Niobe

Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

Representations on Preferred Options - Do you agree that the Council has identified all reasonable options for Rural Communities?

Representation ID: 33914

OBJECT Kenilworth Town Council (Mr G D Symes)

Summary:

Kings Hill is a grave incursion into the Green Belt and should not be included until development is complete. We are, however, supportive of the decision not to develop in the area between the Town and Coventry and would support the Districts decision not to develop in the area of Burton Green.

Representation ID: 33862

OBJECT Lenco Investments represented by RPS Planning (Paul Hill)

Summary:

Developing at appropriate levels in a highly sustainable village location at Baginton provides the opportunity to develop a mix of housing to meet local needs, secure a high level of affordable housing and greatly assist funding and providing local infrastructure and facilities.

A spatial strategy which allows a proportionate level of housing/employment and local needs growth at such a location, alongside peripheral development around the main towns provides an optimum development strategy.

Representation ID: 33822

SUPPORT Gallagher Estates (Mr David Keyse)

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 33759

SUPPORT Shirley Estates represented by Davis Planning Partnership (Mrs Jill Davis)

Summary:

Local needs only may lead to unbalanced population structure, need to encourage mixed house types.

Representation ID: 33729

SUPPORT Sharba Homes represented by PJPlanning (Graham Parker)

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 33717

OBJECT Mr John Burman represented by Bigwood Associates Ltd (Mr Nigel Gough)

Summary:

There is an opportunity to provide some supportive and appropriate employment provision for key villages and this should be explored, such as Care Villages.

Representation ID: 33613

SUPPORT Warwickshire County Council represented by Savills (L&P) Ltd (Mr Rob Wells)

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 33612

SUPPORT Warwickshire County Council represented by Savills (L&P) Ltd (Mr Rob Wells)

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 7686

OBJECT Ray Bullen

Summary:

Should be more prescriptive with farm diversification. How can rural buildings be re-used for economic purposes, since most are asbestos cement roofed barns.
Could be opportunities for leisure breaks in former mansions similar to Walton Hall. Points out changes occurring in rural communities with rise of cars and dormitory settlements eroding sense of rural community. Have to build on changes. Each community will have different issues but some commonalities. PCs should be encouraged to lead rural community finding ways of providing new facilities at small scale. Inhabitants of dormitory villages are comparatively well off and could be persuaded to support initiatives.

Representation ID: 7660

SUPPORT Mr & Mrs Forrester of Loes Farm, Guys Cliffe represented by Barlow Associates Limited (Mr Nick Barlow)

Summary:

Support, but should be more wide ranging. Employment is often needed in villages, positive policies for the re-use of rural buildings are paramount.

Representation ID: 7551

OBJECT Mr George Jones

Summary:

Object

Representation ID: 7468

OBJECT Hatton Estate represented by RPS Planning (Mr Nick Laister)

Summary:

In paragraph 9.8 it states that it is not possible within the Core Strategy to identify, or plan for, what the local need should be in terms of new development within each of the villages.

Whilst we acknowledge that the District Council needs to work closely with Parish Councils, this should not be at the expense of the requirements set out in PPS7.

As each village has different characteristics, the CS should identify which villages can in principle meet certain important criteria, which needs to be specified in order to provide clear guidance to parish councils.

Representation ID: 7094

OBJECT CPRE Warwickshire (Mr Michael Jeffs)

Summary:

Object to allowing market housing in villages and hamlets, but support policy to provide affordable housing restricted in perpetuity to residents who have grown up in the area. This needs to be rented as market housing in the District's villages will never be 'affordable' in terms of within the price range for lower-income households.

Support policy which positively encourages provision of jobs in rural communities.
Quite possible that as price of fuel rises, it will become less desirable to live in the countryside, and that the value of rural property will decline and therefore become more affordable for local people.

Representation ID: 7055

COMMENT Warwick and Leamington Green Party (Janet Alty)

Summary:

Greater support needed for agricultural industries. Developments must be allowed to stimulate local food economy.
Farmland not merely aesthetic consideration. Farmland is scarce, valuable resource that must be protected for food production. Only allow housing on agricultural land for people who work on land. Restrict change of use of buildings from Agricultural / industrial into residential, and conversion of multiple dwellings into single.
Our rural communities often lack affordable housing, but impossible to impose affordable housing requirement on single developments. Advocates affordable housing levy, based on 10% of development completion value.

Representation ID: 6993

SUPPORT Norton Lindsey Parish Council (Mr ARTHUR FOWKES)

Summary:

Supported, but see comments on affordable housing

Representation ID: 6934

COMMENT Bishops Tachbrook Parish Council (Mrs Simone Bush)

Summary:

Rural Communities
The Preferred Options Paper should be more prescriptive in it‟s dealing with employment and in particular with the diversification of activities undertaken within the farming communities. We wonder how rural buildings can be re-used for economic purposes such as tourism. Since most buildings are asbestos cement roofed barns do we put ramblers and hikers up overnight? But there could be opportunities for one or two nationally marketed leisure breaks in former mansions enlarged to provide attractive leisure facilities, with an imaginative approach to conservation as being the next stage in the life of that building complex similar to Walton Hall and others. It is however too small an initiative to rate being included in the core strategy.

Representation ID: 6864

SUPPORT Binswood Allotment Society (Dennis Bradley)

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 6689

SUPPORT Milverton New Allotments Association Ltd (Mr Stanley Anthony)

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 6437

SUPPORT graham leeke

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 6335

OBJECT John Jessamine

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 6312

OBJECT Mr and Mrs Cheatle

Summary:

Rural communities may not retain their identity if they join up main towns.

Representation ID: 6252

SUPPORT Ross Telford

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 6183

OBJECT John, Elaine and Sarah Lewis

Summary:

Object

Representation ID: 6155

OBJECT Barry & Valerie Sankey and 1 other

Summary:

Development at Kings Hill will be the loss of a rare inroad of rural life and will be an indication to villages that they will soon be swallowed up.

Representation ID: 6133

OBJECT Richard and Judy Swallow and 1 other

Summary:

One cannot know whether the Council has identified all reasonable options or indeed whether any of those are identified are reasonable options.

Representation ID: 6067

OBJECT Mr Stephen Skidmore

Summary:

I'm sure there are pockets of land around rural areas to be used which will offload some of the houses.

Representation ID: 6026

SUPPORT Paul Skidmore

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 5991

OBJECT Debbie Harris

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 5911

OBJECT Mr Alan Roberts

Summary:

Its a fallacy that to build more will keep facilities, since the last ware more development occured but commercial has declined.

Representation ID: 5886

OBJECT Mr and Mrs C G Price

Summary:

Object

Representation ID: 5843

SUPPORT Pamela Payne

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 5759

SUPPORT Philip Wilson

Summary:

Allotment land provides a sustainable cohesion in rural areas and binds the fabric of the local communities to work together for the common good (as has been the case since feudal times). It is important to maintain the need to keep allotment land available around villages and not let them become expensive housing estates. While at the same time maintaining the rural space between rural and urban communities

Representation ID: 5696

SUPPORT Roger Warren

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 5650

SUPPORT Jane Boynton

Summary:

Provided that infrastructure is enhanced to support expanded rural communities

Representation ID: 5616

OBJECT Val Pestell

Summary:

The effect of all these new homes in one place will also have a large inpact on village life and will not enhance the community. Again in your own statement regarding to these plans you state you are trying to enhance the quality of village life.

Representation ID: 5575

SUPPORT George Martin

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 5519

SUPPORT Mr and Mrs G Morgan and 1 other

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 5436

OBJECT Mike Cheeseman

Summary:

The Core Strategy recognizes the need to provide for "office/Hi-Tech R&D/Light Manufacturing adjacent to housing. The Strategy could promote/support such activity in rural communities.

Representation ID: 5387

SUPPORT John Baxter

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 5336

OBJECT SEAN DEELY

Summary:

The core strategy should be more prescriptive in it's dealing with employment and in particular with the diversification of activities undertaken within the farming communities.

Representation ID: 5282

SUPPORT J. N. Price

Summary:

The Council has recognised that some of the District's smaller villages and hamlets have already lost many of their services and therefore no longer offer the necessary range of community facilities, local access to jobs or key services. The option of not allowing any further housing in those settlements would only exacerbate the problems, resulting in the ultimate extinction of these communities, not
least by denying such villages and hamlets the opportunity for regeneration through proposals for development of new facilities, linked with additional housing.

Representation ID: 5199

OBJECT Sonia Owczarek

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 5172

OBJECT Lindsay Wood

Summary:

As I've said before - keep greenbelt green

Representation ID: 5125

OBJECT Mr Barry Betts

Summary:

Some rural communities do need better communications, so a spreading of development, rather than a concentration (bottleneck) would make more sense.

Representation ID: 5042

SUPPORT Michael Morris

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 4932

SUPPORT Mr Graham Harrison

Summary:

Qualified support - The preferred option perhaps expresses the ideal objective , but does it give sufficient recognition to the practicalities of delivery bearing in mind the economics of smaller numbers of smaller-sized houses?

Representation ID: 4931

SUPPORT Mr Graham Harrison

Summary:

Qualified YES - The rural parts of the District receive scant consideration. It is a pity that the opportunity has not been taken to develop and enhance the symbiotic relationship relationship between the rural and urban areas to give the Strategy greater synergy.

Representation ID: 4863

SUPPORT Vera Leeke

Summary:


Support.

Representation ID: 4665

SUPPORT V Gill Peppitt

Summary:

Continue to work with Rural parishes.

Representation ID: 4591

SUPPORT Mr S Morris

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 4528

SUPPORT Southern Windy Arbour Area Residents' Association (Mr Adrian Pauling)

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 4527

SUPPORT Southern Windy Arbour Area Residents' Association (Mr Adrian Pauling)

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 4364

SUPPORT A Picken

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 4246

OBJECT Kulwinder Fathers

Summary:

More employment land should be allocated to rural areas, other than the over developed areas of Bishops Tachcbrook, Heathcote and Whitnash. More affordable housing will encourage changes in the demographics and help rural communities, schools & services to be sustained.

Representation ID: 4196

OBJECT Onkar Mann

Summary:

More employment land should be allocated to rural areas, other than Bishops tachcbrook, Heathcote and Whitnash. Additional affordable housing should encourage a change in the demographics and help to ensure that rural communities, schools & services are sustained

Representation ID: 4174

SUPPORT Warwickshire Rural Community Council (Linda Ridgley)

Summary:

WRCC supports the proposed measures to maintain the sustainability of the rural areas, provided this is framed in an exception policy to retain control over unsuitable developments

Representation ID: 4040

COMMENT Mrs Diana Sellwood

Summary:

there is a need to include leisure and play facilities available within villages.

Representation ID: 4037

SUPPORT Ms Angela Clarke

Summary:

Yes.

Representation ID: 3970

OBJECT Mr Kim Matthews

Summary:

Insufficient thought has been given to development of rural areas to make villages more sustainable communities. For example development between Kenilworth and Leek Wootton would have a number of advantages: providing a larger customer base to make provision of facilities/retail in Leek Wootton; the area has ready access to the A46 and Kenilworth town centre; the development could incorporate a cycle path from from Leek Woootton to Kenilworth encouraging sustainable transport.

Representation ID: 3932

SUPPORT Andrea Telford

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 3868

OBJECT Patricia Diane Freeman

Summary:

have you considered all implications involved: - Traffic, schools, few shops in Green Lane, doctors surgery, dentists, post office, libraries etc.

Representation ID: 3863

OBJECT Debbie Wiggins

Summary:

No the council has not considered the correlation between developing urban and villages together. There has to be a strategy that ensures the approach supports urban and villages. The council needs to talk to CABE and check out their advice on sustainable cities as well as looking at the historical development of it's villages. Too many restrictions seem to be the problem across the board. You don't seem to have consulted your various parish councils with your strategy - why not?

Representation ID: 3698

SUPPORT Mr Richard Brookes

Summary:

Yes

Representation ID: 3664

SUPPORT Mr Stephen Keay

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 3644

SUPPORT Mr Dennis Michael Crips

Summary:

support

Representation ID: 3604

COMMENT Sport England (Mr Bob Sharples)

Summary:

The re-use of buildings and land should also be considored for uses in connection with traditional and exterme sports

Representation ID: 3564

OBJECT Mr Owen

Summary:

object

Representation ID: 3394

SUPPORT Mrs M Kane

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 3266

OBJECT Mr David John Bowers

Summary:

People who live in these rural areas because it is
a nice place to live, and take on board that you
need a car, have no local shops. Yes house prices
have risen because of this.

Representation ID: 3225

SUPPORT mrs stella moore

Summary:

balance between affordable housing/ limited housing growth transport links is all there

Representation ID: 3224

SUPPORT mrs stella moore

Summary:

balance of limited housing development, job creation and support for diversification/affordable housing are all there

Representation ID: 3158

OBJECT Mr R.C Hadfield

Summary:

No Green field sites should be developed before all brown field sites have been fully identified and regenerated.

Representation ID: 3146

SUPPORT John Murphy

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 3082

SUPPORT Mr Anthony Morris

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 3020

OBJECT Bill McCutchon

Summary:

The amount of unnecessary pain this will inflict on the local population with no identifiable gain for them and the loss of the opportunity which should be taken to spread the requirement for housing over a wider area to include the sensible development of rural communities, many of which are finding it difficult to survive as communities witnessed by the closure of schools, local shops, post offices, public houses etc.

Representation ID: 2978

OBJECT Mrs and Mr J Parr and Cotterill

Summary:

Stopp ripping the heart out of rural villages lives

Representation ID: 2927

SUPPORT Barford, Sherbourne and Wasperton Joint Parish Council (Mr John MURPHY)

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 2871

OBJECT Susan Butcher

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 2832

OBJECT Mr Robert Butcher

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 2791

OBJECT Mrs Sheila F. Hadfield

Summary:

There should be no development on green field sites at all.

Representation ID: 2740

SUPPORT Pauline Neale

Summary:

Villages should be allowed to develop in their own way subject to local consultation and not have new housing / employmen units bolted on to encroach on surrounding countryside.

Representation ID: 2706

SUPPORT Mr Terence Kemp

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 2678

SUPPORT Mrs Margaret Devitt

Summary:

Yes.

Representation ID: 2617

SUPPORT John Arnold

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 2555

SUPPORT Mr R.A and Mrs B.E Donaldson and 1 other

Summary:

Emphasis should be placed on support, i.e. transport, retail and service needs to underpin existing communities.

Representation ID: 2492

COMMENT British Waterways (Chrisine Hemming)

Summary:

British waterways prefer the options, which would encourage the use, improvement and access to the canal corridor. This includes redevelopment immediately adjacent to the waterway corridor utilising the canal infrastructure to meet Warwick District's development requirements.
Radford Semele, Hatton and Kingswood are close to the Grand Union Canal, North Stratford Canal and South Stratford Canal hence its inclusion within the list.

Representation ID: 2431

OBJECT Mr Connolly

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 2392

OBJECT Roy Standley

Summary:

No.

Representation ID: 2316

OBJECT S B Hoyles

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 2169

COMMENT Mr and Mrs Barrie and Margaret Hayles

Summary:

More emphasis needs to be placed on the identified need to consult with residents and their elected representatives at local level.

Representation ID: 2052

OBJECT mr john jacques

Summary:

no because it has gone about the currnet study without properly consulting those affected

Representation ID: 1915

OBJECT Mr Ed Rycroft

Summary:

Again the council is making a top-down decision that will effect all the villages. Rural communities should be the ones that decide what is best for them and be impowered to act on those local needs with the the support not the rule from local government...after all the local residents pay your wages so are entitled to the help they decide they need. There are more options than you have put forward.

Representation ID: 1838

OBJECT Mrs Helen Cheatham

Summary:

Not enough known about it. Not enough information in the public domain.

Representation ID: 1816

SUPPORT Val Hunnisett

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 1786

OBJECT Max Bacon

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 1729

OBJECT Mr and Mrs D zacaroni

Summary:

Object

Representation ID: 1681

OBJECT J.G Whetstone

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 1629

OBJECT William Bethell

Summary:

See comment above re New Town or expansion to otherwise isolated villages with reasonable access to major road systems.

Representation ID: 1564

SUPPORT B.L.A.S.T. (Mr Geoff Southgate)

Summary:

9a Allotment land provides a sustainable cohesion in rural areas and binds the fabric of the local communities to work together for the common good (as has been the case since feudal times). It is important to maintain the need to keep allotment land available around villages and not let them become expensive housing estates. While at the same time maintaining the rural space between rural and urban communities

Representation ID: 1548

COMMENT Mr and Mrs David and Heather Hall

Summary:

A rural communities policy should be flexible to enable schemes to be developed both within and on the edge of rural settlements to enable the villages to be grown to sizes viable to support the services required by their communities.

Representation ID: 1512

COMMENT Mr Nigel Hamilton

Summary:

Support rural pubs.

Use them to provide lunchtime meals for village schools and lunch clubs for the elderly.

Endorse the "pub is the hub" campaign.

Look to give rate incentives for pubs offering wider services such as community meeting rooms, school meals, running a shop/ post office form the premises.

Improve rural transport- investigate creating shared mini bus taxibus routes, introduce post bus services, more frequent bus services.

Representation ID: 1441

OBJECT Mrs Larraine Curzon

Summary:

In the context of the proposed housing at Warwick Gates - How does the plan fulfil the comment under Rural Communities that 'This preferred option has a positive outcome in terms of economic and social effects, such as increasing prosperity, reducing the need to travel..'

Representation ID: 1367

SUPPORT Guide Dogs for the Blind Association represented by DNS Planning and Design Consultants (Mr Dan Drayton)

Summary:

Yes

Representation ID: 1233

COMMENT Andrew Horsley

Summary:

No-
9.14 You cannot expect people not to travel. Unless schools, health, shops, employment are all facilities in each village of course people will have to travel!

Representation ID: 1176

SUPPORT Barry Elliman

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 1154

OBJECT Alice Jarrett

Summary:

In words it is identified but in conclustion it appears that the approach is insufficiently positive towards making village development happening.

Representation ID: 1093

SUPPORT Mr and Mrs T Robinson

Summary:

Support

Representation ID: 1074

SUPPORT Mrs Pamela Beedham

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 993

SUPPORT Cllr Tim Sawdon

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 974

OBJECT Kirit Marvania

Summary:

Dont believe building on large amounts of Green Belt is reasonable.

Representation ID: 908

SUPPORT Christine Betts

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 844

OBJECT Adrian Farmer

Summary:

Leave the rural communities as they are

Representation ID: 776

SUPPORT Faye Davis

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 743

OBJECT West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium represented by Tetlow King Planning (Meghan Rossiter)

Summary:

Paragraph 9.8 is not supported as these go against PPS3 advice in paragraph 30.
The Council should, therefore, go further than encouraging Parish Councils to carry out research, and seek to include within the Core Strategy and evidence base information regarding local needs. In doing so, evidence would point to those areas of greatest need and allow the Council to set out a robust policy on rural exceptions sites to allow for 100% affordable housing provision. This would strengthen the Core Strategy and further assert the Council's commitment to contributing to the vitality of rural communities through affordable housing provision.

Representation ID: 705

SUPPORT P.A. Yarwood

Summary:

Yes.

Representation ID: 615

OBJECT Mr G.R. Summers

Summary:

Object.

Representation ID: 552

SUPPORT Mr A M Webley

Summary:

Support.

Representation ID: 482

SUPPORT Georgina Wilson

Summary:

Some system of actively helping village communities to maintain or re-open shops / post offices etc would be helpful.

Representation ID: 431

SUPPORT Peter Clarke

Summary:

Yes.

Representation ID: 353

OBJECT Peter Pounds

Summary:

No.

Representation ID: 326

COMMENT Mr and Mrs D Bolam

Summary:

Rural communities difficulties identified.

Representation ID: 258

OBJECT Patricia Robinson

Summary:

Injecting new housing into rural areas but result in viable school numbers, demand for local shops.

Representation ID: 209

OBJECT Mrs Caroline Baxter

Summary:

No.

Representation ID: 148

OBJECT R Clipson

Summary:

You should not be supporting 'market housing' in most villages. This leads to higher income families mostly commuting into towns to work or even taking the car to the station and commuting to London or Birmingham. They shop at an out of town shopping centre and do not support village life.
They also force up the price of local housing and the young people cannot afford to stay in the village.
We must support affordable housing to get life back into the villages and support local shops, pubs and other services.

Representation ID: 121

OBJECT R A Chapleo

Summary:

No - I think this is apolitical resonse. Rural communities IN THIS DISTRICT require no strengthening.

Representation ID: 101

SUPPORT Mrs Zita Lowe

Summary:

I think the Council has identified the pitfalls involved in this plan

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult