I wish to object most strongly to the proposals in the new local plan to develop green belt land to the north of Leamington. The whole point of the green belt is to retain open land, and prevent urban sprawl and the merging of adjacent built up communities. Visitors from the USA have often commented to me how brilliant it is that we have designated green belt areas, which preserve the countryside from destruction and prevent the wholescale urban sprawl found in many parts of their country. If this planned development goes ahead, not only will it destroy a significant area of open countryside, it will bring the built up areas of Leamington and Kenilworth very close together. This will, in future years, make it harder to defend the green belt which remains, and will inevitably lead to Leamington and Warwick becoming merged with Kenilworth, and via Kenilworth with Coventry in one vast conurbation. The ultimate fate of Warwick District, then, would be to be absorbed into the city of Coventry, as many parts of the county already have (and as, for instance, Sutton Coldfield was absorbed into the City of Birmingham in 1974). I am sure this is not something which local residents or councillors wish to see happen.

I like the suggestion in the local plan of designing 'garden' areas where development occurs, but it seems to me pointless to go to this trouble while at the same time destroying beautiful countryside we already have to enjoy.

I would also like to see more joined up thinking in local planning desisions. It is obvious that our shopping habits have changed and as a result we are seeing pressure on local shops and town centres. This needs to be acknowledged in the local plan - we may not have enough houses but we certainly have too many shops. While I applaud the council's decision to allow no more out of town retail developments, it seems that permission is still being given for supermarket developments in redundant commercial premises which could have been used for housing, and which then have a detrimental effect on existing shops. Two examples are the Lidl on Myton Road which was formerly a garden centre, and which would have made a good quality canalside housing development, and now the enormous Morrisons on the Ford site, which could have been a really attractive, all residential, area. Yet, despite these additions, more supermarkets are still being proposed, for instance on the site of the Oak Inn on Radford Road, and the Total garage on Rugby Road, both of which could be used for housing. All that will happen is that existing businesses will be affected, after all, how many supermarkets can one town possibly need??!

So please:

a) No development of the green belt
b) No more supermarkets
c) All redundant commercial or retail premises to be considered for housing development before any other use.