Comment

Representation ID: 7508

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Government Office for the West Midlands

The preferred options lack evidence of a spatial approach being taken.
There should be a clear audit trail setting out how the preferred strategy was arrived at.
Clear diagrams are essential to visually express what the Core Strategy is seeking to achieve and to communicate the strategy to a wider audience. A key diagram must be included to identify the key spatial characteristics of the District and its relationship to neighbouring authorities and the region.
Policies should be delivery and outcome focussed, setting out how they will drive development and the outcomes identified in the vision rather than being enabling and supporting. Only a limited number of policies should be included in the Core Strategy that expand upon national and regional policy rather than duplicate it.

Object

Representation ID: 7535

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Mr George Jones

Object

Support

Representation ID: 7561

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Warwickshire County Council [Archaeological Information and Advice]

Agent: Framptons

Support

Support

Representation ID: 7590

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Coal Pension Properties Ltd

Agent: Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners

Support in principle the vision to focus major retail, commercial and cultural developments within or adjoining Leamington Spa but request it is amended to reflect the sequential approach.

Object

Representation ID: 7628

Received: 14/12/2009

Respondent: Mr Boyle

Agent: Brown and Co

In terms of prematurity, it would have been appropriate to await the publication of the Panel Report on the Phase 2 Revision of the Regional Spatial Strategy. Clearer guidance would then be available to look at the directions of growth and the closer relationship needed between the authorities acting in the sub-regional areas.

Support

Representation ID: 7651

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Warwickshire County Council - Environment & Economy Directorate

From a transport perspective, the County Council supports the preferred growth strategy which will:
- Minimise the distances which people need to travel,
- Make best use of the existing bus network,
- Allow easy access to the existing rail network,
- Allow improvements to be made the existing critical mass of transport infrastructure and services within the area. This would be much harder to achieve if the development were to be more widely dispersed across the District; and
- Support the vitality of the two main town centres, and encourage trips to be made to them on foot, by bike or on public transport.

Object

Representation ID: 7653

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Forrester of Loes Farm, Guys Cliffe

Agent: Barlow Associates Limited

Parts of the areas identified for housing south of Leamington should be replaced by the land at Loes Farm as it provides a definable edge for future development between the A46 and A429.

Object

Representation ID: 7673

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Ray Bullen

No references to improving transport and mobility.
Objective 5 implies development is only remedy to improve vibrancy.
No reference to developing learning culture; insufficient reference to development of cultural attractions.
Objective 6 should state Grade 1 & 2 agricultural land should not be considered for housing to avert national food crises. Land currently subject to rural area policies should remain protected to facilitate objectives 10 & 13
Strategic objectives should recognize interdependence between WDC and neighbouring authorities. Many WDC residents work in them and many of their residents work in WDC. When considering employment, housing, transport issues, authorities should work together.

Comment

Representation ID: 33526

Received: 15/12/2009

Respondent: Natural England

Necessary development should be accommodated with minimum impact on the natural environment and deliver maximum benefits for the natural environment and people together.
The most environmentally sustainable locations should be found for new development. Development should avoid environmental assets such as protected and historic landscapes, habitats, sites (statutory and non-statutory), habitat networks, species and floodplains, and should promote sustainable travel patterns. Policies and decisions on development proposals should conserve valued environmental assets by seeking first to avoid loss or harm, before considering the need for mitigation or compensatory measures. Where development takes place in areas which currently have a low environmental value, we would expect the development to enhance environmental value by providing green infrastructure as well as provide new development.
Natural England supports the valuable urban containment role played by the green belt. However we also believe that there is potential for to increase people's enjoyment of green belt (and improving its effectiveness as a result) through improved access to it in appropriate locations. This could be through the establishment of strategic green links between settlements and the green belt. Other benefits of such an approach include opportunities for education regarding the natural environment, habitat enhancement and landscape benefits. A Green Infrastructure study could highlight where enhanced access to green belt would be appropriate and feasible.

Support

Representation ID: 33548

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association

General agreement about Growth Strategy, particularly protection of Green Belt to separate Kenilworth from the urban area of Coventry in north and strict control development within open countryside.

Object

Representation ID: 33550

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association

CRA not in agreement with development on fringe of built up area of Coventry- contradicts green belt protection and maintainance of open countryside between Kenilworth and Coventry. Planned growth and its associated infrastructure at Warwick University and Kings Hill will adversely affect this area.

Support

Representation ID: 33559

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Thomas Bates & Son LTD

Agent: Andrew Martin Associates

Support the proposal to direct growth to within and adjoining the combined urban areas of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash as it is consistent with RSS and minimises loss of Green Belt.

Support

Representation ID: 33570

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Revelan Group

Agent: Harris Lamb

Support the recognition that new development should be focussed at Warwick and Leamington.

Support the acknowledgement that new development should be focussed within and adjoining the urban areas of Warwick, Leamington and Whitnash.

Support the objective of focussing new development to the south of the urban area, to prevent intrusions into the Green Belt. Development to the south will have excellent access to the motorway network without the need to travel through Warwick's historic town centre.

Support

Representation ID: 33605

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Warwickshire County Council [Archaeological Information and Advice]

Agent: Savills (L&P) Ltd

Support the Council's strategy.

The Strategy should also recognise the redevelopment potential of the future use of existing Major Developed Sites in the Green Belt. Appropriate new uses should be identified for such sites. Full consideration should be given to the removal of appropriate sites from the Green Belt in order to foster development.

The Growth Strategy should not be so prescriptive to prevent the redevelopment of identified major developed sites, particularly North Leamington School. The boundary of the site should also be reviewed in order to ensure housing redevelopment can be carried out.

Support

Representation ID: 33638

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CB Richard Ellis

Agent: Barton Willmore

Support the majority of new development being directed to the combined urban areas, including Leamington Spa, which includes focussing major retail and commercial developments within the town centre.

Support

Representation ID: 33643

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: A C Lloyd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Support the proposal to direct most of the growth towards Warwick/Leamington with some growth in rural areas. This is in accordance with the RSS.

Support for the growth strategy in that it ensures development is able to build on an existing core of development to the south and therefore ensures short travel to work journeys.

Object

Representation ID: 33655

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Support directing most of the growth to Leamington/Warwick with some growth in the rural areas.

Object to the inherent imbalance of focussing development to the south. In addition to the land to the south, there is a need to allocate land to the north to ensure a balanced approach to housing delivery. By not providing employment land to the north, you are simply encouraging continued journeys through the town centre to the existing employment areas.

Support

Representation ID: 33671

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr T Steele

Agent: Savills (L&P) Ltd

It is agreed that growth on the urban fringe adjacent to Coventry is appropriate in order to assist in the sub-regional strategy.

It is also agreed that a proportion of growth should be directed to Kenilworth, being to the east of the town. This is the most sustainable location as well as minimising impact on the Castle and its separation from Coventry.

Support

Representation ID: 33703

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Midland & Regional and Travis Perkins

Agent: Signet Planning

Agree with Leamington as the main location for future needs for convenience goods retailing.

Object

Representation ID: 33714

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr John Burman

Agent: Bigwood Associates Ltd

Specific reference should be to key centres, such as Hatton Park where appropriate new development on a strategic scale should be identified.

Support

Representation ID: 33726

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Sharba Homes

Agent: PJPlanning

Focus on main towns is correct and accords with national and regional policy. Enabling development in the villages to support their vitality is an important means of ensuring and retaining quality of life and sustainability outside the towns.

Support

Representation ID: 33746

Received: 28/08/2009

Respondent: Shirley Estates

Agent: Davis Planning Partnership

Support, but widen scale to allow planned growth fur rural communities.

Comment

Representation ID: 33795

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr R Wood

Agent: Framptons

Welcome the reliance upon on-strategic urban brownfield sites to contribute to the overall provision.

Welcome the decision to enable some limited development to come forward within and adjoining the villages and hamlets where it can meet local business and community needs.

This will ensure the Core Strategy is suitably flexible to allow small scale development throughout the District.

Support

Representation ID: 33797

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Mr D Hunter

Agent: Framptons

Support the strategy, however flexibility should be written into the strategy to allow for localised reviews of the Green belt boundary where this would serve to facilitate the most sustainable form of development on deliverable sites.

The deliverability and sustainability of sites should be given considerable weight in the allocation and phasing processes.

Greenfield and green belt development should be considered equally and without prejudice.

Support

Representation ID: 33799

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Gallagher Estates

Agree with the Preferred Strategy and do not consider the exceptional circumstances are necessary for incursion into the Green Belt.

Comment

Representation ID: 33813

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: West Midlands Fire Service

Appreciate preferred option report is overarching strategy and therefore doesn't include site specific information.
Proposed growth and development in Warwick District area will have impact on Warwickshire Fire and Rescue Service in terms of ability to reduce risk to communities and the provision of emergency response and other community safety services. Therefore, wish to be kept informed of the site specific developments that will enable us to determine the change in the level of fire risk and required resources (fire stations, appliances and hydrants etc.) due to the proposed developments.

Support

Representation ID: 33852

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Tripartite Consortium (McDaide, Hibberd, KRFC)

Agent: Framptons

Support

Object

Representation ID: 33858

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Lenco Investments

Agent: RPS Planning

Strategy does not go far enough in recognising the availability of additional development land adjacent to Coventry City, particularly south of Baginton.

Comment

Representation ID: 33876

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: A C Lloyd

Agent: Redline

Emphasise the significant educational, general community, recreational and environmental advanatages that can emerge from substantial residential development at South Sydenham.

Object

Representation ID: 33909

Received: 28/09/2009

Respondent: Kenilworth Town Council

We agree with the Preferred Growth Strategy but feel that again the Preferred Options do not carry out these sentiments in relation particularly to the Green Belt at Thickthorn and Kings Hill.