Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for Flood Risk?

Object

Representation ID: 100

Received: 03/07/2009

Respondent: Mr W C H Morris

No, the new build on the Severn trent development have already suffered flooding as any local could have predicted and the defences on the old Potterton site has successfully move the problem to new areas upstream a brillant piece of planning!

Object

Representation ID: 289

Received: 10/07/2009

Respondent: Patricia Robinson

Land close to Warwick Technology Park flooded when old drains were destroyed. Properties in The Malins and Myton gardens are likely to flood when further development takes place.

Object

Representation ID: 388

Received: 22/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Pounds

Object.

Support

Representation ID: 464

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Peter Clarke

Yes.

Support

Representation ID: 516

Received: 24/07/2009

Respondent: Georgina Wilson

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 587

Received: 27/07/2009

Respondent: Mr A M Webley

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 650

Received: 23/07/2009

Respondent: Mr G.R. Summers

Object.

Support

Representation ID: 739

Received: 10/08/2009

Respondent: P.A. Yarwood

Yes.

Support

Representation ID: 810

Received: 05/08/2009

Respondent: Faye Davis

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 880

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Adrian Farmer

Stop the building on green fields to stop the flood risk

Object

Representation ID: 941

Received: 19/08/2009

Respondent: Christine Betts

Even more housing near Warwick Gates will cause substantial flood risks. The drainage already in gardens is dreadful and will just get worse if more fields are developed.

Support

Representation ID: 1021

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Cllr Tim Sawdon

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 1046

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Kirit Marvania

Kings Hill (Green Belt) Development would surely increase risk of flooding?

Object

Representation ID: 1113

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Beedham

Building should not have been permitted on the old Pottertons playing field site or on other flood plains.

Support

Representation ID: 1149

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs T Robinson

Support

Comment

Representation ID: 1211

Received: 21/08/2009

Respondent: Barry Elliman

No

Proposed developments at Kings Hill and Thickthorn will add to flood risk through water run off into Finham Brook - Sowe and Avon.

Support

Representation ID: 1276

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Andrew Horsley

Yes

Support

Representation ID: 1335

Received: 24/08/2009

Respondent: Sarah Jane Horsley

Yes

Support

Representation ID: 1396

Received: 18/08/2009

Respondent: Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Agent: DNS Planning and Design Consultants

In accordance with PPS 25

Object

Representation ID: 1572

Received: 31/08/2009

Respondent: Mr Nigel Hamilton

SUDS currently only required on sites of over 1 hectare, this should be lower.

An expectation that ALL surface water drainage should be kept on site and NOT discharged elsewhere. The stored water can then be used in grey water recycling to flush toilets or water gardens.

The council paper does not encourage green roof - sedum-technology this should be the expectation on all new major developments. The building of steeply pitched "traditional" roofs should be avoided, apart from when adjacent historic/ character properties.

The SUDS guidelines 20% decrease flood risk to neighbouring properties AND 20% allowance for climate change incorporated.

Object

Representation ID: 1586

Received: 31/08/2009

Respondent: B.L.A.S.T.

20a We feel the need for greater co-ordination between the different agencies to maintain waterways and drainage with planned development

Object

Representation ID: 1664

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: William Bethell

The continued use of green field sites for building will increase risk of flooding in some areas. Perhaps developers providing SAND BAGS for 1 in 10 year flash floods might be the answer!!!!

Object

Representation ID: 1721

Received: 27/08/2009

Respondent: J.G Whetstone

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 1755

Received: 01/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs D zacaroni

Object

Object

Representation ID: 1797

Received: 20/08/2009

Respondent: Max Bacon

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 1870

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Val Hunnisett

More detailed work on King's Hill/Finham/Green Lane as building there would reduce surface drainage and affect built areas between Green Lane and A45.

Support

Representation ID: 1968

Received: 03/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Andrew Ferguson

support

Comment

Representation ID: 2095

Received: 05/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Peter Kerr

Flooding is becoming an increasing problem but here the objectives and options appear to concentrate on rivers. No mention is made of 'flash flooding' due to surface water drainage problems. This can sometimes be caused by previously 'grassed' ares being covered by non -pourous surfaces and this aspect, including coeect drainage desigh and meaintanence should be covered in this section.

Support

Representation ID: 2202

Received: 07/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Barrie and Margaret Hayles

The possible relocation of housing 20.7 must be after appropriate consultation with affected residents on such action, including the choice of more sustainable locations.

Object

Representation ID: 2352

Received: 21/07/2009

Respondent: S B Hoyles

Object.