(vii) Land west of Europa Way, Warwick

Object

Representation ID: 5815

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Ms Alison Cox

1. Poor infrastructure - not enough to support density of housing and employment - transport is already very congested along Europa Way and Myton Road.

2. Flooding is already an issue here - from run off from fields.

3. This is a designated area of restraint - building on it is a direct contravention of the vision to 2026 which states the aim of preserving the individual characteristics of existing towns, and of using green field areas last.

4. Protected species live on this site, e.g. crested newts.

Public consultation has proven this is the least popular option.

Support

Representation ID: 5851

Received: 13/10/2009

Respondent: Pamela Payne

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 5908

Received: 05/10/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs C G Price

Extra housing would again lead to more traffic.

Object

Representation ID: 5924

Received: 28/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Alan Roberts

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 5967

Received: 21/09/2009

Respondent: Lisa Hartill

Object to sites south of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash:
Sheer volume of housing - causes problems for traffic congestion and schooling. Infrastructure requirements won't be considered until post consultation. Would schools be accepting children from first day house purchased? When families move in, where will children go to school? Primary school availability already huge problem and will only get worse before it gets better even if new schools are built. Problems with roads will be huge particularly at peak times.
Areas of restraint put in place when Warwick Gates was built to protect area from over development. Situation hasn't changed, Whitnash still needs protecting. Why are these areas to be developed first and not last?
No consideration to maintaining individuality of Warwick and Leamington or Warwick and Whitnash. What about maintaining the green field areas between Leamington and Bishops Tachbrook? Will Bishops Tachbrook eventually merge with Leamington post 2026?
M40 plays a role in choosing where to build but north Leamington could just as easily take a large number of houses with improved A46 and M45 access. It is also closer to Coventry where people may seek work. Have other areas truly been considered or are south Leamington options just easier?
Houses should not be built giving access to railway station as South of Warwick Gates, East of Europa Way and Woodside Farm are not particularly close and traffic heading towards town in rush hour and on Saturday morning is horrendous.
Kenilworth should be considered for more housing now that it is to have a railway station. Has this been taken into account?
If south of Harbury Lane continues as a preferred site, could a train station south of Whitnash be considered similar to successful Warwick Parkway?
At Woodside Farm, houses were proposed but refused in 2007 due to the quality of agricultural land - can this now be ignored?

Object

Representation ID: 6000

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Debbie Harris

Too many houses in one area. Insufficient amenities incl. schools!

Support

Representation ID: 6077

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Stephen Skidmore

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 6098

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Ann and Eric Mundler

Object to west of Europa Way.
Where are people living in new houses going to work and how will they get there?
Will electricity, water and sewerage infrastructure be able to accommodate density of development?
Amenties - schools, shop, surgeries for GP's and dentists
Areas of grass and trees and footfalls and cycle paths
Need to roads of adequate width, footpaths and cyclepaths
Arrangement of houses into communities around green spaces and not just lines of featureless dwellings.
Area bounded by three of most congested roads in district - Europa Way, Myton Road and Banbury Road/Gallows Hill. If traffic increased serious thought should be given to ring road to deal with traffic.
Do we want Warwick's reputation as tourist town worthy of great day out, bringing wealth into area and a good place to live? If we care, developments must be in keeping with quality of area or located elsewhere.

Object

Representation ID: 6194

Received: 13/10/2009

Respondent: John, Elaine and Sarah Lewis

Object

Object

Representation ID: 6209

Received: 05/10/2009

Respondent: Mrs J E White

Ten minute journey takes an hour. Grossly irresponsible to build new houses and businesses in Whitnash/Warwick area. Roads not adequate for volume of traffic. Also consider toxic emmissions from stationary cars.

Support

Representation ID: 6265

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Ross Telford

Agreed

Object

Representation ID: 6319

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Cheatle

We need as much green area as possible to be kept or else the housing sprawl will take over the pleasant Warwick.

Object

Representation ID: 6348

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: John Jessamine

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 6349

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: John Jessamine

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 6392

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Ed & Zoe Rycroft

Number of people: 2

Huge increase in traffic arising from at least 8000 new cars in this area will result in pollution and add to existing air quality problems in local town centres.

At peak times the local roads are almost at gridlock. Traffic in the morning queues, it stretches from town, down the A452 and also onto the M40 at junction 14 back to the Warwick junction 15. Surrounding roads are grid locked as a result.

Proposed development will add to this congestion.

No evidence to suggest current problems will be fixed now or in the future.

Object

Representation ID: 6446

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: graham leeke

Object

Object

Representation ID: 6500

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs J A Hattersley

Object to site at:
West of Europa Way
Understand that this does not include need for supporting infrastructure and provision for more offices, factories. Further land and outlay required for schools, sports fields, and other leisure facilities, shops, surgeries, churches, car parking (including park and ride), not to mention utilities, sewage and flood prevention from a greatly increased urban footprint. What consultation taken place with Severn Trent etc?
Serious impact on M40 junctions and town centres of Leamington and Warwick. Congestion at start and end of working day already bad with limited bridges over and under rivers, canals and railway lines will become worse. Those living in towns will be trapped by increased gridlock and historic buildings will be subjected to greater risk of traffic damage and air pollution.
Development at Woodside Farm will detract from Mallory Court Hotel which is successful business in pleasant environment attractive to visitors and provides local employment.
Extensive development along Harbury Lane will spoil countryside as it will be along ridge line and will impinge and impact on Bishops Tachbrook.
Wholly inappropriate to consider release of land at Finham to Coventry City Council for their own building requirements. Coventry will still have economic benefits of having district residents using their facilities.
Consider it appropriate to develop relatively small housing development at Hatton Park and share requirement around other small pockets of land to spread impact.

Object

Representation ID: 6525

Received: 10/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Neil Chisholm

1E: My main objection is to the proposed development on the land West of Europa Way as this site was identified as an area of restraint. I cannot understand why this is in the first phase of the housing development.
This should be the last place to be considered which would then give the chance to see whether this is required in the long term. There is also a risk of flooding in this area.

Object

Representation ID: 6540

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Anne Steele

Object to sites at:
East of Europa Way
Why only one option offered when there were other options.
Plan is developer/landowner led - they are ones asked to identify areas for development. Areas in question are obviously already in land bank or under option. Concerned that developers may have been given assurances concerning planning consent, perhaps not from local, but national govt. WDC should select appropriate sites after consultation with Town and Parish councils and the public.
Where are the people to live in new properties? No concrete proof of projections.
Led to believe that there is a housing waiting list of 500,000, yet local people will not be given priority as housing associations can offer homes to anyone on their waiting list. Is this going to be the same mistake as was made at Warwick Gates - moving people to a strange area away from families and into an area where employment is at a premium.
To allow building of majority of housing in this area will have detrimental environmental and socal impact on already overstretched community. If there is a need for housing at top of quota then small areas of development spread throughout district will have lowest impact on existing communities.
Whitnash and immediate areas have already suffered from Warwick Gates, Tachbrook allotment and South Farm developments. Roads chaos particularly at school and rush hours.
Schools are full to capacity.
Police, dentists, doctors and hospital facilities are already overstretched. Where are plans to ensure adequate services.
High increase in population where employment opportunties are decreasing adds to strain on public finances. Since plan was prepared, world has suffered economic meltdown and will take a long time to recover. In this area commercial land lays undeveloped and buildings empty. Employment has been lost with demise of AP, Fords, Wolseley and IBM.
Priority should be given to brown field sites thus protecting green field and agricultural land. Govt. stated that we must produce more of our own food so it would seem ridiculous to use available agricultural land for building.
Nothing has changed since govt. Inspector found two years ago that the land at Woodside Farm and between Whitnash and Radford Semele was unsuitable for development.
More recent development is the new proposed railway station at Kenilworth - suggest development here makes more sense.
Studies are only now being carried out into effect of preferred option on areas involved - should have been done before. How can one be asked for an informed opinion when there are no impact studies available and no information to support large-scale population increase in one area? It would appear that these will be left to the whim of developers - not good enough.

Object

Representation ID: 6549

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Mr & Mrs E R and B Edwards

Object to site at:
Land west of Europa Way, Warwick
4200 houses between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates threatens existence of Bishops Tachbrook as a village. If it becomes another suburb of Leamington Spa this will reduce the quality of community life at Warwick Gates, Whitnash and Bishops Tachbrook.
Large estates lack social cohesion which leads to anti social behaviour and poor education performance. If this proposal is the same size as Warwick Gates, Chase Meadow and Hatton Park all put together what kind of community will be born as result? Especially as 40% will be social/council housing in an area with poor transport links to the areas that give the most support to the under privileged i.e. town centres.
Number of new homes contradicts vision
Utilities/services (Police, Dentists, Doctors etc) already overstretched.
Huge increae in traffic will result in pollution and add to existing air quality problems in Warwick and Leamington town centres. At peak times, Europa Way, Gallows Hill, Tachbrook Road and Tachbrook Park Drive are grid locked - proposed development is along these roads adding to problems.
With demise of AP, Fords, IBM and other firms, there is not work available for incomers. Large number of existing residents already leave area to work and people living at Warwick Gates commute along M40 or by rail as far away as London.
No sense in carpeting green spaces with housing for mobile population travelling elsewhere.
Why not disperse housing over whole district? Preferred Option is not that chosen by public so why have you ignored our views?
Some housing may be needed for organic growth within individual communities, however this should be decided at a local level with support of local people not imposed by govt. in a top down approach. Local people neither want or need this housing.
Why is district council not mounting legal challenge to figures?
Look at regeneration possibilities in towns, work with owners and developers on imaginative schemes to bring forward housing on brown field land.

Object

Representation ID: 6565

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs J C Honnoraty

When Warwick Technology Park was built the water table was disturbed and flooding on the Myton Road area occurred. If 1E were taken over by housing this situation would worsen.

One of the main accesses would be via Myton Crescent and The Malins which would struggle with the massive amount of traffic movement. At present traffic very slow at peak times.

Would have the problem of accessing the north of Warwick and Leamington Spa by one of only two bridges across the Avon.

Object

Representation ID: 6588

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs C Gregson

Object to sites at:
South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Woodside Farm
West of Europa Way
Major development has taken place in last ten to fifteen years - enough is enough.
Plans are going ahead too quickly. No consideration given to major infrastructure - water, drainage, sewage, roads and transport needs, schools, healthcare, community facilities et al. Surely plans for these need to be in place before considering viability of site. Existing resources already stretched and don't have capacity to take on more.
Impact studies are urgently needed into all these areas and into environmental issues. Certainly study into traffic needs to take place during term time.
Delay of six months needed for research to be carried out, results published and consultation period launched.
Population forecasts thought to be flawed and should be subject of legal challenge.
Option numbers have changed between consultations which is confusing or misleading.
To make consultation meaningful, it is essential that public are provided with pros and cons and rationale for options chosen and those rejected for each option previously consulted upon.
Why is Finham site not being used for Warwick Districts needs to spread load more equitably, particularly as this was the publics preference following the previous consultation.
Sites are in current area of restraint. Simply to remove designation and then compound it by developing this area first, is a travesty. Protection was given for good a valid reason.
Object particularly and specifically to land west of Europa Way. Area gives much needed green breathing space to south of Warwick and Leamington. Would ask that this area be removed from any development plans and preserved as area of restraint.
People are feeling frustrated and angry about process. Clear perception that this is a 'done deal' - to dispel this and reinstate trust, consultation process needs to be stopped and legal challenge started, carry out credible impact studies, research infrastructure needs and costs and bring this information to public arena for truly democratic process to be entered into. Should present number of viable options giving proper weight to public opinion and only then begin any sort of decision making process.

Object

Representation ID: 6591

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs C Gregson

Object to sites at:
South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Woodside Farm
West of Europa Way
Major development has taken place in last ten to fifteen years - enough is enough.
Plans are going ahead too quickly. No consideration given to major infrastructure - water, drainage, sewage, roads and transport needs, schools, healthcare, community facilities et al. Surely plans for these need to be in place before considering viability of site. Existing resources already stretched and don't have capacity to take on more.
Impact studies are urgently needed into all these areas and into environmental issues. Certainly study into traffic needs to take place during term time.
Delay of six months needed for research to be carried out, results published and consultation period launched.
Population forecasts thought to be flawed and should be subject of legal challenge.
Option numbers have changed between consultations which is confusing or misleading.
To make consultation meaningful, it is essential that public are provided with pros and cons and rationale for options chosen and those rejected for each option previously consulted upon.
Why is Finham site not being used for Warwick Districts needs to spread load more equitably, particularly as this was the publics preference following the previous consultation.
Sites are in current area of restraint. Simply to remove designation and then compound it by developing this area first, is a travesty. Protection was given for good a valid reason.
Object particularly and specifically to land west of Europa Way. Area gives much needed green breathing space to south of Warwick and Leamington. Would ask that this area be removed from any development plans and preserved as area of restraint.
People are feeling frustrated and angry about process. Clear perception that this is a 'done deal' - to dispel this and reinstate trust, consultation process needs to be stopped and legal challenge started, carry out credible impact studies, research infrastructure needs and costs and bring this information to public arena for truly democratic process to be entered into. Should present number of viable options giving proper weight to public opinion and only then begin any sort of decision making process.

Object

Representation ID: 6598

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Martin & Kim Drew & Barnes

Object to sites at:
Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane
South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Woodside Farm, north of Harbury Lane
West of Europa Way
4200 houses next to Bishops Tachbrook will overwhelm the village making it into a suburb of Leamington and Warwick eradicating its character, reducing quality of life and destroying rural setting.
Development would be contrary to vision.
Such disproportionately large housing development will create soul-less commuter estate lacking identity and social cohesion and will be natural breeding ground for anti-social behaviour and a dormitory for Birmingham and Coventry.
Recent housing needs survey carried out a Bishops Tachbrook identified requirement for 15 dwellings, not 4200.
Infrastructure and local services - police, healthcare, schools, nursery care, water & sewerage will be not cope with such a huge increase in population. Emergency access to Warwick Hospital will be endangered owing to further congestion of road bridges in Warwick and Leamington.
Bishops Tachbrook already a rat run for commuters and parents delivering children to school because the promised infant school at Warwick Gates was never built.
4200 new homes equates to approx. 8000 vehicles. Roads and bridges will not take increases in traffic. Not to mention massive increase in pollution.
Historical precedence confirms infrastructure promises are not fulfilled or are delayed.
Where will newcomers work? Preferred Option highlights deficit of 20 ha of available land on which to build employment premises.
Recognise the need for new housing although the figure questioned.
Alternatives:
Disperse small numbers of new homes in all villages
Build new halls of residence at Warwick University and release student rented houses in Leamington.
Utilise land north of Leamington around Blackdown and towards Stoneleigh - why is this land sacred green belt but not that near Bishops Tachbrook.
Utilise Ford foundry and Peugeot plant sites.
Use WDC area in Finham that Coventry covets to meet own housing targets.

Object

Representation ID: 6608

Received: 12/08/2009

Respondent: Mr & Mrs G Lloyd

Not good at letter writing but agree with leaflet enclosed which states:
No to becoming another suburb of Leamington.
No to destruction of Tachbrook Valley.
No to putting lives in danger by gridlocked roads to the hospital.
No to increasing rat runs through the village
No to overcrowding doctors surgeries, hospitals, schools and nurseries.
No to increased pollution and the elimination of more green spaces.
No to overloading sewerage systems and reduced water supplies.
No to massively increased traffic congestion.
Says
Yes to supporting alternative options by building at Finham.
Yes to using existing homes - more halls of residence at University to free up student lets and require fewer houses to be built.
Yes to small scale housing in the county.
Yes to building on brown field sites at Coventry Airport, former Peugeot site and Arches area of Leamington.

Object

Representation ID: 6614

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: James Mackay

Object to objectives and content of preferred options:
Underlying theme of strategy is rapid development of employment, retailing, tourism and housing. Sustainability is seen only as a qualification.
Completely different strategic objectives and detailed proposals, directed towards sustainability, should replace existing Core Strategy.
Population 'projections' which lead to development proposals are not forecasts with any realistic basis - assumes continuing in-migration at rate between 2001 and 2006 when house building was allowed to greatly exceed local needs. Demonstrates false and circular arguement that population growth was driven by house-building not the other way round. Should be based on local needs otherwise Warwick and other towns in the district will become part of increasingly sprawling West Midlands Conurbation, based on growing and unsustainable car use and destroying qualities of County's towns.
Above all, local need is for affordable housing, sustainably sited. Extensive greenfield development necessitating high car use would not permit either affordable or sustainable life styles.
Requires local employment, retail, education, health and leisure provision. Strategic objective for rapid growth in retailing floorspace in Leamington conflicts, leading to weaker Warwick Town Centre and greater reliance on transport to meet shopping needs.
10,800 new homes is excessive and proposed distribution is unsatisfactory. Forecast for brownfield site development is too low based on those previously achieved. A reappraisal of availability is needed leading to substantial upward change to brownfield forecast. This would reduce number of houses required on greenfield sites.
Strongest objection to excessive house-building on greenfield land south east of Warwick, between it, Leamington, Whitnash and Bishops Tachbrook - would severely damage both town's setting and through traffic generation.
Strongest concern for town's setting from 1,250 houses on land between Europa Way, Gallows Hill and Myton Road - classified as Area of Restraint in 1995 local plan. Given extent of development on greenfield sites since then, this is even more important. Each of urban areas has its own identity and loss of green open space would result in single, characterless sprawl.
This land and other sites further south would be heavily car-dependent with requirements of a flexible job market, two-income households, choice of school places, increasing concentration of retailing competing major centres, many out of town and the desire to enjoy a range of far-spread leisure activities. Suggestion that houses will be close to work so that people will walk to work, unrealistic.
Assertion that infrastructure needs could only be assessed once preferred option confirmed is ludicrous. Limitations of transport infrastructure serving sites is implacably worsened by geography: the Avon crossed only at Castle Bridge, Warwick and Prices Drive, Leamington is absolute barrier and already saturated by traffic. Availability of infrastructure - transport, energy, water, sewerage, educational and social needs is essential and choice cannot be made until after their appraisal is completed. Concerned at absence of such an appraisal, the damaging impact of development of these sites on Warwick Town Centre through the generation of traffic will be overlooked. Development would increase total load on already congested urban and main road network so that journeys from and to new developments will be diverted in search for least congested route adding to traffic in Warwick Town Centre where it is confirmed that the impact of traffic must be reduced. Town centre roads already form part of Air Quality Management Area where pollution exceeds legal threshold and Air Quality Action Plan requires reduction in traffic for health of residents.
Europa Way site is proposed for early development. This would be unsatisfactory, enabling development here to precede that in Coventry and inhibiting brownfield site development in Warwick District. Any greenfield site development should be at the end of the plan period when development of brownfield sites is exhausted.
Weaknesses in policies for conservation of listed buildings and protected townscapes and for the provision of affordable housing. Object to these weakenesses and concerned that the existing local plan policies covering them may become unenforceable after 2011.
Withdraw this preferred option, reconsider policy objectives and content and prepare revised option taking account of objections.

Object

Representation ID: 6651

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Dominic Ashley-Timms

The specific areas I object to are, the housing proposals on:

1) Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane

And also:

2) Land South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
3) Land at Woodside Farm, north of Harbury Lane, Whitnash
4) Land west of Europa Way, Warwick

My objections are based on the following:

* On the recent Housing Needs Survey conducted in Bishops Tachbrook, 500 of the 750 homes in the village responded and told us that only 15 new houses were needed in the village. Therefore we do not need 4200 new homes.

* 4200 houses between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates threatens the very existence of Bishops Tachbrook as a village. If it becomes another suburb of Leamington Spa this will reduce the quality of life for the community here in Warwick Gates, Whitnash and in Bishops Tachbrook.

* Large estates lack social cohesion which leads to anti social behaviour and poor education performance. This proposal is the same size as Warwick Gates, Chase Meadow and Hatton Park all put together; what kind of community is likely to be born as a result of this development? Especially as 40% will be social / council housing in an area with poor transport links to the areas that give the most support to the under privileged i.e. the town centres.
* I think that such a number of new homes contradicts the vision that Warwick District Council has, "providing a mix of historic towns and villages set within a rural landscape of open farmland and parklands".
* Utilities, Services (Police, Dentists, and Doctors etc.) are all stretched to the limit now. With both the major hospitals only accessible across congested bridges over the river Avon, we fear for how long it will take emergency cases to get the medical resource they need.

* The increase in traffic arising from at least 8000 new cars in this area will result in pollution and add to existing air quality problems in Warwick and Leamington town centres. At peak times the traffic along Europa Way (even as far as the J14 M40), Gallows Hill, Tachbrook Road and Tachbrook Park Drive are grid locked, your proposed development is situated right along these roads, simply adding to the congestion already experienced. So far you have failed to fix the current problems and there is no evidence on your part to suggest that you will, even for when this proposed development is complete.

* With the demise of AP, Fords, IBM and other firms, employment opportunities for incomers are diminishing. Many people already leave the area to work elsewhere. A large proportion of people living on Warwick Gates commute up and down the M40 or by rail as far away as London.

* There seems to be poor sense carpeting our green spaces with housing for a mobile population that works elsewhere. Remaining agricultural land should be preserved.

Q1. Why did you decide not to create a brand new settlement within the district (like Southam) maybe below the A46/J15 inter-change where direct links to the road network are very easily accessible? Why did you decide not to disperse the houses over the whole of the district? Your "Preferred Option" was not the public's preferred option in the initial consultation so why have you ignored our views?

Q2. Why have you reserved land at Finham for the Use of Coventry to meet their housing demands and to count towards satisfying their quota and not included this area as a potential for ameliorating the demands place on WDC?

Q3. Why isn't the brownfield site where the Puegot plant was located being considered for housing development?

Q4. Why isn't all housing demand placed upon the region not being centred around Coventry? Here is a city that badly needs an influx of new workers to the region, development of employment opportunities, retail centres and urban regeneration if Coventry is to emerge as a 21st century City. Why are new developments instead being concentrated around the rural and medieval towns and villages of Warwickshire?

I do believe that some housing may be needed for organic growth within individual communities; however, I feel this should be decided at a local level with the support of the local people. I urge you to rethink the Options radically; and focus imaginative thinking on leading the region in the regeneration of brownfield sites.

Object

Representation ID: 6661

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Laura Ashley-Timms

Objections to Large Scale Housing Developments in the following areas:

1) Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane
2) Land South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
3) Land at Woodside Farm, north of Harbury Lane, Whitnash
4) Land west of Europa Way, Warwick

I am writing to object to the plans to further develop the area between Bishops Tachbrook, Warwick Gates and Whitnash.

This area is on the edge of several historic cities and does not have the road systems or broader infrastructure (especially schools and hospitals) to support such widespread growth. The maternity ward at Warwick hospital has already been closed down this year and it only takes a minor incident or a heavy downfall of rain in this area for the entire area to become either gridlocked or flooded. Additional pressures do not make sense.

What seems particularly unreasonable is the need to exert this level of extreme housing development on one of the last villages left in the proximity to Leamington. Bishops Tachbrook would effectively become a suburb of Leamington with this in-fill plan and would lose its identity.

In addition we have a major regional centre in need of resources, development and investment minutes up the road with a fantastic road and rail network, namely Coventry. I would expect there are a number of well sized brownfield sites around Coventry, as well as some large industrial sites on the outskirts of the town (e.g the old Peugot plant) that could easily accommodate such development projects.

The area around Warwick and Leamington and especially Bishops Tachbrook should be reserved for small scheme local developments (e.g. 5-15 new homes at a time or individual projects) that can be easily accommodated into our village without negatively impacting existing residents. All other options in these towns should be limited to brownfield sites.

Thank you

Object

Representation ID: 6668

Received: 05/11/2009

Respondent: Hardeep Lider

I am writing this letter in order to express my strong objection to the following Core Strategy Preferred Options document:
Land at Woodside Farm north of Harbury Lane,Whtinash
Land south of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
Land at Lower Heathcote Farm south of Harbury Lane
Land west of Europa Way Warwick

My objections are based on the following reasons:

* There have already been 2 major developments in the area:South Farm and Warwick Gates. Any further major housing development would have a devastating effect on public services.
* As a resident of Whitnash I have seen the strain Warwick Gates has put on schools, traffic,doctor/dental surgeries, hospitals, sewage works,flooding etc and further development would be irresponsible as we simply do not have the infrastructure.It is already a nightmare around Tachbrook Road/Landor Road during the school run /rush hour. I still remember all the false promises that were made when Warwick Gates was built regarding extra schools and public services.
* No infrastructure findings on schools,traffic environment have been made public of the potential impact of all this extra housing
* Brownfield sites within Leamington and Coventry Airport should be explored and developers should not set house building policy.
* Why is such a massive development being considered when we are losing hundreds of jobs in the area ?(AP,Ford,Wolseley,C&G.HSBC to name a few)
* The environmental impact will be huge to this already well developed area .You will destroy what makes this area attractive in the fist place.
* The council should legally challenge the amount of houses the government has demanded we build in the area. We live in a democracy and should not be dictated to in such a fashion.

Support

Representation ID: 6698

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Milverton New Allotments Association Ltd

support