Publication Draft

Search representations

Results for CPRE Warwickshire search

New search New search

Object

Publication Draft

Do you support or object to levels of housing growth higher than those proposed by the Preferred Options?

Representation ID: 7089

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

Do not accept population projections as statement of fact or rational allocation. Do not accept assumption that growth in District should continue at previous levels.
Deplore acceptance of the "...continued movement of people into the District from the major cities of the region to the District." One of main aims of RSS is to discourage people from moving from major urban areas out into rest of Region. Primary aim for region is to regenerate major conurbations not allow expansion of leafy suburbs. Proposed provision would undermine the RSS.

Comment

Publication Draft

Do you agree with the Preferred Growth Strategy for Warwick District to 2026?

Representation ID: 7090

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

We support the notion that the District should meet its own needs but not provide homes for people who wish to leave the major conurbations or provide land for Coventry overspill. We struggle to understand that building on green fields can be 'sustainable'.

Comment

Publication Draft

Do you agree with the Strategic Objectives for Warwick District?

Representation ID: 7091

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

We note that the aim is a "...strong, diverse economy..." This does not necessarily require "growth" as set out at the start of section 5

Comment

Publication Draft

Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for the location of new employment land?

Representation ID: 7092

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

. We find it difficult to reconcile a growing economy with the declared aim of sustainability. Indeed paragraph 5.8 refers to "sustainable growth" and this appears to us to be a very difficult concept to achieve.

We believe that the policy should encourage employment development only to meet an identified local need, not to encourage businesses and people to move into the District at the expense of the Major Urban Areas of the region and other less-prosperous parts of the country.

Object

Publication Draft

(iv) Land at Kings Hill, south of Green Lane, Finham

Representation ID: 7093

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

Support the locations proposed but not the scale of development which is implicit.

In addition we object strongly to the allocation '...if required to meet Coventry's employment land requirements, land south of Green Lane, Kings Hill, Finham...'. This area is in the Green Belt and should not be developed.

Object

Publication Draft

Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for Rural Communities?

Representation ID: 7094

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

Object to allowing market housing in villages and hamlets, but support policy to provide affordable housing restricted in perpetuity to residents who have grown up in the area. This needs to be rented as market housing in the District's villages will never be 'affordable' in terms of within the price range for lower-income households.

Support policy which positively encourages provision of jobs in rural communities.
Quite possible that as price of fuel rises, it will become less desirable to live in the countryside, and that the value of rural property will decline and therefore become more affordable for local people.

Comment

Publication Draft

Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for the location of new housing?

Representation ID: 7095

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

Reiterate that we recommend a more proactive policy stance in regard to the reuse of vacant properties and the promotion of 'homes above shops' as part of a comprehensive package to revitalise the urban areas of the district. In particular there is at present a large amount of vacant accommodation above shops in Leamington town centre.
Large housing sites are more able to accommodate housing for older people. In our view town centre or edge of centre sites are much more suitable for older people's housing, being closer to more facilities.

Object

Publication Draft

(vi) Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane

Representation ID: 7096

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

Lower Heathcote Farm. This is prime agricultural land which a few weeks ago produced healthy crops of wheat. The land gently slopes to the south towards a brook and is attractive countryside typical of this area. We would be dismayed if this land was used for housing without every alternative being considered. The boundary is shown reaching to the brook apart from a narrow area of restraint. We question whether sufficient account has been taken of the liability of the land to flood.

Object

Publication Draft

(vii) Land west of Europa Way, Warwick

Representation ID: 7097

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

West of Europa Way. This land has been an area of restraint for perhaps twenty years. Again it is good farming land which has produced wheat this year. It is a vital -green wedge' extending into Leamington and retaining some separation between southern Leamington and Warwick.

Object

Publication Draft

(viii) Land at Thickthorn, Kenilworth

Representation ID: 7098

Received: 25/09/2009

Respondent: CPRE Warwickshire

Representation Summary:

Thickthorn. This Green Belt land and we will be reluctant to see it released for development. Building on it will reduce the green buffer zone between Kenilworth and Leamington Spa.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.