Support

Representation ID: 3934

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Andrea Telford

support

Support

Representation ID: 3949

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr John Archer

I agree that a full and exhaustive analysis of al housing options has been undertaken

Object

Representation ID: 3971

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Kim Matthews

More effort should be made in identifying brown field sites - eg adjacent to the recycling facility at Pipers Lane, Kenilworth.

The area between Leek Wooton and Kenilworth shoudl be given further consideration.

Object

Representation ID: 3980

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr M Abba

Housing allocation should be distributed around the district, not placed in one are ie south leamington/whitnash. It seems OK that we don't build on green areas in Nrth Leamington but it's OK in the south. If the houisng is distributed around the district it would lessen the impact on the infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 4044

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Diana Sellwood

I object to the 3,250 houses being proposed to the south of Coventry. It is not suprising that few objections to this were raised in previous consultations as this was with Warwickshire residents. Most of the dissatisfaction with this proposal are likely to come from Finham residents. I feel that all urban sites for housing should be used first before loss of any GB.

Object

Representation ID: 4101

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Mr Jerry Woodhouse

All the development around kenilworth is clustered together, almost linking to the finham development, this will certainly have a huge negative impact on kenilworth, this goes against the vision of warwick council.

Comment

Representation ID: 4132

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: A D Fryer

Do not need expensive housing when there are brownfield sites at Peugeot plant and Baginton Airport.

Object

Representation ID: 4136

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Andy Robb

You have not included land on the old North Leamington School Site or land at Coventry Airport.
There has been no discussion on the availability of the Peugeot site with Rugby DC. Why not?

Review of the SHLAA earlier this year, was at the request of Gallaghers who have purchase rights of the land you have selected as your preferred option.

Your original consultation identified preferred options for development to the south of Coventry and along the A46 corridor. These preferences are now being ignored. Is this at the request of Gallaghers and why?

Object

Representation ID: 4151

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Miss C E Hattersley

New houses that need to be built should be at Finham along area near Burton Green. Would be of benefit to students by providing housing closer to University freeing up hosuing in Leamington. Inappropriate to release land at Finham for Coventry.
Consider Hatton Park and other small pockets of land to spread impact.

Comment

Representation ID: 4166

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: Elizabeth Heigl

Look again at regeneration prospects in towns to bring forward brown field sites.
Why decision made not to build new settlement below A46/J15 interchange where direct road links available. Why not disperse houses over whole district. Preferred option is not public's from initial consultation so why ignored that view.

Object

Representation ID: 4171

Received: 09/09/2009

Respondent: A J Bryan

Stop encroachment of Coventry and change of character in Kenilworth

Comment

Representation ID: 4175

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Warwickshire Rural Community Council

WRCC notes the acknowledgment that there are "issues around the long term sustainability of village communities and services that additional housing directed to villages through the Core Strategy could help to address" but is concerned that because of potential conlficts this has been put into abeyance. A better move would be a total commitment to identifying needs and sites throughout the rural areas in the District through funding for a rural housing enabler.

Object

Representation ID: 4198

Received: 24/09/2009

Respondent: Connie Reid

Object to Kings Hill site:
Plenty of sites in built up areas

Object

Representation ID: 4199

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Onkar Mann

There are additional areas that could be considered e.g. Baginton Airport, North of Leamington, Cubbington, Kenilworth, North Warwick and West Warwick. The land at Finham should be used as to meet Warwick District's needs and not those of Coventry.

Object

Representation ID: 4222

Received: 14/09/2009

Respondent: Rev. J.G. Lister

There are brown field sites around area with demise of industries and houses in lamentable state - regenerate them and use for housing rather than putting up more industrial untis, office blocks and retail parks.

Object

Representation ID: 4253

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Kulwinder Fathers

There are additional areas that need to be considered for development first e.g. Baginton Airport, North of Leamington, Cubbington, Kenilworth, North Warwick and West Warwick. The land at Finham should be used as to meet Warwick District's needs and not those of Coventry. The south of the district is already overdeveloped

Object

Representation ID: 4294

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs Miles

Object to Kings Hill site:
Look for brown field sites instead
Challenge number of homes required

Comment

Representation ID: 4303

Received: 23/09/2009

Respondent: Mrs J Wade

Object to Kings Hill site:
Vacant houses in city boarded up.

Object

Representation ID: 4320

Received: 31/07/2009

Respondent: Mr Trevor E Wood

Stated South Leamington is desirable place to live and not wanting people to trave lacross town so purchase Coventry Airport and no-one would have to travel across town. Council should be pro active in this respect.
Suggest:
Employ small committee of general public to work with WDC to look at opportunities for development if needed..
Buy Coventry Airport
Develop town centre properties rather than make a ghost town of closed shops and expensive parking.
Develop Old Town
Develop Althorpe Street
Develop Flavels and surrounding area
Suggest financially driven and not for any other purpose

Object

Representation ID: 4324

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Peter and Olive Kerr

High concentration of housing on one area leading to imbalance in population growth for the area detrimental to future identity of locality.

Object

Representation ID: 4325

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Roy Standley

Object to putting 4200 homes in one area south of Leamington.

Object

Representation ID: 4344

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: Clive Letchford

Focus more on regeneration of urban centres and development of brown field sites

Object

Representation ID: 4353

Received: 25/08/2009

Respondent: Dominic Simpson

Development should be at Finham for Warwick District, not Coventry.
Additional development at University for halls of residence would free up family homes and reduce student commuting.
Villages should be allowed small developments in keeping, retaining identity and maintaining sense of community.
Massive loss of industry resulted in brown field sites that should be developed first.

Object

Representation ID: 4369

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Michael Kirby

Extensive area to north of Kenilworth with easy access to A45, A46 and feeder routes which will be annexed by Coventry if not exploited.
Many infill and brown field sites in urban areas to be utilised before embarking on irreversible urban sprawl. Judicious use of existing pockets of fallow sites could meet housing requirement for next 15 years by which time more redundant sites will become available.
Accelerating demographic change in social structure will require fewer modest sized family homes and greater need for compact units for single and double occupancy. Should be located within walking distance shops, health facilities etc.

Support

Representation ID: 4371

Received: 22/09/2009

Respondent: A Picken

Support

Comment

Representation ID: 4385

Received: 19/08/2009

Respondent: Daniel & Elizabeth Sheethan

Suggest:
Over 20 villages could include small scale developments growing in traditional, sustanable, organic fashion
Build on brownfield sites (Peugeot site) as alternative to Finham which seems to have yielded to Coventry

Object

Representation ID: 4395

Received: 26/08/2009

Respondent: R.F. Garner

More effort should be put into finding alternatives - brown field or lower agricultural quality.

Object

Representation ID: 4398

Received: 11/09/2009

Respondent: Andrew, Julie, Eleanor, Henry Day

Disperse development throughout district. Look again at regeneration opportunities within the towns for the bulk of housing needed and villages can take some receiving the benefit of fresh investment in local amenties

Object

Representation ID: 4409

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Mr R.L.K. Drew

Should seek to build on brownfield sites.
Audit commission has urged refurbishment of empty/derelict housing - how many in Warwick District? If upgraded, what would impact on housing figures be?

Object

Representation ID: 4419

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: G M Langston

Object to plan 5 Warwick Leamington and Whitnash
Lack of robustness during planning process - infrastructure, traffic congestion.
No explanation of proposed demographic - Whitnash schools unable to accommodate more children.
Quantative assessments of traffic density undertaken when schools were on holiday - asked to defer this until normal term time - has this been done?
Any informal response to question as to whether sewage treatment works at Longbridge could cope with extra demand?
Associated strategy to develop new business requested - is such a strategy live and financed and how do two strategies dovetail?
Justification for Plan 5 surfacing as preferred option after first consultation?
Much of Grand Union corridor contains derelict outdated or sub-standard factory/business units. Why are such opportunities not being adopted?