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

Object

Representation ID: 5325

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: SEAN DEELY

Significant areas of employment land have been vacant for the whole of the last economic cycle. Therefore there is insufficient local demand for the required allocation. Significant developments within Warwick Technology Park have also been vacant for extended periods, post development.

Object

Representation ID: 5376

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: John Baxter

The land south of Green Lane, Kings Hill, Finham should never be used as employment land as it is not necessary, the traffic and noise would be a nuisance and the infrastructure can't serve current situations creating gridlocked roads which would be unsafe for the schools in the area. The loss of farm land and green belt land is unacceptable. Wildlife will be destroyed and the area is prone to flooding in parts because of Finham Brook.

Comment

Representation ID: 5428

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mike Cheeseman

I assume §5.15-5.23 refer, but I want to comment on §5.12/table 5.1. It is not useful to lump Office/Hi-tech R&D/Light Manufacturing together. What concerns people is noise/emissions/pollution/traffic and you would get a more open response by separating them.

Object

Representation ID: 5466

Received: 27/09/2009

Respondent: Joanna Illingworth

The Preferred Option is too negative about providing employment land in Kenilworth despite claims in the opening section to be addressing this issue. Comments on "Kenilworth's more limited employment opportunities and infrastructure" are not helpful

Object

Representation ID: 5508

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: V Strong

Object to Kings Hill site:
Employment - Financially Coventry in bad way - industries sold off and jobs taken abroad. Factory sites are left derelict and no manufacturing base that can absorb even small number of skilled unemployed. People have little money to spend so knock on effect in service industry. Little to attract visitors to city with cheap chains operating.

Object

Representation ID: 5511

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs G Morgan

Number of people: 2

Land in other areas could have been reasonably considered e.g. Land to the west of Warwick Road between Kenilworth and Leek Wooton and land in Rouncil Lane.

Object

Representation ID: 5565

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: George Martin

I believe that the word 'growth' should not be used on its own. In line with the UK SD Strategy it should be growth within environmental limits.

Support

Representation ID: 5613

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: PG Swann

Support

Object

Representation ID: 5637

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs. Zoe Rycroft

Object to
Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane
Land South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Land at Woodside Farm, north of Harbury Lane
Land west of Europa Way, Warwick
Business demand - not likely to recover for some years. Gallagher Industrial Park has seen no development and no one wants to develop Ford foundry. With Spa Park and Tachbrook Park underway there remain empty plots which could have business development on them without developing green field developments.

Comment

Representation ID: 5643

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: Jane Boynton

Not sure, but at least some of the strategic sites suggested seem appropriate

Support

Representation ID: 5689

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Roger Warren

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 5735

Received: 21/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Ed Rycroft

Object to
Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane
Land south of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Land at Woodside Farm, north of Harbury Lane
Land west of Europa Way, Warwick
Migration out of Birmingham and Coventry means increased social deprivation in those areas leading to increased crime, fewer jobs and poorer prospects for for residents leading to increased benefits, reduced quality of life and increased sickness resulting in additional health care costs. By regenerating urban areas, they can be turned into vibrant cultural centres that have modern character and positive outlook. Companies then choose to invest and create jobs.
Assumption that those living in new houses will work on new industrial estates next door - not realistic. People will travel to work where they are best qualified or where they can earn the most money and will drive there.Will also buy houses where they can afford them. Large proportion of people living in Warwick Gates commute elsewhere to work.
Empty plots on existing business parks which could be built upon without taking up more green field developments. Do not make this area appealing to outside businesses at present.

Support

Representation ID: 5748

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Philip Wilson

How many local people out of work who need housing? Is there a prediction for this? Wworking people and the unemployed would benefit from the opportunity to spend time on allotments if available to provide leisure time for the employed and for the unemployed to grow food to supplement their expenses

Object

Representation ID: 5804

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Ms Alison Cox

At a publicc meeting new land at Coventry Airport was mentioned.

Object

Representation ID: 5876

Received: 05/10/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs C G Price

Invasion of the green belt should not be contemplated for any reason.

Object

Representation ID: 5898

Received: 28/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Alan Roberts

There have been sufficient new land in recent years support should be given to existing developments.

Object

Representation ID: 5958

Received: 13/10/2009

Respondent: John, Elaine and Sarah Lewis

Object

Object

Representation ID: 5980

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Debbie Harris

Along the A46 corridor between Warwick and Coventry should be considered at it already has the supporting infrastructure.

Support

Representation ID: 6020

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Paul Skidmore

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 6062

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Stephen Skidmore

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 6110

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Alan John Trinder

Object to Kings Hill site:
Doubt whether Coventry can attract employment to make Kings Hill development justifiable sacrifice.

Object

Representation ID: 6114

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Stephen Trinder

Object to Kings Hill site:
Insufficient evidence that Coventry would be able to attract sufficient jobs to warrant such expansion.

Object

Representation ID: 6172

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Robert Green

Object to Kings Hill site:
Concerned that there will not be enough employment in the city and surrounding area to justify this sort of expansion.

Support

Representation ID: 6240

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Ross Telford

Agreed

Object

Representation ID: 6301

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Cheatle

I do not agree with moving all businesses out of the town centres. This leaves empty units in the town making it look shabby and also creates more industrial units outside the town into the green space when there are empty units available.

Object

Representation ID: 6323

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: John Jessamine

Sufficient current land bank to meet needs in the timescale.

Object

Representation ID: 6383

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Veronica Jessamine

No.

Object

Representation ID: 6426

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: graham leeke

Far too much land has been allocated for employment - many redundant sites ( and some new ones eg Gallaghers site on Heathcote) have been empty for years. Already many of use work from home or in small teams - this trend will increase. These brown field sites should be redesignated for housing or recreation.

Object

Representation ID: 6497

Received: 11/08/2009

Respondent: Edgar George Cousins

What additional businesses in mind? Businesses are significantly reducing staff or closing. Ridiculous situation which was thought up before the recession and does not now appear valid.

Object

Representation ID: 6583

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Prof & Mrs R & S E Carey

Object to Kings Hill site:
Plans were drawn up in 2005/6 when economy was buoyant. Since then serious recession resulting in loss of major manufacturing in Coventry. Will there be working population in future to occupy proposed dwellings? Unemployment in Coventry is still rising.