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

The entire site is not appropriate for full development. It is bisected by the popular bridleway from Church Lane to Radford Semele. This forms the natural boundary to any extension of Sydenham. I consider the northern area suitable, but preserving the school playing fields. Access must be provided from the gap in the Sydenham road layout owing to the weight restriction on the Church Lane railway bridge.

Questionnaire Response:
There has been enough building around Sydenham and Whitnash over the last 40 years. Enough is enough.

A new school for Campion may be necessary but not at the expense of more Green Field sites. Your Council should look around for brown field sites. Not let property developers and landowners tell you where new houses should be built.

The surrounding area has already been grossly over-developed in recent years - with associated irreversible damage being done to wildlife and eco systems. There are already far too many houses within the area of close proximity to the Whitnash Brook & Nature Valley. Further development will completely ruin this area. (For example the otter has only just returned to the brook and will be lost again if further homes impinge on the natural habitat existing at present). The overall impact of further development on traffic in this area will also be increasingly problematic as there are already far too many jams on roads with things as they are. I also doubt whether the sewerage infrastructure can cope either - particularly judging by the ever increasing awful sewage smells becoming apparent in areas where this was not the case before extra properties were built !! Overall I think the time has come to decide enough is enough for the Whitnash area. Far too many green fields have already been lost and the Warwick Gates development is already one too many "blots on the landscape" as far as I and my partner are concerned. !!!

The proposals for this development are unrealistic on a number of fronts.

The development's access plans are inadequate. 1,000 houses would generate significant traffic on their own, and the relocation of Campion School would shift its existing traffic onto routes unsuited to the volumes generated. There is essentially one motor vehicle access to this site, which currently only serves the existing Campion School site. The other, limited capacity vehicle access would also feed onto the same roundabout via Chesterton Drive. That roundabout in question would be at or above its capacity during the rush hour with the potential for serious delays. The junction between Sydenham Drive and Radford Road would also see a significant increase in traffic with an attendant increase in the hazards to pupils at St. Anthony's Primary School. The recently-installed speed bumps on Sydenham Drive would exacerbate the congestion and the long-standing speed bumps on Prospect Road would rule out its use as significant exit route from the development.

The effect on Whitnash's road infrastructure would, if anything, be even worse. There is already significant traffic of parents dropping children off for Campion School near to St Margaret's Church. That would likely stay the same or increase. The effects on Fieldgate Lane and Golf Lane would be catastrophic. The junction of Golf Lane with Whitnash Road is already at capacity and there is already significant congestion caused by parents dropping children off at Briar Hill and St Margaret's Schools. Add in traffic of parents dropping children off at the proposed cycle/pedestrian access to the moved Campion School at Fieldgate Lane and gridlock could result. There would also be an increase in the already-significant hazard to children from east of Golf Lane when crossing that road to access the two primary schools.

The fundamental problem with road access to this development is that the railway line acts as a very effective barrier to communication. Between the bridge over the Bath Street-Clemens Street-High Street junction and the Fosse Way bridge there are a total of nine crossings of the railway. Of those three are in central Leamington near to that junction and are for dead-end side roads. One is a bridge over the Grand Union Canal where pedestrians can cross the railway thanks to the canal towpath. One is for a path between the Sydenham industrial estate and the residences to the west of the line. One is a purely agricultural crossing well down the Golf Lane bridle way with no public right of way. Two are farm tracks. The only substantial crossing of the railway on that length of track is the Prospect Road bridge and that crossing's usefulness is limited by the speed bumps on the road. Consequently the traffic from the development would be very effectively funneled down routes which already have significant capacity problems.

There are no proposals for primary school provision included in the plan. Whitnash's schools are already significantly overcrowded due to this same error being made during the Warwick Gates development. Children from 1,000 houses mainly funneled either into Briar Hill and St Margarets or Sydenham Primary School would cause intolerable overcrowding.

There would also be a significant increase in surface run-off due to the greater area of ground covered in an impermeable layer due to the development. That would greatly increase the flooding risk for the stream to the east of the development, imperiling both the new development and existing areas of Sydenham.

Much of the area of the stream is a nature reserve and it is likely that the development would have a significant detrimental effect on this reserve.

The sewerage coverage for the estate could also be problematical. The estate would be in a low-lying area and thus would need substantial pumping capacity to deal with the resulting foul water. The Whitnash sewerage system already has capacity problems in the area around Fieldgate Lane and any connection of the development's sewers to this existing system would require enormous upgrades to be functional. Extension of the Sydenham sewer system would thus be required.

Finally let me emphasise the massively flawed nature of the whole process this consultation is part of. These "targets" for house building have been imposed by a quango which has no legitimacy. It is a disgrace that such processes are allowed to operate in the United Kingdom and all possible steps should be taken to resist this fiat-based government.

Golf Lane and especially turning in to Fieldgate Lane is not equipped to cope with the extra traffic that would come from parents dropping off at school time. Golf Lane is already very busy at these times as younger children are dropped off for Briar Hill & St Margaret's. It is not always easy to pass with so many cars parked as it is. Extra traffic would put lives at risk, notably of the younger children.
Also turning from Golf Lane in to Fieldgate Lane is quite a sharp bend, accidents will happen, in icy weather the turning can be quite precarious. Even under normal weather conditions, if travelling at any sort of speed you cannot help but go over to the other side of the road. As it stands traffic is limited but the risks will increase. It is also difficult to see up Golf Lane from Fieldgate, if any vehicle should be going up the country lane to the houses.
Some drivers will cut down Mullard Drive, again which is just not wide enough to cope.
There is access to the railway line, which although locked off could be accessed by the most determined teenager (or school bags thrown over for a joke!)
British Rail and Severn Trent often have vans parked in that area for access, sometimes 2 or 3 which can be there at varying times through the day and night.
There is a big enough problem with litter outside the water treatment works, this will only increase with numerous students walking through.
Finally, the area off Fieldgate Lane is a haven for so many birds and animals. What will happen to them?

There has been mass development over the last 20 years in and around Whitnash, schools and medical centre's are struggling to meet the demands of the community. There has been a high influx of people to the area.Building more houses will mean the need to build more schools and another medical centre. The proposed location is a home to wildlife & many protected species i.e herons, bir.ds of prey, fox's, rabbits, pheasants to name but a few. The land is a designated flood plain & it doesn't take much rain for the field to flood. In light of the Police having to save 10 million this year and the proposed closure of fire stations it doesn't seem common sense to build more houses when there is going to be a cut back on the emergency services. There is a large area of land, the old Fords site which could be better utilized rather than putting another supermarket on there which Leamington doesn't need. One reason put forward is that Campion school needs modernizing, in that case is the plan to modernize all the schools in Whitnash i.e Whitnash primary.

If Campion School is to be rebuilt, it should be in the middle of its catchment area, not on the edge furthest from the homes, to minimise the traffic.

Putting the school at the south edge of the built up area would inevitably lead to additional traffic on Golf Lane. This would get tangled up with all the traffic bringing the children to St Margaret's and Briar Hill schools. The roads cannot take it.

A large number of cars would use Fieldgate Lane to drop children off to go through the bridge under the railway. The road is not wide enough to cope with this, and the only turning space is the entry to the sewage pumping station.

The current sewage facilities in Fieldgate Lane are only just sufficient for the area. It cannot cope with 1000 additional houses and a large school.

1000 houses means 1000 additional cars trying to get off the Sydenham estate to drive to work between 8.00 and 9.00 every day. The traffic is already bad enough!

This site is of great local historic interest and needs to be preserved not built on. It also has a history of flooding.
The locality of the land is effectively a cul-de-sac due to VERY limited access because of the railway line.
Whitnash is south of the river, the infrastructure as it is cannot sustain any further developments as there are only 5 bridges between Leamington and Warwick connecting us to the north which at peak times is horrendous. All service are north of the river i.e. hospital, fire service, police etc . Campion school should not be moved as it is central to all who attend - Whitnash, Sydenham and Leamington pupils.
Provision of a primary school would be needed as the present schools would be insufficient.
Extra pressure on GP.s and all child health services that young families need.
All present amenities would need to be improved.
Finally Whitnash is saying enough is enough - no more greenfield building - please.

Roads: There is no room to build roads into/ out of new home settlement. For every house there will be at least 2-3 cars trying to get onto already congested roads. People do not walk their children to school (walkway to school). They drop them off by car - adding more cars to congested roads.

This scheme would build on areas that are already flooding making the problem even worse.

The brook which is of great local and some historical interest would be lost to us.

Building on this site with relocation of the school to the south end of the site will cause traffic problems in Field gate lane as parents will drop off children for school. If building goes ahead this issue will need to be addressed.
All other issues are outlined in the Whitnash Objection Report.

I have major concerns about the volume of traffic that will be generated if the proposed 1000/1200 homes are built. Householders must work shop and have recreational opportunities. This will more than likely be acheived away from Sydenham. What is required is work opportunities and close by, otherwise as we know the daily grind of the commute is in store and can the road(s) take it . I think not . There may be justification for the "regeneration" of the school but to dress the whole thing up as a regeneration package is a bit rich. To build houses to fill a bigger school is quite frankly ridiculous. I object to the proposal.

I support this because it is extending an urban domestic dwelling area rather than overwhelming a small 'village' community

On the grounds that this development will simply bring profits to developers and do nothing to provide rented homes for those in need of affordable homes, as identified by successive Council surveys

Significant extant traffic noise from railway line, area not well connected to existing road infrastructure / topology.

This site is a better alternative to Kings Hill beacuse it closer to the centre of WDC area rather than on the outskirts.

The watercourse to the west of the proposed site has an associated flood plain. There may be approximately 10% of the site lying within flood zone 3 and therefore restricts the amount of developable land. A significant detailed hydraulic modelling will be required for a level 2 standard FRA to be undertaken.

Any design of this proposal should ensure that there is no inappropriate development in the flood plain and ensure there is sufficient easement adjacent to the watercourse. We would also seek enhancements to the water course corridor where possible

The road infrastructure is totally inadequate to support additional traffic which will undoubtedly be increased by 1000 houses and a school.
The local schools will not be able to cope with additional new students from 1000 new homes.
They are already overflowing.
The area is of historic interest and new archeological finds are currently being made.
There are natural springs in the area and a brook which will be suppressed. These are of natural beauty and of ecological benefit to the area.
The development is being submitted by the developers solely for financial gain, not because it is a suitable site and certainly not with the interests of local residents in mind.
The area is a flood plain. It is low land and the higher land drains to it. The flood plain is in the emergency plan which makes the development even more questionable.
There is too much development south of the river and access to this area is already over subscribed.

Any large development in South Leamington will put extra pressure on the two main access routes into the town centre over the Princes Road and Willes Road bridges with the likelihood of further traffic snarl ups in the absence of a new bridge. Inevitably the new residents will want to shop and use the amenities offered by the town centre. If the Council backed new Clarendon shopping centre incorporating a major store proves to be the magnet promised by its sponsors these pinch points will have to cope with increased traffic as it is.

A limited small scale development which raises money for new school buildings would be just about acceptable.

Sites 1a; 1b; 2: Support.
Site 3: I do not support the development of purely greenfield land if re-development is available elsewhere.
Site 4: If a greenfield site is to be used, this would appear preferable to others due to it location near a major route.
Site 5: I do not support the development of purely greenfield land if re-development is available elsewhere. In particular, this site does not appear to possess an adequate road network to support the level of development proposed. Any improvements to the road network would further disrupt greenfield land.
Site 6: I would support this location for development, so long as guarantees can be made to residents of Baginton village that investment will be made in local amenities to support an influx of new residents.

Questionnaitr Response:

Sites 1a; 1b; 3; 4; 5; 6:
I have No Objection.

Site 2:
If this land were to be developed it would have an extremely damaging effect on the area.
1.It is a flood plain and there is a reason for it being so.
2. Sewers around Whitnash already have problems they do not need to be exacerbated.
3. Roads around the area are already extremely busy at key times in the day and any Bank holiday. It is not a viable proposition to support an extra 1000 houses with probably two cars per house and more children to ferry to primary schools out of the area as there are not enough suitable places locally.
4. Golf Lane has reach capacity for traffic coming and going at busy times a new school in the position suggested would mean far more traffic coming down Golf Lane and Fieldgate Lane which could not cope.
5. Because of a lack of places for children to play in this area, Fieldgate Lane at the moment attracts children playing as it is reasonably safe being a no through road. Climbing trees and being kids!! We do need places not continually full of traffic we seem to be creating one big housing development without much relief.

Having attended various meetings on the core strategy last year, I wanted to thank you for coming up with the alternative sites. These proposals go a long way towards addressing the very real concerns that so many of us raised about the prime arable land South of Harbury Lane.

The alternative sites distribute the housing around the Warwick-Kenilworth-Leamington area, integrating it into already established communities, with consequently less infrastructure impact. Nor are any of the proposed alternatives (so far as I am aware) prone to flooding in the way that the Harbury Lane South site is.

My final request would be that wherever possible you look to develop brownfield land first. I realise that this requires more effort in terms of ground clearance and decontamination prior to use, but the social benefits are correspondingly greater. Derelict eyesore sites are improved and brought back into productive use and agricultural land can continue in its prime purpose of feeding people with trusted locally-sourced products.

i stongly object to the development of building of houses and a replacement school in the area in question of which was discussed my objection is of historic value of the whole site , i am also in full support in all those who are in objection to this developement of this area., please keep me informed of the progress thanking you stop. mr hugh williams.

I strongly object to the above development due to the increase of motor traffic in the already over populated town of Whitnash with all the past Housing and industrial building at Warwick Gates.

I would like to object to the development of land at Campion School/south of Sydenham.

I do not object to the building of houses on the land at the back of Campion School, I object to the access arrangements proposed. Golf Lane is already very busy with vehicles taking children to schools already in Whitnash (Briar Hill and St Margarets). To propose even more access along this road to a new school will be MAYHEM. Once in to Golf Lane it is going to be extremely difficult to get out on to the main road again at certain times of the day. Why does Campion School have to be closed. Surely it would be more sensible to keep the school where it is so children from Sydenham can still access it easily. If a new school is so necessary why not build it on land nearer to Warwick gates, thus easing the traffic flows which are already very congested at certain times of the day. I feel very sorry for the people living in Fieldgate Lane who will be most affected by these access arrangements. Obviously the planners of this scheme do not live there!

Land re-development in this area will significantly benefit education with funds being utilised to create a bigger & better Campion School facility for any new populace. There is a reasonable road infrastructure in place giving good access to current and mooted out of town shopping facilities and town centre. There are decent industrial units and areas for industrial development in close proximity to provide employment opportunities to the new residents and much of this within walking distance. Supporting this is an excellent bus service running late into the evening. There are good leisure facilities nearby and it is within walking distance of Newbold Comyn. This area has seen good class housing development in the past 15-20 years and has coped with it well. Provided this quality is maintained, it is the best answer to Leamington's housing needs.

I cannot understand the lack of understanding to want to build on this land. Pure greed seems to be the motive, not the need for houses? No building should be undertaken on this land, the Survey put together a few years ago showed this, but it seems to be taken no notice of!
The civil and road structures are already under pressure and with extra house building, it will just not cope! Accessibility to the estate will be a big problem and the local facilities will be significantly affected. The local environment and wildlife will be damaged and Whitnash Town will once again struggling to cope with traffic and facilities.

Having recently objected to the previous core strategy preferred options, especially on the
Land South of Sydenham and East of Whitnash, I am now horrified at the scale of the alternative site being put forward for this area, which is to include the rebuilding of Campion School.

This amount of building on this Greenfield site would have a devastating effect on the local area, Whitnash in particular. The traffic around Whitnash Road, Golf Lane and Fieldgate Lane would be increased dramatically with parents dropping off their children to walk through to the new Campion School Site. According to the meeting held on 7th April, Church Lane is to be a pedestrian and cycle access route only too, but I wonder how you propose to prevent the traffic from using this lane as a cut through into Whitnash, as there needs to be access to the farms and stables past the brook itself. A lot of walkers and dog owners use the bridle path and I feel this would become a very dangerous walk if these houses are built.

The traffic along Whitnash Road has already escalated over the past number of years and will be increased even more if this development goes ahead. The roads in and around Whitnash will not be able to cope with yet more cars passing through. Traffic around the Asda/Campion island will be expansive as it will be the major route into the estate.

With all of these extra houses, there will be extra strain on Whitnash's Primary Schools which are already being stretches by the previous Warwick Gates development. Utilities will be put under more pressure such as, Policing, Doctors and Dentists. Wildlife and the local
Countryside will be greatly distrupted and effected, especially along the brook where birds,
Insects, fish, badgers and foxes occupy the hedges, bushes, tress, water and land. It is unrealistic to think this development will not have an impact on the wildlife in this area. This area has given pleasure to the local community for many, many years and it is unjust that it would be spoilt and lost within this build. In a society that is encouraging people to exercise more for their health, we should be preserving these areas, not taking them away.
Over recent years, the flooding from the brook has worsened, and at the meeting it was stated that the Department of the Environment would not allow the brook to be cleared as it wants the fields surrounding it to flood. How then, can houses possibly be built near and around this brook! The houses when built, would only add to the flooding problems as all the rain would run off their blocked paved driveways down towards the brook instead of being soaked into the soil of the farmers fields.

Therefore, I am totally opposed to this alternative site option.

I do not think that the entire site is appropriate for full development. It is bisected by the popular bridleway from Church Lane to Radford Semele. This forms the natural boundary to any extension of Sydenham. The northern part of the site down to the southern boundary of the housing to the east would be suitable for 600 homes, moving the school and its playing fields south of the bridleway between Church Lane and Radford Semele. Road access to both the school and housing would be from the existing roundabout, at Sydenham Drive and Prospect Road running parallel to the railway south to the new school and housing. The school is unlikely to require the whole of the area to the south and this balance area should be retained as arable.

The aspect of access during the start and end of school hours has not been thought through completely. Given the increase in popularity of parents and carers of children dropping them off at the school gates then it is anticipated that Fieldgate Lane and the surrounding area will become a car park during the morning and evening rush hours. This road is already used as through route from Mullard Drive to Golf Lane. Furthermore, the access to Golf Lane is difficult due to the narrow access and sharp bend 50 metres from its start: this will become an accident hotspot.
As an additional point the increased residential area will place further strain on the primary and middle schools and it is not clear that there is adequate capacity in the locality for these children.
The submission made on behalf of AC Lloyd is full of errors; school name and the crossing in Fieldgate lane is under the railway. Therefore it is clear that they have not done their analysis thoroughly.