(i) Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 113

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 110

Received: 06/07/2009

Respondent: R A Chapleo

Representation Summary:

Yes - this will allow development in an area of gretest need without the constriction of the Green Belt.

Comment

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 163

Received: 07/07/2009

Respondent: mr John Wheatcroft

Representation Summary:

Perhaps light industry or small industrial estates or perhaps business centre's. Perhaps an area where new startup businesses could flourish, on say a cheap rental

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 180

Received: 11/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Alexander Holmes

Representation Summary:

This option enables development to focus on an area with capacity to meet employment needs, without encroaching on the Green Belt.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 205

Received: 03/07/2009

Respondent: Mrs Caroline Baxter

Representation Summary:

Strongly object. These houses will back onto a small village that has very few resources, a run down and empty pub, a small school and tiny shop, the village will no longer remain a village and therefore I strongly object. The part time doctor surgery won't be able to cope, there is little parking

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 250

Received: 10/07/2009

Respondent: Patricia Robinson

Representation Summary:

There is already too much employment land in the area.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 317

Received: 21/07/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs D Bolam

Representation Summary:

Too near a village which would be swamped and taken over by any development.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 343

Received: 22/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Pounds

Representation Summary:

Object.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 421

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Clarke

Representation Summary:

I object on the grounds of traffic grid locks. The Harbury Lane is already heavily congested and is too narrow for heavy vehicles and at least 10,000 more cars.

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 472

Received: 24/07/2009

Respondent: Georgina Wilson

Representation Summary:

Support.

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 542

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Mr A M Webley

Representation Summary:

Support.

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 594

Received: 03/08/2009

Respondent: B A Alston

Representation Summary:

Support this proposed location

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 604

Received: 23/07/2009

Respondent: Mr G.R. Summers

Representation Summary:

Object.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 665

Received: 06/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Susan Edkins

Representation Summary:

rural area spoil the rural aspect

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 680

Received: 10/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Smith

Representation Summary:

Traffic issues on what is too narrow a road to take yet more traffic.
Quality of life for those living on Harbury Lane who have seen their country lane turn into a traffic nightmare over the last ten years.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 695

Received: 10/08/2009

Respondent: P.A. Yarwood

Representation Summary:

Object.

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 766

Received: 05/08/2009

Respondent: Faye Davis

Representation Summary:

Support.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 834

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Adrian Farmer

Representation Summary:

No need for more building. A large percentage of business property is currently empty and without the new homes this will not be necessary

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 898

Received: 19/08/2009

Respondent: Christine Betts

Representation Summary:

Residential Area and roads would not support increased traffic and it is supposed to be a rural area!

Comment

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 943

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Mr David Clough

Representation Summary:

Not enought thought gone in re. Transport,schools,shops,employment

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 951

Received: 22/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Ed Rycroft

Representation Summary:

I object to industrial use of this lands due to:

Insufficient road infrastructure. - There is already a large volume of traffic between the M40 and the roads leading into Leamington. Including along Europa Way. Traffic from a development at Harbury lane would simply add to the ridiculous volume of traffic seen at present. This added to the proposed 4500 houses in the same area would destroy any access to either town or the M40 at peak travel times.

As there is no school in the area of Warwick Gates nearly all children are driven to school adding to this problem.

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 964

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Kirit Marvania

Representation Summary:

Support

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1058

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Beedham

Representation Summary:

Limited Use. Good Landscaping.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1059

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs T Robinson

Representation Summary:

Green field site too far out to be central and too big an area for the link roads to M40. With major congestion, the Warwick Gates housing estate will become a dangerous cut through to existing commercial land and the town centre.

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1166

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Barry Elliman

Representation Summary:

Support

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1219

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Andrew Horsley

Representation Summary:

There are several industrial units that lie vacant already on Tachbrook Park, Heathcote Ind, Sydenham, Queensway and Warwick Technology Park. Why do we need more?
NB: Several have lain vacant for many years.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1267

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Robert Margrave

Representation Summary:

I object to industrial use of this land due to:

Insufficient road infrastructure. - There is already a large volume of traffic between the M40 and the roads leading into Leamington. Including along Europa Way. Traffic from a development at Harbury lane would simply add to the ridiculous volume of traffic seen at present. This added to the proposed 4500 houses in the same area would destroy any access to either town or the M40 at peak travel times.
As there is no school in the area of Warwick Gates nearly all children are driven to school adding to this problem.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1289

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Sarah Jane Horsley

Representation Summary:

Lots have been empty for years. New ones not justified

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1357

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Agent: DNS Planning and Design Consultants

Representation Summary:

The authority needs to provide more available employment land.

Our clients, the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association, their future needs may be more compatible to a rural location, and this may be more suitable given the nature of the use - which is a dog training school.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1542

Received: 29/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Mark Roberts

Representation Summary:

This geenral area is already heavy with employement areas (Spa Park, Tachbrook Park, Gallagher Park) - many of which with spare building areas which have not bee built on for years. Existing housing in Wawrick gates was sold as a 'village location' with green field views - putting a mixed use estate all around would transform rural life into a concreate urban jungle!

Comment

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 1546

Received: 31/08/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs David and Heather Hall

Representation Summary:

This appears to be the most suitable location with very good access to the motorway network and will compliment the preferred option for new housing to encourage local employment. It enables development to focus in an area with potential increased capacity to meet employment needs, without encroaching on the Green Belt.