I write in response to the consultation exercise for the Revised Development Strategy for the emerging Warwick District Local Plan published in June 2013 ("the Revised Development Strategy").

Warwick District Council ("the Council") has a very difficult task providing new growth whilst balancing environmental, planning and other objectives. The Local Plan must be based on sound principles and robust evidence.

I do not wish to challenge the number of new houses included in the Revised Development Strategy which I understand has been estimated in accordance with guidance issued by the coalition Government. If the Local Plan contains too few houses there is a risk that it will be found unsafe at Public Enquiry. I simply ask the Council to keep the housing requirement to a minimum.

A Joint Strategic Housing Needs Analysis is being performed with Coventry City Council. Should this review identify that it is necessary to increase the housing numbers above those included in the Revised Development Strategy, I believe that there is sufficient non Green Belt land to accommodate this additional development.

I am pleased that the Council has recognised that the Exceptional Circumstances to develop the Green Belt to the North of Leamington do not exist and that as a consequence the risks of the Local Plan being found unsound at public enquiry are reduced.

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.

New development should be concentrated where there are existing employment opportunities and infrastructure to support the development. It is essential for new development to be properly planned and controlled, and for there to be adequate investment in new roads and other infrastructure to support that development.

The Revised Development Strategy proposes that a substantial proportion of the new 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 & their quality of life. Furthermore there is almost unlimited green space to the south of Leamington where the nearest town is Banbury.

The Revised Development Strategy provides a similar number of new houses for the District as the "Preferred Options" published last year. Importantly it removes the proposal to build 2000 houses on the North Leamington Green Belt and, through the better use of Brownfield sites, results in only 325 further houses on Greenfield land South of Leamington

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 improvements 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.

The Revised Development Strategy has a fair distribution of new housing across the District. 16% 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.

Although cycleways are mentioned in each phase of the Revised Development Strategy, detail is lacking for such a key proposal for components of traffic
management, environmental improvement and recreation. The cycle ways need linking together and cycleways to larger places of Work and Educational institutions ought to be detailed and feature prominently.

The proposed development South of Leamington includes a new country park. If the country park is sited next to the existing houses with new housing beyond it, the result would be to make the park more accessible, reduce the impact of further development on the existing houses; it could be crossed by cycle-ways and would act as a green-lung to reduce air pollution.

For the reasons set out above, with the exception of the sighting of the country parks and improvements to the cycleways, I support the Revised Development Strategy.