Cefnogi

ID sylw: 6874

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Binswood Allotment Society

support

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 6883

Derbyniwyd: 24/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr David Higgin

On the recent Housing Needs Survey conducted in Bishops Tachbrook, 500 of the 750 homes in the village responded and told us that only 15 new houses were needed in the village. Therefore we do not need 4200 new homes.

o 4200 houses between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates threatens the very existence of Bishops Tachbrook as a village. If it becomes another suburb of Leamington Spa this will reduce the quality of life for the community here in Warwick Gates, Whitnash and in Bishops Tachbrook.

o Large estates lack social cohesion which leads to anti social behaviour and poor education performance. This proposal is the same size as Warwick Gates, Chase Meadow and Hatton Park all put together; what kind of community is likely to be born as a result of this development? Especially as 40% will be social / council housing in an area with poor transport links to the areas that give the most support to the under privileged i.e. the town centres.

o We think that such a number of new homes contradicts the vision that Warwick District Council has, "providing a mix of historic towns and villages set within a rural landscape of open farmland and parklands".

o Utilities, Services (Police, Dentists, and Doctors etc.) are all stretched to the limit now. With both the major hospitals only accessible across congested bridges over the river Avon, we fear for how long it will take emergency cases to get the medical resource they need.

o The huge increase in traffic arising from at least 8000 new cars in this area will result in pollution and add to existing air quality problems in Warwick and Leamington town centres. At peak times the traffic along Europa Way (even as far as the J14 M40), Gallows Hill, Tachbrook Road and Tachbrook Park Drive are grid locked, your proposed development is situated right along these roads, simply adding to the congestion already experienced. So far you have failed to fix the current problems and there is no evidence on your part to suggest that you will, even for when this proposed development is complete.

o With the demise of AP, Fords, IBM and other firms there is not the work available for incomers. Many people already leave the area to work elsewhere. A large proportion of people living on Warwick Gates commute up and down the M40 or by rail as far away as London.

o We see no sense in carpeting our green spaces with housing for a mobile population to travel elsewhere. Our remaining agricultural land should be preserved to feed future generations.

Why did you decide not to create a brand new settlement within the district (like Southam) maybe below the A46/J15 inter-change where direct links to the road network are very easily accessible? Why did you decide not to disperse the houses over the whole of the district? Your "Preferred Option" was not the public's in the initial consultation so why have you ignored our views?
I do believe that some housing maybe needed for organic growth within individual communities; however, I feel this should be decided at a local level with the support of the local people not imposed from the Government in a top-down approach as it is at the moment and certainly not to the numbers you are suggesting.
We urge you to rethink the Options radically; to look again at regeneration possibilities in the towns, to work with owners and developers on imaginative schemes to bring forward brown field sites for housing development.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 6892

Derbyniwyd: 09/11/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr J P Garrett

Please accept this letter as my formal objection to the "Core Strategy Preferred Options" document dated June 2009.

The specific areas I object to are, the housing proposals on:

1) Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane

And also:

2) Land South of Sydenham and east of Whitnash
3) Land at Woodside Farm, north of Harbury Lane, Whitnash
4) Land west of Europa Way, Warwick

My objections are based on the following:

* On the recent Housing Needs Survey conducted in Bishops Tachbrook, 500 of the 750 homes in the village responded and told us that only 15 new houses were needed in the village. Therefore we do not need 4200 new homes.

* 4200 houses between Bishops Tachbrook and Warwick Gates threatens the very existence of Bishops Tachbrook as a village. If it becomes another suburb of Leamington Spa this will reduce the quality of life for the community here in Warwick Gates, Whitnash and in Bishops Tachbrook.

* Large estates lack social cohesion which leads to anti social behaviour and poor education performance. This proposal is the same size as Warwick Gates, Chase Meadow and Hatton Park all put together; what kind of community is likely to be born as a result of this development? Especially as 40% will be social / council housing in an area with poor transport links to the areas that give the most support to the under privileged i.e. the town centres.
* I think that such a number of new homes contradicts the vision that Warwick District Council has, "providing a mix of historic towns and villages set within a rural landscape of open farmland and parklands".

* Utilities, Services (Police, Dentists, and Doctors etc.) are all stretched to the limit now. With both the major hospitals only accessible across congested bridges over the river Avon, I fear for how long it will take emergency cases to get the medical resource they need.

* The huge increase in traffic arising from at least 8000 new cars in this area will result in pollution and add to existing air quality problems in Warwick and Leamington town centres. At peak times the traffic along Europa Way (even as far as the J14 M40), Gallows Hill, Tachbrook Road and Tachbrook Park Drive are grid locked, your proposed development is situated right along these roads, simply adding to the congestion already experienced. So far you have failed to fix the current problems and there is no evidence on your part to suggest that you will, even for when this proposed development is complete.

* With the demise of AP, Fords, IBM and other firms there is not the work available for incomers. Many people already leave the area to work elsewhere. A large proportion of people living on Warwick Gates commute up and down the M40 or by rail as far away as London.

* I see no sense in carpeting our green spaces with housing for a mobile population to travel elsewhere. Our remaining agricultural land should be preserved to feed future generations.

Why did you decide not to create a brand new settlement within the district (like Southam) maybe below the A46/J15 inter-change where direct links to the road network are very easily accessible? Why did you decide not to disperse the houses over the whole of the district? Your "Preferred Option" was not the public's in the initial consultation so why have you ignored our views?

I do believe that some housing maybe needed for organic growth within individual communities; however, I feel this should be decided at a local level with the support of the local people not imposed from the Government in a top-down approach as it is at the moment and certainly not to the numbers you are suggesting.
I urge you to rethink the Options radically; to look again at regeneration possibilities in the towns, to work with owners and developers on imaginative schemes to bring forward brown field sites for housing development.
1) What happened to local democracy? How can The District Council blatantly side with Central Government and the quango of an unelected regional assembly in forcing through such a blatantly undemocratic strategy? This strategy will have a detrimental effect on Warwick Gates, but its shock waves will also be felt in Bishops Tachbrook, Whitnash, Warwick, Kenilworth and further afield across the district.
2) Warwick Gates children already have to travel out of the catchment area to primary schools, so use some of the land near the estate to build the school you should have included for our children when the development was first proposed.

3) Use Brown field land within larger population centres such as Coventry, Leamington and near Warwick Parkway Station and The A46 first, for factories and businesses, so as to protect the countryside for residents of Warwick Gates, Bishops Tachbrook and Whitnash. Some of this land is already prone to flooding, so why not enhance the natural habitat rather than destroy it. Destroy it by building homes and businesses that will be at risk of flood damage.

4) The developments proposed for South of Warwick Gates will also have a negative effect on the value of our houses, increase traffic congestion and lower air quality. In short, it will leave us with a poorer general quality of life than we currently enjoy.

5) Our local doctors surgeries are already at capacity and facilities at Warwick Hospital have been steadily downgraded during the last five years, with a view to Wallsgrave Hospital serving the whole of Leamington, Warwick, Kenilworth and Coventry. Add this to the extra traffic on the roads and there is serious likelihood that lives could be lost as a result of this development.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 6922

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Land at Lower Heathcote Farm
The Parish Council believes that:
1. To achieve the employment land to support the target housing requirement of the WMRA, it is unnecessary to develop this Grade 2 agricultural land because there are sufficient sites available on brownfield, lower grade green land and sites at the edge of the city of Coventry that are more appropriate and from which a choice can be made.
2. It is not necessary to re classify arable land for employment before all long-neglected employment land has been fully utilized and that it is imperative that this grade 2 farmland is not given over to development
3. It would lose a significant piece of high landscape quality Warwickshire countryside that is effectively much larger than the plan would suggest being one side of a valley that falls between 45 and 60ft (75mAod down to 55m) down to the historic Tach Brook that was part of the boundary that separated the Saxon Hwicce tribe from the Mercian tribe in north Warwickshire. To build on one side of the valley would ruin the aspect from the other side.
4. It will destroy the Tach Brook valley buffer between the town and village to dimensions that are too small to be effective. It would be particularly disastrous if the land is covered with factories and other employment land detritus.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 6945

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council

Land at Lower Heathcote Farm
The Parish Council objects to this location in the Preferred Option for the following reasons.
1. To achieve the target housing requirement of the RSS, it is unnecessary to develop this Grade 2 agricultural land because there are sufficient sites available on brownfield, lower grade green land and sites at the edge of the city of Coventry that are more appropriate and from which a choice can be made.
2. The District would lose a significant piece of high landscape quality Warwickshire countryside that is effectively much larger than the plan would suggest being one side of a valley that falls between 45 and 60ft (from 55m AOD to 75m) down to the historic Tach Brook that was part of the boundary that separated the Saxon Hwicce tribe from the Mercian tribe in north Warwickshire.
3. To build on one side of the valley would ruin the aspect from the other side. The plan drawing is deceptive as it does not show the nature of the land affected, which is part of the valley of the Tach Brook, an historic watercourse that feeds New Waters and thence the Avon in the woodland south of Warwick Castle. Consequently, the land south of Harbury Lane falls from about 70 to 75m above ordinance datum down to less than 55m at the brook level. This is a fall of between 15 and 20m (45 to 60ft) with, in places, a gradient of 1 in 12. The land then slopes back up to Bishop‟s Tachbrook to around 75m forming the 2 sides of a valley that compliment each other and form a unified landscape, with the brook itself meandering through it. Normally, the brook is about 3m wide with freshly flowing water arising from aquifers to the east.
4. For most of its length it is surrounded by mature trees, hedgerows and a variety of plants down to the waters edge, shaded by the tree canopy providing ideal habitats for many birds and mammals that are so important to the countryside. This includes some protected species including bats and probably water voles. Surprisingly, WDC say that ecological surveys have yet to be done. If housing is constructed so close to the brook, contamination of the watercourse is bound to occur, both during construction and from ongoing human habitation and the environment will undoubtedly be affected.
5. The WDC evidence includes a landscape report that describes the landscape quality of the proposed site as medium to high, but taking the valley as a whole, it is clearly the higher side of medium. The valley is a classic piece of gently
Bishop's Tachbrook Parish Council
Response to WDC Core Strategy Preferred Option
undulating rich farmland that Warwickshire is famous for and one of the reasons for the tourist trade that forms part of the core strategy of the district. Seen from the surrounding roads and footpaths, the views across the valley are such that it would be Municipal Vandalism to destroy it by covering the northern slope with housing, however high it‟s quality.
6. WDC does not appear to have had any regard for the evidence submitted to them by commissioned reports when considering this part of the preferred option but rather, appear to have selectively ignored evidence that they have acknowledged for adjacent sites around Bishops Tachbrook should not only prevent development there but also make it an area of restraint. This is a severe case of double standards.
7. It will destroy the Tach Brook Valley buffer between the town and village to dimensions that are too small to be effective. It would be particularly disastrous if the land is covered with factories and other employment land detritus as well as housing.
8. Until now, WDC has retained the land south of Harbury Lane as an essential buffer between Leamington / Whitnash and Bishop‟s Tachbrook by the use of Rural Area Policies in the Local Plan. For the same purpose, Woodside Farm was made an Area of Restraint in the local Plan to resist development pressures to the south of Whitnash. The distance between the village and town is only 1100m on the B4087 and 1500m between the Bishop‟s Tachbrook northern village boundary and the NW corner of Grove Farm on Harbury Lane. The published preferred option would reduce this distance to 800 & 650m respectively. This distance is too small to remain an effective buffer.
For these reasons, no part of site W07 should be lost to development as it is a prominent site and naturally beautiful. Any development of this site will lead to a loss of the identity of Bishop‟s Tachbrook as a rural community and destroy views and aspects visible from the few footpaths on the south side of the valley that form one of the limited number of recreational facilities of this village community.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 7001

Derbyniwyd: 24/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Norton Lindsey Parish Council

Qualified Suuport but concerned at the dense housing in the area without investment in amenities

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7096

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: CPRE Warwickshire

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.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7193

Derbyniwyd: 08/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Pamela Payne

Object to all sites around Whitnash, Bishops Tachbrook, and Watwick Gates.
Problems with traffic, schools etc. Cannot cope with more houses.
Try to get children into local schools, drive around roads, walk paths, cross roads, use buses and local facilities before suggesting more housing. Area is above capacity.
New housing alwaysin Whitnash area, let other towns take strain. Hope infrastructure will be provided in any new development.
Whitnash was village but has grown and lost its heart. Involved in community life so able to comment on what would not work. Schools a particular problem with children having to travel to schools outside local area due to lack of places and pupil priority.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7208

Derbyniwyd: 17/08/2009

Ymatebydd: W R Bethall

Against further housing in Whitnash and surrounding area.
History of new development south of Leamington and Warwick and development of green spaces between Whitnash and urban area.
Problems with roads and worsening conditions if more development takes place. Worry about where access will be for new development.
Extra schools needed. Warwick hospital unable to expand leaving local patients having to attend hospitals in Coventry in future.
RSS requires land at Finham and within Warwick district to be available for Coventry overspill. Enough is enough.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7239

Derbyniwyd: 28/08/2009

Ymatebydd: Mrs J E White

Whitnash is big enough. To build more housing, let alone business premises, would turn it into an urban sprawl, totally lacking in identity.

Sylw

ID sylw: 7479

Derbyniwyd: 23/09/2009

Ymatebydd: J C Evans

Harbury Lane provides a natural boundary line for developments. I have no objection to a small development in the area to the north of the lane but extending the housing southwards would create urban sprawl destroying the character of the district.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7500

Derbyniwyd: 14/09/2009

Ymatebydd: The Occupiers

object

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7563

Derbyniwyd: 17/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr George Jones

Object

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7643

Derbyniwyd: 14/12/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Boyle

Asiant : Brown and Co

In terms of land allocations, we do feel that insufficient consideration has been given to the wider regional picture and that too much details is provided on the strategic sites. We feel that there are other more suitable sites available and that at this stage the plan should be more general in terms of its direction for growth without site specific details being put forward. If these are not deliverable, as we understand has yet to be proved, then the plan may generally not be deliverable and sustainable.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7676

Derbyniwyd: 23/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Ray Bullen

To achieve employment land to support housing requirement, unnecessary to develop Grade 2 agricultural land - sufficient sites available on brownfield, lower grade land and sites at edge of Coventry.
Not necessary to re-classify arable land for employment before all long-neglected employment land has been utilized. Imperative grade 2 farmland not developed.
Would lose significant piece of high landscape quality countryside that is larger than plan suggests.Building on one side of valley would ruin aspect from other.
Will destroy Tach Brook Valley buffer between town and village to dimensions too small to be effective. Disastrous if land covered with factories/employment land rubbish.

Sylw

ID sylw: 7692

Derbyniwyd: 24/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Warwickshire County Council - Environment & Economy Directorate

Focussing growth in this location will:
- Facilitate short trips to the existing employment sites to the south of Warwick and Leamington and minimise through centre traffic;
- Allow good access to Leamington rail station, without impacting on the town centre network;
-Allow longer distance car trips to access the motorway and trunk road network, minimising the impact on the local & town centres road network.
Traffic mitigation measures could include improved bus services, urban cycle network & traffic management; virtual park & ride facilty; bus priority lane & dualling on/of A452; cycle parking at Leamington rail station; and a new linkfrom J14/M40 to C209.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7714

Derbyniwyd: 23/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Ray Bullen

Use of this cannot be allowed because
To achieve housing requirement it is unnecessary to develop Grade 2 agricultural land. Sufficient sites available on brownfield, lower grade green land and sites at edge of Coventry
Would lose significant piece of high landscape quality Warwickshire countryside.
To build on one side of valley would ruin the aspect from other. Plan drawing is deceptive as it does not show the nature of the land affected, which is part of the valley of the Tach Brook, an historic watercourse.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7715

Derbyniwyd: 23/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Ray Bullen

Could affect species including bats and probably water voles. Surprisingly, WDC say that ecological surveys have yet to be done. If housing is constructed so close to the brook, contamination of the watercourse is bound to occur, both during construction and from ongoing human habitation and the environment will undoubtedly be affected.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7716

Derbyniwyd: 23/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Ray Bullen

Evidence includes landscape report that describes landscape quality of proposed site as medium to high. Seen from surrounding roads and footpaths, views across valley are such that it would be Municipal Vandalism to destroy it by covering northern slope with housing, however high quality.
WDC does not appear to have had regard for evidence submitted by commissioned reports but rather appear to have selectively ignored evidence acknowledged for adjacent sites around Bishops Tachbrook should not only prevent development but also make it an area of restraint. This is a severe case of double standards.
It will destroy Tach Brook Valley buffer between town and village to dimensions that are too small to be effective. It would be particularly disastrous if the land is covered with factories as well as housing.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 7717

Derbyniwyd: 23/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Ray Bullen

Until now, WDC has retained land south of Harbury Lane as essential buffer between Leamington / Whitnash and Bishop's Tachbrook by use of Rural Area Policies in Local Plan. Woodside Farm was made Area of Restraint in Local Plan to resist development pressures to south of Whitnash.The preferred option would reduce this distance making it too small to remain effective buffer.
No part of site W07 should be lost to development as it is prominent site and naturally beautiful. Any development of this site will lead to loss of identity of Bishop's Tachbrook as rural community and destroy views and aspects visible from footpaths on south side of valley forming one of limited number of recreational facilities of village.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 33583

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Revelan Group

Asiant : Harris Lamb

It is premature to allocate land for development until a comparative site assessment is undertaken based on a robust evidence base.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 33645

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: A C Lloyd

Asiant : Barton Willmore

Support the identification of land at Heathcote Farm as a sustainable urban extension. This will be a high quality urban extension capable of providing appropriate local services and facilities as required. Offers the opportunity to deliver housing utilising largely capacity in existing infrastructure. Site is capable of providing significant open space of benefit to the wider area. The site is well related to existing development. There are no technical constraints which preclude development.

A phasing restriction on the site will cause problems with delivery, in terms of infrastructure.

Sylw

ID sylw: 33657

Derbyniwyd: 10/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Warwick Town Council

Wish to object to Core Strategy Preferred Option to build 10,800 houses, the majority to the south of Warwick/Leamington - areas 1E, 1F, 2F, 3F, 1D.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 33790

Derbyniwyd: 21/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Hancock Town Planning

The land at Old Budbrooke Road offers the following potential advantages which are not offered by this site:

- Much of the site is previously developed land;
- The site has little agricultural value;
- The site is not part of the wider landscape;
- Highly sustainable location within easy walking distance of Warwick Parkway;
- Easy pedestrian access to Warwick/Leamington via the canal;
- Well screened from Old Budbrooke Road by existing vegetation;
- Access can be gained from the site frontage.

Cefnogi

ID sylw: 33826

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Gallagher Estates

Support the general preferred locations of new housing and in particular the Land at Lower Heathcote Farm. We control in excess of 50% of the land and with the other two major landowners wish to deliver a comprehensive sustainable urban extension to the south of Harbury Lane.

Sylw

ID sylw: 33873

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Environment Agency

The site lies adjacent to Flood Zones 2 & 3. The proposed redevelopment of the site must not encroach into the flood zones.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 33954

Derbyniwyd: 02/11/2009

Ymatebydd: S A Aston

Tachbrook will just be joined to Whitnash and Leamington

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 33969

Derbyniwyd: 18/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr Shafiq Uddin

Object to
Land at Lower Heathcote Farm, south of Harbury Lane
Approx. 40% of all proposed new housing concentrated in areas to south Leamington. This area has seen housing growth in last 10 years. Local services/road network under increased strain.
More sense to spread new housing evenly across district, making use of A46. No additional infrastructure. Supermarkets used almost to capacity. If new housing built north of Leamington and east of Kenilworth, supermarkets could bring needed jobs.
Areas chosen by public in consultation do not match preferred options.
Area at Finham promised to Coventry for overspill - no explanation.
If goes ahead will be in direct contradiction to wishes of electorate:rethink strategy

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 33978

Derbyniwyd: 21/12/2009

Ymatebydd: Heathcote Park Residents Association

The proposed development for land to the south of Harbury Lane will completely surround the Park. There is concern that this will 'blight' the residents' homes and future resale will become very difficult, similar to the Myton Park, some 20 years ago.

Gwrthwynebu

ID sylw: 33989

Derbyniwyd: 25/09/2009

Ymatebydd: Mr David Ashbourne

Object