Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 5007

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Misses PK and EM Kennedy

Representation Summary:

Object to sites south of Harbury Lane and Whitnash:
Why has public preferred option of Finham been rejected?
Why has Finham been given to Coventry when it is not in Warwickshire?
What has Coventry given/paid for site?
Why does district council wish to disregard it's vision?
Not opposed to small housing development spread between villages which, plus brown field sites, could address large part of housing requirements.
Commuter traffic for M40 tends to use Bishops Tachbrook morning and evening making roads very busy. Increase in traffic will result in gridlock. What proposals are there for improving public transport and public access to railway station, motorways etc
Utilities would need updating/improving to cope with increasing demands as would medical and social service provision. hospitals, GP surgeries, chemists, dental surgeries, community services and social worker provision.
Local schools unable to place children currently. What proposals are there to address now and in future?
Will new housing development include shops and extra post office or will residents have to travel? Law enforcement?
Does council propose to improve and increase employment opportuntiies? Not cheap to live in Warwickshire and limited or no employment will result in houses not selling.
Ignoring health, wellbeing and environment of community and ecological balance of wildlife. Increased pollution, traffic problems, destruction of rural and green field sites. Loss of unique characteristics and identity of villages and areas affected by development.