(iv) Land south of Sydenham and east of Whitnash

Object

Representation ID: 3650

Received: 15/09/2000

Respondent: Mr Dennis Michael Crips

Objection detailed in supporting letter.

Support

Representation ID: 3669

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Stephen Keay

Support brownfield development

Support

Representation ID: 3704

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Richard Brookes

Supported

Object

Representation ID: 3791

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Wendy Bolland

Views of Mrs.Wendy Bolland

We, our children, grandchildren and countless Whitnash residents have enjoyed access to beautiful open countryside via the Whitnash to Radford bridleway that runs alongside the proposed development site and so making this area part of Leamington's urban sprawl. Why should present and future generations be denied the benefits that we have enjoyed for the convenience of a developer?
Viewed from this bridleway, Whitnash may be seen as a community separate from Sydenham and Leamington. Nothing should be done that will threaten this living community.

Object

Representation ID: 3813

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: J P G Hattersley

No account taken of supporting infrastructure and provision of more offices, factories for employment. Further land and outlay will be required for schools, sports fields and other leisure facilities, shops, churches, car parking including park and ride site, not to mention utilities, sewage and flood prevention. What consulation has taken place with Severn Trent on feasibility?
No travel impact survey undertaken - likely increase in air pollution.
Serious impact on M40 junctions and town centres of Warwick and Leamington. Impact on bridges over and under canal and railway lines, tiime taken to get to hospital. Those living in towns will be trapped by gridlock, historic buildings damaged by traffic and air pollution.

Object

Representation ID: 3881

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Debbie Wiggins

It is interesting to see that established communities such as Whitnash and Sydenham have enough residents who are objecting. Their arguments should be used to form a requirements list for any new housing at any location in the district and used to determine what to build and where rather than the requirements list currently used by the council.

Support

Representation ID: 3954

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr John Archer

An appriopriate site as part of a balanced provision of housing to meet identified needs

Comment

Representation ID: 4050

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Ms Angela Clarke

If restricted to true brownfield develpoment, but danger of encroachment on to precious nature conservation sites and destruction of agricultural land. Numbers should be looked at.

Object

Representation ID: 4056

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Stephens

Schools in area are already massively oversubscribed partly due to new Millpool Meadows development and Warwick Gates. If new houses are built here this will have a further negative impact on availability/provision of doctors/dentists and existing infrastructure.

Regarding new houses south of Sydenham access will be via Chesterton Drive. This road is already very busy. The addition of so many new houses will make matters far worse. Also the boundary of this area has been dedicated as a local nature reserve. 200 new homes is certain to have a negative impact.

More brownfield sites should be considered for building.

Object

Representation ID: 4061

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Stephens

Schools in area are already massively oversubscribed partly due to new Millpool Meadows development and Warwick Gates. If new houses are built here this will have a further negative impact on availaability/provision of doctors/dentists and existing infrastructure.

Regarding new houses south of Sydenham access will be via Chesterton Drive. This road is already very busy. The addition of so many new houses will make matters far worse. Also the boundary of this area has been dedicated as a local nature reserve. 200 new homes is certain to have a negative impact.

More brownfield sites should be considered for building.

Object

Representation ID: 4148

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Miss C E Hattersley

Object to site at:
East of Whitnash
No account taken of infrastructure and provision of offices and factories for employment.
Further land will be needed for schools, sports fields and other leisure facilities, shops, surgeries, churches, car parking (inc. a park and ride scheme to replace the one at Europa Way). Also utilities, sewage and flood prevention from greatly increased urban footprint. What consultation has taken place with Severn Trent etc?
No travel impact survey undertaken - number of new vehicles likely, to further detriment of air quality.
Serious impact on access to M40 junctions and town centres of Warwick and Leamington. Congestion at beginning and end of day already bad and bridges over and under canals, railway lines and rivers. This impacts on bus and train services. Extra time to reach hospital. Those living in towns will be trapped by increased gridlock and historic buildings will be subjected to greater risk from traffic and air pollution.
Development at Woodside Farm will be in particular detract from successful buiness at Mallory Court Hotel.
Development along Harbury Lane will spoil countryside and impact on Bishops Tachbrook.
New houses that need to be built should be at Finham along area near Burton Green. Would be of benefit to students by providing housing closer to University freeing up hosuing in Leamington. Inappropriate to release land at Finham for Coventry.
Consider Hatton Park and other small pockets of land to spread impact.

Object

Representation ID: 4158

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: Elizabeth Heigl

Object to site at:
South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash.
Recent housing needs survey shows only 15 houses required in Bishops Tachbrook.
4200 houses between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates threatens existence of Bishops Tachbrook as village.
Large estates lack social cohesion leading to anti-social behaviour and poor educational performance.
Number of new homes contradicts vision.
Utilities, services - police, doctors, dentists etc all overstretched now. Hospitals only accessible via bridges over Avon and fear for emergency cases reaching assistance.
Huge increase in traffic will result in pollution and air quality problems in Warwick and Leamington town centres. At peak times, traffic gridlocked along roads to M40.
Reduced employment since demise of AP, Fords, IBM and work not available for incomers. People commute elsewhere to work, especially at Warwick Gates.
Remaining agricultural land needed to feed future generations.
Why decision not to build new settlement below A46/J15 interchange where direct road links available. Why not disperse houses over whole district. Preferred option is not public's from initial consultation so why ignored that view.
Look again at regeneration prospects in towns to bring forward brown field sites.
Some housing may be needed but this should be based on local need from bottom up, not top down from govt. and not the numbers suggested.

Object

Representation ID: 4180

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Onkar Mann

Areas to the north of the district (Finham, Baginton Airport, Kenilworth, Cubbington, Lillington, Milverton, North Warwick and West Warwick should be allocated, due to the overstretched services, infrastructure and massive recent development in these southern areas.

Support

Representation ID: 4239

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Andrea Telford

support

Comment

Representation ID: 4240

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Andrea Telford

support

Object

Representation ID: 4259

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Kulwinder Fathers

Areas to the north of the district (Finham, Baginton Airport, Kenilworth, Cubbington, Lillington, Milverton, North Warwick and West Warwick should be allocated, due to the overstretched services, infrastructure and massive recent development in these southern areas.

Object

Representation ID: 4311

Received: 31/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Trevor E Wood

Object to:
Land south of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Vision, strategy and strategic objectives are all poorly conceived and do not stand up to scrutiny.
Main objection to Woodside Farm which would cause greatest impact on Whitnash/Bishops Tachbrook due to topography and location on dangerous and overutilised road system.
Fieldgate Lane and Woodside Farm were Omission sites which were rejected at the time of the local plan examination, why are they again up for development?
No impact plan commissioned.
No consideration given to:
Schools, children from same families go to different schools typically opposing travel/traffic strategy
Police - crime increased since Warwick Gates developed
Dentists
Doctors
Road access - congestion. Bridge to Warwick and Leamington bottlenecks, M40 backs up to Longbridge Island in morning.
Services/utilities - already stretched to limit
Leisure facilities - built to placate residents when Warwick Gates built but are poorly utilised, inaccessible, incomplete
Flora and fauna - currently woodpeckers, muntjacks, foxes and many wild birds which would be compromised if Woodsite Farm site was developed.
No explanation as to why houses and employment needed. Process based on statisitcs known to be flawed and change daily.
Should look at empty units on Heathcote Industrial Estate, Warwick Technology Park, Shires Park, Sydenham town centres etc before building more factories etc.
Engineering/business leaving area not coming in which is flaw in strategy.
Stated South leamington is destibale place to live and not wanting people to trave lacross town so purchase Coventry Airport and no-one would have to travel across town. Council should be pro active in this respect.
Suggest:
Employ small committee of general public to work with WDC to look at opportunities for development if needed..
Buy Coventry Airport
Develop town centre properties rather than make a ghost town of closed shops and expensive parking.
Develop Old Town
Develop Althorpe Street
Develop Flavels and surrounding area
Suggest financially driven and not for any other purpose
Why is this correct strategy if a Conservative govt. would shelve process?
Will not gain public support until demonstrate that all brown field areas have been examined and a robust plan in place.

Object

Representation ID: 4338

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Clive Letchford

Object to Land south of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Size of proposed development - larger than recent developments
Location on edge of town and problems of transport - lack of effective public transport and increasing car congestion
Burden on services, police, health and education
Lack of indication of where people will be employed - already significant numbers of commuters
Contradicts vision
Focus more on regeneration of urban centres and development of brown field sites

Object

Representation ID: 4390

Received: 26/08/2009

Respondent: R.F. Garner

Land east of Whitnash and south of Sydenham
Need - based on acceptance that another 4200 needed in this area. Survey identified need for 15 new homes in Bishops Itchington - if not justified, what is being done to resist it.
Environment - South of Warwick Gates through to Bishops Tachbrook essentially rural. Clearly this would be destroyed if development allowed, making Bishops Tachbrook a suburb of Leamington.
Traffic will increase causing problems on already overcrowded routes. Quality of life in rural areas will deteriorate with no compensating benefits for local people.
Infrastructure - Already stretched due in part to lack of facilities at Warwick Gates. No assurances about new resources: police, medical, schools, shops, leisure facilities, parks, will be provided - likley to be woefully inadequate.
Employment and Transport - Not clear where new inhabitants will work. Not employment for them in Warwick/Leamington, therefore need to commute. Roads can't cope with more cars. Increased traffic would impinge on remainder of Leamington and Warwick and greater number of cars need to use limited existing routes across towns.
Green field development - iniquitous that high quality green field land should be squandered. Land needed for food production. More effort should be put into finding alternatives - brown field or lower agricultural quality.

Object

Representation ID: 4403

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Mr R.L.K. Drew

Object to site:
South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Number of houses proposed far exceeds those required in needs survey for Bishops Tachbrook
By what process was the size of the development proposed determined?
Housing estates of this size have strong tendency to generate anti-social behaviour in younger residents, many of whom fail to achieve educationally. Have police been consulted? Few officers on patrol these days.
Bishops Tachbrook will feel less of a village, reducing quality of life for residents and at Warwick Gates and Whitnash. How does this square with the vision when it will destroy open farmland and obliterate one of the valued villages?
Roads already congested and often approach gridlock if there is an accident. Concerns about effect on some historic buildings from vibrations caused by heavy traffic. Most new households would have at least one car - how will traffic keep moving? What plans for dealing with increased pollution and deterioration in air quality in towns and increased deterioration in road surfaces.
Bishops Tachbrook is already used as rat run by commuters avoiding Europa Way - particularly dangerous to school children. What measures proposed to prevent this and reduce risk to villagers.
Rivers form physical obstacles to traffic movement. Increase in population south of river, remote from emergency services, seems unwise.
Where are jobs for new residents? Many existing residents commute. Generates more traffic, pollution, global warming and carbon emissions.
Loss of land suitable for food production against govt. policy. Should seek to build on brownfield sites.
Audit commission has urged refurbishment of empty/derelict housing - how many in Warwick District? If upgraded, what would impact on housing figures be?
Ignored results of last public consultation - how sham exercise justified financially?

Object

Representation ID: 4416

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Richard Sparkes

Object to significant harm to Whitnash and Bishops Tachbrook. Warwick Gates turned Whitnash into amorphous mass; this would threaten greater loss of identity with more unwanted homes and industrial units.
Where are impact studies for
Traffic
Schooling
Access
Drainage and Sewerage?
When were WCC and Severn Trent consulted? If not, then public consultation is a farce and should be stopped.

Object

Representation ID: 4422

Received: 29/09/2009

Respondent: J & P Foley

Object to housing in and around the area of Harbury Lane:
More traffic on Harbury Lane - busy and hard to cross now.
More schools, medical centres would be needed.
Strain on public services - public transport, ambulances, fire service, police. Talk of closing some of depots, so how will they cope with more people.
The bridges in Warwick will not be able to cope with extra traffic.
More jobs - not enough for people living here.
Warwick Gates is more than adequate in size and is sufficient share of housing for the area.

Object

Representation ID: 4428

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Robert Johnson

Bringing such a large number of houses to the area south of Warwick Gates will cause problems:
Infrastructure - roads are congested at rush hour in south Leamington - 8,000 more cars will make situation worse.
Emergency services will not be able to cope with increase - have they been consulted?
Increased pollution - breathing problems and listed building cleaning.
Bishops Tachbrook is village with own community and all advantages that this brings. Intended growth would encroach on area between village and Leamington.
Alternatives:
Public opinion at previous consultation was that Finham was most popular area for new housing - Coventry's infrastructure better.
On campus housing for students would free housing in Leamington.
Brown field development - sites still unused - Peugeot plant at Ryton.

Object

Representation ID: 4434

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: JD & CL Mackenzie

Object to 4,200 new homes near Harbury Lane, Europa Way and Whitnash
Loss of green belt land
Lack of infrastructure - busy roads, local hospitals, doctor's surgeries, local schools

Object

Representation ID: 4460

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mick & Sandra Coulson

Object to development of over 4,000 houses between Warwick Gates and Bishops Tachbrook.
Would overload the area - traffic congestion already a nightmare.
Pressure on schools, doctor's surgeries.
Area would lose identity and become sprawling area of Leamington.
Build small building projects in most villages for benefit of growing families who wish to stay in village where they were brought up. Small increase would not have such disasterous effect.

Object

Representation ID: 4499

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs E R Matthews

Object to housing sites south of Whitnash:
Request delay of not less than one year.Large body of public opposed, including those not immediately affected.
There will be more damage from financial crisis and little likelihood of improvement this decade.
Lack of school spaces and water supply.
Land south and south west of Whitnash developer driven and not electorally/local authority driven.
Reasons to delay:
Likely to be more developable land available at Coventry Airport, former Peugeot factory, North Leamington School, other land and redundant factories and areas more accessible to proposed Kenilworth station.
Further loss of employment opportunities and therefore inward migration.
Lack of consideration of intensely polluting, anti-environmental, detrimental, ecological effects and loss of good local amenity of current proposals.
Infrastructure problems - schools, bridges, access roads, flooding and lack of forethought and awareness of contemporary urban housing and transport developments in and beyond UK.
Need for genuinely affordable housing for existing local population.
Already too much new housing in wrongly designed, laid out and priced areas.
Lack of existence of organised voluntary committee of mixed local politician, expert advisor and informed community members involved in planning ahead acceptable housing and other developments in the locality.
Recognise that:
District council hamstrung by previous promises to and the pressures from at least four, profit-hungry developers looking for easy job in unsuitable land.
Dichotomy approach of WDC and WCC which sadly would be better constituted as a unitary authority.
By central govt. for last 8 years, producing short term policies.
Govt. currently discussing changes to local needs and development plans as a result of financial crisis and unparalleled levels of govt. debt.

Support

Representation ID: 4535

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Southern Windy Arbour Area Residents' Association

support

Support

Representation ID: 4597

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr S Morris

support

Object

Representation ID: 4611

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Verrier

Object to site:
East of Whitnash
10,800 new homes seems to be a govt. figure plucked out of thin air with no thought for where and without the necessary economic support with local industry and for infrastructure.
New development would be three times bigger than Warwick Gates development.
Further land and outlay needed for schools, sprots fields and other leisure facilities, shops, churches, car parking including park and ride, and utilities such as sewerage and flood prevention.
How much consultation taken place with Severn Trent for eg. Flooding problems twice in 12 years when expected once in a lifetime.
Travel implications with additional 8,000 more vehicles and detrimental to air quality in towns. No travel impact survey done. Serious effect on M40 junctions and town centres of Warwick and Leamington in both directions. Bridges over and under rivers and canals and railway lines will inevitably be worse. Impact on public transport services as well as emergency vehicles. Those living in towns will be trapped by increased gridlock and historic buildings will be suject to greater traffic damage and air pollution.
Extensive devt. along Harbury Lane will spoil ridge line and countryside - visibly impinge on Bishops Tachbrook. Whitnash and Bishops Tachbrook already have Warwick Gates, further devt. will mean they lose individual identity.
Development should not be concentrated in area with so much new development.
New houses should be at Finham which would benefit students and free up significant number of houses in Leamington. Should not be releasing land to Coventry but develop for Warwick. Coventry would still have economic benefits of having district residents using their facilities.
Consider developing small housing devt. at Hatton Park and put other housing around small pockets of land to spread impact.
New home building should be on brownfield sites as a priority.

Object

Representation ID: 4669

Received: 01/10/2009

Respondent: Mrs C Gribbon

Object to housing figure and the development of land south of Warwick, concentrating most of the development into small area.
Acknowledge and support need for affordable housing.
Fail to see how preferred option complies with 'Strategic Objectives'. How has this preferred option been chosen above those preferred by majority of local people.
Strategic Objective to help disadvantaged areas through supporting regeneration - none will be supported through regeneration from developments south of Warwick. Deprived areas of Brunswick St and Kingsway will be disadvantaged further with additional traffic moving into the town centre and railway.
Road,rail links - sites cannot be considered viable without new rail link from Kenilworth for north Leamington/Kenilworth area, alleviating traffic through Warwick and Leamington town centres. Preferred option would increase traffic along Tachbrook Road to Leamington station which does not have parking capacity.
All major routes from Bishops Tachbrook/Whitnash/Warwick Gates to Leamington and Warwick and motorway are heavily congested in south of town - will impact on local residents and tourism, contravening the strategic objective.
Schools already oversubscribed and Warwick hospital needs to expand. Developments on north of the town would have access to expanded, improved services at teaching hospitals in Coventry.
If 90% of district outside urban area, proposals to develop land in Bishops Tachbrook increases the urbanisationof Warwick, Whitnash and Leamington.
Living on large estate cannot be considered to improve community. Lack of community based projects resulting in non-contributing estate
type behaviour.
Will result in lack of open spaces and real community value to south of Warwick.
Lack of commitment by developers to provide community facilities.
Core strategy hgihlights need to protect environment yet proposed area of restraint will not protect environment or community of Bishops Tachbrook.
Survey of infrastructure yet to be carried out. Potential increase of 8000 cars in area with severe effects on carbon emissions.
Planning to build on know flood plain seems ludicrous.
Need for transparency. Wish to see plan withdrawn and alternative presented better refecting opinion of public.