Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1222

Derbyniwyd: 24/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Andrew Horsley

Support

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1225

Derbyniwyd: 24/08/2009

Ymatebydd: MS Judith Bennett

This is green belt land and as such needs to be protected. I am still not convinced that the demand for housing and therefore employment will be there in 2026.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1292

Derbyniwyd: 24/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Sarah Jane Horsley

Support

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1348

Derbyniwyd: 25/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Rod Pickering

- Proposed loss of green belt land (no longer regarded as sacrosanct?!)
-An excessive number of new dwellings
Traffic problems envisaged - poor infrastructure - loss of farming land - cross boundary overspill endangering areas of recognised biodiversity and both geographical and historical vaue - a lack of communication as well as known limitations to proposed sites etc

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1360

Derbyniwyd: 18/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Asiant : DNS Planning and Design Consultants

The authority needs to provide more available employment land.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1475

Derbyniwyd: 27/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr and Mrs Kundi

Nifer y bobl: 2

Object.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1590

Derbyniwyd: 31/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Miss Melanie Turnbull

I obect to any building work on this beautiful land

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1596

Derbyniwyd: 30/08/2009

Ymatebydd: EUNICE NICOLSON

Strongly object -
Precious green belt land must be protected
Services, facilities, roads, infrastructure only just able to cope with current population

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1612

Derbyniwyd: 01/09/2009

Ymatebydd: William Bethell

This is one sensible option and to suggest this be reserved (your para 10.10) in the event that Coventry cannot find other areas for their expansion quite honestly, sucks! If to be used, it should be to meet Warwick District's needs not COVENTRY, in housing and employment.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1672

Derbyniwyd: 27/08/2009

Ymatebydd: J.G Whetstone

Support.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1704

Derbyniwyd: 01/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr and Mrs D zacaroni

There are opportunities to build the infrastructure to make developments fit for purpose.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1780

Derbyniwyd: 20/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Max Bacon

Support.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1808

Derbyniwyd: 28/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Val Hunnisett

Object.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1827

Derbyniwyd: 31/07/2009

Ymatebydd: Mrs Helen Cheatham

Obviously it will take pressure off Warwick.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 1928

Derbyniwyd: 03/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Andrew Ferguson

support

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 1974

Derbyniwyd: 09/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Ken Hope

(5.b.iv) If this list is in priority order then the King's Hill site should be nearer the top.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2042

Derbyniwyd: 04/09/2009

Ymatebydd: mr john jacques

because it is based on biased unproven numbers provided by New Labour to suit own ends in getting relected, to get votes from mass of welfare dependent unemployed/unemployable hangers-on it has created in 11 years of mismanagement.

and this will overwhelm the quality o fthe existing ecology nearby, change the neighbourhood completely for residents,choke roads, swamp local facilities and is in conflict with stated views of residents.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2141

Derbyniwyd: 07/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr and Mrs Barrie and Margaret Hayles

Filling in these green field spaces, decade by decade is creating a huge urban spread from Nuneaton in the north, across 30 miles, to Bishop's Tachbrook in the South.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 2295

Derbyniwyd: 21/07/2009

Ymatebydd: S B Hoyles

By far the best site for consideration is the land within the WDC area South of Coventry at Finham. Being close to that city where the existing infrastructure is well able to accommodate the influx. i.e. with respect to shops, transport, schools etc should be the preferred option.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 2387

Derbyniwyd: 04/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Roy Standley

Yes.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 2424

Derbyniwyd: 08/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Connolly

Support.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2519

Derbyniwyd: 10/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Terence Kemp

Objects to incremental urbanisation of land currently defining separate identities of Coventry and Kenilworth.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2595

Derbyniwyd: 09/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Richard Storey

Object.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 2609

Derbyniwyd: 14/09/2009

Ymatebydd: John Arnold

Support.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2638

Derbyniwyd: 14/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr James Delaney

Gap between Kenilworth and Coventry to be maintained, to retain the local identity of both areas.
Any developments in this green area will encourage closure of the gap, a large part of the appeal to both areas residents.
Transport infrastructure in Kenilworth inadequate for any proximate developments (narrow roads, parking, etc).

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 2733

Derbyniwyd: 09/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Pauline Neale

Yes, as close to transport links although not on greenfield sites.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2785

Derbyniwyd: 14/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mrs Sheila F. Hadfield

I reject any attempt to erode the Green Belt.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2820

Derbyniwyd: 15/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Tony Hyndman

Finham does not have the amenities to support such a large expansion on it's borders. Erosion of green belt land must not be allowed.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 2905

Derbyniwyd: 15/09/2009

Ymatebydd: ALISON ELFWOOD

THERE ARE NO JOBS IN THIS AREA, PEOPLE ARE MOVING OUT NOT IN. I KNOW PROFESSIONAL MEN WHO ARE SORTING BOXES AT THE AIRPORT BECAUSE IT'S ALL THEY CAN GET. WHERE ARE THE JOBS????

Sylw

ID sylw: 2925

Derbyniwyd: 15/09/2009

Ymatebydd: 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.