a flood zone. People in the above mentioned areas pay a premium to live there, and I cannot foresee a large reduction in Council Taxes. 312/1 Mrs E A n/a There are plenty of brownfield sites which should be See response 592/1 and 418/1 on residential Buckingham prioritised before SHS4; affordable housing should also development in Nuneaton Town Centre. be provided in the town centre; houses should be closer to employment in Bermuda area to alleviate traffic issues in and around the town centre; the roads cannot cope with the additional traffic, in particular the Leicester Road Bridge area; there are already issues with air quality. 419/2 Mrs Helen N/A Section 3.2 An objective of the Plan is to direct development McCarroll Economy – states that many residents commute out of towards Nuneaton. There is development proposed for the Borough to Coventry, Leicestershire and elsewhere other locations around Nuneaton and Bedworth. in Warwickshire. Nuneaton has the A444 running However, it is noted that a large allocation to the north straight through residential areas and the main town ring of Nuneaton results in disproportionate growth across road. It is the main road in and out of the town for the Borough. It is of the view of the Council though, that residents commuting out and for non-local traffic. the development will result in positive benefits. In Increasing housing along key sites along this road would addition, the allocation of large scale sites is more likely increase traffic congestion on roads that are already to accrue larger infrastructure benefits. stretched to capacity, and would diminish the air quality Road infrastructure is not currently adequate to support around certain parts of the town. the growth. For this reason, the Council has been In addition, in section 3 – Infrastructure, existing working with the County Council on this issue. S- problems with traffic congestion are acknowledged as it Paramics modelling has taken place. It identifies the states: necessary improvements to the road network. It is “Traffic congestion is high, with Nuneaton having one of anticipated that there will also need to be sustainable the highest levels of traffic density in Warwickshire transport improvements to assist with reducing the 140

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent during peak times. Particular problems occur on the negative impact of the development. The S Paramics A444, the Long Shoot (A47), Lutterworth Road (B4114), modelling also assesses the impact on AQMAs. The Camp Hill/Tuttle Hill (B4114) and Coventry Road results of this work will feed into the development of the (B4109).” You are acknowledging that there are pre-submission document and update of the IDP. problems along these roads and then proposing housing It is accepted that SHS4 is not closely linked to the new located on the opposite side of the town to the proposed employment allocations within the Borough, however it employment sites, which would exacerbate the existing is located in close proximity to employment sites in problems, by forcing people to commute to their neighbouring authorities, e.g. MIRA. It is also well employment along already overburdened roads. The located for existing and new employment opportunities same section goes on to state that the sites at Bermuda in the town centre. Park, Attleborough Fields and Prologis are difficult to The Plan encourages improvements to public transport, access without a car. The preferred option places the walking and cycling. new jobs at that site, but the majority of new housing at the opposite side of Nuneaton. The extra commuters, in addition to increasing congestion and reducing air quality, would also suffer a reduced quality of life by spending up to 40 minutes travelling from Weddington to Bermuda and beyond. Why place the new houses so far away from the new jobs?

Make a significant reduction in the number of houses proposed for Weddington and St Nicolas. The proposed areas to develop houses are unevenly distributed and places almost all of the new homes in one part of the Borough, leading to the problems with traffic, congestion, air quality, etc. By reducing the number of homes proposed for this area and spreading them more evenly throughout Nuneaton and Bedworth, you would help to prevent many of these problems. 419/6 Mrs Helen N/A The 'circulatory' one-way system where the A444 goes See response 592/1 McCarroll along from Weddington Road to Leicester Road is already an Air Quality Monitoring Area. Increasing homes and therefore traffic in that area will worsen this problem and reduce the quality of life and life expectancy for those living nearby.

Reduce the number of homes proposed for Weddington,

141

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent which would therefore cut down on the number of additional commuters and would help the air quality in this location. 419/7 Mrs Helen N/A The housing site allocations are not based on the 2009 The Issues and Options consultation in 2009 did not McCarroll 'issues and options' consultation, sustainability appraisal identify specific locations for development, but a or other evidence. The council needs to go back and number of potential options for distributing the growth seriously consider the initial 2009 proposals and and where. evidence, rather than ignore them. The site selection background papers explain how the process for selecting the strategic sites takes account of the responses to the Issues and Options consultation, the accompanying Sustainability Appraisal, and the evidence base. For example, this explains the benefits of large sites in terms of the likelihood to accrue larger infrastructure benefits. They also explain the overarching principles and criteria for selecting sites. The Borough Plan has been developed with an awareness of the evidence. The Plan will be independently examined to test the soundness of the proposals contained within it. 703 Mrs Jean N/A The Plan will have a devastating impact on the green See response 592/1 Millen spaces in the Weddington and St Nicolas Park areas, as they will be lost forever. There will also be a devastating impact on the environment and wildlife in the area. The new road will contribute to the already heavy traffic at peak times.

The consultation has not been done properly or fairly. Please listen to local people, not the political option preferred by the Labour Party. 433 Mrs Jeanette N/A Concerned about the increased volume of traffic that will See response 94/1 Richardson need to go over the Leicester Road Bridge for visits to the local supermarkets, situated in the town centre.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes I understand provision has been made for road

142

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent infrastructure around the town. However, carrying bulky and heavy shopping goods, cars will still need to get into the Town Centre and be able to park. I think that rather than the intended regeneration/improvement of the Town Centre, the proposals will lead people to boycott the Town Centre, as it will be gridlocked with increased traffic from the proposed 3000 new homes. 699 Mrs Kim N/A Allocating 38% of the total 7900 proposed houses onto See response 94/1 and 01/6 Murray one specific part of Nuneaton in Weddington and St Nicolas is disproportionate. Of all the areas of the Borough, this one will see the most dramatic change, whereas others will only see moderate change. I am not confident that the relief road will provide enough relief to Weddington Road, as this is a particularly busy road and has a considerable amount of congestion on weekday mornings, without the additional housing. Higham Lane and The Long Shoot too will suffer from similar issues, and again I fear that these roads will become a pollution hazard and be chaotic on weekday mornings and evenings.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes MIRA alone will not produce the economic growth and jobs necessary to appeal to over 6000 new residents that would be moving into this part of town. I would support some development of around 1500 houses and would reallocate the remainder to other areas of the Borough to give people a fair share. The people of this area, in particular, like the appeal of being near country fields, and maintaining some of that would be preferable if possible. The 7900 houses should be distributed more evenly to avoid adding additional pressure on roads like Leicester Road and Weddington Road. 693 Mrs Louise N/A It is unrealistic to build the undisclosed number of the See response 592/1 Mohacsi projected houses in an area of farmland off Weddington Lane and Higham Lane, where there is already The strategic housing sites will make provsion for congestion at both peak hours and school hours, is market and affordable housing.The Council will plan for 143

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent unrealistic. a mix of housing based on current and future demographic trends, market trends, and the needs of The proposed road will just filter the traffic onto Higham different groups in the community, in line with the Lane, The Long Shoot and Weddington Lane. It already NPPF. takes in excess of half an hour to drive through Nuneaton and this will increase markedly when the The Borough Plan includes policies on Urban additional housing in other areas is added to the Character and Design Quality, as well on Infrastructure equation. and Green Infrastructure, to ensure that development is well planned to provide the supporting infrastructure for The secondary schools are oversubscribed and sixth new residents. form provision is poor.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes This area and the Lutterworth Road area are the more affluent areas of Nuneaton, attracting homeowners with disposable income. Detracting from the value of existing attractive properties by hemming them in with housing estates, will decrease the number of professional people moving in to the area, and this will negatively impact on the quality of the schools, etc. and instigate a downward spiral.

We need to attract a population which will add financial value. If this farmland must be surrendered then use it to enhance not detract.

A proposal for a golf course and health club was dismissed many years ago, which would have added leisure facilities to the town. The lack of proper park facilities in this area means the youngsters have few activities -- the skate parks are all in less affluent areas but we have teenagers too.

Instead of looking to cram as many houses in as possible, like the recent developments opposite the Horeston Grange shops, we need to look at making the surroundings spacious, attractive and more appealing.

144

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Look at the provision of quality education at all phases-- it is overshadowed at secondary level in this part of town and poor at sixth form level. 705 Mrs Marie N/A Too many houses in this area. There will be a massive See response 592/1 Wellings impact on health services and air quality.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes There are insufficient local jobs to cater for the influx of people to the proposed development. Additionally, most of the recreation facilities and employment will still be on the other side of Nuneaton. People living in this development, therefore, will have to travel to use them. Employment, housing and recreational facilities need to be equally distributed across the Borough so people can live, work and socialise locally, and help boost the local economy and reduce traffic. 615 Mrs Melanie N/A Increased Traffic See response 592/1 Bruce On a normal weekday morning, from 8am, traffic builds up and queues back up to Glenfield Avenue. If there is an accident in town or on nearby motorways traffic slows down, leading to further congestion and delays. The impact from an extra 1000 homes, with 1 or 2 cars per house, will be a nightmare. How will the new road help if it only connects Weddington Road to The Long Shoot? The increase in the number of cars on the roads will result in further associated traffic problems, such as safety issues for children and the elderly, and increased air and noise pollution.

Loss of Countryside Building on farmland around Weddington will impact on the inhabitants and wildlife. This side of town is less built up and has countryside within walking distance. Many people who come to live in Weddington never leave. It is the sort of place where you know your neighbours and look out for them. This proposal will take this village feel away from us. In the summary 145

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent document it states that the Plan will "protect the Borough's natural assets". It seems to me that you will be destroying them!

Building house on farmland will affect wildlife. The recent report "State of Nature", June 2013, highlighted the plight of nature with a massive decline in the number of nesting pairs of birds, declining hedgehog and frog numbers. One of the key factors causing this decline is building. Building on brownfield and Green Belt takes away natural habitats and food sources for wildlife. It also fragments wildlife corridors that are necessary for animals to inhabit, migrate, look for food, and to reproduce. The natural environment you will destroy and the impact on biodiversity will far outweigh the tiny gestures of preservation you offer.

Flooding Weddington has always been prone to flooding. That is why the flood relief channel was built. Climate change is something that you should consider carefully, especially as we seem to be experiencing more rain and floods the last few years. The flood relief channel does not extend to where the new houses are proposed to go. Only this year some of the area that you propose to build on flooded and houses at the edge of the fields suffered from flooding. Flooding will get worse if the area is concreted, as there will be less natural drainage. 656 Mrs Rebecca N/A Strongly oppose the proposal to build 3000 new homes See response 592/1 Knowles with a relief road in this part of Nuneaton. No houses to The Council must prepare the Plan in line with national be built in this area or at the very least a huge reduction planning policy and evidence as set out in the NPPF. It in the number of homes proposed to be built. 3000 new must balance these issues with the views of those that homes in this area is too much. It is unneeded and make comments on the Plan. unwanted. Protect our countryside by not building on this designated countryside land. No relief road to join The Long Shoot; it is already an extremely busy road, with people's homes on, who do not want to live on a

146

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent relief road.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes Building 1000s of new homes on Green Belt, countryside land by Weddington, St Nicolas Park Estate and The Long Shoot is fundamentally wrong. We do not need that many new homes, as it will take away the only bit of countryside separating the current houses and the A5. The current stretch of land is the natural divide of our town from neighbouring Boroughs. Once this countryside is built on, it's gone forever; let's build on brownfield sites, therefore protecting natural habitats and wildlife.

The proposal to create a relief road joining the already extremely busy Long Shoot is ridiculous. It will put so much pressure on the top of the Long Shoot and Harvester/Hinckley Road roundabout, onto an already busy road and junction. The road will end up being a relief road for the A5, with commuters using the new road to avoid traffic on the busy A5. Why would we want to put that amount of traffic onto roads with homes on and endanger children living in the area?

Understand the need for new houses but do we really need so many in Nuneaton? Any new homes should be built on brownfield sites and equally distributed around the town. If jobs are being created Bedworth way, surely affordable houses should be built closer to the new job opportunities.

Strongly oppose the Borough Plan. There needs to be a new Borough Plan, prepared in an open, honest forum, which will be in the best interests of the people of Nuneaton and Bedworth, not to just satisfy policy. 650 Mrs Rosalie N/A You need to use landscaping, but the impact from the See response 592/1 Stretton A5 on air quality is bad now. It's going to get a lot worse

147

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent or there would be no need to state this.

Why so many houses to the north of Nuneaton when the roads leading from them are already at gridlock and the air quality is poor without more excessive traffic? If the proposed amount of houses are put in this area, as when the Council give planning permission for flats, there will be a minimum of 1.5 parking spaces per flat. That means there will be 4500 cars using these roads that are already congested.

At one time the Plan was to build 1600 houses on Bedworth Woodlands, why the sudden change?

As we are called Nuneaton and Bedworth, not Nuneaton and Hinckley, why not find sites that join the two towns together?

You state it will make more jobs. It is impossible now for the young to get a new job. With the amount of new houses there is no chance of jobs. Nuneaton has the highest unemployment in Warwickshire.

The hospitals, Drs' surgeries and schools are all full to capacity.

Good agricultural land, which is Green Belt, will be lost, never to be replaced.

If this is a proposed Plan for the Borough, why has the burden of new homes not been shared fairly across the Borough instead of being plonked in one area. 179/1 Mrs Tina N/A The proposed development in Weddington and St 1. See 94/1. Simpson Nicolas is disproportionately high relative to other areas 2. At the time of preparing the PO the evidence of the Borough. Bedworth and Whitestone are both identified a need for 30,000sq m of office space. In surrounded by greenfields, yet they have low levels of addition the evidence indicated a need for 43,000sq m planned development. Weddington and St Nicolas are of comparison and 4050sq m of convenience. The

148

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent already oversubscribed in terms of facilities, although I Council has undertaken a more recent town centre note it is planned that schools will be built. requirements assessment. This updated work will feed Nevertheless, they are not identified on a map nor is it into the development of the Pre-Submission document, stated what size they will be. Traffic will continue to be a including a review of the Quarters approach. nightmare as there are only two routes in. It can already 3. Wider infrastructure will be developed through the take 30 mins to cross from St Nicolas or Weddington to IDP. This is an ongoing piece of work. Upon the other side without 3000 extra houses. The road completion this should be read in conjunction with the detailed in the PO will not solve access to the town Borough Plan because it will not be possible to centre. The level of building should be evenly spread illustrate every scheme on the maps. across the Borough with extensions to schools and other facilities.

In terms of the town centre development there is no point investing in extra retail space if it is too expensive to rent, and we already have vacant buildings and facilities. How will it be marketed to attract anything other than cheap shops and pound shops which compete with the successful outdoor market (Wed and Sat). Parking is limited and expensive, so unless this changes shoppers will continue to go out of town to the Ricoh and Fosse Park.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes Distribute development evenly across all areas of Nuneaton so that the volume of traffic and pressure on facilities is more evenly split. 28/1 Mrs. C. Object to major developments of up to 3000 homes in See response 592/1 Rowley the Weddington and St. Nicolas area. The development in this area appears to be more than all the other areas put together. The Long Shoot is already a fast busy road. Already there is difficulty getting off our drive in a car, and crossing on foot. A lot of extra vehicles will be using the road, heightening danger for old people and children trying to access the facilities and schools on St. Nicolas and surrounding areas. Cars trying to exit the new development and turn onto the Long Shoot to get into town and other areas of Nuneaton, etc. will have to

149

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent turn right. It is impossible now to turn right when pulling out of homes on the Long Shoot. New development home owners will turn left for ease and do a U turn in the bus stop pull in that is located on the bend of the Long Shoot. Home owners between the bus pull in & the Harvester roundabout will see a constant stream of traffic, making pulling out impossible. It will also be dangerous when trying to turn into my own drive when returning home. Proposed new roads from Weddington and Whitestone are funnelling extra traffic onto The Long Shoot, particularly between the Harvester roundabout and the exit/access of the new development. No traffic calming along this road. The air quality will decrease and noise will increase. Crashes and fatalities are not unknown on this road. Flooding has been known on The Long Shoot; all this development is preventing draining away of any excess rainfall. A road from the A5, joining up to the roundabout by the new crematorium, would be a better option. Cars, and more importantly lorries, from the M69 would by-pass The Long Shoot and would have ready access to Attleborough Fields Industrial Estate, also, providing another route into town. All this excess traffic will be funnelled down The Long Shoot, Hinckley Road, (an area of families and children walking to school, etc.) and hit that bottleneck at Leicester Road Bridge, which is extremely busy now. Not enough Green Belt land in area. No cycle routes; would not dare cycle along these roads now, never mind with increase in traffic. I am very worried about the massive increase in traffic along the Long Shoot. I would like to see the development dramatically reduced in size and spread fairly throughout the Borough, with promises of no new developments. A road bypassing The Long Shoot from the A5 and joining up the new crematorium by Attleborough fields would help some of the heavy traffic, but ensuring it is well away from homes. Have some traffic calming measures on The Long Shoot.

150

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Access roads from the new developments straight onto the A5, so everything doesn't have to be funnelled down the Long Shoot. Increase Green Belt land. More cycle routes and easier routes for walkers. 649 Ms Frances N/A The estimated future employment growth is unrealistic. See responses 592/1 and 229/2 (section 5) on retail Barter I do not agree with the optimism regarding traffic growth. mitigation. I do not agree with the number of houses planned for.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes MIRA may be expanding but insufficiently to create so many proposed jobs. Traffic in Nuneaton is bad. I have little confidence in the proposed new roads. I am highly sceptical about the number of houses, which links in with employment/unemployment. The proposal for more Rope Walk type shops sounds ludicrous in view of the number of retailers that have closed down. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Paragraph 3.2 - Infrastructure Section - do not support Paragraph 3.2 on Climate Change makes reference to Wilkinson this section - this Section fails to mention that NBBC has the fact that few people travel by public transport, the highest percentage (73%) of residents travelling to walking and cycling. The Plan promotes improvements work by car in the region, which is above the national to public transport, walking and cycling. This is for the average (Census). This is despite the Borough having benefit of all residents. the lowest car ownership in Warwickshire. The NPPF's objectives as duplicated in paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4 set The Plan directs development to Nuneaton as a out the Government's objectives to create sustainable priority. Whilst it is recognised that a large proportion of communities and foster sustainable development. Is the development is proposed for North of Nuneaton, the Borough's intention to allocate housing to the north of Borough Plan proposes a number of sites across the the Borough and employment to the south of the Borough and recognises that development will take Borough really going to achieve these objectives, or just place in the existing urban areas. It is too simplistic to further increase the percentage of residents driving to assume that all newly forming households will work by car? automatically be accommodated in new build housing or that they will find jobs on the new employment land. The housing and jobs markets are more complex than this. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Question BP4 - There is some confusion over the The Council must plan to ensure that the required

151

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Wilkinson housing figures stated in paragraph 5.26. The table number of houses are built during the Plan period. The states that there is a need for a further 4550 dwellings residual requirement (taking off completions, planning on strategic urban extensions. However, the four sites permissions and identified urban sites) was 4550 at quoted equate to 5194 dwellings. This surplus in April 2012. The total capacity of the strategic housing addition to the statement in paragraph 5.28 that "urban sites is higher because it recognises there needs to be sites identified by the SHLAA will not be identified" will some flexibility to ensure that the total is met. lead to an oversupply of housing allocated in the Borough. There is a risk that this housing will be built on Potential urban sites have been assessed through the greenfield sites outside the Borough's urban boundaries SHLAA. This identifies all potential sites from the in preference to urban brownfield sites that may come information available at that time. The SHLAA will be forward at a later date as windfall sites. regularly updated as it is recognised that new sites come forward but other sites fall by the wayside. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Question BP5 and Housing Allocation SHS4 - OBJECT See response 94/1 Wilkinson to Strategic Housing Site North of Nuneaton for up to 3000 dwellings in addition to the 326 already approved in Weddington - The Borough Plan is for 7900 dwellings up to 2026 of which 3326 will be located to the North of Nuneaton. This equates to 42% allocated in one location. To put the scale of this housing allocation into perspective, the neighbouring market town of Atherstone comprises some 4000 households with a population size of 10471 and an estimated car ownership of 6000 (based on average of 1.5 vehicles per household) generating some 40000 trips per day (based on an average number of 10 trips per household per day). Based on these figures, housing allocation SHS4 coupled with the recent approval off Church Lane will generate an additional 8706 people with 4989 vehicles generating some 33260 trips per day in an area already suffering severe congestion on the A5 from the Higham on the Hill roundabout to the M69, and from the Redgate junction to the M42. The Leicester Road gyratory already suffers from congestion, as do the routes onto it from Weddington Road, Higham Lane and Hinckley Road. With the addition of the proposed northern relief road, this will merely act as a “rat run” increasing traffic onto

152

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the Leicester Road Gyratory, and the two notorious junctions onto the A5 – the Red Gate Junction and The Long Shoot Junction. Indeed, improvements are proposed to these two junctions to accommodate the development proposal at MIRA, (if this development ever materialises) but I question whether these measures are going to be sufficient to accommodate an additional 5000 vehicles additional housing in the north of Nuneaton will generate? 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a NBBC are proposing 42% of its housing allocation in an See response 592/1 Wilkinson area without any employment land allocations, without adequate infrastructure projects and without sufficient measures that will make this housing allocation sustainable. As stated for paragraph 3.2 Nuneaton and Bedworth already has the highest percentage of residents travelling to work by car in Warwickshire. This housing allocation will merely be a commuter suburb. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a NBBC has expressed concerns at North Warwickshire See response 94/1. The S Paramics modelling takes Wilkinson Borough Council’s allocation of 400 dwellings in Hartshill account of the potential allocation at Hartshill. stating that this allocation will impact on the Air Quality Management Areas in Nuneaton at the Leicester Road Gyratory and Midland Road to Corporation Street. This is an allocation for 400 dwellings. An allocation some 8.5 times larger as proposed by SHS4 will have a huge impact on the two Air Quality Management Areas in Nuneaton at the Leicester Road Gyratory and Midland Road to Corporation Street. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a NBBC has also registered their concerns that an North Warwickshire provided no information on Wilkinson additional 400 houses in Hartshill will impact on the supporting infrastructure for its proposed development. existing school provision and other local services. The Council has worked with service delivery partners Housing allocation SHS4 being 8.5 times the magnitude to identify suitable local infrastructure, such as schools, of this allocation will have a huge impact on existing healthcare and roads, required to support the new school provision in this locality. All of the primary and development proposed. This information, as was secondary schools in the North of Nuneaton are already known at the time of writing, was provided in the running over their capacity. The traffic they generate in Locality policies and in more detail in the Infrastructure themselves is substantial on unsuitable roads. Where Delivery Plan. The Council is continuing to work with

153

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent are these new primary and secondary places to be service delivery partners to update this information, and located when the sites are already up to their capacity? to identify when it will be located and when it will be When will they be provided? At the end of the delivered. This work will inform the Pre-Submission development or at the start of the development which is version of the Borough Plan. when they are required? 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Where is there any reference to new areas of open The Locality policies and Infrastructure Delivery Plan Wilkinson space being allocated. The fields the subject of housing make reference to new open spaces to support the allocation SHS4 have a number of well used public strategic housing site. footpaths running through them. The loss of all of these See response 592/1 fields will have a negative impact on the landscape. Does the Council really agree with Nick Boles MP that these fields are “environmentally uninteresting green spaces”? All of these fields are farmed to produce crops – none of them have been neglected like most of the Green Belt land in the Borough! Indeed, when we walk along the public footpaths that cross these fields, my six year old daughter asks me “Where will we grow our food when these fields have gone?” - not on most of the Green Belt allocations in the Borough, that's for sure! 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Questions BP38 (Flood risk areas) and in the Vision for The Council has prepared Strategic Flood Risk Wilkinson Weddington and St Nicolas – Reference is made to the Assessments for the Borough in line with the NPPF. development of a Strategic Housing Site including The proposals of the Borough Plan do not plan to “Measures suitable for flood risk zones and surface develop areas of Flood Zone 2 or 3. However, it is water flooding recognised that there are some existing areas where What about the measures required for areas outside this flash and other types of localised flooding occur. The housing site allocation which will experience additional Strategic Flood Risk Assessment makes surface water run-off from this proposal? recommendations about how the reduce the risk of My property’s curtilage includes the Change Brook. I flooding, i.e. as a result of increase run-off due to the have photographs showing how this Brook suffers from increase in hard surfaces. At the planning application flash flooding during peak rainfalls. This is a clay stage, the developer will have to prepare a site specific catchment and so soak-aways will not work in this flood risk assessment to identify any potential flood location. In the 28 years our property has stood, the risk, and the measures to be put in place to ensure Brook has never overtopped its banks in this location. flood risk is not increased elsewhere. Priority is given to However, any additional surface water flowing into it sustainable drainage systems. from this housing allocation and a relief road upstream The Council will continue to raise specific issues with will cause the water to overtop its banks, as the diameter the Environment Agency and Severn Trent Water of the culvert under Milby Drive is not of a sufficient size through the work on the IDP. 154

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent to take any additional flows. If this were to happen then the four properties surrounding this culvert, including mine, will be flooded. Take this as Notice that should my property flood following the development of the land to the North of my property then I will hold NBBC liable. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Question BP5 and Housing Allocation SHS4 See response 592/1 Wilkinson The Borough’s Housing Allocation should be distributed around the Borough in accordance with the Employment Land Allocations and existing employment sites locations in order to ensure that any new housing schemes are located in the most sustainable locations. Parts of the land highlighted under allocation SHS4 is capable of accommodating some additional housing, but not on the scale being proposed. Large areas of this allocation need to be excluded so that they remain as agricultural land as characterised in the Council's Landscape Appraisal 2011 as the "Anker Valley Estate Farmland" where the intention of Council in the Plan is to "enhance" the landscape of this area, and to cover it all with built development will certainly not enhance the landscape character of it! 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Question BP6 - links do need to be made between The Council proposed to link the timing of the Wilkinson employment land and housing allocation land, however, development. if 42% of the housing allocated is to the north of the The Plan directs development to Nuneaton as a Borough, and the majority of the employment land priority. Whilst it is recognised that a large proportion of allocated is to the south of the Borough, where is the development is proposed for North of Nuneaton, the link? Borough Plan proposes a number of sites across the Borough and recognises that development will take place in the existing urban areas. It is too simplistic to assume that all newly forming households will automatically be accommodated in new build housing or that they will find jobs on the new employment land. The housing and jobs markets are more complex than this. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Question BP7 - This designation should be reviewed, This land meets 4 of the 5 purposes of the GB and is

155

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Wilkinson and options explored to allocate part of this land for particularly important in maintaining separation housing in order to promote the first two visions NBBC between Nuneaton and Hinckley. For this reason the has for the areas of Weddington and St Nicolas. land was ruled out as a potential site for new development. 371/1 Ms Sharron n/a Question BP38 and Vision for Weddington and St Noted. Wilkinson Nicolas - The Change Brook is a wildlife corridor that The NPPF and Strategic Flood Risk Assessment should be protected and enhanced. There should be a promote the use of sustainable drainage systems as a reduction in the surface water flows being discharged priority. into this Brook from the land to the North and there should be improvements made to its water quality. The use of Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes should be tested to see if they are suitable for this clay catchment. 178/1 Ms Victoria N/A The plain English guide to the Localism Act, published in 1. The content of the Preferred Options document was Stapleton November 2011 by DCLG, states that the previous informed by the cross party Member Working Group planning system ". . . Did not give members of the public with Cabinet approving the document for consultation. enough influence over decisions that make a big 2. The consultation took place in line with the Council's difference over their lives. Too often power was adopted SCI and consultation strategy. exercized by people who were not directly affected by 3. The maps provide the appropriate level of detail for a the decisions they were taking. This meant, Borough Plan. As a strategic document it is not understandably, that people often resented what they intended that every road name should be legible on the saw as decisions and plans being foisted on them. The map. result was a confrontational and adversarial system . . .".

I believe that this criticism of the previous planning system perfectly sums up the way that I feel as a resident of the locality of Weddington and St Nicolas in the way the Council is behaving towards my local area and in the formulation of the Borough Plan.

I refer to the fact the majority of the new homes to be built in the Borough are to be constructed on much valued greenfields within the locality. I find it suspicious that the Labour controlled Council wants to use the Borough Plan to place a very large and unpopular development in an area which traditionally does not return a high percentage of votes for their party. It 156

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent seems to me that they are trying to dump the development in the area which they believe will have the least fallout for themselves in terms of votes.

This appears to be one of those rare occasions when the democratic process is actually working against a large section of the local community, pitting one local area against another as Councillors use the Borough Plan to further their own political careers, rather than acting in the wider interest of the Borough.

I also note that the timing of the Preferred Option has been orchestrated to ensure the least political impact for Councillors involved. NBBC have delayed the release of the PO until after both local and county council elections have taken place so that voters could not express their thoughts on these proposals through the electoral system. It is now four years since the Issues and Options consultation took place. In the meantime developers have been able to use the lack of an up to date Plan to force through proposals, such as Church Fields in Weddington, against large scale local opposition.

The title, Borough Plan Preferred Options, is misleading, as it only contains one option. My local Councillor, Keith Kondakor, has been prevented from speaking at the consultation events by NBBC's legal team. If this is truly a consultation and not an attempt to bulldoze the Council's one option through the process, why is my democratically elected Council representative prevented from speaking at the consultation events about the issues we face in the Borough?

The quality of the information provided as part of the consultation is very poor. In the PO Summary the proposals are broken down into localities but the

157

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent document does not show how these interlink across the localities through the Borough as a whole. The maps are of poor quality and appear to be of a low resolution, with place names that are unreadable. I do not believe the Council has provided the public with clear and adequate information upon which to judge these proposals.

Reasons For Comments and Preferred Changes The Council should initiate a real consultation where a range of viable options can be assessed by the people of the Borough, rather than a section of the Council attempting to use the process to rubber stamp their interests. The quality of the information should be of a high quality that is easily legible. 712/2 N. Hansen Highways The A5 provides an important regional and inter-regional Noted Agency function and the Highways Agency has some reservations about the likely impact of the proposed Northern Housing Site on the A5. In order to maintain the operational integrity of the A5, the creation of new accesses would only be considered in exceptional circumstances after all other options had been considered. 712/3 N. Hansen Highways The Highways Agency welcomes the suggestion of a Noted Agency proposed Northern Relief Road to serve the Northern Housing Site, and would support this proposal provided it can be connected to the A5, utilising existing junctions, improved as necessary. The more detailed S-Paramics modelling that is yet to be undertaken should help to identify how the proposals for this sector could be delivered to the satisfaction of the Borough and County Councils, and the HA. 106/1 P. Brooks I wish to register my objection to the propsoed new See response 592/1 housing development around Weddington and St Nicolas Park Drive. I understand that the Labour Planning committee have over-riden the plan produced

158

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent by the planning experts which proposed a more equitable distribution of housing around Nuneaton and Bedworth.

The MIRA plan is exaggerated; aren't Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council planning 1000 new homes on the back of the same expansion? 106/2 P. Brooks Traffic around St Nicolas Park Drive, Hinckley Road and See response 94/1 The Long Shoot is already intolerable in the morning and this will not help the matter.

Also the traffic route into the town centre over the Leicester Road Bridge and by Etone School will significantly worsen with an adverse environmental impact. 106/3 P. Brooks What about school places in this area. All three local See response 592/1 primary schools are full and could not cope with any signifcant rise in the number of new children 01/5 P. Clarke N/A At a planning application meeting, WCCH said an island See responses 592/1 and 09/1 (Section 11 Whitestone onto the A47 is not acceptable as the flow of traffic was and Bulkington) on Eastern Relief Road. constant during most of the day and there are safety issues. This junction would only meet regulations for 120 plus cars entering and exiting. This is also the case for the Bellway junction onto the A47/Long Shoot. Given WCCH's worries on safety and traffic flows, why are you proposing a road for 2000 plus new homes which would mean 4000 more cars entering a junction that WCCH says is unsafe? Not responsible for the Council to consider putting one in their preferred plan. Must protect road users under existing laws. Many issues need addressing before development is undertaken: air quality in the town centre, congestion of the A47 into the town coming from Hinckley each day, traffic queues over Eastboro Way bridge where traffic is trying to get to town by a different route, flooding in Nuneaton, Weddington and downstream. The increased

159

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent traffic onto the gyratory system and its effect on air quality in homes, a school and college in Leicester Road. Putting people's health at risk is unacceptable. The new road suggested for Whitestone has been muted for many years as have new schools which have not been delivered due to lack of funding. The new road across St Nicolas Park would more than the £10m for the Whitestone project and would become a rat run and not improve traffic congestion. Duty of care and due diligence must be the main concern, not money generation. 218/6 P. Donely N/A Develop land rear of Nuneaton Football/Rugby Club Such uses are not restricted in this location. alongside River Anker as a sporting facility. All weather The Council will consider whether a footpath is feasible and grass football pitches are desperately needed for and deliverable through the Borough Plan. the local community. The land is currently a wasted resource. Need a footpath from Attleborough Road to Nuneaton FC. 218/7 P. Donely N/A As well as Change Brook and Buttermere, include The approach is about providing all residents with Horeston Grange Park for improvements. It is currently access to a Community Park. Horeston Grange is not very run down and improvements are long overdue. identified as a Community Park and so is not included. 218/2 P. Donely N/A Over 3000 new homes is far too many for St Nicolas See response 592/1 Park and Weddington. Will cause traffic chaos. Leicester Road Bridge / A444 gyratory is already congested and will not cope with extra traffic. Schools will not be able to cope with influx. 570/3 P. Goodyer N/A Putting a housing estate will spoil a most saught after See response 592/1 area to live; a road coming out onto The Long Shoot would be lethal. A small row of houses with good sized gardens completing the line of housing would complete the desirability of the road. Suggest a small park behind and then an extension of St Nicolas Park; field on left of Calendar Grove farm fronting onto The Long Shoot has terrible flooding every year and is not suitable for housing; need more green areas, not less, in Nuneaton,

160

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent as air and noise pollution are driving people away. 718/10 P. Rogers The vision for Weddington and St Nicolas refers to "New See response 592/1 Primary and Secondary Schools". No quantity or The Council is continuing discussions with service location given, and no mention of dental and medical delivery partners to identify the scale and general facilities which are already grossly overloaded, without location of new local infrastructure. This information will adding 3000 additional homes in the area inform development of the IDP and Locality based policies. 718/7 P. Rogers The Air Quality Monitoring Area is already exceeding See response 94/1 (Section 11 Weddington and St European regulations; the building of 3000 homes in the Nicolas) North will cause a massive increase in traffic causing even higher levels of pollution, inevitably shortening the lives of the people who live in this zone. Furthermore, Leicester Road bridge is the only access between north & south of the Borough, and this is already at breaking point. Also, whoever thought of building a feeder road to come out on Golf Drive is either a lunatic or has never driven a car. 618/1 P. Vernon I wish to object to the local plan as it fails to take account See response 94/1 of the problems associated with building so many houses into the area North of Weddington.

The area is hemmed in by the West Coast Mainline Railway, the border with Leicestershire and the A5 road. Unless a bridge can be built over the railway to link into the Abbey Green/Tuttle Hill area there's only one way in and out for the town over Leicester Road bridge. The problems of excess traffic and poor air quality on Old Hinckley Road and near Etone School are already known and will be compounded 618/3 P. Vernon The hope that the expansion of MIRA will create jobs See response 599/1 (Section 1). which in turn will create housing demand is unlikely to be Those that rent accommodation still require a dwelling fulfilled; these jobs are going to be slow to emerge and to live in. will be taken by people with specific skills who may already live within 20 miles or who are seconded for 2-3 years and will live in rented accommodation. 618/4 P. Vernon Much of the land to be built on between Higham Lane It is acknowledged that the proposal will lead to the

161

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent and Weddington Road is Grade 11 Agricultural Land loss of agricultural land. This is one of a number of which should not be built on. issues that the Council has to balance in terms of identifying suitable sites. See site selection background papers for further information. 618/5 P. Vernon The area between Tuttle Hill and the West Coast See response 208/1 Mainline Railway is brownfield land, and would be preferable for building smaller starter homes and maisonettes which are what the Borough needs, i.e. homes that are under £90,000 646/1 Peter and N/A Surprised that so much development is concentrated in See responses 94/1 and 592/1. Jean Pickard such a small area. This can only lead to further traffic, drainage and educational problems in an area where problems already exist.

They feel that a more systematic and equally distributed form of development should be adopted which will be advantageous to some of the areas where little or no development is proposed. A more systematic approach would be to the advantage of the future of the Borough as a whole. 684 Peter N/A The plan is patently heavy handed in relation to the See response 592/1 Croshaw north end of the Borough. This plan needs to focus its attention on providing housing and infrastructure nearer to, and around Bermuda Park. Indeed Bedworth should take more housing than is suggested.

However, fundamentally the REAL need for housing in particular is unlikely to be anywhere near as regards targets set, any job creation in the area is unlikely to be fulfilled under any circumstances.

No doubt in the distant future, further housing will be needed in the north of the Borough, however nowhere near the amount of the proposed debacle.

PLEASE MAKE CHANGES WHICH ARE MORE

162

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent EQUITABLE IN RELATION TO THE WHOLE BOROUGH. 681/11 Peter Dutton Paragraph 82 the Framework outlines the circumstances The Council's evidence indicates that this parcel of land in which new Green Belt can be designated. meets 4 of the 5 purposes of Green Belt land and that it is important for maintaining the separation between Taking these factors into account Gladman question the Nuneaton and Hinckley. It is therefore ruled out as a decision to seek the inclusion of the land south of The location for new development. Long Shoot in the Green Belt. Specifically we submit that including the western portion of this land in the Green Belt, immediately to the east of Eastboro Way, would not be necessary to prevent any further coalescence of Nuneaton and Hinckley and would prevent the development of a sustainable housing site. We strongly question whether there are exceptional circumstances to include this parcel of land in the Green Belt.

The Council’s evidence shows that land south of The Long Shoot is a sustainable location for further development. The parcel of land to the east of Eastboro Way could meet the housing needs of Nuneaton and the wider Borough, benefits from close proximity to a range of services and facilities that could be accessed by walking and cycling, and is well related to the existing settlement area. 254 R. Hastings I watch with concern the development of plans for over See response 94/1 3000 additional homes around Nuneaton. Whilst I completely recognise the need for additional (and affordable) housing in the UK, my concern largely lies with the chaos that will undoubtedly ensue because of the massive increase in traffic around the Town. I'm a resident of Weddington. The road system, particularly leading to the ring road, cannot cope as it is. The idea of 100's of more cars adding to the congestion is frightening. 94/1 R. Rose Object to the plan because: 1. An objective of the Plan is to direct development

163

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent towards Nuneaton. There is development proposed for 1. Too many houses for one area making it other locations around Nuneaton and Bedworth. disproportionate with the rest of the Plan However, it is noted that a large allocation to the north of Nuneaton results in disproportionate growth across 2. Road Infrastructure is not adequate for so many the Borough. However, it is of the view of the Council houses. This will lead to long delays going into and out that the development will result in positive benefits. In of town and surrounding areas. Recommend dual addition, the allocation of large scale sites is more likely carriageways, flyovers and under passes to be built to to accrue larger infrastructure benefits. cope with an extra 7 to 10 thousand cars on our road 2. Road infrastructure is not currently adequate to network. support the growth. For this reason, the Council has been working with the County Council on this issue. S- Paramics modelling has taken place. It identifies the necessary improvements to the road network. It is anticipated that there will also need to be sustainable transport improvements to assist with reducing the negative impact of the development. The S Paramics modelling also assesses impact on AQMAs. The results of this work will feed into the development of the pre-submission document and update of the IDP. 94 R. Rose I would like other plans to be considered before the final The site selection background papers set out what plan is agreed other options the Council considered for housing development. It sets out the reasons why other I would have thought the most likely alternative is to alternatives were ruled out. build the houses closer to where the work will be, e.g. Bedworth and the surrounding areas. 710 Rachael N/A 1. Seek clarification on what information has been used See response 592/1 and 04/2 (Section 5) Dimbleby to arrive at the target figures used in the plan. 2. Interested to know if all brownfield sites have been considered prior to encroaching onto countryside land. 3. The plan seems somewhat heavily weighted to building homes in the Weddington and St Nicolas areas of Nuneaton. It would seem more appropriate for the mass of building to be spread more evenly across the Borough. 4. Ask how the Woodlands has now been designated as Green Belt land when this was not it's original designation in the earlier Borough Plan? It is a large 164

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent area of land which could share some of the building works, lessening the burden on the north of Nuneaton. 5. Concerned that the air quality in the north of Nuneaton will be adversely affected due to the large increase in cars with the residential area proposed. 6. Believe that the large amount of building in the north of the county will encourage home owners there to travel to either Hinckley or Atherstone for shopping and leisure rather than encouraging people to use Nuneaton Town Centre. Travel into Nuneaton will prove problematic, as the increase in traffic will make it difficult to even get into the town. 133/4 Richard Warwickshire Site is adjacent to Weddington Coutry walk LWS (LWSs Noted. The presence of Local Wildlife Sites within or Wheat Wildlife Trust are core areas for nature conservation, which underpin adjoining potential development sites was taken into local ecological networks and make a significant account during the site selection process. This contribution towards both national and local biodiveristy information also contributed to the calculation of the targets and objectives). We believe that the developable site area, i.e. land where constraints were value/importance of these features, and the level of identified were removed. References to relevant Local protection assigned to them in Paragraph 113 of the Wildlife Sites will need to be made for this Locality. NPPF, must therefore be upheld during the selection of Policy ENV1 Biodiversity and Geodiversity recognises preferred site allocations so that the identified the need to protect wildlife assets taking account of development needs of the district can be fulfilled without their place in the hierarchy. any net loss or degradation of countywide important Further work is being undertaken on biodiversity to wildlife assets. inform the requirements for specific sites.

Principally, impacts on Local Sites should be avoided in the first instance and so we look to the Local Authority to select sites that are situated away from, or can clearly demonstrate no significant effects on, a LWS. However, where justified, sites that are inclusive of or are adjacent to a LWS should be reviewed to ensure that the development capacities or densities proposed are reflective of the constraints posed by the size and extent of the LWS and its location within the site. In accordance with the mitigation hierarchy detailed in paragraph 118 of the NPPF, a review of the development capacity or density at a proposed site must also take account of any

165

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent mitigation needed to safeguard a LWS within the proposals. This may include making provision for any extensions, buffers and ecological connectivity needed to conserve the feature in the long-term.

The Trust is concerned to note that some but not all of the site descriptions in section 11 identify the presence of a LWS within or adjacent to a preferred site allocation. These allocations will therefore need to be updated to ensure that the presence and extent of the LWS is reflected in the capacity and density of development, and in the green infrastructure proposals for the site. In this instance, we look to the local authority to apply the mitigation and enhancement principles, described for sites where LWS have already been identified, to all preferred sites listed in the table above. We believe that this, together with a robust policy for the protection of non-statutory wildlife sites within the Borough Plan, will ensure that the value of LWSs is adequately upheld within all preferred site allocations.)

It is recommended: Clearly indicate the presence of a Local Wildlife Site within or adjacent to all preferred site allocations to ensure that all constraints to development are identified. - Ensure that the allocation of preferred sites, and the proposed development densities within these sites, reflect the presence of a LWS and the mitigation requirements to safeguard the site within the long-term 336/1 Roger Brown n/a If many more houses are built on the Weddington/St See response 592/1 Nicolas Park part of the local plan, then as I see it the infrastructure will not cope. Another thing I observe is the designated sites are crop-bearing agricultural and livestock areas, and I feel these areas should be preserved. 634 Ron Bell N/A I cannot see any benefits accruing to Nuneaton from the An ELR and SHLAA update is being undertaken which building of a huge housing estate between Weddington will review proposed site allocations and their suitability 166

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Road and Higham Lane, since all business and to come forward to support growth. industrial sites are on the opposite side of town.

Access to Nuneaton Town Centre is limited to one bridge on Leicester Road, which is already severely congested at peak times and slow at most other times of day. It is also the meeting point for the A444 and A47, both very busy routes.

The increase in traffic funnelling through this very small area would make the air pollution problem even worse than it is already.

Before building more houses consideration should first be given to improving road services.

I object strongly to this proposal in its present form. 405/1 S. Bonner N/A Oppose the Borough Plan: Clear that this plan has been See response 592/1. put together on the basis of politics rather than what is best for the Borough, and indeed that alternative options have not been offered to residents of St Nicolas Park and Weddington; The impact of these developments on the area's infrastructure will be immense, causing difficulties from increased traffic, school places, doctors, dentists and other basic amenities; Building a new school/surgery in Weddington will not be sufficient as spaces are already at maximum in the current growing population; An additional road paralleling the A5 and linking these two sites will not relieve traffic pressures, as they are already at maximum on the Long Shoot and A5, and peak times are increasingly difficult; New road will cause increased traffic as most homes now have 2 cars, so potentially 6000+ new cars is a horrendous prospect; Residents in these areas are long term, with very little transience as young families settle here and older residents remain and retire. Many people work hard and aspire to live and raise their families in this

167

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent semi-rural area - outrageous that residents views may potentially not be listened to due to local politics and councillors not 'wanting it on their doorstep' as it seems in Bedworth. 257/2 S. J. It is appears that the proposed decision to concentrate See response 94/1 Roxburgh the majority of the new housing development on one side of Nuneaton, well away from the Bedworth side of the town, is a political one by a Bedworth dominated Labour Cabinet and therefore seems to indicate that it may not be a fair one, having regard to the interests of the community as a whole. 257/5 S. J. The fields each side of the Long Shoot are prone to See response 93/1 Roxburgh flooding. It is likely that building on these fields will spread the risk of flooding over a wider area and my aim would be to hold the Council accountable for any increased house insurance premiums that arise because of the currently proposed new housing development. 257/1 S. J. Wholly unacceptable that the majority of the new See responses 94/1 and 406/1 Roxburgh housing in this plan is concentrated into one area to create a city suburb type conurbation on one side of Nuneaton. In order to maintain the market town character of Nuneaton and provide an equitable solution to the need for more housing, the new housing should be spread around the north, south, east and west of the town. 335/1 S., C., M., & N/A Protest about the Borough Plan: Weddington Fields and See response 592/1 P. White the surrounding area flood on a regular basis. Planning permission was recently given for 510 homes in this area and will cause flood problems. What will the Council do about the flooding problem if we are to have thousands more homes? Hallam Land Management's 333 new homes (not the 510 now passed) had provision for a balancing pond to stop flooding. The pond will be up to 1 metre deep and will be drained when appropriate, into the River Anker. How does this work when it has rained solidly for a

168

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent month? Will it be necessary to have several of these ponds to try and alleviate flooding, and will they all drain into the River Anker? Will the new workforce for the new extended MIRA buy/rent houses in Weddington / St Nicolas Park area, or will they travel from where they live at present. It is ridiculous to base the argument to build more houses in this area on one company that is expanding its workforce. Many people in this area have no work, so where will all these new residents work? What provision is made to expand existing schools or build new ones to cater for the children of new residents? There is no planning nearby for this. So are these children going to travel to another part of Nuneaton? This will add cars to the traffic chaos. If new residents have just one car (many households have two or more cars nowadays) how are the existing roads going to manage. Extra traffic will make the air quality very poor, and Leicester Road Bridge and surrounding areas will become very bad traffic jam areas. The proposed plans will badly affect many people's lives. Nuneaton is already classed as a deprived area of Warwickshire. This Plan will cause untold damage to the environment, air pollution, people's health, local economy, etc. 102/1 T. Briggs N/A Oppose new housing at North of Nuneaton: the extent of See response 529/1 the planned new housing; quiet surroundings and countryside I chose to live will be taken from my family; understand the need for new housing, but query the scale. The chaos and long term disruption of the building will be bad enough, but impact both environmentally and to the lives of residents will be huge; increased traffic and passing through; currently beautiful and unscathed by human hand and will be turned into an eye sore. House prices in the local area are buoyant as it attracts families due to the schools; the

169

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent very reason why I moved there. Is anyone really thinking of the complete picture here. 568/1 T. Ford N/A Justify the planning forecast of 3000 houses in See response 592/1 Weddington and St Nicolas. 3000 homes will mean 6000 cars putting pressure on infrastructure that cannot cope now. Improving the A5 will not help the roads in Nuneaton. What will 6000 people do for employment and leisure facilities. Car parks will fill up with extra cars. The vision will not counterbalance the destruction of the Weddington and St Nicolas area. Working Group have no interest in the area, other than building 3000 houses. 723/1 T. Lyons We are pleased to see that the Top Farm site at Noted. Weddington has been taken forward as a strategic site, which will help deliver the Borough’s preferred strategy over the plan period. We intend to continue to promote the site through the final stages of the plan process. I confirm that to my knowledge there are no reasons why the site cannot be progressed 227/2 V. Penfold N/A Oppose draft Plan: Disproportionately allocates land for See response 592/1 and 388/2 housing in one part of the Borough to detriment of local people due to scale and size of proposal; previously assured that this land is countryside and will be protected or limited in terms of building; plan for 3000 homes is wildly optimistic and unnecessary; will have an adverse impact on local ecology; pollution from extra cars will adversely impact on air quality; Increase in vehicles will create huge traffic problems for residents who are familiar with delays at junctions; creating a new road to nowhere, except to link 2 busy roads (Weddington Road and The Long Shoot) will add to congestion at key junctions, leading to more pollution and adversely impacting the health and well-being of the community. Also runs parallel to existing A5 trunk road; Linking the roads through to Golf Drive to a notorious traffic bottleneck is clearly unrealistic; predicted growth in employment is overly optimistic - MIRA development,

170

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent whether or not it goes ahead, has already spurred considerable development in Hinckley and it is doubtful there will be significant demand for housing in Nuneaton as a result; Considerable loss of amenity as countryside and land capable of food production is lost forever; local amenities, e.g. Pingles Leisure Centre and George Eliot Hospital are already at capacity; Not clear what arrangements for water supply, fuel, waste/refuse have been made, but assume properties will draw on stretched existing resources. Given that this Borough includes Bedworth and Nuneaton, suggest more practical to join up both towns for new housing - the road system is better able to cope due to existing infrastructure in place, rather than joining Warwickshire and Leicestershire. 404/1 W. and J. Strongly opposed to proposed Borough Plan to build See response 592/1 Cope 3,000 houses on open countryside in our immediate area of Higham Lane, and St Nicolas Park Nuneaton. The area does NOT need the sheer volume of housing being proposed, and that the volume of housing being proposed is totally excessive will do nothing to improve our area. Rather than enhance this lovely area, in fact it will be utterly destroyed by the building of these 3,000 houses 404/2 W. and J. 1: Traffic congestion. See response 94/1 Cope The main roads within our vicinity are already severely gridlocked every weekday morning and evening during 'rush hour,' a situation aggravated much more during school term time when parents are dropping their children off at the three local schools. We believe that the sheer volume of this extra housing will mean a vast amount of extra cars using these roads, potentially causing the current situation to become absolutely unworkable.

Also, there is only ONE access road INTO Nuneaton 171

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent Town from the Weddington area, namely Leicester Road Bridge, which is constantly also gridlocked during rush hour and school term time. We're very concerned as to how the sheer volume of extra traffic potentially being created will be able to either enter OR travel through Nuneaton on this route, especially as there is a busy senior school situated along this road. 404/3 W. and J. 2: Potential flooding. See response 392/7 Cope As it is at present, Higham Lane Road, and some gardens at the town end, very quickly become water logged and prone to flooding during heavy rain. We believe that the erection of such a massive amount of properties can only aggravate an already overstretched drainage system which will just not be able to cope. 404/4 W. and J. 3: The loss of our greenfields. See response 592/1 Cope The open countryside at the top of Higham Lane, towards Higham-on-the-the-Hill, is beautiful. The fact is that once these greenfields are gone to this development, we will NEVER get them back. They will be gone forever, a fact which makes us very upset. 399 Davidson's Paragraph 11.54 refers to recent planning permissions The maps focuses on the Borough Plan proposals Development and this might be reference to land off Church Lane and rather than permissions already granted which are not Limited Weddington Road, which has outline planning subject to consultation. Supporting documents provide permission for housing and associated development details about sites with valid planning permissions, e.g. under reference 030775, dated 20 February 2012. Five year land supply position statement. Therefore, this section should identify this land as land with planning permission. Policy SHS4 and Map 13 refer to the north of Nuneaton Strategic Housing Site. This includes a proposed new access road onto The Long Shoot. The land adjoining The Long Shoot has outline planning permission for housing and associated development under reference 031741. Access off The Long Shoot was approved under this outline permission. The width and specification of this approved access is

172

Response Full Name of Organisation Please add your comment Response Ref Number Respondent the subject of proposed minor variations under application 032217. However, siting of the approved access is not proposed to change. 660/ Coventry Agent states that his client supports the allocation to the Noted. Diocesan north east of Nuneaton and that his client is prepared to Board of act with other adjoining owners, statutory authorities, Finance external consultants and NBBC planning officers in order to bring the land forward for development.

173