I suggest that all options should be considered again to spread the increased number of houses throughout the village. This would cause the least landscape impact and have least effect on traffic. Access has been mentioned as a problem but it is very likely that developers could purchase land and/or houses to provide the necessary entrance.

I do not understand why potential ribbon development in Red Lane (options 3 & 4) is deemed unacceptable as it is how the village has grown over many decades.

The reason given for rejecting Option 7, Hodgetts Lane, is flawed:
1. It is stated that it is "Not suitable due to proximity / relationship to HS2". Owners of existing properties in the vicinity, but much closer to the route of HS2, have been assured by HS2 Ltd in the recently published Environmental Statement documentation that the effect of HS2 will be "negligible".
2. Lack of suitable access is also mentioned. I understand that, at that early stage, none of the current residents had been specifically asked if they would sell their property to provide an access road - a number have now said they would.

I agree that any development should include a proportion of social and/or affordable housing. The developer should provide a guarantee to Warwick DC that this type of property will be constructed in phases throughout the development period to ensure that the Developer does not renegue on his initial plan when he finds that his final profits are not as high as planned.

All new properties should be constructed employing the best insulation techniques.

All new properties should be thoughtfully designed so that they provide sufficient living and storage space. Many new homes have so little storage they are barely sufficient for childless couples with minimal possessions - no wonder one of the boom industries in the UK is self service storage units.

All new properties should be preferentially offered to local residents and/or workers before being generally available, as currently happens to new properties in Harbury.