The Location of New Housing

Object

Representation ID: 49605

Received: 18/07/2012

Respondent: Andrew, Julie, Eleanor, Henry Day

Missed opportunities at
Bubbenhall, Baddesley Clinton.
Urban brownfield land.
Reduce need of greenfield sites buy regenerating south Leamington, the telephone exchange, garage opposite Convent Garden multi-storey, Quarry St dairy/Jewsons andin Warwick, Barrack St, Linen St car park and Warwick Police Station.

Object

Representation ID: 49755

Received: 25/07/2012

Respondent: Sir Thomas White Charity

Agent: Stansgate Planning

The allowance for windfall sites of 2,300 dwellings over the plan period is excessive.

The number of homes developed on windfall sites in the early 2000's was very high but this was under different Government policy which encouraged development on previously-developed land and at minimum densities.
Whilst some allowance has been made for changes in policy, there is no justification for the allowances proposed.
Levels of windfall development over recent years have been below the levels proposed but this is partly due to the moratorium and the economic downturn. Even so, it is unlikely that windfall levels will increase to te levels proposed.

Support

Representation ID: 49756

Received: 25/07/2012

Respondent: Sir Thomas White Charity

Agent: Stansgate Planning

Supports the inclusion of a flexibility allowance to ensure the full housing requirements can be met.

Object

Representation ID: 49757

Received: 25/07/2012

Respondent: Sir Thomas White Charity

Agent: Stansgate Planning

Reference should be made to the potential Gateway development at Coventry Airport as this could be another advantage of locating development to the north of Leamington & Warwick.

Object

Representation ID: 49758

Received: 25/07/2012

Respondent: Sir Thomas White Charity

Agent: Stansgate Planning

Reference should be made in paragraph 7.32 to the Coventry Joint Green Belt Review (January 2009) by name, and to the least constrained parcels identified therein. This should include land between Lillington and Cubbington(Parcel WL10). It is considered that this parcel of land should be allocated for residential development (see separate representations). However if the land is not to be a Preferred Option proper justification for its exclusion should be provided.

Support

Representation ID: 49759

Received: 25/07/2012

Respondent: Sir Thomas White Charity

Agent: Stansgate Planning

Supports the Council's approach to villages in the Green Belt. Village envelopes, within which development may occur, are the best way to ensure appropriate levels of development are achieved in the Green Belt villages. The envelopes should be drawn through the preparation of the Local Plan and not left for a subsequent Site Allocations DPD.
Further comments on this matter are contained in separate representations regarding Policy PO4

Object

Representation ID: 49970

Received: 03/08/2012

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

There is insufficient evidence for the windfall allowance.
The reference to a Regional Investment Site is inexplicable and inappropriate.

Object

Representation ID: 49982

Received: 03/08/2012

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Objects to exclusion of any land south of Harbury Lane.
The Sustainability Appraisal shows that this site has one of the best scores of all sites considered.
Objects to reference to Garden Suburbs. This concept requires further exploration.

Object

Representation ID: 49986

Received: 23/07/2012

Respondent: G A Hayward

Grave concerns for countryside and landscape and consequences of development.
Balance required between preservation and providing housing for young.
Population growth likely to be less than forecast.
Last consultation people wanted low growth option.
Loss of amenity land.
Southern approach to Warwick would be dramatically impaired.
Traffic congestion acute.
Proportions of house numbers across district unfair.
Brownfield sites are under utilised.
Regerate poorer parts of Leamington and Warwick.
Housing needed close to Gateway.
Small scale housing should be allowed in villages such as Bubbenhall and Baddesley Clinton.
Each generation responsible for handing the world on in better condition than before.

Object

Representation ID: 49989

Received: 23/07/2012

Respondent: Mr J Wright MP

Understand arguements about large concentration of houses in one place have led to spread of housing across more sites. However, has been significant shift of policy away from last iteration of Plan where substantial proportion of new provision was near Warwick Gates. Relatively little housing planned for that area. Explanation needed for this significant change in approach.

Support

Representation ID: 50069

Received: 25/06/2012

Respondent: Miss Jennifer Instone

Supports the development of the following sites:-
Thickthorn, Kenilworth
Milverton Gardens (North Milverton)
Whitnash East (South of Sydenham)
Red House Farm,Lillington
Loes Farm, Warwick
Warwick Gates Employment Land
Fieldgate Lane/ Golf Lane , Whitnash

Object

Representation ID: 50107

Received: 18/07/2012

Respondent: Mr Michael lambert

Objects to the development in the Green Belt north of Leamington (Blackdown and Old Milverton) that currently offer a pleasant area and a barrier between Leamington and Kenilworth. Non-green belt alternatives should be exhausted first.

Object

Representation ID: 50110

Received: 10/07/2012

Respondent: Mr Peter Kerr

There are sufficient brownfield opportunities that need to be maximised, only then should any green field sites be released to developers. The proposals in the preferred options show an excessively high number and concentration of new housing in Warwick which will create a population imbalance and transport infrastructure problems