Object

Revised Development Strategy

Representation ID: 52683

Received: 27/06/2013

Respondent: Mr Peter Wilding

Representation Summary:

Transport mitigation proposals for Kenilworth will not be able to accommodate traffic arising from Thickthorn

Full text:

I read WDC's new plan for green belt development for Thickthorn with dismay and would like to add my objection to what would be this damaging and costly ruination of our town.
WDC have no democratic mandate to proceed with these plans. In response to a previous consultation nearly 60% of respondents opposed development in the Green Belt yet you ignore this and offer us only options on which massive level of destruction we would prefer. Where is the explanation of the benefits to Kenilworth that wrecking the southern part of the town ?
Green belt is there for a reason, and previous WDC studies had identified areas of development that did not require this harmful removal of precious land.
Kenilworth cannot cope with 700 additional homes and 1000 + cars. It is gridlock during rush hour and most of the day up the Warwick Road and surrounding streets. There is nothing in your plans to accommodate this extra traffic load on the existing roads other than shunting traffic lights on St John's gyratory. Expecting this alone to deal with the increased traffic flow is la la land nonsense.
Nor is there evidence of how the disruption, noise and pollution will be minimised or managed while the development is underway.
It is interesting to note that the few people who support your plans on the comments forum are either those who directly financially benefit from the scheme or those who actually live in the town and therefore won't be affected.
As with HS2, even though there is overwhelming local objection, the will of the majority is being ignored. Our democracy is a sham. Where is the option for us to say "None of the above"?