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

Support

Representation ID: 3383

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs M Kane

Would help cut down on road traffice

Comment

Representation ID: 3444

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mr P Dimanbro

Population growth not accepted. Many east Europeans are returning home. Birth control strategies are expected to reduce UK population. Failure to consider the impact of Global warming. Climate change will alter the basis for decision making. Essential to retain green belt for farming we need to be self sufficient.
Also the need to reduce carbon footprints with more locally grown produce. Increasing fuel costs will cause foreign imports to become increasingly expensive.

Object

Representation ID: 3510

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Owen

Object

Support

Representation ID: 3662

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Stephen Keay

support

Object

Representation ID: 3688

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Richard Brookes

The type of employment that is expected in Warwick District is the "Office/High Tech R&D/Light Industrial" sector. The "High Tech R&D/Light Industrial" description indicates a development such as a "Science Park" which should be as close to the University as possible to tap into the research talent there. The Lower Heathcote Farm site is the site furthest from the University area - and a town centre - it is the most unsuitable for employment land

Object

Representation ID: 3834

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Debbie Wiggins

Suggestions for the type of employment we should encourage included, high technology industries, service sector jobs, tourism, biotechnology and professional and financial/business services.

You have not stated HOW MANY new jobs you need to create. You have not done ANY research to the type of jobs already in existence eg, people working from home vs those working in sites that require land eg factories, retail, offices. You are fixated on LAND - why is your land fixation greater than the public response? Difficult to support a proposal so badly flawed.

Use up the land you have before assigning any more.

Object

Representation ID: 3839

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Debbie Wiggins

Suggestions for the type of employment we should encourage included, high technology industries, service sector jobs, tourism, biotechnology and professional and financial/business services.

There is already enough available land for the above industries. The Ford foundary closed - so the thought of providing land for factories or light industry does not reflect the current situation.
Use up the land you have before assigning any more.

Object

Representation ID: 3854

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Patricia Diane Freeman

I do not know of Lower Heathcote planned site or Harbury Lane - Protest

Support

Representation ID: 3943

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr John Archer

This site is an appropriate location as part of a balanced packege to meet future employment needs

Object

Representation ID: 3977

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr M Abba

There is already available employemnt land within the immediate area that has not been taken up, so why allocate more. Insufficeint infastructure in an already congested area

Comment

Representation ID: 4020

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Ms Angela Clarke

I don't have detailed area knowledge to inform an opinion on this.

Comment

Representation ID: 4023

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Diana Sellwood

this is not an area I know so can not comment

Object

Representation ID: 4190

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Onkar Mann

Due to shortage of employment to the north of the district 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

Object

Representation ID: 4234

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Kulwinder Fathers

No should be Kenilworth, Finham, Baginton Airport, North of Leamington/Warwick areas. This would reduce traffic in town centres and provide good access traffic from/to the A46, A45/M45 and the M40. There are already large areas of employment to the south of the district

Support

Representation ID: 4356

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: A Picken

Support

Object

Representation ID: 4510

Received: 29/09/2009

Respondent: Southern Windy Arbour Area Residents' Association

lack of appropriate existing traffic infrastructure.

Support

Representation ID: 4580

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr S Morris

support

Object

Representation ID: 4656

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: V Gill Peppitt

Is land brown fields, green belt or 'productive ? We may need more land to be self -sufficient with food!

Object

Representation ID: 4804

Received: 18/10/2009

Respondent: Ian Frost

Object. Not convinced of need. Are there not vacant sites/buildings struggling to find occupiers?

Comment

Representation ID: 4827

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr. Andrew Clarke

I do not have detailed knowledge of this site,if it is green belt I totally object

Object

Representation ID: 4853

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Vera Leeke

Strongly object - this will wreck Tachbrook Valley and threaten rural setting on Bishop's Tachbrook village. Harbury lane is a strong boundary between the urban and country landscapes and should not be crossed. The proposed Area of Restraint should be extended up to Harbury Lane.

Support

Representation ID: 4870

Received: 07/10/2009

Respondent: Mr Graham Harrison

Qualified Ues - It is impossible to give a reasoned response without knowing the infrastructure implications etc.

Object

Representation ID: 5024

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Michael Morris

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 5104

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Lindsay Wood

Object

Object

Representation ID: 5115

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Barry Betts

Green Space! This area is mature countryside with long established eco systems. Development here would require massive infrastructure development (bourne by existing home owners in the long run) and would turn the area into an urban sprawl and potential (new) deprived area due to the volumes of (supported) housing proposed. I'm also concerned with the implications of climate change and the rising water table, development here would put drainage pressures onto the lower lying areas and destroy local wildlife.

Object

Representation ID: 5189

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Sonia Owczarek

Over development.

Object

Representation ID: 5326

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: SEAN DEELY

It is not necessary to re classify arable land for employment before all long-neglected employment land has been fully utilized.

Support

Representation ID: 5377

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: John Baxter

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 5566

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: George Martin

I support the object provided it is not on existing green belt and that the developments are zero carbon buildings NOW - or together as low carbon communities through the use of decentralized energy.

Support

Representation ID: 5617

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: PG Swann

support - These sites are natural urban fringe locations; not in the Green Belt; : well located within the existing urban framework; compact and physically ideal for development; have a good relationship to the strategic road framework; are sufficiently close to the two main town centres and to more recently established communities facilities; will provide opportunity for the Planning and Highway Authorities to secure Planning Gain to provide a well co-ordinated comprehensive development scheme and to provide and enhance the local community and highway/pedestrian/cycleway and other infrastructure facilities and overcome existing problems in this part of the District.