BASE HEADER
Mod 14 - Policy DS15
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 69960
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Hallam Land Management & William Davies Ltd
Asiant : Marrons Planning
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
In respect of site g (land at Gallows Hill and the Asps) the site has already been granted outline planning permission in part. It is not therefore possible for the remaining part of the site that does not have approval to comprehesively plan for the whole site. The wording of the policy is not therefore clear and contrary to Paragraph 154 of the Framework.
A Design and Access Statement would be a requirement in any event. The requirement to produce a Development Brief is unnecessary
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 69988
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Richard & Janel, Vince & Caroline Hill & McCullagh
Asiant : Turley Associates
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The allocation at Westwood Heath should be extended to include land to the east. The Council has assessed the site as unsuitable and not achievable. However it is contended that access can be achieved via Cromwell Lane. Alternatively access could be achieved through site H42. A landscape and visual impact assessment has been undertaken. This shows the site can accommodate some change, particularly in light of site H42 and the safeguarded land further to the east. The site is within close proximity to employment opportunities (e.g. Charter Avenue Industrial Estate) and community facilities at Tile Hill and Burton Green. The site is within the green belt but does not meet the 5 purposes of the green belt. There are no physical constraints which would prevent the development of the site. It is available now and the landowners are willing to release it.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70016
Derbyniwyd: 20/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr. Philip Jeary
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Object to proposal: -
- Road infrastructure inadequate and improvements would impact further on green belt
- value of green belt as identified in Framework does not accord with what has been identified in Warwick
- accommodating Coventry's needs by using a site this far distant does not represent sustainable development
- no justification for use of green belt
- believe there is a precedent for assessing green field sites - why has WDC given a low value to best area of green belt
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70020
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Julene Siddique
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The lands proposed for development are currently used for farming/local business. They are also community grounds. This violates environmental conservation of the Warwickshire Green Belt. The proposed development and removal from the green belt is not sound and not in accordance with the democratic will of the Milverton community
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70033
Derbyniwyd: 20/04/2016
Ymatebydd: West Midlands Police
Asiant : Tyler-Parkes Partnership
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
To remove land from the Green Belt at Kings Hill and allocate it primarily for: residential development with the potential for some employment land, land for secondary school provision, primary schools, local centre, community facilities, health centre and new rail station would inevitably have an impact on the level of policing which could be provided without commensurate investment in, and provision of, infrastructure to maintain the quality of service expected.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70041
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Stagecoach
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Heb nodi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Any Park and Ride provision can only be effective if buses are not subject to congestion on the routes into the town centres. Without effective and comprehensive bus advantage, there will be virtually no obvious reason to use the P+R provision at all.
Stagecoach supports the provision of the Park and Ride at North of Milverton (H44)
The optimum location of the facility is something that Stagecoach would want to see examined further.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70072
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Warwickshire County Council [Archaeological Information and Advice]
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The text throughout the planned modifications with reference to educational requirements shows some inconsistencies and these should be amended appropriately (see below).
This will properly identify the need for a secondary school and an additional primary school.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70075
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Warwickshire County Council [Archaeological Information and Advice]
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Ydi
There are inconsistencies within the plan with reference to educational requirements at Kings Hill. These should be rationalised to cater for/ identify a secondary school and primary schools as required.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70108
Derbyniwyd: 16/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr. Charles Mulraine
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Object to H44: -
- exceptional circumstances do not exist to remove land from green belt
- lower value sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference
- WDC should not promote commuting from old Milverton to Coventry
- loss of open space between Kenilworth and Leamington
- park and ride could result in flooding from runoff and is unlikely to be used as there is sufficient parking in Leamington
- A452 already congested - will be worsened by additional traffic
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70112
Derbyniwyd: 05/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr. Philip Parker
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Object to H44: -
- no exceptional circumstances to remove site from green belt
- site too far from Coventry to meet needs
- land available nearer to Coventry that is more suitable
- loss of open space between Leamington and Kenilworth
- loss of farmland
- park and ride unsustainable - sufficient parking available in Leamington
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70119
Derbyniwyd: 16/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mrs Pauline Pemberton
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Development proposed to support Coventry's housing need. Sustainable sites available closer to Coventry that should be used instead of H44 to reduce unnecessary commuting, traffic congestion and expensive road construction to alleviate the latter. People who want to live / work in Coventry unlikely to buy houses in Leamington, which is more expensive than Coventry.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70121
Derbyniwyd: 13/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Ian Salvin
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Not demonstrated that exceptional circumstances exist for removing land from green belt.
Proposal not practical solution for Coventry overspill given distance from Coventry.
Congestion on A452 will blight area
Solutions involving lower grade areas of green belt closer to Coventry should be explored.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70122
Derbyniwyd: 09/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr. Louis Skiffington
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Objects to proposed park and ride: -
-site too close to Leamington
- no dedicated buses
- traffic enters Leamington from the south
- tarmacked surfaces contribute to flooding
- park and rides can amplify problems they are intended to address
- environmental and other impacts e.g. loss of wildlife, habitats, increase in pollution, congestions
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70126
Derbyniwyd: 12/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Dr Alexandra Tansey
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Exceptional circumstances for the removal of this land from the green belt North of Milverton have not been demonstrated. Highly productive land will be lost as well as established wildlife habitats and a green lung between Kenilworth and Leamington. This area is highly valued for recreation. This would lead to commuting to Coventry on already over-congested roads.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70140
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Taylor Wimpey
Asiant : Barton Willmore
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
OLD MILVERTON
Proposed changes to text of policy
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70147
Derbyniwyd: 20/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Maggie Coleman
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Heb nodi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Land is in the green belt and should not be removed.
High scoring area in terms of air pollution. Development will increase problem.
Plenty of brownfield sites closer to Coventry available, to house Coventry people who will otherwise commute to work adding to congestion.
Traffic at a standstill by Old Milverton roundabout at peak times.
Character of county towns would be changed to city conurbations.
Old Milverton will cease to retain its separate identity.
Wildlife and the quality of life of residents of Leamington will be adversely affected
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70151
Derbyniwyd: 21/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Julie Newman
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The land north of Leamington should remain green belt and not be allocated for housing. It is a valuable 'green lung' and provides the necessary separation between Leamington and Kenilworth.
The green belt at this location is of a high value, the land is productive for farming and has high quality habitat/ wildlife .
The area is a recreational resource that is much used by the public and this should be preserved. The park and ride proposal is flawed as it is too close to Leamington.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70169
Derbyniwyd: 22/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr Bruce Paxton
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Exceptional circumstances to remove land north of Milverton from Green Belt not demonstrated.
Sustainable sites closer to Coventry should be used in preference - reduce unnecessary commuting, congestion, road construction.
People who want to live and work in Coventry unlikely to buy houses North of Milverton - proposal will not support Coventry's housing need.
Sites with lower Green Belt value should be used in preference.
Loss of open space between Leamington and Kenilworth
Adverse impact on visual and historic amenity
Loss of farmland and wildlife habitat
Loss of recreational amenity
Proposed park-and-ride scheme unsustainable
Railway station unviable
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70190
Derbyniwyd: 20/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mrs Ann Kelsey
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Object to allocation: -
- inappropriate location to meet Coventry's needs
- exacerbate commuting
- air quality
- sites of lower green belt value available closer to Coventry
- increase housing density / delivery rate at Kings Heath
- reassess Coventry's own sites
- Nuneaton co-operates with overspill provision
- loss of open space between Leamington and Kenilworth
- adverse impact on landscape, character of area, recreational and sporting activity, heritage, wildlife and habitats
- loss of high quality farmland
- railway station unviable
- park and ride unsustainable
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70197
Derbyniwyd: 18/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr J C Clack
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Exceptional circumstance for release of the land north of Milverton from the Green Belt have not been demonstrated. The site is needed to support Coventry's need. There are more appropriate sites closer to Coventry. This site will cause unnecessary commuting, and congestion and road building.
This area provides productive farmland. It also provide important habitats for a range of wildlife and contains mature hedgerows. The open nature of the land also enable water to soak away and restores aquifers.
Housing in this area will exacerbate flood risk and potentially subsequent pollution of watercourses.
Traffic congestion is compounded by problems at Thickthorn A46 junction. Development north of Milverton, combined with development at Thickthorn means this will get worse and not even a dual carriageway will assist. In addition there will be problems for emergency vehicles.
The proposed park and ride would means buses are caught up the gridlock - the park and ride at Stratford has not worked.
There is no requirement for Coventry's residents to move here, so how does the proposal meet Coventry's needs.
the proposed railway station would be costly and track restrictions would mean services are infrequent.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70201
Derbyniwyd: 19/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mrs Jean Seton
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Removal of land north of Milverton from the Green Belt is unsound. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry which have lower green belt value. Leamington will almost be joined to Kenilworth and will undermine the sense of community for both towns. Productive farmland will be lost along with important habitats and an area which is used for recreation. The park and ride scheme will not work as most employment is south of the towns; there is plenty of parking in Leamington, and there will be no dedicated buses.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70209
Derbyniwyd: 14/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr. & Mrs. Douglas & Valerie Burcham
Nifer y bobl: 2
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Object to H44: -
- no evidence of people in Coventry wanting to live in Leamington
- no evidence of demand analysis
- commuting increases congestion
- appropriate sites closer to Coventry
- reuse brownfield sites
- access constrained by congestion on A452, A445; railway
- hard surfaces increase flooding risk
- three alternatives minimise congestion - Thickthorn; between Hatton and A46; north of A46 / SE of A429 junction.
- loss of recreational amenity
- unsustainable park and ride
- "safeguarding" a misnomer; green belt not being preserved
- railway station unfeasible
- lack of detail on sewerage capacity
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70219
Derbyniwyd: 12/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr Graham Cooper
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The green lung between Kenilworth and Leamington will be reduced. This area is enjoyed for recreation which promotes healthy lifestyles. The proposals will damage this pleasant approach to Leamington. Productive farmland will be lost along with important habitats.
The access points on the A452 will create bottlenecks. the proposed railway station will not be viable.as construction would be impracticable.
The proposed park and ride is located too close to Leamington and could then also serve Coventry and Warwick. Further most of the traffic is heading to employment and retail areas south of Warwick and shoppers are unlikely to want to use it as there is plenty of parking in Leamington.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70220
Derbyniwyd: 06/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mr. Michael Chandler
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Exceptional circumstances for the removal of land north of Milverton from the green belt have not been demonstrated. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry which have lower green belt value. Old Milverton Lane is not able to support the extra vehicles. people will not use the park and ride, it will add to congestion and pollution.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70221
Derbyniwyd: 14/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mrs J Bradley
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Site should not be removed from the Green Belt.
It has been assessed as high quality green belt; areas on the outskirts of Coventry are of lesser quality and should be used as an alternative
It is currently in productive agricultural use; this should not be lost if other areas are available.
Site is a much-valued recreational resource and used by a wide range of interests.
It is close to the adjacent Avon Valley (designated Local Wildlife Site) and there are many species of animals and birds that are found here as a consequence.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70222
Derbyniwyd: 17/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Prof. Charlotte Brunsdon
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Heb nodi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The proposed plan (including development at north Leamington) would encourage long distance (unsustainable) commuting levels from Coventry.
There would be a reduction in green belt land and the separation of Leamington and Kenilworth would be eroded if the plan is adopted as proposed.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70224
Derbyniwyd: 18/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Ms. Caroline Cottin
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The exceptional circumstances for the removal of the land north of Leamington have not been proven/ made. The allocation of the land north of Leamington will have a serious negative impact on the quality of Leamington Spa putting too much pressure on existing resources/ services.
The land north of Leamington is high quality agricultural land that is very productive , it's loss will also cause the destruction / loss of valuable habitat.
The land is a very valuable recreational resource that is used by a wide variety of interests, walkers , bird watchers, cyclists etc. The allocation of land for a park and ride is also flawed as it is too close to Leamington Spa, it would not be useful without a dedicated bus service and is not located closely enough to the major employment areas that are south of Leamington Spa.
The development proposal should not go forwards here , alternative sites should be found nearer to Coventry (to best serve Coventry's housing needs).
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70235
Derbyniwyd: 19/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Miss Melanie Astell
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Nac Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
Object to proposals: -
- exceptional circumstances required by NPPF for allocation of green belt have not been demonstrated
- unlikely that people that work in Coventry will want to live in Milverton
- lower value green belt sites closer to Coventry should be used in preference
- promoting commuting from Milverton to Coventry
- increased traffic congestion
- open space between Leamington and Kenilworth will be lost
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70250
Derbyniwyd: 16/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Ms. Margaret Heavey
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Ydi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
The area is a long established wildlife habitat and this, together with farming land would be lost. There are alternative sites closer to Coventry which have a lower green belt value which could be used to be development more conveniently for Coventry residents.
Gwrthwynebu
Proposed Modifications January 2016
ID sylw: 70252
Derbyniwyd: 19/04/2016
Ymatebydd: Mrs. Norma Walker
Cydymffurfio â’r gyfraith? Heb nodi
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
Dyletswydd i gydweithredu? Heb nodi
As development is to cater for Coventry's unmet housing need other, less valuable green belt options should be utilised that are nearer to Coventry.
Contrary to NPPF on use of green belt.
People wanting to live / work in Coventry unlikely to live here.
Loss of recreational amenity.
Loss of productive farmland.
Loss of wildlife habitat.
Unsustainable park and ride scheme