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

Object

Representation ID: 3540

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: R.F. Garner

Insufficient jobs in Warwick/Leamington for residents of 4300 new homes so will increase commuting

Object

Representation ID: 3658

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Stephen Keay

Green belt should be protected from development for this purpose.

Object

Representation ID: 3687

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Richard Brookes

Employment land is required for the "Office/High Tech R&D/Light Industrial" sector - small enterprises and start-ups offering services and products for a digital, virtual world. Rather than zoning sites and allocating a percentage as employment land, the District should consider minimising land take with the approach of "zero commuting" - where one's employment and housing can co-exist in the same building footprint - like maisonettes over shops. This could free up 20ha (800 dwellings-worth) of land.

Comment

Representation ID: 3742

Received: 03/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs L J Stevens

Vacant factories and offices in Warwick and Leamington - where will new residents work? Existing residents at Warwick Gates commute out of area.

Object

Representation ID: 3743

Received: 13/08/2009

Respondent: Alan N Gandy

Horror at vast numbers of houses proposed. Do not need or desire development on this scale. Unclear who is to be accommodated. Growth suggests job market likely to expand and unemployment fall - bringing thousands more people in will increase competition for jobs to detriment of current residents. Sudden growth in job market seems unlikely so housing plans not put forward as part of local need. Many new homes on the market and all local needs met.

Object

Representation ID: 3846

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Debbie Wiggins

The council has not looked at the different ways of providing employment. They are fixated on providing employment land. Perhaps they can indicate what would be built eg, how many factories, what type of products would be produced, how many warehouses, what they would store, what transport links are required. They might be pleasantly surprised at how many different types of locations are available to them and they may move away from providing land as the only employment option. If its only LAND they are interested in then make sure it is where the BEST transport links are available.

Object

Representation ID: 3852

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Patricia Diane Freeman

So many people are out of work and in this day and age of peoples where are the 3500 going to come from - Coventry and Warwickshire.

Object

Representation ID: 3892

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: L M D Louise, Matthew, David Drinkhall Paul Kalus Anthony Barrett

Basis for homes is national population growth. Imposing massive growth where little expansion of employment results in commuting.

Object

Representation ID: 3898

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mr S S Khera

Object to Kings Hill Site. Homes should be built when there is a demand and employment nearby. In current economic downturn there are not enough jobs for existing households, nevermind new ones.

Object

Representation ID: 3902

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Kim Matthews

The brownfield site adjacent to the recycling facility a Pipers Lane, Kenilworth is clearly more suiable as employment land than that at Thickthorne, Kenilworth

Object

Representation ID: 3979

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr M Abba

Comment

Representation ID: 4015

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Ms Angela Clarke

Need to preserve Green Belt and to ensure infrastructure development is realistic for plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 4021

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Diana Sellwood

I support the need to develop employment sites. Where possible sites that have been previously used for employment but factories closed down etc should be used for employment. there is a need to develop more empl opportunities in Kenilworth to avoid the numbers who have to travel outside of Kenilworth to work.

Object

Representation ID: 4122

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Colin Sharp

Population and employment growth figures unsubstantiated.

Object

Representation ID: 4128

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: A D Fryer

Coventry is shrinking not growing due to lack of manufacturing work.

Object

Representation ID: 4163

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: Elizabeth Heigl

Reduced employment since demise of AP, Fords, IBM and work not available for incomers. People commute elsewhere to work, especially at Warwick Gates.

Comment

Representation ID: 4173

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Warwickshire Rural Community Council

WRCC is concerned that most of the identified sites will encourage commuting and take no account of the sustainablity agenda. Nowhere in the options is any consideration of the need to provide support for the rural economy and the need to keep village shops and services open.

Object

Representation ID: 4189

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Onkar Mann

Given the current stated imbalance & to reduce traffic employment areas need to be allocated to the Kenilworth, North of Leamington and Warwick areas. These areas have relatively good access to the A46, A45/M45 and the M40. This would maximise use of existing infrastructure & mean less traffic having to go through Leamington & Warwick centres. Please re-consider.

Comment

Representation ID: 4227

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Aldi Stores Ltd

Agent: WYG Planning & Design

Paragraph 5.15:
The Council's Employment Land Review suggests that the Queensway Employment Allocation Site is one where it would be appropriate to restrict future uses to offices/high tech employment. In the light of a substantial period of unsuccessful marketing of this site for B1, B2 and/or B8 uses, such a re-allocation would be strenuously opposed by the site owners. The site is not commercially suited for purely high tech/office use in the context of other available sites in the District, which are more appropriate for such uses.

Comment

Representation ID: 4229

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Aldi Stores Ltd

Agent: WYG Planning & Design

Paragraph 5.16:
The existing allocation site at Queensway is also an appropriate site to be considered for the introduction of non-employment uses and greater flexibility in the range of permissible uses, in order to provide a catalyst for employment related development on the remainder of the site, given the historic difficulty in achieving development on this site purely for B1, B2 and B8 uses.

Object

Representation ID: 4231

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Kulwinder Fathers

Employment areas should be allocated to the Kenilworth, North of Leamington/Warwick areas. Road networks are good & traffic flow is lower, so with good access to the A46, A45/M45 and the M40 this would benefit the town centres. This would make better use of existing infrastructure and spread additional traffic more evenly.

Object

Representation ID: 4288

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: H R Anderson

Object to Thickthorn site:
Beautiful area of Kenilworth.
Town lacks resources to cater for so many new residents. Extra traffic
Where is money coming from for such a project?

Object

Representation ID: 4296

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Heather Cooper

Object to Kings Hill site:
Any new development should be employment led - why build new houses in area of high unemployment? Where would these people go to work?

Object

Representation ID: 4302

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs J Wade

Object to Kings Hill site:
Unemployment set to rise, where are the jobs?

Object

Representation ID: 4319

Received: 31/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Trevor E Wood

Should look at empty units on Heathcote Industrial Estate, Warwick Technology Park, Shires Park, Sydenham town centres etc before building more factories etc.
Engineering/business leaving area not coming in which is flaw in strategy.
Stated South Leamington is desirable place to live and not wanting people to travel across town so purchase Coventry Airport and no-one would have to travel across town. Council should be pro active in this respect.
Suggest:
Employ small committee of general public to work with WDC to look at opportunities for development if needed..
Buy Coventry Airport
Develop town centre properties rather than make a ghost town of closed shops and expensive parking.
Develop Old Town
Develop Althorpe Street
Develop Flavels and surrounding area
Suggest financially driven and not for any other purpose
Why is this correct strategy if a Conservative govt. would shelve process?
Will not gain public support until demonstrate that all brown field areas have been examined and a robust plan in place.

Object

Representation ID: 4343

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Clive Letchford

Lack of indication of where people will be employed - already significant numbers of commuters

Support

Representation ID: 4355

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: A Picken

Support

Object

Representation ID: 4394

Received: 26/08/2009

Respondent: R.F. Garner

Employment and Transport - Not clear where new inhabitants will work. Not employment for them in Warwick/Leamington, therefore need to commute. Roads can't cope with more cars. Increased traffic would impinge on remainder of Leamington and Warwick and greater number of cars need to use limited existing routes across towns.

Object

Representation ID: 4407

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Mr R.L.K. Drew

Where are jobs for new residents? Many existing residents commute. Generates more traffic, pollution, global warming and carbon emissions.

Object

Representation ID: 4421

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: G M Langston

Associated strategy to develop new business requested - is such a strategy live and financed and how do two strategies dovetail?
Much of Grand Union corridor contains derelict outdated or sub-standard factory/business units. Why are such opportunities not being adopted?