Object

Representation ID: 2742

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: Pauline Neale

Land to the south of Whitnash should be kept as proposed housing development along with land around Radford Semele as designated on Plan 1.

Object

Representation ID: 2793

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Sheila F. Hadfield

Brownfield sites only should be used.

Object

Representation ID: 2834

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Robert Butcher

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 2873

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Susan Butcher

Object.

Object

Representation ID: 2902

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: ALISON ELFWOOD

I THINK YOU ARE GOING FOR EASY OPTIONS WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITIES THAT EXIST THERE ALREADY.

Object

Representation ID: 2907

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: ALISON ELFWOOD

YOU'VE GONE FOR EASY OPTIONS AND OVERESTIMATED NEED

Object

Representation ID: 2929

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

This council believes that Hatton Park, Bagington and Burton Green should be included to assist in spreading the load of development over a wider area and also in the case of Hatton Park to significantly increase viability, vitality and sustainability of that settlement, especially when it already benefits from good communication infrastructure in terms of access to the motorway network and Warwick Parkway railway station.

Furthermore consideration and provision should be made for potential use of Bagington airport should that site become available - NB: Source of minerals and development?

Comment

Representation ID: 2964

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Jason Marvelly

A potential area for the location of new housing is the area of land in Kenilworth at the back of the houses at Rounds Hill. I know this is green belt land currently but there are no businesses, current houses or sports clubs that would have to be displaced to make way for new housing.The land is either being used for farming or is lying dormant. There could be possible access to a housing development off Rouncil Lane from the road that currently leads to the houses that were built on the old hunt kennels site.

Object

Representation ID: 2980

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs and Mr J Parr and Cotterill

Strongly disagree

Object

Representation ID: 3016

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Bill McCutchon

This is far too high a number of dwellings to place in this particular locality because of the huge increase it will generate of vehicular traffic and the affect this will have on the main thoroughfares in the locality and to and from Coventry and adjoining towns.

Object

Representation ID: 3034

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Rhyan Barry

Empty shops and houses should be populated before new buildings are erected. The council should introduce legislation not allowing properties to be empty for over 12 months without a viable reason. The council should be in negotiation with the owners of these properties and introduce them to the people that are going to habitat the new buildings that are proposed.

Object

Representation ID: 3084

Received: 17/09/2000

Respondent: Mr Anthony Morris

Land at Coventry airport could be identified for use now that the commercial passenger flights have been stopped by Warwick DC planning policy.

Object

Representation ID: 3122

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Mel Gillman

The local infrastructure cannot support such large areas of development. Schools and roads are already beyond capacity.
I strongly disagree that areas of large areas of green belt are developed when there are numerous sites earmarked for employment land that have not been used in excess of 10 years.
Since land in the district is in short supply perhaps more consideration could be given to the type of housing identified, taking a smaller footprint.

Object

Representation ID: 3125

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Mel Gillman

The council has not identified all resonable options for locations of new housing. There are many smaller sites within the district that could be utilised for development rather than choosing large areas of green belt - thats the 'lazy' option.

Object

Representation ID: 3149

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: John Murphy

Hatton Park, Bagington and Burton Green should be included to assist in spreading the load of development over a wider area and also in the case of Hatton Park to significantly increase viability, vitality and sustainability of that settlement, especially when it already benefits from good communication infrastructure in terms of access to the motorway network and Warwick Parkway railway station.

Furthermore consideration and provision should be made for potential use of Bagington airport should that site become available - NB: Source of minerals and development?

Object

Representation ID: 3160

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Mr R.C Hadfield

Not to take place on green fields sites

Object

Representation ID: 3204

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Robert Burtonshaw

Why build more??? not needed

Object

Representation ID: 3205

Received: 18/09/2009

Respondent: Robert Burtonshaw

No building on North Leamington Allotments

Object

Representation ID: 3226

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: mrs stella moore

I do not agree with the figures imposed on this area from central government. also I do not think that we should be used as an overspill area for building in coventry. Therefore I do not think the process is democratic

Object

Representation ID: 3228

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: mrs stella moore

Do not agree with the figures imposed on us by central government

Object

Representation ID: 3268

Received: 20/09/2009

Respondent: Mr David John Bowers

No need for anymore housing south of Leamington and Warwick.

Support

Representation ID: 3310

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Caroline Martin

Support

Comment

Representation ID: 3319

Received: 08/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Susan Munday

New housing should be located at Warwick Gates

Object

Representation ID: 3345

Received: 21/09/2009

Respondent: Gill Barker

Family homes taken off market for student accommodation

Object

Representation ID: 3356

Received: 17/09/2009

Respondent: Christopher Gibb

Object

Support

Representation ID: 3396

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs M Kane

Support

Object

Representation ID: 3430

Received: 04/09/2009

Respondent: Mr & Mrs J Morby

Housing not needed. Houses in Barford and former Pottertons site empty a year after completion

Object

Representation ID: 3443

Received: 21/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Gillian F Starkey

New housing needs to be more evenly spread across whole district including villages to reduce impact on existing communities

Object

Representation ID: 3449

Received: 16/09/2009

Respondent: Mr P Dimanbro

The old library and museum.
Unoccupied properties in Warwick and Leamington Spa about 2500, such as old Potterton's site.

Object

Representation ID: 3480

Received: 04/08/2009

Respondent: W R Bethall

It would seem that the Council has already discussed and approved the areas and timing of development without any previous public participation and now we are left either agreeing or disagreeing with the Council. Was consideration given to the allotments to the rear of Northumberland Road and which other areas were considered? Why is Finham shown as only being needed in the longer term?