No

Representation ID: 85960

Received: 10/01/2025

Respondent: Graham Ball

The UK is already an overcrowded country as evidenced eg by the fact that the UK is a significant net importer of food. With a finite land supply, development is unsustainable. Therefore, development has with no net benefit to existing residents. However, developers profit from development because there do not pay the social cost of the lost land such as space, fresh air, quietness and freedom. Therefore, the S106, S278 and CIL are too small. The contributions required under these levies by developers should be raised significantly. They will be at the correct level when development is net nil.

No

Representation ID: 85995

Received: 11/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sian Corrie

The policy gives too much weight to the need of public transport as a justification for development in a particular area. This is even more so when looking at railways.

Workers are no less reliant on public transport, many now work from home for significant periods. Public transport is only suitable for a small proportion of workers as in most cases it will not facilitate a door-to-door commute. Commuters will inevitably default to private cars.

Yes

Representation ID: 86001

Received: 11/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kate Harris

I think it is very important that all sites whatever their scale adhere to this approach

Yes

Representation ID: 86058

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

No

Representation ID: 86237

Received: 17/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Mark Brightburn

Existing Town Centres need considering as the key infrastructural requirement to support any new substantial edge of settlement growth options.

Other

Representation ID: 86316

Received: 21/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Daniel Chandler

We have first hand experience of the fleeting promises of developers. The Rowington Development has contributed to increased flooding on the Old Warwick Road. Developers are not in this for the long-haul and quick and convenient decisions made by the council now can, and will, have significant ramifications in the future. The consideration of the impact on existing residents (not just on NIMBY grounds, but genuine environmental and infrastructure impacts) needs to be at the heart of the consultation, not just hitting a government target.

No

Representation ID: 86328

Received: 21/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Ashcroft

It should only consider feasible infrastructure or where future development is realistic. It is not feasible to develop Wood End train station due to the depth of cutting and lack of land surrounding it. Future development would need to be of such a scale and the land surrounding it and road infrastructure makes the use of station as a basis for future development as totally unfeasible. If the station was extended then the scale of development would be such as to change the sense of place beyond all recognition fundamentally changing the character of the whole greenbelt area

No

Representation ID: 86402

Received: 23/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Chennells

Cycle ways are used occasionally in this area of Kenilworth as can be seen from the usage at Castle Farm no where near what was anticipated by the council. Most people with children use cars and we have limited funds for proposed projects
The council must not be blinkered in their approach and decisions and be very careful when road traffic surveys etc are made. As at Castle Farm they got it all wrong. Flood risk is a vital consideration and the road system. Building is also happening in leek wooton on the old police station!!

Yes

Representation ID: 86433

Received: 24/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Daphne Tilley

Yes it is vital that some infrastructure is developed BEFORE building is started. Too often we have seen building first then infrastructure. With the growth of Leamington and Warwick and the areas potential for further development it is ESSENTIAL that significant infrastructure is in place. Surely it is time to consider a new purpose built hospital in Leamington to help alleviate the pressure on Warwick hospital.

No

Representation ID: 86448

Received: 25/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carole Johnson

The area suffers from persistent water leaks due to the outdated system and reduced pressure. This should be addressed before any new building takes place and funded by developers not residents.

Yes

Representation ID: 86519

Received: 27/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Terry Simmonds

Public transport, especially buses, need vastly improving for rural people having to travel within 25 - 30 miles of their rural areas

Yes

Representation ID: 86523

Received: 27/01/2025

Respondent: Mr justin kerridge

definately

Other

Representation ID: 86584

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

Infrastructure must focus on rail freight, excellent public transport (including buses and rail) and cycle ways.

Developers wishing to make money out of developments MUST pay for all required services and infrastructure improvements, otherwise the general tax payer will have to, or they don't get done.

Yes

Representation ID: 86603

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Darrell Muffitt

The approach appears to take account of previous consultations.

Other

Representation ID: 86620

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Trevor Bradnam

Bus routes and times to and from Shipston are marginal at best and should certainly be protected and enhanced particularly in view of potential further housing development

Yes

Representation ID: 86743

Received: 29/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Linda Dane

Local communities should be invited to advise on what amenities are lacking in their area using their local knowledge. Preferably this should be done before land is released for development so that new and improved amenities can be planned from the beginning and not as an afterthought to development. In considering what is needed, consideration should be given to helping Parish Councils expand/introduce the services that they are responsible for.

No

Representation ID: 86867

Received: 30/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Hopkinson

Your infrastructure planning makes much of public transport. However this flies in the face of the industrial reality of the West Midlands: the main engine here is the motor indsutry. It would be curious if employees in motor companies were to give up using cars as you seem to suggest. LandRovers and Jaguars made the Midlands great!

No

Representation ID: 86899

Received: 31/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Arthur Hogan-Fleming

Just today witnessed a huge truck nearly take the Clopton bridge parapet with it as large trucks northbound cannot get on the bridge without doing a large turn into the southbound carriageway. Large trucks should be banned from our ancient bridges. More development just causes more damage to infrastructure. Time to stop development, reduce debt, control immigration properly.

No

Representation ID: 87005

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: S Gardner

Not enough consideration is been taken into account for
- green corridors around high growth areas for maintaining green corridors
- renewable local energy production
- development of community water harvesting and green energy transformation, delooping of existing infrastructure to support green living
- cycle ways been major urban areas, ie, kenilworth and Leamington
- pressure on existing schools with expansion requirements and how feasible this is
- maintaining standards of living in existing communities

Other

Representation ID: 87050

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Judith Corless

Builders must be held to account. They are driven by huge profits not the needs of people. The extra facilities needed by housing must be carefully considered and included in 'the deal'. These facilities should be built at the same time as the associated houses, if not before housing commences. Appropriate fines should be applied if Housing companies do not comply with their promises. All housing should reflect the area it is located in, not thousands of houses of similar design, they should be built to endure the changes to our climate. All housing must be well built by professionals.

Other

Representation ID: 87166

Received: 05/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Bryan Hay

My observations only apply to the specific areas around Lapworth and Hatton, where the existing road infrastructure (in particular the B4439 and the A4177) are already inadequate for existing traffic, so any large scale new development would only exacerbate these issues. In addition, we can all cite examples where developers have signally failed to meet their infrastructure commitments, so I don't feel we can have any confidence that the approach of requiring developers to provide infrastructure will work in the future.

No

Representation ID: 87184

Received: 06/02/2025

Respondent: Mr peter guest

there is no mention of the B4100 being improved between greys mallory roundabout and junction 13 of the m40, this needs to be a priority before any further development is taken in the land around bishops tachbrook as the junctions from mallory road and oakley wood road onto the b4100 are dangerous side road onto a main road junction that are impossible to navigate safely of efficiently at peak times.

Yes

Representation ID: 87295

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Hewitt

All large housing developments should contribute to the infrastructure they rely on

Yes

Representation ID: 87374

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

Consideration should be given to determining 'critical infrastructure' that must be delivered early in any development, not only roads, but also a local school, or country park. Too often these pieces of 'critical infrastructure' have come last, after all the homes have been built.

No

Representation ID: 87554

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Michaelina Jakala

No and I certainly do not support pumping more money into things like cycle paths. No one uses them and the road infrastructure is falling to pieces. Not to mention road flooding because the drains are clogged all over the place. Again bad management.

Yes

Representation ID: 87560

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: mrs susan morris

I agree as of today but needs in years to come will need more infrastructure

Yes

Representation ID: 87712

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mr justin kerridge

roads flood regularly as new developments have continued to contribute to flows into the pipes. New developments must certainly cope with all the water flows off their site on site and where existing flooding occurs improve run off rates to the surrounding roads.

sites should be chosen to minimise the possibility of developers claiming infrastructure costs make a development unviable.

Yes

Representation ID: 87732

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Kim James

1. There must be stronger guarantees that these contributions will be sufficient, timely, and directly benefit the local area.
2. Too often, infrastructure delivery lags behind housing development, placing increased strain on local roads, healthcare, schools, and public services before mitigations are in place.
3. the A46 corridor must be carefully considered to ensure they provide genuine benefits to local communities, rather than simply facilitating through-traffic at the expense of local road networks and environmental quality.
4. Any transport upgrades serve local needs first, rather than prioritizing regional and national traffic movements.

No

Representation ID: 87781

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Katarzyna Wielis

Park & ride are very rarely used (the one near my parents house near Norwich was recently closed due to lack of use) and so presuming this will solve the traffic problems of Warwick & Leamington is wishful thinking

No

Representation ID: 87807

Received: 11/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Emily Godson

The policy lacks clear commitments, timelines, and guarantees that infrastructure will be delivered before development proceeds. Without enforceable obligations, new housing could worsen existing pressures on roads, schools, healthcare, and utilities. While infrastructure contributions are mentioned, no firm delivery schedules or funding commitments are provided, raising concerns about underfunded mitigation. Existing deficiencies must be addressed before further development. The policy should ensure essential infrastructure is in place before occupation, prioritize key projects with transparent funding, and deliver tangible benefits to current residents. Without these assurances, the plan risks creating unsustainable growth that harms rather than enhances communities.