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

Object

Representation ID: 4144

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Andy Robb

In an area known for flooding you have responded by actually doing nothing. Your preferred option is to say you will develop a strategy - this should have been a priority task. At the moment you are in a position where you don't know what you will do to mitigate flood risk but you suggest to go ahead with the building anyway.

Object

Representation ID: 4215

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Onkar Mann

Why are the council planning for development on designated flood areas?

Object

Representation ID: 4275

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Kulwinder Fathers

Why has the council proposed development on designated flood areas?

Object

Representation ID: 4327

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Roy Standley

Flood risk assessment suspect if this not a problem indicated with this area, as M40 closed recently due to flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 4333

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Janette Eslick

Increased risk of flooding - at present run off is slowed by pasture and crops. Development results in flooding of houses.

Support

Representation ID: 4486

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Andrea Telford

support

Object

Representation ID: 4571

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Southern Windy Arbour Area Residents' Association

Current focus on water courses. Surface water drainage for all areas, particularly with clay top soil should be covered. See Pitt Report on 2007 floods ( Central Government cabinet office)

Support

Representation ID: 4638

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mr S Morris

support

Support

Representation ID: 4732

Received: 23/10/2009

Respondent: V Gill Peppitt

support

Object

Representation ID: 4740

Received: 05/10/2009

Respondent: Miss M S Saben

Object to Kings Hill site:
Potential for serious flooding. Finham Brook has flooded to the top of its banks near to sewage farm.

Comment

Representation ID: 4749

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Richard Whidborne

Suggestions for reducing flood risk in Kenilworth.

Object

Representation ID: 4780

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Hunt

Object to 8100 new houses in Warwick District:
More housing developments would increase risk of flooding. At present run-off is slowed by pasture and crops in fields.

Object

Representation ID: 4797

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: richard keylock

Flooding / drainage issues adjacent to Green Lane,

Support

Representation ID: 4903

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Vera Leeke

support.

Object

Representation ID: 4993

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs P E Hunt

Object to sites at Bishops Tachbrook/Warwick Gates:
Flooding - Knock on effect of flooding to services and infrastructure will increase with additional housing.

Support

Representation ID: 5086

Received: 09/10/2009

Respondent: Mr Graham Harrison

Qualified YES: Support in respect of flooding, but consider this is a WOEFULLY RESPONSE TO ADAPTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE. What measures are proposed for reducing 'urban heat' islands through green infrastructure for example.

Object

Representation ID: 5147

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs ME Shaw

Object to sites south of Warwick, Whitnash and Leamington:
Water supply problems following development at Warwick Gates eventually sorted out, but likely to return with further building. Surface water on roads still a problem and leads to blockage of drains and local flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 5178

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Barry Betts

The council does not state where it will drain excess water into (drains need to lead somewhere). Green fields are natural soak aways. We have already experienced water pollution/disruption as a result of other Warwick developments (tournament fields) should we expect more.

Object

Representation ID: 5242

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Sonia Owczarek

The Council has already demonstrated that it builds properties that affect the flood plain of an area.

Object

Representation ID: 5308

Received: 23/10/2009

Respondent: Lindsay Wood

Many flooding problems caused /worsened by grassed areas being built on.

Object

Representation ID: 5313

Received: 23/10/2009

Respondent: Lindsay Wood

More conflicting objectives.

Comment

Representation ID: 5318

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: J. N. Price

Available options appear to be constrained (rightly or wrongly) buy national policy, therefore affording little scope for local variation.

Support

Representation ID: 5369

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: SEAN DEELY

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 5421

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: John Baxter

The Kings Hill proposal would be at risk from flooding from Finham Brook.

Object

Representation ID: 5459

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mike Cheeseman

Again this makes it sound like an afterthought. It should be part of the Core proposal

Support

Representation ID: 5494

Received: 27/09/2009

Respondent: Joanna Illingworth

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 5557

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Mr and Mrs G Morgan

Number of people: 2

Support.

Object

Representation ID: 5598

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: George Martin

20 Flood Risk

In order to assist with the alleviation of flood risk I would recommend the following.

Recommendation 20A - develop a target for the introduction of intensive green roofs in risk areas - most especially in terms of non domestic buildings. For maximum benefit the roofs must be INTENSIVE.

Recommendation 20B - develop a target for mandatory use of rainwater harvesting systems.

Recommendation 20 c - ban the use of non permeable paving from all developments, including those in existing properties that look to pave over their gardens,

Recommendation 20 D - further develop the use of SUDS.

Comment

Representation ID: 5611

Received: 27/09/2009

Respondent: Dave Crisford

Land management practices can affect the run-off flood risk to vulnerable properties. It is not clear to me whether this has been factored into the at risk property numbers in the paper and it is not addressed in the discussion of options

Support

Representation ID: 5733

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: Roger Warren

Support.