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

Object

Representation ID: 1447

Received: 03/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs S Dahlison

Objects to the proposed housing at land south of Harbury Lane.
Objects to the large housing numbers at this location without benefit of any infrastructure. This would would lead to more car trips and lead to more pollution, further pressure on overburdened existing infrastructure, eg roads, doctors surgeries, shops.

The other brown field sites area availabe. WDC has a site near Coventry which could be used which is more appropriate.

Object

Representation ID: 1449

Received: 17/08/2009

Respondent: William Bethell

Whitnash and the South of Leaminton has already suffered large amounts of development over many years.

Infrastructure will not be able to cope, how will the local authorities deal with increase in traffic on Harbury Lane, Tachbrook Road and Europa Way. In total the Harbury Lane will be expected to deal with a further 17,600 vehicle journeys daily

Finham site should be used to meet Warwick District's needs.

Object

Representation ID: 1450

Received: 03/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs S Dahlison

Objects to the proposed housing at land south of Harbury Lane.
Objects to the large housing numbers at this location without benefit of any infrastructure. This would would lead to more car trips and lead to more pollution, further pressure on overburdened existing infrastructure, eg roads, doctors surgeries, shops.

The other brown field sites area availabe. WDC has a site near Coventry which could be used which is more appropriate.

Object

Representation ID: 1451

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: K J Hudson

Our green field sites must be protected from development for a number of reasons the most important being the need to prevent world food shortages resulting in famine. Britain will need to be able to produce sufficient food to meet our increasing needs

Object

Representation ID: 1454

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Nick Bessant

I strongly object to the proposal to build thousands of new homes in the Warwick District over 3 phases (as very considerable construction has already taken place recently), I do feel that we need a positive solution which does allow for some new properties and demonstrates solid well reasoned alternative arguments that considers:-

* Infrastructure (i.e. - Schools, Hospitals, Roads etc.)
* Quality of Life
* Environment

Object

Representation ID: 1455

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Hugh Furber

Number of people: 2

Total number of homes is wrong as it is based on a report by the Government which J Plaskitt MP described as "flawed".

No account of existing dwellings provided over the plan period to 2011 has be taken.

A legal challenge should be mounted to the Government over the allocation of housing to the South Warwick area.

No assement has been made on impact or infrastructure.

More imaginative housing options should be considered. Such as an area wide approach perhaps with a the possibility of a new town.

Object

Representation ID: 1459

Received: 23/08/2009

Respondent: Judith Burdon

I feel that Warwick District has, in recent years, taken much of the local housing burden and that until the infrastructure exists to cope with the current population it would be inappropriate to grow Leamington and Warwick further.

Object

Representation ID: 1465

Received: 12/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs M Turnham

Objects to the large amount of housing which would have a detrimental impact on the existing infrastructure.
Concerns about the lack of infrastructure in an area which the existing services/ infrastructure are already stretched to full capacity.
Proposed housing option at land to the south of Harbury Lane would destroys the existing character of Bishops Tachbrook - Other options exist - brown field sites should be used first and future student accommodation at warwick University. Save the green field sites. More practical to build south of Coventry where there is existing infrastructre.

Object

Representation ID: 1472

Received: 27/08/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Kundi

Number of people: 2

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 1499

Received: 20/08/2009

Respondent: Mr & Mrs G.A Hayward

Deeply concerned about the loss of the green spaces at national and county level. This is through piecemeal erosion of the countryside through urban sprawl, particularly with the joining up of Leamington Spa and Warwick, Leamington's urban sprawl and most recently, Warwick Gates expansion.
Proposed housing at south of Harbury Lane and Heathcote will result in the loss of identity for Bishops Tachbrook with the loss of finite green space between Whitnash and Bishops Tachbrook. Priority should be given to the conservation and restoration of existing towns.

Object

Representation ID: 1504

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Nigel Hamilton

More of the development should be on the fringe of Coventry, which already has the facilities to support such a major population growth.

The greenbelt around Warwick needs greater protection

Object

Representation ID: 1536

Received: 29/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Mark Roberts

South of Leamington transport, school, hospital and all other infrasture links are not capable of any more building. Current commercial development is not being built on and should be used first. Building should take place adjoined to Coventry to avoid 'twons and villages; adjoining farmland, becoming urban creep, against the vision.

Support

Representation ID: 1550

Received: 31/08/2009

Respondent: B.L.A.S.T.

3a On all future developments deliver a mutual beneficial policy towards green land for gardens and allotments, green spaces for recreation and healthy living, green attitude towards future self-sufficiency in home grown food production

Object

Representation ID: 1593

Received: 30/08/2009

Respondent: EUNICE NICOLSON

I strongly object to the proposal to build on green belt land at King's Hill.

Object

Representation ID: 1599

Received: 08/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Marcus Fear

The Warwick and Leamington area is a desirable place to live as they are not just other faceless towns that have become little more than a sprawling housing estate. The Council's proposal to locate all of Warwickshire's new housing requirements in one area will turn the towns into just that and potentially destroy the heritage of these historic towns for future generations. I hope the farcical nature of the proposal can be seen before it is too late.

Object

Representation ID: 1601

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: William Bethell

Certainly not without a clearer & declared vision of impact on road systems, junction constraints, hospitals and school limitations without yet further in roads into greenfield sites.

Object

Representation ID: 1645

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Vanessa Hickerton

Whitnash has been heavily developed over the past number of years and I feel strongly that if all this new housing goes ahead it will have a negative and detrimental effect on Whitnash as a whole.

The sheer number of houses will put a strain on Whitnash's facilities. From education to healthcare to poilicing.

Traffic is busy during rush hour. This alone tells you that if people have to travel long distances to work then the houses are not being built in the correct place. There isn't the work anymore in Leamington as major factories have closed down.

Object

Representation ID: 1655

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Elizabeth and Daniel Sheehan

Number of people: 2

RE: Warwick District's Core Strategy Preferred Options of building 4,200 houses south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash

The proposed positiong and quantity of houses to be built is illogical and without precedent in this area.

New pinch points would be created in an area already dependant on the limited number of bridges to cross the local rivers and canals.

The Council is performing a 'volte face' by commending the "good communications" network when in the past it has highlighted the unacceptable traffic congestion.

The proposed new buildings lack school, medical, leisure and sports facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 1660

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs B Langley

Smaller scale developments shared equally through the district would dilute the strain on localised infrastructure and basic public services.

Object

Representation ID: 1666

Received: 27/08/2009

Respondent: J.G Whetstone

How can we the public comment when all possible options have not been identified to us.

Object

Representation ID: 1679

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs D zacaroni

It will put too much strain on the infrastructure roads, hospitals, schools.

Object

Representation ID: 1774

Received: 20/08/2009

Respondent: Max Bacon

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 1799

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Val Hunnisett

Development in Coventry's urban fringe will use greenfield, Green Belt, high grade agricultural land - not responsible use of space. Coventry CAN accomodate its growth within the city - the statistical base need bringing upto date.

Builders will press for greenfield for greenfield with all possible arguments as it is cheaper for them. Danger of Coventry developing a neglected middle ring.

Object

Representation ID: 1804

Received: 31/07/2009

Respondent: Mrs Helen Cheatham

Already beginning to resemble Redditch as overall town, also infrastructure inadequate.

Object

Representation ID: 1917

Received: 14/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Cederic Box

Object to 4200 proposed housing located close to Bishops Tachbrook. Recent poll identified that the village need only 15 extra homes. Dont want to become another suburb of Leamington Spa. The lack of infrastructure would have a similar detrimental impact on the village's amenities as happened when Warwick Gates was built, such as low water pressure, raw sewage overflow, lack of places at the local school as villlage places are taken by new development, medical services stretched beyond capacity, more traffic congestion and parking problems.

Support

Representation ID: 1922

Received: 03/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Andrew Ferguson

But words are easy

Object

Representation ID: 1965

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Ken Hope

(3.b) Consideration has been given to the effect of the growth of Coventry and its possible effects on WDC borders but none appears to have been given to growth in the Stratford DC area For instance a major housing development or industry growth in the Wellesbourne area could have a major effect on the roads and other services in south WDC area. The same could apply to borders with other DCs eg Rugby.

Object

Representation ID: 1986

Received: 03/09/2009

Respondent: K A Ferguson

On the recent Housing Needs Survey conducted in Bishops Tachbrook demonstrated that the village requires only 15 new homes. Object to the 4200 houses proposed between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates would threaten the village's character and identity as a separate settlement, and reduce the quality of life for the communtiy here and in Whitnash and on Warwick Gates. Housing should be located around the District to accommodat housing needs over the next 18 years.

Object

Representation ID: 2001

Received: 03/09/2009

Respondent: A. J Daubnley

On the recent Housing Needs Survey conducted in Bishops Tachbrook demonstrated that the village requires only 15 new homes. Object to the 4200 houses
proposed between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates would threaten the village's character and identity as a separate settlement, and reduce the quality of life for the communtiy here and in Whitnash and on Warwick Gates. Housing should be located around the District to accommodat housing needs over the next 18 years.

Object

Representation ID: 2012

Received: 03/09/2009

Respondent: The Occupier

On the recent Housing Needs Survey conducted in Bishops Tachbrook demonstrated that the village requires only 15 new homes. Object to the 4200 houses

proposed between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates would threaten the village's character and identity as a separate settlement, and reduce the quality of

life for the communtiy here and in Whitnash and on Warwick Gates. Housing should be located around the District to accommodat housing needs over the next 18

years.