BASE HEADER

I am writing largely in support of the New Proposed Local Plan.

I believe this strategy will have positive impacts on the provision and scope of housing needs in the area and goes much further to improving sustainable transport links, particularly in improving cycle routes across the area. These (particularly on the A452) will have a positive impact on use of sustainable transport but also on the flow of traffic on the road.

I am concerned at the designation of the Village of Old Milverton and have responded to this on-line. It should be considered as a smaller village rather than a smaller feeder village - it is smaller than villages in it's current classification in every respect. Over expansion of it's footprint or housing/commercial density would have an unnecessarily detrimental effect on the purpose and provision of the green-belt in that area.

The Revised Development Strategy correctly recognises that the exceptional circumstances necessary for a major development in the North Leamington Green Belt do not exist. It is vital to preserve the limited green space between Leamington and Kenilworth. Otherwise there is a real risk Leamington and Warwick will merge with the West Midlands Conurbation. Furthermore there is almost unlimited green space to the south of Leamington where the nearest town is Banbury

WDC is to be congratulated for preparing a Revised Development Strategy which, whilst providing a similar number of new houses for the District, removes the proposal to build 2000 houses on the North Leamington Green Belt and, through the better use of Brownfield sites, and results in only 325 further houses on Greenfield land South of Leamington.

The Revised Development Strategy has a fair distribution of new housing across the District. 17% of the new houses will be in the Green Belt North of Leamington, at Thickthorn and Lillington. 15% of the proposed development will be in Warwickshire Villages. It is important to recognise the need for appropriate development in these villages, particularly in infrastructure terms (Gas, broadband, foot, bus and cycle routes for example). They should neither be destroyed in character, changed in nature by virtue of over expansion nor left behind as quaint examples of 'the way things used to be.'

It's important that most of the development is located close to where there are employment opportunities (to the South of Leamington & Warwick) providing an opportunity for people to live close to their place of work, reducing or eliminating commuting for many people, with a consequential positive impact on the environment, public safety & their quality of life. The location of the focus of development to the south also grants easy access to national transport links which will undoubtedly draw national business into the area.

The prospect of access to a good local workforce will help to encourage more businesses to set up & relocate to the area, helping to generate more jobs & prosperity for the local community.

The Revised Development Strategy provides for improvement to the road network South of Leamington to relieve the existing congestion and to cater for the new development. It is important that these road improvements are carried out as part of a coordinated plan. Traffic surveys show that road improvements can cope with the planned new development and that locating the majority of the development South of Leamington will reduce traffic movements, ease congestion and reduce pollution.

The Revised Development Strategy provides for the necessary schools and other infra-structure to support the new development.
I believe that the new proposals represent a well considered approach to an unpopular problem. Objections I have raised are few and meant to contribute further to improving what is already becoming a positive way forward for the area.