Thickthorn

Kenilworth is subject to actual and potential significant development disruption through the expansion of Birmingham Airport (Over flight) and the planned development of HS2. Given the stress of these activities on this town, the addition of so many houses would significantly and detrimentally impact on the character and life enjoyment of the town.

Although broadly supporting the principle of extra housing there is a need to ensure traffic congestion on Birches Lane is not made worse and that alternative sites are found for the Rugby and Cricket Clubs that currently use the Thickthorn land.

The provision of housing here has long been tempting as it is a "perfect spot" for infill. However the infrastructure cannot cope. With the plan stating there will be no need for further bridges across the A46 it is implicit that all 770 houses will disgorge onto Glasshouse / Birches Lane which currently struggles at peak times and has accident black spots at the Courtaulds bend, Rocky Lane and Windy Arbour. If the plan is to put housing here it must consider how traffic is to get into Kenilworth and should also consider how to stop Kenilworth being used as a shortcut rat run through to the M6. The unique character of the area is that they are Lanes and the housing behind if "affordable" could seriously damage the character and saleability of these properties. In addition to this you are proposing the wholesale destruction of Glasshouse Spinney, a nature reserve, and green route through to the Stoneleigh Estate and Ashow. Will Rocky Lane be kept as it is, or upgraded? Your plan is to vague.

Inadequate detail provided as to the infrastructure improvements, notably schools and traffic management, required for this site.

Number of new residences appears high given the current size of the town. Effect upon, and wishes of the local community to be considered fully in any full development proposal.

Site has good transport links via A46 but is also in walking/cycling distance of Kenilworth town centre.

Kenilworth needs the ability to expend and this is an appropriate site being contained by the A46.

At peak times the traffic is heavy on Birches lane with long tailbacks and delay, adding another 700+ houses would cause great strain.

Inadequate detail provided as to the infrastructure improvements, notably schools and traffic management, required for this site.

The addition of so many houses would significantly and detrimentally impact on the character and life enjoyment of the town.

Negative impact on the existing countryside, flora/fauna the feel of Kenilworth being a small town.

I only object at this stage because there is insufficient detail of the infrastructure that will be put in place to support the development. This level of housing in the general vicinty seem reasonable, although I question whether the area immediately south of Crewe Lane and east of Glasshouse Lane would not be a better choice because proportionally less of the land is adjacent to the A46 and traffic would naturally disperse in several directions from there.

Members considered that Kenilworth is a viable and thriving Town, and every effort should be made to keep it so. Notwithstanding that, the KS understands that Warwickshire is required to provide extra housing by 2026, and that the WDC have proposed an allocation of 770 houses by 2026 to Kenilworth. KS considers this reasonable and will be supported subject to a number of caveats.

The preferred option of 770 houses to the Thickthorn area bounded by the A46 is agreed. However some of this number could be allocated to Common Lane and other small Town infill areas. This would reduce the Thickthorn site house numbers to below 700.

Members believed that the Thickthorn area should have access to the Traffic island
on the A46, and this land dedicated to offices and high-tech units, not to exceeding two stories in height, and over an area aligned as a sound barrier adjacent to the A46.

Construction should be eco friendly and of sustainable materials with adequate car parking based on better criteria than the 2006 N&J report, i.e. 3 car parking spaces per dwelling - not 1.31 spaces as suggested.

Access via Thickthorn Drive should be avoided. Possible access might be from the junction of Dencer drive/Glasshouse Lane. Possibly a traffic island with lights, and access to the housing/school off the Glasshouse Lane end of the development.

KS would like to see all existing woodlands and boarders to be retained.

Rocky Lane is essential to be preserved, and hopefully incorporated into the creation of new "green spaces".

The new development should include for substantial tree planting and low maintenance green landscaping.

Housing should also not exceed two stories, be eco friendly, have high insulation factors, designed for low running costs, designed from sustainable products.

Consideration should be given for a district heating scheme.

Consideration should be given for the incorporation of photo voltairic panels.

It is essential that adequate off road car parking adjacent to each dwelling is incorporated, and road widths should be wide enough for further parking. We support the N&J report on diagonal street parking, or end on parking. We would like to see three spaces allocated to each dwelling, and more to units over three bedrooms.

The new development should incorporate play area's.

The mix of housing with the preferred option for 40% to be affordable housing is supported.

We would prefer to see no CIL on the Kenilworth 770 houses.

In the remaining mix consideration should be given to disabled/elderly/students.

KS members would like to see the inclusion on the estate of a one stop shop, and possibly community meeting places.

The population influx will need a new infants school and a further increase in facilities to the local secondary school.

The local medical surgeries will also need to be expanded to cope with the additional facilities.

The restoration of a Town Railway station is supported, along with associated rail/bus integration.

If this development is to take place, let it be an asset to the Town, that other towns come to see and admire. This is a wonderful opportunity to do it right!

The proposed developement is far too large for Kenilworth. 'Ribbon' developement along the A46 will further contribute to traffic congestion in the town .. The High street is regularly at a standstill and at rush hour times the road to Leamington is a traffic jam. This south east part of the town has already been over developed and more housing will lead to similar problems experienced at the A46 Stoneleigh junction. The sports clubs are blinded by the potential income, they are both currently Kenilworth community clubs- Dads and Lads walking or Cycling regularly to a local club.

This is far too large a development. I am unclear where the Rugby Club and Wardens cricket club will move to. It is important that these amenities are located within walking distance and cycling distance for local people particularly children. There is also concern about the drainage requirements. The brook flowing to the Avon can barely cope with the run off from Knights Meadow and the A46 etc even after some remedial work.

Although accepting that this is the best location for new housing in Kenilworth I have serious concerns over the loss of the rugby and cricket club grounds. Their current location means that they are easy for the youngsters of Kenilworth to either walk or cycle to. They should only be used as the last part of any development in the town, and planning permission should only be given once both clubs have found new sites adjacent to the current town boundary to relocate to. Relocating to a new ground at some distance from the town is not acceptable, neither is a one or two year gap between the sale of the land and the new facilities coming into use. This would destroy the clubs.

Castle Farm must be retained as a public open space and for general recreation. Under no circumstances should it become the property of, or under the control of, either the cricket or rugby clubs.

I think this is an acceptable area

Although I support the use of land at Thickthorn for a mixed housing and employment development, with employment sites abutting the A46, I object to the proposals to build on Kenilworth Rugby Club unless a suitable alternative site for the club is identified in the Local Plan. If Castle Farm Leisure Centre is chosen it will result in loss of publicly accessible open space, which is in short supply in Kenilworth. Therefore new public open space must be provided on top of that required for the new development.

Firstly 770 extra houses in Kenilworth is disproportionate to the size and nature of the town.Primarily people choose to live there because of it's current size and character.

Secondly the cocentration of the entire development at one location simply because there is a convenient SE boundary is unjustifiable. The status of the Birches Lane and Glasshouse Lane areas will inevitably suffer and I have serious concerns regarding PO14 Transport and PO16 Green Belt which I refer to in seperate representations.

Dear Sirs

I wish to express my concern about proposed development of the Thickthorn site for mixed residential and employment purposes.

A development this size will require huge infrastructure additions and greatly impact traffic flow on the A46. At peak times access to and from the A46 will be log jammed and accidents inevitable. Who will pay for the necessary changes, possibly including widening of the A46 with traffic light controls on Thickthorn island?

Yours sincerely

Geoffrey Field

The development size is far too large for the needs of the area.

The traffic system is already under pressure both am and pm with queuing back into Kenilworth making the exit from Birches Lane onto the Warwick road difficult. It is also a very dangerous and difficult road to cross and with many children and elderly living on the Kenilworth manor side of the road it will only make it worse.
The Kenilworth Manor and the surrounding area is on Green Belt and is much prized and loved by the community. Separating as it does Kenilworth from the A46. This means that Kenilworth retains its historic situation as a medium sized town surrounded by greenery. The proposed development area encompasses the historic Manor lands belonging to the Manor.Not only would inappropriate development contravene the terms on which the manor lands were put to community use but would also threaten the nearby ancient woodland. The access proposals are as yet unclear but Thickthorn close is unsuitable for access purposes beyond its current usage. The existence Kenilworth Manor nursing home means that there is frequent traffic all times of the day from staff, delivery and visitors. As a result Thickthorn Close already carries a greater volume of traffic than wold be suggested by the number of people resident on it.The road does not easily allow for two way traffic and any parking on it makes this impossible. Whilst this is satisfactory at the moment it goes to demonstrate that this road cannot tolerate any greater usage. There is no prospect of altering the road as the current layout is understood to have been mandated when the land was transferred from the Manor. In particular the tended verges are a significant and indeed historic aspect of Thickthorn close to the extent that the rose bushes tended by the residents are directly related to the name of the road.

The area proposed is ideally located for development and subject to an appropriate master plan addressing the transport/educational needs of the area is an ideal location for the development envisaged.

need to make sure tha drainage to the area is adequate as this has implications downstream for Ashow ( and Stoneleigh)

Given appropriate housing densities and infrastructure improvements (including the enhancement of existing green infrastructure) in the area, this area of land appears appropriate. The proximity of the A46 makes its future development almost inevitable.

CRA is largely supportive of the proposed development of the land at Thickthorn, but would appreciate some consideration being given within the Local Plan to potential sites for relocation of Kenilworth RFC and The Wardens.

I would like to express my protest at the new proposals to allow development in the green belt area of Blackdown, Kenilworth and Old Milverton as these plans

* Reduce the" Green Lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth to less than 1 1/2 miles.

* Reduce everyone's ability to walk, ride, cycle and enjoy this important green space.

* Have a detrimental effect of the picturesque northern gateways to Leamington and Kenilworth, turning them in to another Europa Way and contributing to these Towns losing their identity.

* Result in a "Northern Relief Road" which has no purpose other than to take new home owners quickly on to the A46 and to jobs and shopping opportunities away from our Towns.

* Be another blow to independent retailers in Leamington, Kenilworth and Warwick who make the area attractive places to live. Further "Out of Town" shopping will take trade away from the Towns.

* Not help traffic flows. At peak times the delays on the A452 result from commuters wanting access to the Town centres. Making it a dual carriage way will not help.

* Not comply with the Government's National Planning Policy Framework for development in the Green Belt.

* Violate an important nature corridor along the River Avon.

* Involve construction on the flood plain at Leek Wootton.

* Result in the loss of a significant amount of high quality agricultural land.

* Ignore the views of residents. In response to a previous consultation nearly 60% of respondents opposed development in the Green Belt

I hope you take into account all the above issues and look at your policy again.

I read WDC's proposed plans for green belt development with dismay and incredulity and would like to add my objection to what will hopefully be a successful campaign to stop this damaging and costly ruination of our local area.

WDC have no democratic mandate to proceed with these plans. In response to a previous consultation nearly 60% of respondents opposed development in the Green Belt yet you ignore this and offer us only options on which massive level of destruction we would prefer.

Green belt is there for a reason, and previous WDC studies had identified areas of development that did not require this harmful removal of precious land.

Kenilworth cannot cope with 770 additional homes and 1000 + cars. It is gridlock during rush hour and most of the day up the Warwick Road. There is nothing in your plans to accomodate this extra traffic load on the local streets. Nor is there evidence of how the disruption, noise and pollution will be minimised or managed while the development is underway.

The quicker this ill conceived and unwanted plans are shelved the better. I wish WDC the worst of luck and will resist in every way I can.

Scanned Letter

Local Plan

We object to the choice of Milverton and Blackdown as preferred sites for new housing because:

1. They are in the Green Belt and specifically in the narrow Green Belt between Kenilworth and Leamington. There cannot be shown to be a need to build here as there are other sites not in the Green Belt which are available.

2. There is an obligation to prevent urban sprawl and allowing development in this area, for which there are already several large developments proposed (Coventry Gateway, HS2, continuing development at the University, Stoneleigh Park and Abbey Park) would destroy the valuable rural environment which maintains the spatial integrity of the small villages (Leek Wootton, Hill Wootton, Old Milverton, Stoneleigh, Ashow and Stareton).

3. The proposed new road necessitated by the developments would negatively impact the area towards Guys Cliffe. In a period of Council cut backs one would need to question the wisdom of proposing such a costly project especially when considering how much the Rugby relief road ran over budget.

4. A traffic model to consider the combined impacts of all the developments proposed for this area is urgently required before any of them are given the go ahead. We are advised that this has not been carried out. The traffic congestion in Stoneleigh is already unacceptable at peak times and this must be taken into consideration before any further development in the greenbelt is permitted.

We object to the size of the proposed development at Thickthorn.
1. Whilst it has long been acknowledged that the area up to the A46 would be a possible location for housing, the extension of this site to now include the Rugby Club and the cricket club land is not acceptable. It is essential that these facilities remain close to the population to permit access by foot and cycles and to reduce the need for motor car use.

2. There have been problems with flooding in Ashow caused by the run off from the existing housing on this side of Kenilworth and the drainage off the A46. Measures proposed to solve this existing problem have still not been fully implemented. Further development, on any scale, cannot be permitted until a full assessment of the drainage requirements has been carried out.

Town's Position
Kenilworth is situated in close proximity to the boundary of Coventry and in places, the Green Belt is less than 600 metres wide. The protection of the Green Belt as a whole, and in particular on the Coventry border, has always been a matter of great importance to the Town Council and it has made this a priority over a number of previous Local Plan consultations.
The population of the Town has grown by 140% in the last 40 years and this has led to the whole of the available land within its boundaries being used for additional housing. This has included in recent years land zoned for employment, as the District had accepted that there was no demand for some of the existing employment land.
Given the tremendous increase in population and the lack of demand for employment land, it was the view of this Council on the previous (subsequently withdrawn) consultation on the preferred options, that there was a clear case for there being no further development within the Town. This was vitally important, as any development that was allowed had to be on the Green Belt surrounding the Town. Those arguments are, we believe, still valid, especially as it is apparent from the Options paper that there are areas of land within the District that are not within the Green Belt, but which it does not intend to zone for development.
The Preferred Options do include land available for development that is not within the Green Belt. It is the Council's view that this should be reflected by requiring the phasing of developments to ensure that non Green Belt land is developed first. In this way, the existence and benefits of the current Green Belt would be extended.
District Council Position
The Town Council does, however, recognise that the District has put forward arguments, supported by the SHLAA and SHMAA surveys, that the Town does require now, and in the next 20 years, a certain amount of housing and employment land, for it to remain sustainable and viable; these will inevitably be in the Green Belt. It further appreciates that, if such developments were to be allowed to proceed, then it is necessary and essential that these should be carried out in the right place and subject to regulation that would enhance the Town and not damage it.
It is further aware, and accepts that it is the view of the District Council and the surveys carried out, that this would mean the addition of some 700/800 houses and provision for employment land and that it proposes that this development should be in the Thickthorn area.
Town Preferences
So that it assimilates better into the Kenilworth community, it is the Town preference that development of such magnitude should be distributed instead of being concentrated on one site. Such an approach would also assist in alleviating the disruption to the town's infrastructure that the planned block development would create.
A-2
K:\PLANNING 2012\M19072012 KENILWORTH TOWN COUNCIL FINAL RESPONSE WDC NEW LOC PLAN JUL 12 FINAL.DOCX
With this in mind, we have considered a variety of sites within the Town and since the areas available are all within the Green Belt, have tested those sites on the basis that the following requirements should be met:
1. It must be capable of being protected from further extension by having clear and defendable boundaries.
2. There should be clear separation from any other urban areas so as to avoid ribbon development.
3. It should be capable of having easy access to the Town.
4. It should complement the local community and not form a separate entity.
We applied these tests to the sites we had identified. Overall, we concluded that they would suffer from the major problem, not only of incursion into the Green Belt, but also of lacking defendable boundaries for the future.
Preferred Option Land
We also considered the Thickthorn site on the same requirements basis as described above.
This site has for many years been in danger of exclusion from the Green Belt. On all previous occasions, development has been opposed by the Council because of the danger of opening up the whole of the area bounded by Kenilworth, the highway and Stoneleigh Road.
Our view in regard to this site was as follows:
1. The northern extremity of the proposed development area is shown as the northern boundary of the Wardens Cricket Club. This was felt to be too far in a northerly direction, whilst there was no clear and defensible boundary to protect the Green Belt from further incursion to the north.
2. It would result in the loss of the Cricket Club and Rugby Club and its four training pitches, with the need to relocate them in the Green Belt if they are not to be lost to the Town.
3. This would also effectively double the loss of Green Belt in the Town area if, as we would wish, they were relocated adjacent to the Town.
4. The roads serving this area are subject to considerable congestion now. The addition of perhaps 700/800 houses and business use would add considerably to an existing problem, especially at the Thickthorn Junction, which is a major access point to the Town and its main connection to the dual carriageway.
Whilst we would not wish this area to be developed, we appreciate that the District has this in mind and, if development is to take place in that area, then it would be essential that:
1. The development should terminate at Rockey Lane in order to have a clearly defensible boundary.
2. This would allow the Rugby Club to relocate its number one pitch and Club house to the Cowpatch (being the field to the north of Rockey Lane) and the Cricket Club to
A-3
K:\PLANNING 2012\M19072012 KENILWORTH TOWN COUNCIL FINAL RESPONSE WDC NEW LOC PLAN JUL 12 FINAL.DOCX
remain in its current location, which it is understood, would be the Cricket Club's preference. These two grounds within the Green Belt, together with Rockey Lane, would then serve as buffer to development, as well as providing for open space and retaining the very important sporting facilities they provide for the Town.
3. We are aware, however, that the Rugby Club would have difficulty in relocating all of its facilities onto the Cowpatch.
4. If, in those circumstances, it was felt that the inclusion of the Cowpatch should be allowed then the protection of the Green Belt required by the Town Council could be obtained by the dedication of a public open space adjacent to the Cricket Club's southern boundary. This would not only protect the Green Belt but also act as protection to the Cricket Club from being too close to housing.
5. The inevitable traffic congestion at the entrances to this area require very specific planning provisions and, without definitive assurances in the Plan not to increase vehicular movements along Glasshouse Lane West and Birches Lane, then the Town Council would object to the site as a whole
6. There would be a clear need for road improvements at both the Leamington Road and Dalehouse Lane junctions to ease traffic flows. These would need to include the widening of Leamington Road, certainly in the area of the junction, and perhaps the widening of the slip road into the junction, allowing for traffic from the new estate direct access to the highway. Likewise, careful attention would be required at the Dalehouse Lane junction in order to have the same effect and the provision of an island should be considered to ease traffic flows at that access point. Having regard to the importance of these matters, it should be a condition of any development that the road works are carried out in accordance with traffic surveys and a modelling of the effects of the development should be carried out in advance.
7. The internal roads and infrastructure of the area will be equally important. Having regard to the size of the proposals there is a real danger of it being developed piece meal and by different developers. This could lead, as elsewhere in the Town, to the overall theme being distorted. It should therefore be built into the Plan that there should be an overall planning brief agreed before any development is started and that this shall be carried through.
8. Any development on the site would need to meet the requirements of the Plan for Garden Town type layouts, together with the need for the provision of open space, and a road layout that complements these requirements.
9. We feel it will also be necessary to make provision for a Primary School. For the purposes of safety and sustainability, this should be within the site thus allowing children to walk to School where possible.
10. The Local Plan presents an opportunity to include an Inset Plan that takes into account all these requirements. The Planning Department of Warwick District Council should provide a brief on the basis of these requirements, which should form part of the Plan, to assist in the development of the site as part of the local community and a complement to it.
A-4
K:\PLANNING 2012\M19072012 KENILWORTH TOWN COUNCIL FINAL RESPONSE WDC NEW LOC PLAN JUL 12 FINAL.DOCX
Effects on the Local Community
These must be taken into account, as the presence of the Town and its facilities are the main reason for making this area so attractive for development and will have a huge effect on its value.
In these circumstances, it is essential for facilities to be expanded and improved to cater for the new development as well as easing the strain on those already existing. This requirement will not only benefit the existing community, but also conserve those facilities and make the Town more attractive.
With this in mind we would expect that funds arising from the development should be provided to help the aspirations of the Town for the expansion of the Civic Centre to include all facilities, including a Theatre.
Further the introduction of 700/800 houses, whilst making the Town Centre more viable, will increase the burden on the Town Centre car parks and would merit the construction of a car park similar to the Waitrose model, namely one and a half storeys.
It will also require the provision of addition medical services by way of at least one more Doctor accompanied by the nursing services that the Surgeries now provide. This will mean that both surgeries serving the Town will require some extension. There will also be further pressure on the Clinic, which will require enhancement to enable it to serve the additional population.
The Rugby Club
The Rugby Club is a very valuable asset to the Community and if it is to be relocated then it is essential to the community that this is adjacent to the Town. This could provide an opportunity for the District to make provision for it at Castle Farm. The opportunity for joint working with the Club could provide an enhanced sporting offer that not only includes Rugby and the current pursuits, but also an Athletics Track. There would be a need to increase the area of the sports centre and this would fall within the Green Belt. It would, however, be immediately adjacent and accessible and to some degree within the Town. The increase of this existing use within the Green Belt would complement the Town.
Open Spaces
There is a need to increase the area of accessible open space within the Town. This is a matter that must also be addressed within the Plan. Whilst the Abbey Fields and Castle Farm and the Common give an impression of the Town enjoying a great deal of open space, Kenilworth does not enjoy as much open space as the other Towns within the District. Even taking into account the Play Area at Burton Green and Crackley Woods, both of which are outside the Town, the area available per 1000 of the population is 4.42 hectares as against the District average of 5.46 hectares and the Proposed Minimum Standard in SPD of 5.66 hectares.
Allotments
The Town and its Community enjoys several allotment gardens that not only provide an ability to grow vegetables and fruit for home consumption, but also the opportunity to enjoy outdoor exercise and recreation, whilst at the same time providing an additional open space for the community.
A-5
K:\PLANNING 2012\M19072012 KENILWORTH TOWN COUNCIL FINAL RESPONSE WDC NEW LOC PLAN JUL 12 FINAL.DOCX
The allotments are invaluable to the town and extremely popular, confirmed by the waiting list of 200 applicants, despite additional plots being provided in the last few years. It is essential therefore that an allocation of allotment land be found within the plan to meet and encourage this demand, especially as it will provide the further benefit of further open space.
This problem must be addressed in the new development and for the Town as a whole in the Plan. The provision of additional open space at Castle Farm would be a very useful additional contribution.
The Mere
We are awaiting the results of the feasibility study for the renewal of the Mere adjoining the Castle. This exciting project, adjoining an internationally recognised heritage site, would bring increased economic benefit into the area, as it would make the Town a National Tourist attraction with its Castle and Mere. Further, the additional amenity would enhance the open space available to the community and visitors.
Abbey Fields
Overview. The Abbey Fields are and have been for many years an invaluable centre for peaceful, open-air recreation that is easily accessible from all parts of the Town. We would stress that any Plan affecting the Town should ensure that no encroachment should either be allowed or envisaged. It was, and always has been, used for recreation for the community and children and any intrusion will conflict with those uses. No vehicles or cycles should be allowed within its confines other than for the provision of essential services or maintenance.
Cycle Routes through Abbey Fields. The Town Council would object strongly to the provision of a cycle route through the Fields, as this is contrary to the use envisaged for the fields since they were dedicated to the Town. Furthermore, it would be contrary to the byelaws that currently protect them from such use and which were imposed for the sites protection. Any such intrusion would inevitably conflict with people using the paths and the many children seeking recreation in the Fields; it would be impossible to police from abuse.
The Abbey Fields Play Area. The Council would, however, see some elements of evolution of the current usage as being advantageous and in keeping with the original grants. The Children's Play Area is in need of renovation, as is accepted by the District. When this is able to proceed, it is suggested that this would be an ideal time to reposition it on the bowling green area, which has been redundant for many years. This would provide a secure area for the Play Area and the existing Pavilion could be used as a shelter for accompanying parents. A further benefit of the secure area thus provided would be the exclusion of dogs from the play area.
The Play Area released by this relocation would allow for the expansion of the picnic area adjoining and the provision of a more formal site for the periodic Band Concerts. This would provide a better facility for the community and its visitors and be a better use of the Fields without in any way damaging them or being contrary to the original gift and purpose. It would also enhance the setting of the Barn Museum and improve it as an attraction.
Abbey Fields Car Park. The Town Council has considered and approved the proposed resurfacing of the car park in the fields, subject to such work complying with the advice of English Heritage to protect the underlying monument, and work being included to protect the trees in the Lime Walk.
A-6
K:\PLANNING 2012\M19072012 KENILWORTH TOWN COUNCIL FINAL RESPONSE WDC NEW LOC PLAN JUL 12 FINAL.DOCX
The trees form an invaluable asset to the Fields. Relocating the boundary of the parking area away from them and releasing the compaction around their roots caused by parking will improve their life span, although this raises the issue of their age. During the currency of the plan, preparations must be made for their replacement and the preservation of this beautiful part of the Abbey Fields. This should form part of the Plan, as the future of the Walk must be assured for future generations.
The existence of the car park does, however, affect the drainage of the meadow below it and this must be addressed. The meadow below, a very important part of the fields, currently suffers from bad drainage and frequent flooding. This must be improved to increase the recreational use of the area.
Civic Centre
It has been the joint wish of the Town and the District Councils to develop a Civic Centre in Smalley Place. This has begun to take place over the last few years with the relocation of the One Stop Shop to the Library and, latterly, the Town Council, MP, and Town Centre Development Manager, as well as the local Safer Neighbourhood Police Office, to Jubilee House.
It is the clear desire of the local authorities that this process will continue, in the hope that all the services required by the Public shall be available from that site or at least accessible. Further, we would like to see the relocation of the Talisman Theatre to the same area on the basis that this would also provide a venue, not only for the theatre, but also perhaps for use as an occasional Cinema and Meeting Hall in the centre of Town. The relocation of the Theatre would also provide a site for further housing.
There would also be the opportunity for the relocation of the Clinic into Jubilee House. This would provide patients and staff with enhanced accommodation and at the same time release its current site for redevelopment in accordance with the overall plan for the centre. An arrangement of this type would be in keeping with the objective of providing all services to the Community on one site and at the same time would lead to cost savings for the public purse.
This plan would, in our view, be an ideal project to seek support from the monies arising from the developments envisaged in the Local Plan. These facilities will complement and improve the facilities that the Town already enjoys, but would also be available to the persons who relocate to the new areas of the town.
Fire Station
The provision of employment land at Thickthorn could perhaps provide an opportunity to relocate the Fire Station as its current situation is not ideal. Its relocation at Thickthorn would provide an opportunity to build a full-time Station that would be easily accessible to the whole District along the existing and adjacent routes. This would be an advantage to the public purse as this could easily serve the whole District and release the current sites for other purposes.
Schools
As mentioned previously, it will be necessary for a Primary School to be provided for the children of the 700/800 houses likely to be built on the site and this must be provided within the development.
A-7
K:\PLANNING 2012\M19072012 KENILWORTH TOWN COUNCIL FINAL RESPONSE WDC NEW LOC PLAN JUL 12 FINAL.DOCX
There will also be additional pressure on the Secondary School at Kenilworth School and it will be necessary for this to be enhanced for that purpose. Kenilworth School is presently housed on two sites, with the Sixth Form located in Rouncil Lane. This might, therefore, be an opportunity for the Sixth Form to be relocated to Leyes Lane and the other site utilized for housing, as it has access already on to local roads and much of the school site is not used. The income generated would provide an opportunity to reinvest and enhance our Secondary School.
Further, the release of this area for housing would compensate for the loss of the area from the Cricket Club from the Preferred Option Plan area.
Railway Station
Finally, Kenilworth has a population in the region of 25,000 and as such must be one, if not the only Town of this size in the country, which does not have the benefit of a Railway Station. Warwickshire County Council has prepared a strong business case for the reintroduction of a Station upon the former station site at the junction of Waverley Road and Priory Road. The additional population that will result from the new development proposals can only strengthen the case already made for a new Station; the Council feels strongly that the suggested site should be included in the Plan. Additionally, it should be shown as a major objective of the Plan and an essential part of its future sustainability.

Scanned Letter

Scanned Letter

Please find below objection to proposed planning on green belt land in North Leamington:

Local amenity - the land proposed for development to the north of Leamington is an important amenity for exercise and recreation as there is very little publicly accessible space in this area

Green belt - Green belt land should not be developed when other suitable land is available in Leamington for development

Overall level of housing provision - There appears to be over provision of housing resulting from the Council relying on projections from a past period of exceptional growth

Coalescence of urban areas - The development will lead to Leamington, Old Milverton and Kenilworth merging into each other in future

Infrastructure - The current infrastructure cannot support the new development, it would take considerable investment and additional land to provide this infrastructure