Do you support or object to levels of housing growth higher than those proposed by the Preferred Options?

Object

Representation ID: 7506

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: P A and S M Leary

Government must be challenged. 10,800 homes built regardless of local needs/wishes is enfringement of collective human rights.
- right to protection of environment
- right to know how proposal was arrived at regardless of employment prospects, infrastructure requirements (roads, schools, hospitals and local authority services)
- against self-evident disruption to social cohesion and community wellbeing
- access to and departure from Warwick/Leamington at peak times of day, presents major time consuming hazards. Any additional housing based on demand from those with jobs should be located north or east of Warwick and Leamington to distribute road demand and other community development.

Comment

Representation ID: 7511

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Government Office for the West Midlands

Notwithstanding uncertainties over the emerging RSS Review, the Core Strategy should explain the amount of additional growth it could deal with to demonstrate that the strategy is flexible to deal with changing circumstances over the long term. In any event the proposed strategy should incorporate an element of contingencyplanning should the sites proposed not come forward as expected.

Object

Representation ID: 7581

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Mr George Jones

Object

Object

Representation ID: 7604

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Broich

Please we do not need or want any further developments, enough is enough.

Support

Representation ID: 7647

Received: 14/12/2009

Respondent: Mr Boyle

Agent: Brown and Co

Support

Object

Representation ID: 7725

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Ray Bullen

Strongly object to levels of growth already being catered for as there is not demonstrable local demand for housing numbers being proposed. Also object to any increase in number.
Estimated population of District will only be proven in course of time and at 10year intervals by census; no action should be taken or decisions made that compromise the matters of value such as agricultural land by including Greenfield sites in early phases of the programme when brown field sites should be used first.

Object

Representation ID: 7726

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Ray Bullen

The effect of adding 10800 homes to the stock of 55,033 households, in WDC as registered in the 2001 census - a 19.62% increase - is to require towns to expand beyond their design capacity for traffic, medical, social and educational facilities in the vain hope that by developer deals or planning requirements in giving permissions that these missing bits will magically appear. Some will happen, but development is a business and it must turn a profit to survive. That means that such costs would need to be passed on to the housing customer that buys the house. Add to the equation the affordable housing requirement of whatever percentage then it will be normal house purchasers that will get higher than necessary prices meaning that house prices become less affordable. As new house prices rise, prices for old houses rise with them and the market gets out of control.

Comment

Representation ID: 33566

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Thomas Bates & Son LTD

Agent: Andrew Martin Associates

Some of the sites identified for development can cater for increased levels of growth than those set out in the Preferred Options.

Support

Representation ID: 33588

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Revelan Group

Agent: Harris Lamb

We do not object to higher levels of housing growth.

Object

Representation ID: 33598

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Burton Green Residents' Association

We are aware of the complexity and imperfections of the whole exercise: for example how realistic are the government targets or will the problems of infrastructure be properly addressed? However despite these concerns we would like to support the proposals for the future development of housing strategy.

Object

Representation ID: 33601

Received: 16/12/2009

Respondent: Ena M Burton

First came to Bishops Tachbrook in early 1950s when Court Close was being developed. At that stage a small number of new residents was welcome to restore village to earlier size. Now well above that number and accept the number of places estimated as required.

Comment

Representation ID: 33622

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Warwickshire County Council [Archaeological Information and Advice]

Agent: Savills (L&P) Ltd

This has been discussed at the Examination into the RSS Phase Two.

Comment

Representation ID: 33647

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: A C Lloyd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Consideration should be given to the potential for an increase in housing numbers through the review of the RSS. Flexibility should be built into the document at this stage to accommodate an increase in housing or potential non-delivery of sites.

Object

Representation ID: 33660

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Warwick Town Council

The WDC is asked:
- to make a Legal Challenge against WDC housing allocation (plus the further possible overflow from Coventry!) as made by Central Government via the West Midlands Government Office (a legal challenge such as has already been made by some other Councils).
- try to make a more meaningful assessment of the population numbers extrapolation over the Strategy period, necessary to meet WDC needs.

Comment

Representation ID: 33663

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Flexibility should be built into the document at this stage to accommodate an increase in housing numbers or potential non-delivery of sites.

There is an identified need for an additional 5,000 dwellings and as a result there is a need to allocate additional land north of Milverton for 1,800 dwellings plus employment.

Comment

Representation ID: 33683

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr T Steele

Agent: Savills (L&P) Ltd

We await the publication of the Inspector's Report.

Comment

Representation ID: 33723

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr John Burman

Agent: Bigwood Associates Ltd

Should not pre-empt the RSS Phase Two.

Object

Representation ID: 33765

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Shirley Estates

Agent: Davis Planning Partnership

Would detract from planning policy in PPG2.

Comment

Representation ID: 33830

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

This question is irrelevant as the Core Strategy will have to conform with the RSS.

Object

Representation ID: 33868

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Lenco Investments

Agent: RPS Planning

Should the RSS establish additional housing for Warwick there would be little alternative but to identify the land required.

A 2.5% rate of lapsed permissions has not been based on evidence, and a 10% would be more realistic given the current economic climate.

No evidence has been provided of why windfall sites can't be identified.

Comment

Representation ID: 33884

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: A C Lloyd

Agent: Redline

The requirement will be insufficient to cater for future demands. More flexibility is necessary in the process.

Object

Representation ID: 33931

Received: 28/09/2009

Respondent: Kenilworth Town Council

We do not accept that there is either a greater need or that this would be sustainable. It could well destroy the character of the District.

Object

Representation ID: 33966

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Louis Balestrini

I do not want any