Sites Review

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 38

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60472

Received: 28/11/2013

Respondent: Eric Williams

Representation Summary:

Strongly agree with council decision to discount the options listed. All of the reason described are valid and have my strong support.

Full text:

Strongly agree with council decision to discount the options listed. All of the reason described are valid and have my strong support.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60588

Received: 10/12/2013

Respondent: Dr Glenn Miles

Representation Summary:

The "poor access" and "out of character" criticisms of the Peeping Tom site are misleading. It is positioned on Cromwell Lane, 15 minutes walk from Tile Hill Station and 3 minutes from Westwood Heath Road, which covers the great majority of the public transport links compared to the other sites under consideration. If the Peeping Tom site would be out of character, how is the Burrow Hill Nursery site any more in character?

Full text:

The "poor access" and "out of character" criticisms of the Peeping Tom site are misleading. It is positioned on Cromwell Lane, 15 minutes walk from Tile Hill Station and 3 minutes from Westwood Heath Road, which covers the great majority of the public transport links compared to the other sites under consideration. If the Peeping Tom site would be out of character, how is the Burrow Hill Nursery site any more in character?

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60759

Received: 13/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Simon Ward

Representation Summary:

I am in general agreement with the site review.

Full text:

I am in general agreement with the site review however, I do think that rejecting the peeping tom site 2 for houses being out of character with the surrounding area is a point which should be used for all or none of the sites!

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60786

Received: 13/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Danielle White

Representation Summary:

There is no mention of the land that will be affected by HS2 and the opportunities to redevelop this land once/if HS2 goes ahead.

Full text:

There is no mention of the land that will be affected by HS2 and the opportunities to redevelop this land once/if HS2 goes ahead.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60982

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Mr John & Diana Levett

Representation Summary:

All options should be reconsidered. Reasons for rejecting Option 7 flawed. Few suggestions for implementing the development.

Full text:

I suggest that all options should be considered again to spread the increased number of houses throughout the village. This would cause the least landscape impact and have least effect on traffic. Access has been mentioned as a problem but it is very likely that developers could purchase land and/or houses to provide the necessary entrance.

I do not understand why potential ribbon development in Red Lane (options 3 & 4) is deemed unacceptable as it is how the village has grown over many decades.

The reason given for rejecting Option 7, Hodgetts Lane, is flawed:
1. It is stated that it is "Not suitable due to proximity / relationship to HS2". Owners of existing properties in the vicinity, but much closer to the route of HS2, have been assured by HS2 Ltd in the recently published Environmental Statement documentation that the effect of HS2 will be "negligible".
2. Lack of suitable access is also mentioned. I understand that, at that early stage, none of the current residents had been specifically asked if they would sell their property to provide an access road - a number have now said they would.

I agree that any development should include a proportion of social and/or affordable housing. The developer should provide a guarantee to Warwick DC that this type of property will be constructed in phases throughout the development period to ensure that the Developer does not renegue on his initial plan when he finds that his final profits are not as high as planned.

All new properties should be constructed employing the best insulation techniques.

All new properties should be thoughtfully designed so that they provide sufficient living and storage space. Many new homes have so little storage they are barely sufficient for childless couples with minimal possessions - no wonder one of the boom industries in the UK is self service storage units.

All new properties should be preferentially offered to local residents and/or workers before being generally available, as currently happens to new properties in Harbury.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60988

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Alex Hills

Agent: Mr Alex Hills

Representation Summary:

1) not sufficient consideration of the discounted options
2) no details in the type of properties that will be built on these sites, and no details on providing housing for those who are displaced by HS2 who want to remain in the area.
3) In the site review for the discounted option number 7 which constitutes two separate sites, which have not been separated, it states that there is an issue of accessibility. This is not the case. There is a slip way at the side of 36 Hodgetts lane. No arrangements in regards to this have been undertaken.

Full text:

1) not sufficient consideration of the discounted options
2) no details in the type of properties that will be built on these sites, and no details on providing housing for those who are displaced by HS2 who want to remain in the area.
3) In the site review for the discounted option number 7 which constitutes two separate sites, which have not been separated, it states that there is an issue of accessibility. This is not the case. There is a slip way at the side of 36 Hodgetts lane. No arrangements in regards to this have been undertaken.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60991

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Marlene Hills

Representation Summary:

no detail given as to why other options are discounted or right of response given to the site owners

Full text:

no detail given as to why other options are discounted or right of response given to the site owners

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 60999

Received: 18/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Peter Moon

Representation Summary:

Yes, I agree that site 1 would be the best site for the proposed building of houses in Burton Green. Building on the other sites would destroy the character of the village

Full text:

Yes, I agree that site 1 would be the best site for the proposed building of houses in Burton Green. Building on the other sites would destroy the character of the village

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61134

Received: 19/01/2014

Respondent: mrs bronwyn ward

Representation Summary:

I am very keen that ribbon development is avoided as this will have maximum impact on hedgerows, trees and communal views, altering the character of the village. in this much I support the site reviews.

Full text:

I am very keen that ribbon development is avoided as this will have maximum impact on hedgerows, trees and communal views, altering the character of the village. in this much I support the site reviews.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61306

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Crest Strategic Projects

Agent: d2planning

Representation Summary:

-The land at Lodge Farm is one of the least constrained parcels south of Coventry and potentially suitable for release from the Green Belt (Coventry Joint Green Belt Review, July 2009).
-The SHLAA identifies that the land is suitable, achievable and deliverable. The site was not recognised as having a high landscape value and 18.5 hectares could be developed with satisfactory mitigation.
-The site has been intensely farmed for many years and there is little biodiversity interest within the land itself. Development would provide the opportunity to enhance biodiversity.
-HS2 would not restrict the development of the site.
-Site access can be obtained for the requisite standards to serve a development of up to 800 dwellings.
-There are no other technical or environmental issues that would prohibit the delivery of the site.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61383

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Joseph Brewer

Representation Summary:

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61409

Received: 21/01/2014

Respondent: Jeffrey, Valerie and Craig Sawyer

Representation Summary:

The respondents believe that building on Site 7 is a possibility and offers the following objections:
-The construction phases of both HS2 and a housing development would cause an upheaval for many years. Both proposals would financially impact our property.
-The community would not benefit from the site with regard to the relocation of the village hall as envisaged on Site 1.
-The rear gardens of the adjacent houses would be overlooked by the new properties.
-Additional access onto Cromwell Lane would make accessing our property more dangerous. Construction of HS2 will make Cromwell Lane busier, thus exacerbating the danger.

Full text:


In response to a suggested change to Option 7 on the plan for Cromwell Lane/Hodgetts Lane, Burton Green, I attach Appeal against the decision to build on this site, in accordance with the extension to closing date of 24th January 2014.

PROPOSED HOUSE BUILDING IN CROMWELL LANE - OPTION 7 IN YOUR BOOKLET - Appeal for extended closing date of 24th January 2014
Having only heard of the change in proposals for Option 7 on the 20th January, we wish to make the following official appeal against the proposal to build houses on this area.
1 We believe that a second access in this area of Cromwell Lane would make our access onto the road extremely dangerous. Exiting our drive is already very difficult due to the proximity of traffic turning out of Hodgetts Lane and impaired vision and speed of traffic coming over the bridge. There also has to be an awareness of cars entering the Lane from houses on the opposite side of the road, which have very steep downward drives. A combination of these factors and the additional entry from the proposed new road would become extremely dangerous and present health and safety issues. When construction of HS2 starts, Cromwell Lane will become even busier, not only with cars, but also heavy vehicles, thus exacerbating the danger.
2 The commencement of HS2, combined with the house building project( which is very close to it) would cause an upheaval for many years. Building on this land would mean that being just outside the 120m line for HS2 we would not only be 'blighted' by that project, but also by the additional housing on Option 7. We feel it is very unfair that the same people are not only being caused stress and disruption twice, but will be in the position of being financially affected by both schemes.
3 As far as we can see, building on this particular piece of land has no benefit for the community with regard to relocation of the village hall or village green, as envisaged on the present preferred Option 1.
4 Can you please clarify why, if development behind the Peeping Tom(Option2) would be 'out of character', this sentiment would not apply to the land behind Cromwell Lane (Option7)?
5 The rear gardens of the affected houses slope up towards the area suggested for building, which means they would be very overlooked by the new properties.
6 The bungalow which it is suggested be knocked down to provide access into the land behind the properties in Cromwell Lane is shown as 'sold'. Might this suggest that assurance has been given to the purchasers that the scheme will go ahead, without the decision being affected by appeal from residents?
7 The first time residents were aware that building on Option 7 became a possibility was at a Parish Meeting yesterday evening (20th), which has given very little time to make an Appeal. Can you please clarify why affected residents were not made aware of these proposals sooner?
8 The latest information in your booklet was that this area of land was not really an option but suddenly without any official information being received from the Council, it would appear that this decision has been changed. Could you please clarify?
382 Cromwell Lane has been our home for over forty years and whilst we have no influence over HS2, we would like to feel that you might reconsider the proposal of building houses on this particular plot.
An acknowledgment and early reply to our questions would be very much appreciated.

Jeffrey, Valerie and Craig Sawyer

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61429

Received: 22/01/2014

Respondent: Erwin & Claire Verwichte & Foullon

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

-Site 7 should be the preferred option.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61433

Received: 22/01/2014

Respondent: Dr Andrew Gibbs

Representation Summary:

-Largely agree with the reasons for dismissing Site 2, 5 and 6 and would like to add that these would act to make the village part of Coventry rather than Warwickshire. Green Belt should not be impacted here.
-Site 3 and 4 would reinforce the historical ribbon development and therefore it was right to discount them.
-The preferred option at Burrow Hill Nursery does appear to be the best site.

Full text:

Consultation on new local plan

This response is only concerned with the plan for Burton Green, which if I have to declare an interest is where I live, although it also the case that none of the consultation sites directly affect me personally and I have no financial interest in any of them.

In my opinion the requirement for the village to accommodate a further
70-90 homes is somewhat excessive as this represents a large step change in the population, but if that is what we have to deal with then so be it. However this change must be handled sensitively and with complete transparency to avoid it becoming a source of controversy within the village - as such I am slightly disappointed that this consultation was not more widely publicised, and also that the tone of the documentation is very much that the decision has already been made (within Burton Green we have also had input from the potential developer of the preferred site, which is probably inappropriate).

Looking at the possible sites I would largely agree with the opinions stated within the documentation dismissing the options at the north end of the village (plots 2,5,6) and would additionally comment that these would act to make the village part of Coventry rather than Warwickshire - this is not where the green belt should be impacted. I also agree that the plots on Red Lane (3,4) would reinforce the historical ribbon development and hence again should be discounted. Of the two remaining sites the preferred one at Burrow Hill Nursery does appear to be the best however site 7 (behind houses on Hodgetts Lane and Cromwell Lane) also offers the possibility to 'thicken' the village around the central region and appears comparable assuming that suitable access is available. On this basis my personal preferred outcome is that the housing requirements are divided between site 1 and 7, hopefully helping to maintain a relatively open aspect/lower density for the new housing in order to fit well within the current village. Note that should HS2 happen site 1 will probably be worst affected than site 7 as it will experience the greater construction impacts and operating noise, but in this case it probably becomes even more important that the development is split between the two sites to reduce the concept of living the wrong side of the tracks.

I would further comment that it would be helpful if some of the building plots are made available for self-build so that we do not end up with an 'estate' feel (however nice) but can maintain the illusion of organic growth and preserve the rather random housing styles currently within the village.

Dr Andrew Gibbs

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61457

Received: 24/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Christine Clifford

Representation Summary:

-Object to Site 7 as it is likely to increase traffic along Hodgetts Land and Cromwell Lane which are already congested. Access to the site would be hazardous whilst building and for residents once the houses were built. This would be the case for a site entrance in Hodgetts Lane or Cromwell lane.

-The site is back land and a number of existing properties would have their privacy affected.

-The site is very close to the HS2 proposal. This makes the site inappropriate for housing development until the line is completed and its effects on the local area established.

Full text:

I would like to respond to the New Local Plan, Chapter 7, Village Plans and Housing Options.

I would like to object to one of the site option, option 7, development of land off Hodgetts Lane. Although this was declared a discounted option I would still like to object to it for future reference.

I would like to object to this option as it is likely to increase traffic along Hodgetts Land and Cromwell Lane which are already congested at peak times. Entry to and from the site would be hazardous whilst building was undertaken and for residents once the houses were built. This would be the case for a site entrance in Hodgetts Lane or Cromwell lane.

The site is back land and a number of existing properties would have their privacy affected.

The site is very close to the proposed route of HS2. This makes the site inappropriate for housing development until the line is completed and its effects on the local area established.

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61470

Received: 24/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Rosalie Vine

Representation Summary:

-Support the discounted options 2,5,6 and 7 as they are 'back garden developments'.

Full text:

Having carefully studied the proposals for Burton Green Village, I agree that the preferred option No. 1 Burrow Hill Nursery is by far the best option as it will be built on open land having a ready made entrance and will not encroach upon any other properties in the area.
An alternative is to continue with ribbon development as in sites 3 and 4, which is the way the village, has evolved over the years it has been in existence. As there are existing houses opposite these sites, it would be appropriate for this type of development.

I am very much against 'back garden development' as stated in sites 2,5,6 and 7. As it stands at present it is within the green belt and has been appreciated and enjoyed by residents in Burton Green for over fifty years. Should the green belt order be amended it will cause a great deal of anguish, intrusion and most importantly a devaluation of property.

Part C - Commenting on the Indicative Settlement Boundaries.

Burton Green Settlement.

As the Burton Green boundary has been extended down Red Lane almost to Clinton Lane, I fail to understand why this area has not been taken into consideration for housing. It is far enough away from the proposed HS2 railway line and has extensive open countryside.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61502

Received: 24/01/2014

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Marcus & K Stewart

Representation Summary:

Site 2 would be suitable for housing, but not a village hall.
Site 7 is wholly unsuitable for housing development as it will be surrounded by HS2.
Site 5 and 6 are unsuitable as they will start to close the 'Crackley Gap'.
Sites 3 and 4 are unsuitable as they will not be in character with Red Lane.

Full text:


Warwick District Council Local Plan
Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries Consultation

We believe the following are important considerations that need to be taken into account when determining the Local Plan for Burton Green.

* The existing nature of the village needs to be maintained at all costs i.e. open aspect, rural views, low density housing.
* Burton Green should remain a village with an independent identity and that Coventry or Solihull developments do not spread into the Parish boundary i.e the 'Crackley Gap' is maintained.
* That the village is enhanced by any future development and that development should add to the long term sustainability of the community; such as a new improved village hall, homes for young families and those looking to down size but remain in Burton Green, improved parking at the school and creating recreational and open spaces.
* That the impact of the Local Plan, HS2 developments and local needs are considered holistically not separately.

We agree that Greenbelt needs to be maintained as much as possible to retain the rural and open aspect of the village. The proposed boundaries look about right, provided it does not allow back garden developments that would be out of character to the rest of the village.

Any new development should be low density and include a mixture of housing to encourage young families to the village and bungalows for elderly residents to down size to.

We believe the preferred site (Burrow Hill Nurseries) is the most suitable location for new development providing it contains a new improved village hall linking it with the school and recreational space - irrespective of HS2 the current hall is running out of capacity and does not have sufficient open space or parking. Also the development should have rural building density not urban levels as presently proposed. 75 houses is too high for the site to retain the rural nature of Burton Green. Also the development should be used as an opportunity to provide an improvement to the pavements in Red Lane which are too narrow and in a poor state of repair, hindering access for Red Lane residents to the centre of the village and school.

In order to spread housing development across the village we believe site 2 (behind the Peeping Tom) would be suitable for a small additional development, we do not however, believe this site is suitable for the village hall as it would move the centre of the village too far towards Coventry and alienate further residents in Hob Lane and Red Lane and potentially set the village on a pathway to joining with Coventry. We would like to see any development creating a new centrally located heart of the village that will make a more cohesive and inclusive environment for all to share including green/play space with links to the school and potential new village hall.

We are aware of a proposal by local land owners for site 7 as presented at the Parish Council meeting 20th January. We believe this to be a wholly unsuitable site. Apart from it being out of character to the village, residents on Hodgetts Lane would be effectively surrounded by HS2 construction to the front of their properties and this construction to the rear, what a miserable position to be in! It also has only a single access point close to the existing junction with Hodgetts Lane, creating difficulties for emergency services and additional congestion around the two junctions.

We do not believe sites 5 & 6 are suitable as they would start to close the 'Crackley Gap'.

We do not believe sites 3 or 4 are suitable as they would be out of character with Red Lane and would be a hazard on the already narrow stretches of Red lane.

Land that will be sterilised until after HS2 construction, e.g the existing village hall site and land above the green tunnel, should be earmarked for new village facilities such as wildlife area, skate park, exercise area etc.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these proposals.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61510

Received: 25/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Jeremy Marshall

Representation Summary:

-WDC should also consider the area off Hodgetts Lane so we move to be more of a separate village and less of a ribbon settlement linked to Coventry

Full text:


Since there seems to be no online system this is my response re Burton Green.

1. The housing should not be all in the preferred area. 75 units is far too dense and would be out of character.
2. WDC should also consider the area off Hodgetts Lane so we move to be more of a separate village and less of a ribbon settlement linked to Coventry.
3. There should be affordable housing in the mix.

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61551

Received: 17/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Luisa Protheroe

Agent: Viner & Company

Representation Summary:

-168 Cromwell Lane could be developed to produce extra dwellings to add to the dwelling mix of Burton Green.

-There is good access to the site from both the frontage and the land at the side of the property.

-Services are available in Cromwell Lane

Full text:

We support the proposed village boundary for Burton Green, Lane is
inset outside the greenbelt and is surrounded by other dwellings.

Through the Local Plan the site could be developed to produce extra dwellings to add to the dwelling mix of
Burton Green.

There is good access to the site from both the frontage and the lane at the side of the property.
Services are available in Cromwell Lane.

I attach a copy of the proposed Village Plan with our Client's site marked in red.

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61630

Received: 21/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Joseph Geoffrey Powell

Representation Summary:

-Housing should not be built on green field areas.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61706

Received: 24/01/2014

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Max & Judy Cramp

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

Support Site Review as we object to Site 2 because

-Drainage problems- the pond and surrounding fields becmoes very full and wet in the winter. Our proerty floods because the pipe which should take the water down field to a soak away is too small and inadequate.
-In addition there is a great variety of wildlife living in the pond which would be harmful to the many species to disturb- including great newts and other pond life, dragon flies, herons etc. Many small birds nest in the hedges which are also home to pheasants, the occasional partridge and deer.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61737

Received: 23/01/2014

Respondent: Mr & Mrs R C & Linda Stone

Number of people: 2

Representation Summary:

Support Site 7 as a discounted option for the following reasons:
-It would destroy our environment as well as lowering the value of our property on Cromwell Lane.
-Our property would be overlooked because of higher elevation and there would also be noise issues. No building should occur on this site.
-It would be totally out of place in this area and would affect a large amount of people in a small enclosed proximity.
-The village is already blighted by HS2 and now it is suffering the New Local Plan for housing.

Full text:

Regarding the Burton Green Village Housing options on Page 40 of the booklet - No. 7 option for planning permission to erect new houses at the rear of our property No. 376 Cromwell Lane.

We wish to register our objection to the development of new houses being built at the rear of our property No.376 Cromwell Lane.

It would totally destroy our environment as well as lowering the value of our property.
At no stage whatsoever do we want any building to take place on this site (No.7 on local Plan). We would be greatly overlooked because of higher elevation - there would also be noise issues.

It would be totally out of place in this area and it would affect a great many people in a small enclosed proximity - it is a very distressing situation.

We are already blighted by HS2 - now we are suffering the New Local Plan for housing. We would like you to be aware of the impact it would have on a lot of people in this area.

Support

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61783

Received: 31/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Stone

Representation Summary:

Object developing on Site 7 based on the understanding that it is now being proposed for development as:
-The access road would cause lots of disturbance to homes on either side.
-New homes would overlook existing properties and spoil their outlook.
-Too many houses are proposed.
-The Green Belt land would lose its openness.

-There has been a lack of consultation for such a significant development. The site was previously ruled out for deliverability and access reasons.
-Neighbours of Site 7 have only found out by chance. They have not yet had an opportunity to register their objections.

Full text:

I have been contacted by a gentleman who lives in Cromwell Lane in Burton Green , regarding the proposals for site 7 in your list of the sites originally considered. He was speaking on behalf of himself and several neighbours whose homes and gardens back onto the site number 7.

I promised to pass on their concerns.

They did not respond to the 8 week Consultation because it seemed clear in the documents that this site was ruled out for 'deliverability ' and 'access' reasons. At least , this was their interpretation and it is understandable they did not fully appreciate that the comments in the document were not final and could be revised. They did not expect the site to pop up again.

Their concerns are twofold:
1 they don't like the scheme - the access road would cause lots of disturbance to homes on either side, the site is sloping so even 2storey houses would loom over them , it would spoil their outlook [ yes I know , not a planning matter] , too many houses proposed, the land is - currently -- Green Belt and would lose its openness and rural character - ie they oppose the change necessitated to the Green Belt boundary.

2 they are very angry at the lack of consultation for such a significant development , due to the supporters of the scheme coming back with better worked-up proposals at this late stage. They only found out by chance, the supporters had not canvassed them at all. These neighbours will undoubtedly be adversely affected and have not had an opportunity to register their objections. I think they have a valid point here, though I cant see how it could have been helped.

Please can you somehow record their concerns, and be aware that the scheme for site 7 is controversial and has not been fully consulted upon ? Thank you

Regards,
Ann B

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 61962

Received: 16/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Cleeve Belcher

Representation Summary:

-All sites should be considered to spread the increased number of houses throughout the village.
-35 houses could be absorbed into the village without greatly altering its character.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 62016

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Ann Corbett

Representation Summary:

-Housing development should be diffused throughout the village and not concentrated in one small area.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 62023

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Jayne Tomlinson

Representation Summary:

-Recommend that Sites 2,5,6 and 7 are reconsidered for development since access issues can be overcome.
-Should bats be in danger of being eliminated, the priority and the right thing to do is to protect the bats and choose sites where they are not living.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 62027

Received: 15/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Sue Rogers

Representation Summary:

Site 2,5, 6 and 7 should be considered to spread the increased number of houses throughout the village, also maybe the land at the bottom half of Red Lane.
-This would cause the least landscape impact of all the options and have the least effect on traffic.
-Access has been mentioned as a problem but developers will purchase land/houses to provide necessary entrance.
-The village could also be connected to the remainder of Hob Lane with the presence of a few houses.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 62036

Received: 20/01/2014

Respondent: Mrs Eleanor Brewer

Representation Summary:

-All of the housing development should not be placed on Site 1. Some should be located on one of the dicounted sites (i.e. Site 2, 5 or 6).

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 62042

Received: 22/01/2014

Respondent: Dr Andrew Gibbs

Representation Summary:

-Site 7 offers the possibility to thicken the village around the central region and appears comparable assuming that suitable access is available.
-Housing requirement should be divided between Site 1 and 7 to maintain a relatively open aspect/lower density for the new housing in order to fit well within the current village.
-Should HS2 happen, Site 1 will be worse affected than Site 7 and therefore it is more important that the development is divided between the two sites to reduce the concept of living on the wrong side of the tracks.

Full text:

Consultation on new local plan

This response is only concerned with the plan for Burton Green, which if I have to declare an interest is where I live, although it also the case that none of the consultation sites directly affect me personally and I have no financial interest in any of them.

In my opinion the requirement for the village to accommodate a further
70-90 homes is somewhat excessive as this represents a large step change in the population, but if that is what we have to deal with then so be it. However this change must be handled sensitively and with complete transparency to avoid it becoming a source of controversy within the village - as such I am slightly disappointed that this consultation was not more widely publicised, and also that the tone of the documentation is very much that the decision has already been made (within Burton Green we have also had input from the potential developer of the preferred site, which is probably inappropriate).

Looking at the possible sites I would largely agree with the opinions stated within the documentation dismissing the options at the north end of the village (plots 2,5,6) and would additionally comment that these would act to make the village part of Coventry rather than Warwickshire - this is not where the green belt should be impacted. I also agree that the plots on Red Lane (3,4) would reinforce the historical ribbon development and hence again should be discounted. Of the two remaining sites the preferred one at Burrow Hill Nursery does appear to be the best however site 7 (behind houses on Hodgetts Lane and Cromwell Lane) also offers the possibility to 'thicken' the village around the central region and appears comparable assuming that suitable access is available. On this basis my personal preferred outcome is that the housing requirements are divided between site 1 and 7, hopefully helping to maintain a relatively open aspect/lower density for the new housing in order to fit well within the current village. Note that should HS2 happen site 1 will probably be worst affected than site 7 as it will experience the greater construction impacts and operating noise, but in this case it probably becomes even more important that the development is split between the two sites to reduce the concept of living the wrong side of the tracks.

I would further comment that it would be helpful if some of the building plots are made available for self-build so that we do not end up with an 'estate' feel (however nice) but can maintain the illusion of organic growth and preserve the rather random housing styles currently within the village.

Dr Andrew Gibbs

Object

Village Housing Options and Settlement Boundaries

Representation ID: 63146

Received: 13/01/2014

Respondent: Mr Richard Thwaites

Representation Summary:

-Anecdotally the site Matrix document no longer reflects the view of the Parish Council. The Parish Council are opposed to any development in Hampton Magna, but accepting that it is inevitable, they now prefer the Maple Lodge site.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments: