Publication Draft

Support

Representation ID: 2918

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Yes.

Object

Representation ID: 2919

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

The facilities/infrastructure are neither available nor easily provided.
Major traffic issues into/out of Leamington and Warwick. Will need significant road improvements and at least an extra river crossing.

Section 3.14
Points 3 and 4 are fine but bullet points 1,2 and 5 should be changed to spread development more evenly over the FOUR towns, the A46 corridor and south of Coventry.

Finham should be targeted as the prime location for placement of the bulk of extra housing allocated to WDC, in particular accommodating the expected influx from the major conurbations.

It should not be allocated to accommodate Coventry's allocation.

Object

Representation ID: 2920

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

This council believes that the WDC has identified appropriate locations with the serious exceptions that Lower Heathcote/south of Harbury Lane should be retained as an area of restraint to preserve valuable agricultural land and respect the natural boundary to development provided by Harbury Lane.

This council also believes that the area at Finham/south of Coventry should be used to accommodate WDC's allocation of employment land rather than being yielded to Coventry for its needs.

Object

Representation ID: 2922

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

STRONGLY OBJECT - This land must be retained as an area of restraint to properly separate Bishops Tachbrook from the major towns and also to preserve excellent agricultural land.

Support

Representation ID: 2923

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Subject to a balanced spread of development over the four towns and wider district this land represents reasonable infill and has reasonable access to infrastructure without imposing excessive demands.

Support

Representation ID: 2924

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

This area contributes well towards spreading the allocations over the wider district and has good access to established infrastructure - a natural choice.

Comment

Representation ID: 2925

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Object if reserved for Coventry allocation.
Support if taking a significant part of WDC allocation and assisting in spreading the WDC allocation across the whole district. This is a good site for development as it is adjacent to good infrastructure and has good access to the motorway network.

Support

Representation ID: 2926

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Support subject to making the option district-wide (OR at very least the FOUR towns - Kenilworth Castle!!! - has it been forgotten?) - The aim should be to maintain all tourist facilities wherever possible unless they can be convincingly shown to be no-viable.

Support

Representation ID: 2927

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

Support.

Support

Representation ID: 2928

Received: 15/09/2009

Respondent: Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council

This Preferred option is thoroughly welcomed provided proper, full, local consultation and meeting only the community's clearly identified needs (and wishes) is irrevocably enshrined policy.