(ii) Land at Station Approach, Leamington

Object

Representation ID: 6187

Received: 13/10/2009

Respondent: John, Elaine and Sarah Lewis

Object

Support

Representation ID: 6256

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Ross Telford

Agreed - good use of land

Support

Representation ID: 6315

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Cheatle

As this is not a green site then this would not impact on Leamington's image and heritage.

Support

Representation ID: 6343

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: John Jessamine

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 6388

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Ed & Zoe Rycroft

Number of people: 2

Land has been a waste for some years and development of this would be the best option.

Support

Representation ID: 6441

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: graham leeke

But should provide more than 225 homes.

Object

Representation ID: 6524

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Neil Chisholm

Why only 150 dwellings? site could take a greater level of housing.

Support

Representation ID: 6568

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs J C Honnoraty

1A and 1B would create traffic problems but preferable to area 1E, 1F, 2F and 3F, all of which would have the problem of accessing the north of Warwick and Leamington Spa by one of only two bridges across the Avon.

Support

Representation ID: 6693

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Milverton New Allotments Association Ltd

support

Comment

Representation ID: 6766

Received: 06/11/2009

Respondent: Warwickshire County Council [Commissioning, Planning & Partnerships Service, Children, Young People & Families]

The nearest primary school is Kingsway Primary School which is forecast to have no surplus reception places beyond 2010 when this site is developed. The development would require 30 primary school places, and could be provided through the expansion of an existing school.

Early Years provision will also be required, totalling 4 fte places.

The development is forecast to generate 21 secondary school places. A further 5 post 16 places will also be required.

Support

Representation ID: 6867

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Binswood Allotment Society

support

Support

Representation ID: 6868

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Binswood Allotment Society

support

Comment

Representation ID: 6939

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Land at Former Ford Foundry & Land at Station Approach
The Parish Council‟s independent analysis shows that this site L08 should be linked with L28 & L35 to give a comprehensive development site. By amending the ratio of housing to other uses from 20%:80% to a mixed use of 65% residential, 20% office based employment & 15% recreational, with an average dph of 50, the number of homes could increase from 225 to 350.

Support

Representation ID: 6998

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Norton Lindsey Parish Council

Supported

Support

Representation ID: 7454

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Trilogy

Agent: Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners

Support as part of a mixed use development.

Support

Representation ID: 7556

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Mr George Jones

support

Object

Representation ID: 7638

Received: 14/12/2009

Respondent: Mr Boyle

Agent: Brown and Co

In terms of land allocations, we do feel that insufficient consideration has been given to the wider regional picture and that too much details is provided on the strategic sites. We feel that there are other more suitable sites available and that at this stage the plan should be more general in terms of its direction for growth without site specific details being put forward. If these are not deliverable, as we understand has yet to be proved, then the plan may generally not be deliverable and sustainable.

Object

Representation ID: 33534

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Rail Property Ltd & Network Rail Infrastructure

Agent: G R Planning Consultancy Ltd

Do not object in principle to the allocation of the Former Goods Yard and smaller BRBR site for housing. What they object to is its allocation for 'Housing Only'. The site should be allocated for either employment (B1) and/or housing to provide greater flexibility, to improve the marketability of the sites and the likelihood of them coming forward for development within a reasonable time period.

There is no planning justification for the phasing approach to this site.

Object

Representation ID: 33579

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Revelan Group

Agent: Harris Lamb

It is premature to allocate land for development until a comparative site assessment is undertaken based on a robust evidence base.

Object

Representation ID: 33650

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: A C Lloyd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Do not consider this site will come forward for development before 2016 due to little developer interest and given the number of constraints on site.

Object

Representation ID: 33666

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Do not consider this site will be delivered before 2016 due to little developer interest and the number of constraints to this brownfield site.

Comment

Representation ID: 33924

Received: 28/09/2009

Respondent: Kenilworth Town Council

Supports location