(i) Land at Former Ford Foundry, Leamington

Support

Representation ID: 94

Received: 03/07/2009

Respondent: Mrs S.M. Burrows

This area is in town centre location and as such will not impinge on any Green Belt land and also will be an aesthetic improvement on the land's current appearance.

Support

Representation ID: 124

Received: 06/07/2009

Respondent: R A Chapleo

Strongly support

Support

Representation ID: 149

Received: 06/07/2009

Respondent: R Clipson

Much more use can be made of this site with a much higher density than currently proposed

Support

Representation ID: 159

Received: 07/07/2009

Respondent: G Ralph

Agreed. As a brownfield site it would be ideal.

Comment

Representation ID: 169

Received: 07/07/2009

Respondent: mr John Wheatcroft

I think the lack of proper jobs for people to do is a much bigger issue than building houses of the land owned by Ford, Would it not be better to keep this as light industrial land

Support

Representation ID: 186

Received: 11/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Alexander Holmes

Stongly support. This is an eyesore and, with careful planning, will improve the appearance of the area.

Support

Representation ID: 210

Received: 03/07/2009

Respondent: Mrs Caroline Baxter

Houses will be much better built here, there are shops, schools and pubs and the outlook for the community will be better than what's already there.

Support

Representation ID: 260

Received: 10/07/2009

Respondent: Patricia Robinson

Good use of brownfield site.

Support

Representation ID: 298

Received: 17/07/2009

Respondent: Mr David Higgin

Good use of land that is within boundaries and has good access.

Support

Representation ID: 329

Received: 21/07/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs D Bolam

A sensible use of the land.

Support

Representation ID: 356

Received: 22/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Pounds

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 393

Received: 23/07/2009

Respondent: Canon David Tilley

support

Support

Representation ID: 404

Received: 24/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Ian Clarke

This is a very suitable site for housing. It has good transport links.

Support

Representation ID: 434

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Clarke

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 485

Received: 24/07/2009

Respondent: Georgina Wilson

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 555

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Mr A M Webley

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 618

Received: 23/07/2009

Respondent: Mr G.R. Summers

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 708

Received: 10/08/2009

Respondent: P.A. Yarwood

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 779

Received: 05/08/2009

Respondent: Faye Davis

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 847

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Adrian Farmer

Support brown field development

Support

Representation ID: 911

Received: 19/08/2009

Respondent: Christine Betts

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 981

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Kirit Marvania

Support

Object

Representation ID: 1077

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Beedham

Use for employment only and good landscaping.

Support

Representation ID: 1108

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs T Robinson

Though could have severe consequences on traffic in this area.

Support

Representation ID: 1179

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Barry Elliman

Support

Support

Representation ID: 1236

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Andrew Horsley

More housing here. Lots of offices lie empty in Leamington - Fill these.

Support

Representation ID: 1303

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Sarah Jane Horsley

But build more houses. Leamington does not need more offices!

Object

Representation ID: 1370

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Agent: DNS Planning and Design Consultants

It is questioned why this site has been included in the Preferred Options at all. At a yield of 75 dwellings in total this is not considered to be a site of strategic importance. It is considered that there are just as many sites of equal size that fall within the council's 'Amber Sites' category. So the question is why the Former Foundry site has an elevated status to that of a strategic site over the others in the SHLAA.

Support

Representation ID: 1514

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Nigel Hamilton

but more should be built here

Object

Representation ID: 1631

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: William Bethell

Unless you can convince me & others of the means of access & egress into and out of such 'infill'sites.