Loes Farm (North of Woodloes)
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49273
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Marianne Grantham
Detrimental to: wildlife, traffic, population of Woodloes Park, environment, schools/doctors/work in area, value of housing. Overcrowding of Woodloes Park.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49274
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Rita Horseman
Loss of green on the estate and wildlife and trees, as there's not much greenery so the fields should be saved.
Extra traffic and as Primrose Hill - Coventry Road are already gridlocked where will all the extra traffic go?
Devalue properties.
There has been no consultation with local residents and we only found out by chance.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49279
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Alma Wheatly
The extra traffic involved would be reprehensible. Primrose Hill is very busy already and can be chaotic at rush hour so extra traffic would be a nightmare.
The environment would suffer with the added pollution from cars and we have some lovely trees and greenery. What will happen to the wildlife? There isn't much greenery left so is vital to keep the fields.
There has been no consultation with local residents and I only found out by chance on the evening of the meeting on Wed. 3rd July so had no chance to arrange to attend.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49280
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mr John Hall
Whilst accepting the need for new housing I can't accept this need to build on an area that is of historic interest.
This area around Guys Cliffe is the countries smallest parish and is of historical interest so should be preserved.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49281
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Paul Smith
The NPPF attaches great importance to Green Belts. Loes Farm fits 4 of the 5 purposes of Green Belts as expressed in the NPPF so not only are you tryin to go against the resindets but also the Government.
The 2008 biodiversity report said the land was 'not suitable' to be built on why on earht have you still put this site up? We have endangered species, ancient hedgerow old trees etc.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49282
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Ms Riah Gill
There are living creatures, it's nice if you want to go on a walk.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49285
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Jo-ann Bramston
Infrastructure is not feasible.
No places at the local schools or doctors.
No dentist provision.
No dividing line between Warwick and Kenilworth.
Why do gypsies need a permanent site - by nature they travel around.
No local police or fire station in Warwick.
Destruction of Greenbelt.
Flooding problem at Saxon Mill.
Historic site.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49288
Received: 14/06/2012
Respondent: Mr Henry Trewren
No provision to cope with extra vehicle flow affecting the cross road junction of the B4453 - Rugby Road and Windmill Hill - Kenilworth Road area.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49290
Received: 23/07/2012
Respondent: Dr Martyn Pinfold
Primrose Hill is already too busy and subject to traffic build-up - could not support cars from another 180 houses.
Many school children cross the road and it needs traffic calming features to make it safer - adding more traffic will make it even more dangerous.
Website badly designed - hard to find information.
Public poorly informed about the plans - needs to be examined.
Scanned form
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49306
Received: 26/07/2012
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Brian & Charlotte Young
Number of people: 2
Increase traffic through the current Woodloes estate, potential flooding risk to current houses, increase demand for local schools that are already oversubscribed.
Would de-value our properties.
The proposed access to the new site is on an already busy road of the Woodloes making travelling on the estate worse.
Increased population will have an impact on the already stretched hospitals.
Loss of Greenbelt land.
Scanned form.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49309
Received: 25/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Stephen Whiting
The whole area around woodloes and Spinney Hill is already congested with traffic queueing right back along the Coventry Road every night monday - friday. adding more traffic wold make this a complete disaster and even more unsafe for cyclists.
The proposed site is on Green Belt Land which require exeptional circumstances to be built on.
Would mean the destruction of trees and hedgerows that have been there for hundreds of years as well as habitat destruction.
Scanned form.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49325
Received: 14/06/2012
Respondent: Mr & Mrs John & Jackie Payton
Not the right place for development.
Harmful impact on biodiversity contrary to PO15. Once taken away biodoversity gone forever.
Additional traffic generated - where entrances/exits? If off Primrose Hill will add to existing congestion causing further delays.
Must be better options but if it goes ahead, need to preserve natural environment as much as possible.
Attached letter
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49384
Received: 25/07/2012
Respondent: Mr John R Rand
Proposals ignore current economic climate; the overloading of local infrastrucute - espeically roads.
Contrary to previous long standing protection [Green Belt].
Notions of sprawl and coalescence make matters worse.
Farmland should be protected at a time of world wide food shortages.
Document scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49427
Received: 16/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Paul Birdsall
Congestion. Access of Primrose Hill will add to existing congestion.
Water pressure is always an issue and would need to be assured for new development. Contradicts PO18 unless significant improvements are made.
Medieval ridge and furrow should be preserved as historic site.
Extended access required for pedestrians and cyclists.
PO16 re-empts PO4 in that one needs the other. PO16 excuses development wherever but claims to stop urban sprawl.
8000 houses will demand improvements in local infrastructure.
PO2 hollow statement. If PO4 developments go ahead, investment in infrastructure should be mandatory for developers to provide or local community will have to face cost. Strongly object to 'developers are asked to contribute to costs' Demand it.
Attached letter
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49459
Received: 30/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Arthur Hilyer
Housing would be visible in an historic landscape, mature trees would be threatened and noise level would increase.
Loss of green land, and this is an important issue if other sites are available.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49462
Received: 30/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Andy Boswell
Object.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49464
Received: 30/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Alan Sullivan
There will be increased congestion, pollution and congestion. The roads will be even more hazardous.
There will be a loss of green belt land with the loss of recreational land.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49467
Received: 30/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Mary Walsh
Loss of land at Loes Farm means losing an area used for recreation.
Warwick is a historic town and there has already been a lot of development there and in the surrounding areas. The increase in cars will lead to gridlock on the roads.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49469
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Peter Savage
Development at Loes Farm is objected to because it we lead to ersoion of the green belt, the infrastructure is not currently adequate to cope, Woodloes Lane will be hit with more traffic and there is the ecological impact.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49518
Received: 02/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Paul Goulding
Supplementary objection
Erosion of green belt
Visual impact of high density housing on otherwise rural approach to Warwick
infrastructure (roads, traffic)
Ecological impact.
Do not believe Natural England appropriately briefed. Formal request to consult with NE appropriately, since this site is clearly not appropriate for housing development.
See attached letter
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49519
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Tracey Smith
Land has been designated as park by English Heritage.
Peak hour traffic congestion will increase.
The current schools do not have the capacity to cope with more students.
The healthy natural habitat which would be lost and many people use the area for recreation.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49577
Received: 16/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Ian Lillystone
Current traffic volume is stretching infrasture and more houses will only add to this.
Maintainance of pavements and vegetation will worsen. Emergency service responses will worsen anbd there will not be enough school spaces.
Encroachment would occur at historic sites such as Guys Cliffe.
Roads will become even more dangerous and removal of countryside will affect walkers. There will be high noise and pollution levels and employment opportunities will not meet demand.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49580
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Gillian Lillystone
Roads would not cope with increased traffic. The countryside would be destroyed for houses and infrastructure would not cope. Historical sites such as Guy's Cliffe are too close to proposal. Noise and disruption would occur and the emergency services would not be able to cope with more houses.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49583
Received: 16/07/2012
Respondent: Ms Gina Lillystone
Increase in traffic would worsen a situation which is already quite bad now.
Emergency services would struggle to cope with the increased demand from a bigger population. There is not enough employment locally. The increase in traffic would be bad for environment as too near to A46 and more dangerous for people. More countryside would be destroyed.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49584
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Ms Clara Lillystone
There is insufficient employment opportunites locally currently.
The current coverage by emergency services is not good enough even before you consider additional housing. Coutryside and animal habitats would be destroyed. Increase in traffic would lead to more traffic congestion.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49591
Received: 07/11/2012
Respondent: Mrs H Bastock
No building should take place here as the losss of natural habitat would spoil our outlook. The attractiveness of the are was one of the key reasons for moving to this location.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49594
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Rob Twissell
Building on this land will ruin the outlook for all on the estate.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49600
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mr Mark Barnett
Other sites that are more suitable exist and should be developed instead. Consideration needs to be given to the wildlife which exists. Will the current services such as doctors, schools and roads improve as a result of development?
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49604
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs Estelle Barnett
This land is countryside with plenty of natural habitat and wildlife. THe outlook will be lost and that will make life miserable for us.
As scanned.
Object
Preferred Options
Representation ID: 49606
Received: 27/07/2012
Respondent: Mrs M Shaw
As longstanding resident (30years) enjoy the peacefulness of living near the green belt. Previously lived in Drayton where spent time walking/ running and enjoying the 'Green' Lane.
As scanned.