(ii) Land west of Europa Way, Warwick

Object

Representation ID: 1698

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs D zacaroni

Object - same reasons for Employment (ii)

Object

Representation ID: 1778

Received: 20/08/2009

Respondent: Max Bacon

Object.

Support

Representation ID: 1805

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Val Hunnisett

Support.

Comment

Representation ID: 1926

Received: 03/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Andrew Ferguson

Traffic will not permit any further development

Object

Representation ID: 2040

Received: 04/09/2009

Respondent: mr john jacques

more research and consultation needed

Object

Representation ID: 2097

Received: 06/09/2009

Respondent: Miss Karen Seymour

I strongly object to this proposal. As this land is currently an area of restraint it is obvious that the council is aware of the reasons for this land being unsuitable for this purpose, as this would have been taken into account when it was deemed so. There is very little greenland available in this area and so this should remain an area of restraint. Anyone travelling into or out of Leamington/Warwick at peak times would realise the damage that adding the traffic connected to an extra 1250 house would bring to the Europa Way way area.

Object

Representation ID: 2139

Received: 07/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Barrie and Margaret Hayles

Traffic is already a problem to Warwick and Leamington Spa and adversely affects surrounding villages, especially at peak hours am/pm. Inadequate bus services necessitate car use. This plan will make matters worse.

Object

Representation ID: 2304

Received: 21/07/2009

Respondent: S B Hoyles

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 2385

Received: 04/09/2009

Respondent: Roy Standley

No.

Support

Representation ID: 2422

Received: 08/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Connolly

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 2523

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Terence Kemp

Support

Support

Representation ID: 2608

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: John Arnold

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 2668

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Devitt

Yes but I am concerned that residents of that southern area are to lose an important area of open land - a lung for that part of the city.

Support

Representation ID: 2731

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: Pauline Neale

Yes as the area currently supports employment units and this would balance the profile of the area. But only on existing brownfield sites e.g. the former C+G building not on greenfield sites.

Object

Representation ID: 2827

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Robert Butcher

Lack of infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 2866

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Susan Butcher

Object.

Support

Representation ID: 2923

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Subject to a balanced spread of development over the four towns and wider district this land represents reasonable infill and has reasonable access to infrastructure without imposing excessive demands.

Support

Representation ID: 2970

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs and Mr J Parr and Cotterill

Unless that land is not currently used for farming.

Object

Representation ID: 3028

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Rhyan Barry

Object

Support

Representation ID: 3057

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Alison Oliver

Excellent location for shops, station, motorway and employment.

Support

Representation ID: 3073

Received: 17/09/2000

Respondent: Mr Anthony Morris

Whilst I object generally to further development to the south of Leamington and Warwick, this area would have less impact on the rural areas adjoining Bishops Tachbrook and could be a probable infull area for housing and light industry.

Support

Representation ID: 3142

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: John Murphy

Subject to a balanced spread of development over the four towns and wider district this land represents reasonable infill and has reasonable access to infrastructure without imposing excessive demands.

Support

Representation ID: 3196

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Robert Burtonshaw

No building on North Leamington Allotments

Support

Representation ID: 3220

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: mrs stella moore

just extending existing development

Support

Representation ID: 3257

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: Mr David John Bowers

If we do have more houses in Warwick District this
would be the best site.

Support

Representation ID: 3308

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Caroline Martin

Support

Object

Representation ID: 3352

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Christopher Gibb

Object mainly because the roads around here are all jammed up in the rush hour and there is no capacity for any more communters on the M40- Europa Way axis.

Support

Representation ID: 3384

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs M Kane

Support

Comment

Representation ID: 3445

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mr P Dimanbro

The need to reduce carbon footprints with more locally grown produce. Increasing fuel costs will cause foreign imports to become increasingly expensive.
I also live in Princes Drive, we have traffic jams 3 times a day. The proposed large extra housing and traffic will cause greater congestion and loss of productivity and greater pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 3639

Received: 15/09/2000

Respondent: Mr Dennis Michael Crips

This proposal eats into Warwick's diminishing "green belt".