Do you support or object to the development of Land at Campion School/south of Sydenham?

Having studied all the sites, I think this one offers the best choice for development with the least disruption for existing residents, the possibility of improved schools and resources and the least invasive into green belt land.

Thank you for asking B.L.A.S.T. to comment on the latest Core Strategy Options Consultation dated 3rd February 2010.
B.L.A.S.T. (Bringing Leamington Allotment Societies Together) represents several allotment societies in and around Leamington who decided to join forces and oppose any plans to build on allotment land and to seek new land for future allotment use. The group have over 700 members producing fresh and wholesome food for nearly 3000 people, we also have a combined waiting list of over 200 people, enough to fill a good size allotment today if one were available in the near future. B.L.A.S.T. has already presented to the Council a document entitled 'Time to Grow More', a proposal for possible new allotment sites around Leamington Spa. We expect to discuss this further in April 2010 when Cultural Services have carried out their 'Greenspace Review'. This would, of course, be in light of any findings or decisions concluded during this Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation.
The B.L.A.S.T. view of Leamington 'green spaces' is to see them as potential sites for allotments and growing fruit and vegetables, whether it's on Warwick District land unsuitable for building or allocated for any other specific use or in this case land where potential housing development could take place.
B.L.A.S.T. believe and made this point to the full WDC meeting last year that all future 'new' housing development over a minimum size should make provision for people to grow fruit and vegetables by making sure the plans approved allow for gardens or an area suitable for collective growing that is part of the development. If the site is large enough, eg 100 houses, then an area for 25 allotment plots should be considered (an NSALG plot size is 30 x 10 yards).
This view would certainly be relevant regarding Glebe Farm, Loes Farm, Hurst Farm, and land at Campion School. Regarding the financing of this, it would come from the developer and be seen as an integral part of the development to the benefit of the future home owners health and self sufficiency. This new allotment area could link with its nearest existing allotment society to act as a guide and support until well established. This land could come under the control of the Council like many other allotment societies around Leamington.
Along with future allotment provision B.L.A.S.T. strongly support protection of existing allotment land and where relevant neighbouring Green Belt land. We notice most of these sites in this consultation are on Green Belt land as illustrated on your map page 10 in the Option for Growth leaflet dated May 2008. Green Belt land that can and is being used for growing should be the last place for building. Britain needs to use its food producing land as effectively as possible to provide for our present and future needs. As imports from overseas with carbon miles become more expensive in the changing climate and with Third World food demand increasing, self sufficiency and building on food producing land do not go together.
Growing land on Green Belt around Leamington and Warwick with its well established trees and hedges is part of the lungs of Leamington that give the town breathing space while also giving a home to local wildlife, flora and fauna, including the protected Crested Newt. Green Belt land also allows local people to exercise, socialise and grow their own food, lead a healthy lifestyle and help reduce Leamington's carbon footprint. 'Green Belt NOT Red Brick' 'Cabbage Patches NOT Semi-Detaches' as we said on our last campaign march

My house has beautiful rear views of country-side which I would like not to lose. Not to mention the impact development would have on the wildlife and nature. I also have fears that the surrounding areas, roads, primary schools and other resources will struggle with more development.

The local area could not support another housing development. The area should be left alone.

So many areas of greenery have been spoilt by over-development. It is an unnecessary project.

Questionnaire Response:
I object to the above development because we live in wonderful location, with beautiful views of the fields and wildlife on our doorstep. The children can play safely in our lovely quiet cul-de-sac. The perfect situation you would agree.

How horrified are we at the plans to ruin our perfect surroundings, by building thousands of houses on our doorstep and turning our cul-de-sac in to a main road in to the new houses.

The poor wildlife, roads and environment would suffer immensely putting strain on the local schools and Doctors surgery. My poor children would no longer be safe to play outside in the street - how sad for them to grow up on a building site.

We bought our house because of its location and views over the fields how awful to then look out over row upon row of houses.

Questionnaire Response:
Part of the intrinsic qualities of Lillington and Cubbington is that it borders with the local countryside. This has natural benefits in terms of health and well being for residents of all ages. The further encroachment into the countryside which should be protected is would have negative affects on the residents and possibly residents within other parts of North Leamington, by distancing them further and perhaps limiting their ability or opportunity to benefit experiences such observing nature and walks into the countryside. This would potentially impact on the peacefulness that can be observed in Cubbington and I wonder how the council would envisage protecting these qualities and opportunities for its local residents and how would it protect the local wildlife?

I worry for the basic infrastructure of the area also. More residents and housing means more cars and traffic. The mini roundabout at the top of Windmill hill can already cause minor tail backs at
rush hour, mornings particularly and I believe this to be true for the road leading into Leamington
from Radford Semele into Leamington Spa which can get very busy/ congested. This is a route that I imagine residents in the new housing might also take, if exited via Off Church. How do you plan to support the increased traffic and relieve us from any potential congestion, irrespective of the route that we take?

In addition, what are you plans to cope for additional services that would be required in terms of housing and health provision? For example, I am only aware of one GP practice in the area on the Cubbington Road.

I can not see why the district council should allow a development on a flood plain which does not have an access without knocking down a perfectly good school. The site is of archaeology interest to the town of Whitnash. The Transport infrastructure will make the area of Golf Lane/Fieldgate Lane a no go area during the school runs both ways
The foul water problem in Home Farm Crescent due to the lack of water run-off to the Whitnash Brook which will be made worse if the area is built on.Thank you

I would support partial development of this site as far south as the footpath that crosses the site from west to east. I would support a more extensive developement of this land if linked to a new school and the provision of a new Leamington Parkway station.

Questionnaire Response:
As a resident of Fieldgate Lane, I am very concerned about the increased amount of traffic this would bring into Golf Lane and Fieldgate Lane, especially around school hours for
Dropping off and picking up of children, this already caused problems in Whitnash outside its existing schools. Fieldgate Lane could not cope with parents "dropping off" their children
As there is no turning point down here, it is a dead end.

Also I am concerned about the increased flood risk the extra houses would bring to this area, we already pay higher insurances due to the flood risk and all this could do is make it worse.

Although you propose a new school for secondary aged children, where do you propose the junior and infant aged children will go to. Whitnash schools are already over subscribed, not able
To accommodate the whitnash children now. Warwick gates was promised a new school, and that never happened the extra volume of children on this estate has already caused problems in the local schools.

ROAD ACCESS - it seems that access to this site will be via busy roads on existing housing estates. This cannot be acceptable as it will add to congestion and safety hazards.
NEW SCHOOL ACCESS - Along roads through a busy housing estate.
PEDESTRIAN/CYCLE ACCESS THROUGH FIELDGATE LANE BRIDGE - Will almost certainly encourage many cars to Fieldgate Lane (to drop students off) through an area which is already heavily used by school traffic (Golf Lane / Coppice Road etc).This is already a hazard.
FLOODING POTENTIAL - Fieldgate Lane is in a valley. The drainage channel in Fieldgate Lane already takes drainage from the adjacent field / Golf Course / Golf Lane Bridle Path / surrounding streets and is at its limit at times of heavy rainfall. The water is often fast flowing and reaches within inches of the top of the channel. The council already have to regularly clean it out to maintain flow. This channel passes under the railway line through a pipe and drains into the area of the proposed new school. I have already had house insurance refused due to the perceived flood risk. I feel that any development on the east side of the railway line will make this situation worse as this is already a flood plain.

I have been appalled to learn that plans are being considered to build yet more houses in Whitnash; once again on valuable "Green Belt" land, which in this particular case, is an area of historic interest, being the site of a former iron-age settlement, Regia Via the old Roman road and a historic Templar well; as well as being a wildlife habitat. I feel that Whitnash has already suffered a great deal from the never-ending development by greedy construction companies, land-owners and developers over the past two decades and roads, Health Centres, Dentists and schools are already at bursting point with rush hour grid-lock around the town.

We have almost lost the separation between our lovely town and Radford; this development will spoil yet another area of natural beauty that can never be replaced. In my humble view I consider this proposal to be completely unacceptable and amounts to state vandalism, as quite clearly there are those within Leamington, who are strongly behind the plan because of their own vested interests.

I would like to register my protest in the strongest possible terms that this plan to devastate one of the few remaining areas around our town of true natural beauty should not be permitted to go ahead.

Yes I support the development.

I support the development of campion school.

Questionnaire Response:
Royal Leamington Spa Town Council supports Alternative Site 2 being included in Warwick District Council's Core Strategy for th following reasons
1. complete rebuild of Campion School is to be welcomed. The School is doing a first class job in improving the life prospects in the area. It is unlikely the Building Schools for the Future Programme would include Campion for at least ten years. A new state‐of-the art School with the latest facilities would aid significantly the good work already being done.

2.The relocation of the School half a mile to the south still leaves it within easy walking distance of Sydenham and Brunswick.

3.The new School would be an improved community resource with sports facilities and other meeting rooms.

4.Access to the development would be from the roundabout at the top of Sydenham Drive. There is no suggestion of a southern link road as speculated in some quarters.

5.Being the other side of the railway cutting, it would have little impact on the adjacent housing in Brunswick and Whitnash. However, the existing farm road bridges would give pedestrian and cycle access.


6.The development would not be in sight, as far as we can see, of Radford Semele.


7.The Whitnash Brook Valley is proposed to be maintained with a nature trail and cycle route and will form a definite barrier to urther development.


8.There may be some legitimate concern about the impact on road capacity on the Prospect Road route and the Sydenham Drive/ Radford Road junction.


9. In conclusion, this site would have less impact in the exisiting community than other sites and should be supported.

Questionnaire Response:
I was a pupil at this school. All the staff and teachers worked extremely hard to provide me with a decent education. I progressed to university and qualified as an accountant and certified auditor. This school and the local community in the surrounding area would greatly benefit from the development.

Questionnaire Response:
No Comments

STRONGLY OBJECT! Clearly a step too far for development in Whitnash area (hence AC Lloyd's sweetener in rebuilding a perfectly good school).

The Golf Lane/Fieldgate Lane areas could not withstand the additional traffic, especially around peak school-run times.

Focus on options offering appropriate/affordable housing nearer areas that desperately need investment/ regeneration.Brownfield sites should be priority.

Afford Greenbelt land protection as intended and encourage children to covet local heritage and nature-not eliminate it on their behalf.

Limited employment prospects available particularly for manually skilled workers.

Whitnash schools - B/Hill and St.Margarets are oversubscribed and little consideration given for provision of medical services.

Questionnaire Response
Site 2: Support - This area is already being developed and the proposed idea of a new building for Campion School could mean a bigger school to take the extra numbers resulting from the extra development.
Site 3: Object - This is green belt land and splits Cubbington from Leamington Spa making Cubbington a village. This land is heavy clay subsoil and would worsen the existing village flooding problems.
Local schools can not cope with this scale of development and there are already problems with cars blocking roads and driveways at the start and end of school.
The roundabout at the top of Windmill Hill already has a high number of accidents and further traffic would make it even more dangerous for drivers and pedestrians and particularly children.
We bought our house in Cubbington because it was a village location with footpaths and lovely fields full of wildlife on the doorstep. More development would completely ruin village life.
I strongly object to this proposed development at Glebe Farm.

From the drawings I have seen there seems to be 2 major concerns.
1. Volume of traffic.
The parcel of land Site L10. This seems to indicate that access for this development will be St Fremund Way.
If planning is given to this area there will be upwards of 200 houses with the potential of a minimum of 200 cars.
St Fremund Way has not been built to carry this amount of traffic and already the parking makes it extremely dangerous.
In addition road out of the estate Chesterton Drive is similarly not built to carry this volume of traffic.
The wider plan involving the release of further land for housing and then a school is a funnel. Although there is a plan to build a road running parallel to the railway line this will end at the roundabout at the junction of Sydenham Road and Chesterton Drive.
One can only imagine the bottleneck this volume of traffic will cause. Bearing in mind the number of houses and that a large number of parents who now drop off and pick up their children at school by car.
This will lead to rat runs when people look to avoid the problems, causing even greater problems on St Fremund Way and Chesterton Drive.
2. A C Lloyd Capacity
In looking at the plans there are over 1000 proposed houses. To my knowledge this is outside the capcity of this local builder within a reasonable time frame. I understand that in fact they have been told by the council that they have 12 months to finish the existing development at Millpool Meadow, since they have been at it for over 10 years and people who have bought houses at the begining have endured 10 years of building works.
One must then ask that in fact is this a speculative move by a company that has recently made a large number of its staff redundant, by gaining planning permission for a lucrative site (throwing in a new school) and then selling it on to another developer?

In addition Although I am not an expert the school looks as if it is to be built on flood plain. Have we not learnt our lessons on flooding?
Safety, whilst I'm sure there will be substantial efforts to secure the railway line so that children do not have access, is building a school near such danger a really an option?

Question
I would also like to know what type of housing will be anticipated for this proposed development, since from what I've seen of how these builders operate they apply for one thing and then change their mind at different phases. Hence the number of flats that appeared in the Millpool Meadows development.

Vehicular parking. The current off road parking provided on the Millpool Meadow development is wholly inadequate for the number of cars being used. This leads to cars being parked all over the roads and passing extremely difficult. Bearing in mind that we are supposed to learn lessons from existing developments what plans would be put into place to stop this in the new development.

The proposed extension of the AC Lloyd housing estate would ruin the current well balanced residential area. The current development has provided a good sized estate where people have moved specifically to take advantage of a quiet area, close enough to town yet also on the door step to a nature reserve. The new plans will remove the current nature reserve close to residence and only allow access to one near the school, it will increase flow of traffic which vastly alters the estate for residences, and it will also oblitorate the outlook sold as country side views at Parish End.
I believe brown field sites should be build on first as a priority, and current O/S routes preserved. There are other proposals which could keep areas of green land rather than oblitorate an entire area.

I object to the development of land due to the lack of schools, hospitals etc. Also I was always led to believe that this was 'Green Belt'. Does this not exist anymore - our countryside is fast disappearing. WE DO NOT NEED THIS EXTRA BUILDING.

As a resident of Fieldgate Lane, my concerns are that Golf Lane and Fieldgate Lane are wholly unsuitable for the increased amount of traffic this scheme will cause. Also we already pay increased house insurance due to the area being classed as high flood risk, what will building on the farm land do to this risk?

In general terms I must protest at the continued housing development being made in the county. Despite understanding the need for housing stock I feel that Warwickshire and Warwick District in particular has already shouldered its fair share. I applaud the councils continued use of brown field sites but feel that with ever increasing targets the threat to green field sites is now intolerable. I object to all the current proposals in this consulation feeling that sites such as old factories on Montague Road, the empty properties at the Potterton Site, the still uncompleted Chase Meadows and the Ford Foundry site offer potential for development without the loss of green fields.

In particular I would like to oppose the development of Loes Farm on the following grounds:

AESTHETICS: The Coventry Road approach to Warwick is one of the best approaches to the town, benefiting from rolling fields and an historic landscape that sets the tone for the town. Many other approaches are conurbated lending a feeling that Warwick is nothing more than an average built up area.

INFRASTRUCTURE: Housing at Loes Farm would increase traffic on the Coventry Road and island at both ends of the road. This section is already overloaded and would require traffic measures that would have knock on effects. There would also be an increase to traffic flow on the A46 increasing pollution in North Warwick. The extra number of households would also see an increased pressure on Warwick Town Centre's already overloaded parking and road infrastructure.
There is a large question over how these extra homes and their occupants will be provided for in terms of energy, sewage, policing, emergency medical care, schooling and fire fighting in a town already on the brink of losing its fire station with a recently closed main police station.

ARCHAEOLOGY: The farmland is one of the few pieces of ancient grazed grassland left around Warwick. There is evidence to ridge and furrow usage and outlines of possible medieval buildings.

ECOLOGY: The sheep pasture is important for local Rooks, Buzzards and Green Woodpeckers. There is a badger sett close to the motorway embankment and bats frequent Woodloes Lane. It would be necessary to check the old trees in the field for roosts. The treets themselves are of intrinsic value themselves with many being over 100 years old.
There are various ponds and wet depressions across the site and in adjacent farm cottages that contain records of Great Crested Newts that could be severly impacted by development. The newts, badgers and bats are all scheduled species and mean that the welfare will eed to come up most in any construction both in the implementation phase and for the life span of the development

SOCIAL: The increased housing will increase the conurbation between Warwick and Leek Wootton and risk diluting both the cultural and social identity of both North Woodloes and Leek Wootton. The increased population as a result of the housing will place greater pressure on employment in Warwick at a time when gaining employment is difficult enough. Where are all these people going to work?

HEALTH: Increased occupation will lead to greater pollution from vehicles and waste disposal. There is the question of already overloaded medical services such as doctors and the hospital. On a more subtle note emotional well being is an important factor to consider. Many people on the Woodloes and in fact in the district enjoy walking up Woodloes Lane in the country and across to Leek Wootton such activities are proved to reduce depression and lower blood pressure.

1) General traffic
In my opinion this site will generate a lot of traffic with only one obvious access point

2) Traffic on Golf Lane
With a pedestrian access point to the secondary school being located at the end of Golf Lane, many pupils will be dropped off by car in the morning in Fieldgate Lane causing a large amount of peak traffic on Golf Lane. This will be dangerous for pupils of Briar Hill and St Margaret's Primary trying to cross a road with no crossing point to go to their school.

3) Parking around Fieldgate Lane
Cars dropping off/ picking up children in Fieldgate Lane will create a very significant hazard and loss of quality of life for those residents

4) Loss of wildlife habitat
Otters in the brook and foxes, hares, buzzards and other wildlife that is often in the field will lose their habitat.

5) Flooding
Some of the fields in question are often subject to flooding. Any work to reduce their flooding risk could lead to increased risk elsewhere.

6) Primary Schools
The development of Warwick Gates has already led to issues surrounding the shortage of primary school places in the local area. These new houses will be even closer to Briar Hill and St Margaret's Primary so there will be even more parents chasing few places.

7) Loss of community facility for Sydenham
The moving of Campion school will cause increased travel and a loss of a community facility for the existing residents of Sydenham

8) Why does Whitnash always get the new developments
The character of the Whitnash area has already been greatly scarred with the development of Warwick Gates, Dobson Lane, recent Chesterton Heights/Sydenham encroachment on the countryside and extension of the South Farm development. It is time that other areas of district share in the development (if indeed it is truly necessary).

The proposed access would result in further congestion to local roads which are already dangerous at school times given the current local provision. Fieldgate Lane is a narrow road.
There have been issues in relation to drainage in this area, which already takes run off from surrounding roads and the fields/golf course which fill the local brook.
Under the railway bridge there is a stream which is swollen when significant rainfall occurs. There are flooding implications associated with this proposed development.
The sewage pumping station has also struggled at times.

There are no corresponding proposals for the road network and increased traffic volumes that would be generated by the proposed development. It is essential that large scale housing developments contain details of effects on existing infrastructure, particularly the road networks and residential areas that are affected by increased traffic volumes.

I object to this development for a number of reasons. I believe that Whitnash has come under huge pressure from housing developments and does not have the infrastructure in place to support any more. I understand that there are no plans to provide primary school provision which is ridiculous given the problems there have been in the area over school places. In addition, as a parent who already struggles to cross Golf Lane to get to Briar Hill/St Margarets in the morning with the number of cars parking in the road, I can't imagine the traffic problems with parents coming to drop off/pick up at the new school site from the Fieldgate Lane access point.
I'm also aware that the site in question is subject to regular flooding after heavy rain; building on it would create more flooding there and elsewhere along Whitnash Brook.
In addition, I understand from the council's own "Focus" magazine that otters have recently been succesfully re-introduced at the Whitnash Brook nature reserve. It would be a huge shame after this to have to move them on again, and there is of course lots of other wildlife in the area that would be affected.
To summarise, I don't think this is a "fair price" to pay for a new school. I don't think that Whitnash, or Sydenham (Which will lose a great amenity provided by the current school) can afford it.

I strongly object to this proposal due to the distruction of green open space for generations to come. The area of land is known by everyone as an area to escxape into the country to paddle in the brook and see wildlife on our doorstep. In addition the proposals will increase traffic in Whitnash and further weaken the infrastructure of the surrounding area - in particular the demand for primary school places which are already taken by the Warwick Gates development over local Whitnash people.

I strongly object to the land around Campion School & south sydneham being destroyed in order to make up the housing numbers that a have been dictated by Central Government.

There is no allowance for primary Schooling meaning additional pressure on Briar Hill/St Margarets. The catchment areas will probably be re-drawn too.

There is very poor road access to that part of Sydenham, with the railway line and the main residential part of Whitnash on the other side. Any Bridge will cause a vast increase to the traffic through Whitnash putting Childrens lives at risk.

Alternative route is the Fosse way a very dangerous stretch of road at the best of times without additonal traffic adding to this.