Publication Draft

Search representations

Results for Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council search

New search New search

Support

Publication Draft

Do you agree with the Preferred Vision for Warwick District to 2026?

Representation ID: 2918

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Object

Publication Draft

Do you agree with the Preferred Growth Strategy for Warwick District to 2026?

Representation ID: 2919

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

The facilities/infrastructure are neither available nor easily provided.
Major traffic issues into/out of Leamington and Warwick. Will need significant road improvements and at least an extra river crossing.

Section 3.14
Points 3 and 4 are fine but bullet points 1,2 and 5 should be changed to spread development more evenly over the FOUR towns, the A46 corridor and south of Coventry.

Finham should be targeted as the prime location for placement of the bulk of extra housing allocated to WDC, in particular accommodating the expected influx from the major conurbations.

It should not be allocated to accommodate Coventry's allocation.

Object

Publication Draft

Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for the location of new employment land?

Representation ID: 2920

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This council believes that the WDC has identified appropriate locations with the serious exceptions that Lower Heathcote/south of Harbury Lane should be retained as an area of restraint to preserve valuable agricultural land and respect the natural boundary to development provided by Harbury Lane.

This council also believes that the area at Finham/south of Coventry should be used to accommodate WDC's allocation of employment land rather than being yielded to Coventry for its needs.

Object

Publication Draft

(i) Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane

Representation ID: 2922

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

STRONGLY OBJECT - This land must be retained as an area of restraint to properly separate Bishops Tachbrook from the major towns and also to preserve excellent agricultural land.

Support

Publication Draft

(ii) Land west of Europa Way, Warwick

Representation ID: 2923

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Subject to a balanced spread of development over the four towns and wider district this land represents reasonable infill and has reasonable access to infrastructure without imposing excessive demands.

Support

Publication Draft

(iii) Land at Thickthorn, Kenilworth

Representation ID: 2924

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This area contributes well towards spreading the allocations over the wider district and has good access to established infrastructure - a natural choice.

Comment

Publication Draft

(iv) Land at Kings Hill, south of Green Lane, Finham

Representation ID: 2925

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Object if reserved for Coventry allocation.
Support if taking a significant part of WDC allocation and assisting in spreading the WDC allocation across the whole district. This is a good site for development as it is adjacent to good infrastructure and has good access to the motorway network.

Support

Publication Draft

Do you support or object to the preferred option for Tourism, particularly in respect of visitor accommodation?

Representation ID: 2926

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Support subject to making the option district-wide (OR at very least the FOUR towns - Kenilworth Castle!!! - has it been forgotten?) - The aim should be to maintain all tourist facilities wherever possible unless they can be convincingly shown to be no-viable.

Support

Publication Draft

Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for Rural Communities?

Representation ID: 2927

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Support.

Support

Publication Draft

Do you support or object to the preferred option for Rural Communities, particularly in respect of rural housing?

Representation ID: 2928

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Representation Summary:

This Preferred option is thoroughly welcomed provided proper, full, local consultation and meeting only the community's clearly identified needs (and wishes) is irrevocably enshrined policy.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.