Do you think the Council should adopt the Community Infrastructure Levy approach to securing developer contributions?

Support

Representation ID: 137

Received: 06/07/2009

Respondent: R A Chapleo

Yes - the burden and risk should be shared

Support

Representation ID: 155

Received: 06/07/2009

Respondent: R Clipson

Yes, more support from developers & business is needed for better access to public transport and LOCAL facilities.
Currently the one-stop-shop approach to giving local people information about available services is good. That and library / tourist information needs to be kept and if possible expanded. Tourists bring much needed money to the local economy and anything that can encourage that is welcome.

Support

Representation ID: 237

Received: 09/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Duncan Hurwood

Seems reasonable to me.

Object

Representation ID: 278

Received: 10/07/2009

Respondent: Patricia Robinson

The implications are not clear.

Object

Representation ID: 373

Received: 22/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Pounds

Object.

Support

Representation ID: 448

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Clarke

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 450

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Clarke

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 500

Received: 24/07/2009

Respondent: Georgina Wilson

Definitely. Developers must contribute to roads, schools, health facilities etc. in order to sustain suitable levels of service for the growing population.

Support

Representation ID: 571

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Mr A M Webley

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 634

Received: 23/07/2009

Respondent: Mr G.R. Summers

Object.

Comment

Representation ID: 683

Received: 10/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Smith

It is to be hoped that, if they do so, they use the money raised for actual schools etc on new developments, rather than ignoring needs as they did on Warwick Gates.

Support

Representation ID: 723

Received: 10/08/2009

Respondent: P.A. Yarwood

Yes.

Support

Representation ID: 794

Received: 05/08/2009

Respondent: Faye Davis

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 862

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Adrian Farmer

Financial cost is only a small part of the problem!

Comment

Representation ID: 925

Received: 19/08/2009

Respondent: Christine Betts

Depends who pays it! If current residents do and Council Tax / costs are increased further to cover unwanted housing we will relocate.

Support

Representation ID: 1007

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Cllr Tim Sawdon

Yes.

Object

Representation ID: 1031

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Kirit Marvania

Paying for something we already pay for through tax.

Object

Representation ID: 1095

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Beedham

It will make new houses even more expensive. Government and local taxes should improve infrastructure so burden is shared.

Object

Representation ID: 1134

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs T Robinson

Developer money should be used on infrastructure directly related to the development concerned. This should be traceable and accountable. All too often the money goes into a black hole, and spend on infrastructure is neglected.

Comment

Representation ID: 1194

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Barry Elliman

Yes

Support

Representation ID: 1252

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Andrew Horsley

In principle. However, it should go alongside a comprehensive and democratic decision making process involving local elected representatives who have no vested interest.

Object

Representation ID: 1318

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Sarah Jane Horsley

Not enough evidence from WCC so preferred option cannot be posed. Our community will suffer because of infrastructure problems.

Support

Representation ID: 1319

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Sarah Jane Horsley

As long asour councillors can have a say in what goes on.

Object

Representation ID: 1385

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Agent: DNS Planning and Design Consultants

This approach is strongly opposed. The government's proposed Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) approach should not be adopted by the Council's Preferred Option. The CIL is an unfair method which puts a serious financial drain on the development. As a consequence, sites will simply not come forward and Warwick will be faced with a housing shortage again.

Support

Representation ID: 1523

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Nigel Hamilton

good idea

Object

Representation ID: 1651

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: William Bethell

Hasn't been done (or at least seen to be done by developers) in the past.

Support

Representation ID: 1706

Received: 27/08/2009

Respondent: J.G Whetstone

Developers should pay for all infrastructure improvements and should complete all changes before house building commences.

Object

Representation ID: 1746

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs D zacaroni

Object

Support

Representation ID: 1790

Received: 20/08/2009

Respondent: Max Bacon

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 1847

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Val Hunnisett

Should be met from community charge.