Cefnogi

ID sylw: 114

Derbyniwyd: 06/07/2009

Ymatebydd: R A Chapleo

Yes - this will allow development in an area of gretest need without the constriction of the Green Belt.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 183

Derbyniwyd: 11/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Alexander Holmes

This option enables development to focus on an area with capacity to meet employment needs, without encroaching on the Green Belt.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 206

Derbyniwyd: 03/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mrs Caroline Baxter

This land would be far better, there are larger resources at Kenilworth, bigger schools etc. Larger shops and employment

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 227

Derbyniwyd: 09/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Duncan Hurwood

I work at a new technology Park in Coventry (Ansty Park, in the north of Coventry), and of the many people who have moved to the area for employment NOT ONE is buying a house in Coventry. They are all buying houses in Warwickshire, and the expansion of employment in Coventry will not lead to a greater requirement of housing in the city. I do not believe that studies for future housing need in Coventry take into account what people are actually going to want to do.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 253

Derbyniwyd: 10/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Patricia Robinson

Close to West Midlands where new jobs are needed. Unemployment lower in Warwick/Leamington.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 311

Derbyniwyd: 21/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Nigel Warden

Green Belt land must be kept for now and future generations. Once it is gone, it is gone forever!
Coventry has suffered massive decline in industrial output over the past decades and is fast turning into a distribution centre. The quality and type of future jobs need to be improved and there are more than enough 'redundant' sites in Coventry capable of sustaining development without the need to build on precious Green Belt land. Save our Green Belt land!!!

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 320

Derbyniwyd: 21/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr and Mrs D Bolam

An area with the capacity and need to meet employment issues.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 346

Derbyniwyd: 22/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Peter Pounds

Support.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 402

Derbyniwyd: 24/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Nigel Warden

After reading many of the responses in support of this option, I can't help asking the question: Have these people fully understood the implications of their support? I personally believe that they are simply trying to move the problem away from 'their back yard' nimbyism, if you like. The problem of destruction of Green Belt land STILL exists and needs to be addressed and if at all possible STOPPED NOW, where ever that may be!

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 424

Derbyniwyd: 27/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Peter Clarke

I do not know this area but again not saturated and room to breathe looking at the map.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 475

Derbyniwyd: 24/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Georgina Wilson

Support.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 545

Derbyniwyd: 27/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr A M Webley

Support.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 597

Derbyniwyd: 03/08/2009

Ymatebydd: B A Alston

Support location

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 607

Derbyniwyd: 23/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr G.R. Summers

Object.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 668

Derbyniwyd: 06/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mrs Susan Edkins

near to coventry where expansion is needed

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 698

Derbyniwyd: 10/08/2009

Ymatebydd: P.A. Yarwood

Support.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 769

Derbyniwyd: 05/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Faye Davis

I object as this is a green field site and I think there are other more suitable areas that are already brownfield sites that have already been developed e.g. Baginton airport and Peugeot site, Ryton and this also minimises any divide between Coventry and Warwickshire.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 826

Derbyniwyd: 14/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mrs Sheila Bannister

There are large unemployment problems in Coventry because of the Credit Crunch, closing the Peugeot factory and many shops in the city centre as well as other firms closing down. If employment cannot be produced in Coventry how is empolyment going to be found in an area like Kings Hill.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 828

Derbyniwyd: 14/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Robert James Bannister

The credit crunch will continue to cause huge employment problems within the timescale mentioned. The Coventry of full employment of the 1950s, 60s and 70s is long since dead. To believe employment opportunities can be provided on another local authority's land without being first able to sustain employment within its boundaries is at best naive.

Sylw

ID sylw: 837

Derbyniwyd: 18/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Adrian Farmer

Best of the options but still not necessary

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 892

Derbyniwyd: 19/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Stuart Sullivan

Object to development due to:
1. Use of greenbelt land.
2. Lack of local infrastructure, and impact upon local infrastructure.
3. Highway safety and traffic generation.
4. Improper consultation identifying site as a 'standby site'.
5. Loss of visual amenity and impact upon local quality of life.
6. Impact upon environment.
7. Availability of several other, more appropriate brownfield sites in Warwickshire.
8. Significant local opposition.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 901

Derbyniwyd: 19/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Christine Betts

Support.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 954

Derbyniwyd: 22/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Ed Rycroft

This is only an overflow from Coventry...

Why are we proposing our "core strategy" whilst Coventry's is emerging? It is certainly hard for us to assess the practical needs for this area.

If Coventry don't know what brownfield land is available for use either as housing or industrial how can we allocate land for them to develop?

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 957

Derbyniwyd: 22/08/2009

Ymatebydd: E Keogh

Object to development due to:
1. Over estimating demand for land type, numerous existing empty or undeveloped existing sites
2. Use of greenbelt land.
3. Lack of local infrastructure, and impact upon local infrastructure.
4. Highway safety and traffic generation.
5. No consultation with Coventry residents identifying site as a 'standby site'.
5. Loss of visual amenity and impact upon local quality of life.
6. Impact upon environment.
7. Availability of several other, more appropriate brownfield sites in Warwickshire.
8. Significant local opposition.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 967

Derbyniwyd: 21/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Kirit Marvania

This is a large development on Green Belt. Don't believe there is a requirement for such a large scale development.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 984

Derbyniwyd: 24/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Cllr Tim Sawdon

This is Green Belt and should remain so. It is not appropriate for employment or housing without substantial infrastructure changes which would destroy the 'gap' between Coventry and Kenilworth.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1064

Derbyniwyd: 21/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mrs Pamela Beedham

Because surrounding roads are already very congested and so many would need widening. So very limited use - prevent inclusion into Green Belt also.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1065

Derbyniwyd: 24/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr and Mrs T Robinson

Support

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1153

Derbyniwyd: 18/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Alice Jarrett

Green Belt should not be industrialized. Housing would be bad enough but 'employment' land would be criminal as Coventry already has sufficient.

This is the first example of "Warwick CC" doing their "Pontius Pilate" act of suggesting Kings Hill development "only to meet Coventry's needs". Who is therefore responsible. Warwick should be protecting that land.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1169

Derbyniwyd: 21/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Barry Elliman

Object