Publication Draft
Search representations
Results for Crackley Residents' Association search
New searchSupport
Publication Draft
Do you agree with the Preferred Vision for Warwick District to 2026?
Representation ID: 33547
Received: 25/09/2009
Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association
Crackley Residents' Assiociation (CRA) in general agreement with vision
Support
Publication Draft
Do you agree with the Preferred Growth Strategy for Warwick District to 2026?
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.
Support
Publication Draft
Do you agree with the Strategic Objectives for Warwick District?
Representation ID: 33549
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
Publication Draft
Do you agree with the Preferred Growth Strategy for Warwick District to 2026?
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.
Object
Publication Draft
Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for the location of new employment land?
Representation ID: 33551
Received: 25/09/2009
Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association
Does not agree with employment/ development on the Kings Hill site because of the reasons detalied above- i.e. adverse impact on the green belt.
Object
Publication Draft
Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for the location of new housing?
Representation ID: 33552
Received: 25/09/2009
Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association
CRA objects to the significant proportion of the Kings Hill site for new housing. CRA does not support significant development of this area. In addition to the scale of the residential development, the requisite infrastructural improvements (transport, power, gas sewage,etc) will evitably have a detrimental effect on the entire area..
Object
Publication Draft
(ix) Land at Kings Hill, south of Green Lane, Finham
Representation ID: 33553
Received: 25/09/2009
Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association
CRA objects to the significant proportion of the Kings Hill site for new housing. CRA does not support significant development of this area. In addition to the scale of the residential development, the requisite infrastructural improvements (transport, power, gas sewage,etc) will evitably have a detrimental effect on the entire area..
Object
Publication Draft
Do you support or object to the preferred option for the density of new housing?
Representation ID: 33554
Received: 25/09/2009
Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association
Supports mix of housing proposed and density.
Support
Publication Draft
Do you support or object to the preferred option for the density of new housing?
Representation ID: 33555
Received: 25/09/2009
Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association
Supports mix of housing proposed and density.
Comment
Publication Draft
Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for Infrastructure?
Representation ID: 33556
Received: 25/09/2009
Respondent: Crackley Residents' Association
Await the publication of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan with the draft Core Strategy and comment accordingly.
