Mod 16 - para 2.81

The proposed allocation of new housing on the green belt to the north of leamington is sited on an area of great social amenity for which the requirement of exceptional circumstances to allow development has not been shown. The path across this proposed site linking Northumberland Road and Old Milverton is extensively used and is of enormous recreational value. It's loss would leave no significant green spaces within easy walking distance of much of North Leamington.
Whilst the North Leamington location I can see would be of greater value to the developer it will greatly exacerbate existing traffic problems along the A452 and Stoneleigh Road which the proposed Park and Ride scheme will do little to alleviate. The very difficult pinchpoint by the bridge on Stoneleigh Road will become a very serious local problem. The traffic from the proposed developments can only go out along the A452 or through Old Milverton towards Warwick which will greatly exacerbate existing traffic problems in both areas. The proposal does not adequately address this and the idea that locating industrial units as part of this development will ease North-South traffic flows is faintly ridiculous. Any possible alternatives to the A452 in particular will be turned into "rat runs" ( Hill Wooton for example as alternative access to the A46) causing great disruption and additional hazard in residential areas.
As partial justification for this proposal is to accommodate housing shortfall in Coventry it would seem more sensible to look for sites closer to Coventry and with easier access to the A46.

I do not condider that the plan should Amend Policies Map to remove additional land from the Green Belt in line with
Policy DS19 in the following location

* North of Milverton, Leamington Spa (H44); (policies Map 2) Nor the adjacent land reserved for future delopement (S2) (also Policies map 2)

Reason for this is that the land is Greeb Belt and no details of a reason for exceptional circumstances is given.

Land is required for additional housing near the Coventry City boundary and this is nowhere near there and causes further commuting for workers and their families. Unable to find any provision for primary school places for the first 250 homes or any subsequent ones. Adjacent roads already heavily congested particularly in the peaks.

Kings Hill site adjacent to Coventry boundary as proposed should be used and accelerated rate of build achieved as has happened elsewhere.

Full consideration of scoring of green belt land sites considered not revealed

My objection concerns the proposal to increase the number of new houses at Hampton Magna / Hampton on the Hill from 100 to 245 (ref H51 and PM20). This will cause significant overload of the infrastructure of this small semi rural community - in terms of the school / medical services and the only through road (Old Budbrooke Road. There is already a serious traffic problem caused by vehicles travelling to /from Warwick Parkway and the M40. This additional number of houses is simply not acceptable as the current problems will be exacerbated. Also the road has a weight limit of 7.5 tons and a low bridge, so access by construction traffic is restricted.
This proposal has not been thought through in these terms. It is not sound.

The land under consideration is designated Green Belt, and as such this cannot be changed unless Exceptional circumstances exist. I do not agree that these circumstances have been met by Warwick DC.
The proposed plans are to build houses for Coventry- this would be far better achieved by building closer to Coventry- less commuting, less environmental pollution, and less valuable land/ Green Belt near to Coventry would be better utilised. Further traffic congestion locally and the need for more road building would be further significant detrimental effects.
There are lover value Green Belt sites close to Coventry which should clearly be used in preference.
Destroying this valuable Green Belt land North of Leamington would significantly reduce the area of countryside between Leamington and Kenilworth, leading the way towards development of a large sprawling conurbation. The unique characteristics of the historic town of Leamington Spa would be irreversibly lost.
Productive farming land and precious wildlife ecosystems would be lost forever.
This particular area of countryside is highly valued and utilised by local residents for walking, running, cycling, exercise, dog-walking and family leisure time.
Regarding the planned park and ride scheme, would be a further environmental disaster. Loss of valuable countryside, increase in flooding, traffic congestion would all follow. I am not at all convinced a park and ride scheme is needed, and believe if would be poorly utilised. If necessary, a site to the South of the town or further out e,g, to the north of the A46/ A452 roundabouts would be more sensible.

The land under consideration is designated Green Belt, and as such this cannot be changed unless Exceptional circumstances exist. I do not agree that these circumstances have been met by Warwick DC.
The proposed plans are to build houses for Coventry- this would be far better achieved by building closer to Coventry- less commuting, less environmental pollution, and less valuable land/ Green Belt near to Coventry would be better utilised. Further traffic congestion locally and the need for more road building would be further significant detrimental effects.
There are lover value Green Belt sites close to Coventry which should clearly be used in preference.
Destroying this valuable Green Belt land North of Leamington would significantly reduce the area of countryside between Leamington and Kenilworth, leading the way towards development of a large sprawling conurbation. The unique characteristics of the historic town of Leamington Spa would be irreversibly lost.
Productive farming land and precious wildlife ecosystems would be lost forever.
This particular area of countryside is highly valued and utilised by local residents for walking, running, cycling, exercise, dog-walking and family leisure time.
Regarding the planned park and ride scheme, would be a further environmental disaster. Loss of valuable countryside, increase in flooding, traffic congestion would all follow. I am not at all convinced a park and ride scheme is needed, and believe if would be poorly utilised. If necessary, a site to the South of the town or further out e,g, to the north of the A46/ A452 roundabouts would be more sensible.

The draft local plan does not meet the criteria of "Exceptional circumstances" required to develop this Green Belt land.
The argument that the only land available is in Old Milverton is incorrect. The additional housing required to assist Coventry meeting their targets should be located closer to Coventry. The distance for commuters would increase pollution.
Sufficient land is available at a reasonable rate on the environs of Coventry that can be used without affecting the Green Belt of Old Milverton.
Therefore the Exceptional Circumstances requirements have not been met. The Local Plan significantly underestimates the capacity of land adjacent to Coventry to deliver Coventry's housing needed and therefore the development in Old Milverton is not required.
In a similar case in Cheltenham and Gloucester the Planning Inspector ruled that when releasing land from the Green Belt the "Green value" of the land should be rated and the least Green rated be removed first.
WDC and Coventry City Council have assessed the sites on the edge of Coventry and agreed that they are of a lower Green Belt Value.
Therefore the lower green belt value land should be released for the Local Plan and not Old Milverton land in North Leamington.

The Green Belt has been very effective in preventing Leamington joining with Kenilworth and Warwick. It thus does the job it was designed to do and assist in preventing the area from Wolverhampton to Leamington becoming one metropolis.

The WDC has complied with the duty to work with other local councils (Coventry City). In doing so it has not reacted the information that is included in the Coventry City Local Plan. Cooperating councils should provide housing land close to Coventry. Old Milverton is not close enough to Coventry to support the additional housing needs.

Land North of Milverton, Leamington Spa (H44) should not be removed from green-belt as there has already been identified more suitable and more sustainable alternatives on land adjacent to Coventry which would require less damaging infrastructure developments in the future.

The circumstances detailed for removing the land North of Leamington from the Green Belt are not exceptional circumstances and therefore this should NOT be allowed to happen.
Coventry City Council should find land closer to their county line if the housing is truly in support of Coventry housing need. Persons working in Coventry need to be within a closer range of the city, not in Leamington. This represents a huge impact on housing and general infrastructure for the town of Leamington and the villages of Old Milverton.
The green belt should be protected. These are not exceptional circumstances.

The Council has not shown that the Modification meets the 'Exceptional Circumstances' test.

The proposal is to support Coventry's housing needs. However, the site is 8+ miles from Coventry, there is no evidence that people who want to live/work in Coventry would want to live at such distance, and such development would result in even greater congestion on the A452.

There are alternative sites closer to Coventry capable of meeting those needs without the problems inherent in this proposal. Indeed, the Council, in its discussions with Coventry City Council, is aware of suitable sites adjoining Coventry more suitable for development.

I feel the exceptional circumstances required by the national planning policy framework to remove the land north of Milverton from the green belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
It is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry more suited. They would be more accessible to people wanting to live and work in Coventry.
We moved to North Leamington to be able to use this green belt land for the safety and well being of our family. The loss of this area would significantly affect our health and way of life.

I feel the exceptional circumstances required by the national planning policy framework to remove the land north of Milverton from the green belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
It is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry more suited. They would be more accessible to people wanting to live and work in Coventry.
We moved to North Leamington to be able to use this green belt land for the safety and well being of our family. The loss of this area would significantly affect our health and way of life.

I feel the exceptional circumstances required by the national planning policy framework to remove the land north of Milverton from the green belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
It is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry more suited. They would be more accessible to people wanting to live and work in Coventry.
We moved to North Leamington to be able to use this green belt land for the well being of our family. The loss of this area would significantly affect our health and way of life.

The inclusion of Milverton area in the context of Coventry housing needs makes no sense.Geographical separation,lack of viable transportation means this site is not suitable.A location closer to Coventry would make far more sense and would be much greener,i.e. there would be less commuting,cleaner air,less need for additional transport infrastructure.
This area is an important local amenity,as a user of these fields for guide dogs in training[the centre is based in Leamington],they provide a valuable local resource.

One of the main reasons for the development is to provide housing for Coventry. This area is quite a long way away from Coventry and there must be land that could be used that is nearer. To travel to work in Coventry from the North of Milverton would put increased pressure on a heavily used road system. It does not seem to make sense to have housing south of the A46. The plan would add to commuting which I thought the government wanted to reduce.

WDC and Coventry CC have identified sites of lower green belt value which could be used. These should be used.

Most employment in Leamington is to the south of the town. Building houses to the north is not sensible as commuters have to cross Leamington.

The Green Belt would be so reduced as to hardly have any value.

The proposed park and ride scheme looks very questionable though easy to put in a plan. It is possible that no park and ride scheme has been that successful other than maybe Oxford. Leamington's main areas of employment are to the south of Leamington so it would need an amazingly improved bus service to handle any significant number of commuters. Shoppers have good parking facilities in Leamington.

I have spent considerable time reviewing the proposed Local Plan and do not think that the exceptional circumstances required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt have been sufficiently demonstrated by Warwick District Council.

My particular concerns to this modification are as follows:

The proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion and further road construction. I would question whether people who want to live and work in Coventry would choose to buy houses on land North of Milverton, so I can not see how the development proposal will support Coventry's housing needs.

I would further point to the precedence for releasing land from the Green Belt requires the "value" of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account and those with the least value to be removed from the Green Belt first. I understand that WDC, in cooperation with Coventry City Council, has assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value. Therefore, even if development at Old Milverton was acceptable as a sustainable location for development, there are sites with a lower Green Belt value that should be used in preference to the land north of Milverton.

I would also highlight that the modification is unsound as it would result in "green lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth will be reduced to less than 1 1/2 miles.

The environmental and social consequences of the modification would also be extremely damaging and irreversible. Not only would the area lose highly productive farming land but also a fantastic recreational space. Like many other local residents, my family, including my two young children delight in walking, bird watching and enjoying the fresh air of this special area. I believe the protection of the Green belt is extremely important and I would urge that this modification be reconsidered.

This representation concerns the removal of land at Old Milverton, north of Leamington Spa, from the green belt.

The Exceptional Circumstances required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land north of Milverton from the green belt have not been demonstrated. The proposed development is to support Coventry's needs, but there are sites closer to Coventry. It is illogical to propose park and ride facilities on the site - residents will not need them. If the site really does serve Coventry's needs, it will cause more commuting and congestion on roads which are already overcrowded at peak times; increases in the amount of dual carrigeway will only serve to shunt the congestion to the next bottleneck. It is in practice unlikely that the development will provide for Coventry's needs.

Green belt development should begin with the least valuable land; it is generally agreed that this is the land on the fringes of Coventry, not that on the edge of Leamngton.

Leamington and Kenilworth will become contiguous, the space between them being less and less noticeable. Productive farming land and long-established wild life habitat will be lost, along with areas used for recreation and education.

I object because:
1.The Exceptional Circumstances required by the NPP Framework to justify removal of greenbelt land have not been demonstrated. This is because there are other , better and nearer sites to support Coventry's housing needs. These have already been identified by WDC in conjunction with Coventry CC These have been identified and are available, though of course the developers will not be as keen on selling houses with a Coventry tag.
The justification for releasing land from the Green Belt requires that those sites with the least Green Belt value be removed first. The Green Belt land at Milverton should be one of the last on the list.

2. If the houses are for Coventry's needs then they are in the wrong place, leading to more traffic congestion in traveling to Coventry.

3. The proposed railway station will not work as there is a deep cutting where it is proposed. A bypass on the track would be needed anyway, for local trains to pick up and set down while the Virgin expresses came through. So even more land required. Coventry is a fair sized city. Do the proposers really imagine that commuters will travel by train to the centre of Coventry ,to then fan out into the city? So what good will the station be for Coventry's housing needs?

4. The proposals include some light industry. It is a good idea for people to live near their work. But how is light industry, which is in the plan, going to address Coventry's housing needs?

5. The area is great for walkers and we see it well used. The prime farmland is an important resource as are the wildlife habitats.

6. The green space between Leamington and Warwick will be further reduced . the pleasant approach to the North end of Leamington Spa will be seriously affected. Green Belt is what it is: a "green belt' separating one area of development from another and should not be eroded.

The exceptional circumstances required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick DC.
The proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are suitable sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion (which is already extremely bad at peak times and would only worsen) and further road construction.
In practice it is impossible to ensure that people who work in Coventry will buy houses on land North of Milverton and therefore this development proposal will not support Coventry's housing need.
Precedence for releasing land from the Green Belt requires the "value" of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account and those with the least value to be removed from the Green Belt first. WDC, in cooperation with Coventry City Council, has assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value. Even if development at Old Milverton was acceptable as a sustainable location for development, there are sites with a lower Green Belt value that should be used in preference to the land north of Milverton.
The "green lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth will be reduced to less than 1 1/2 miles. The value of the ecosystem services which this green lung provide cannot be underestimated.
The picturesque northern gateway to the historic regency town of Royal Leamington Spa will be destroyed.
Highly productive farming land will be lost together with long established wild life habitat.
The residents of local towns will be deprived of an area which is highly valued and sustainable for walking, running, cycling, riding, bird watching and is also used by local schools for educational walks.

The EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
The proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion and further road construction.
In practice it is unlikely that people who want to live and work in Coventry will buy houses on land North of Milverton and therefore this development proposal will not support Coventry's housing need.
Precedence for releasing land from the Green Belt requires the "value" of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account and those with the least value to be removed from the Green Belt first. WDC, in cooperation with Coventry City Council, has assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value. Even if development at Old Milverton was acceptable as a sustainable location for development, there are sites with a lower Green Belt value that should be used in preference to the land north of Milverton.
The "green lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth will be reduced to less than 1 1/2 miles.
The picturesque northern gateway to the historic regency town of Royal Leamington Spa will be destroyed.
Highly productive farming land will be lost together with long established wild life habitat.
The residents of local towns will be deprived of an area which is highly valued and sustainable for walking, running, cycling, riding, bird watching and is also used by local schools for educational walks.
The proposed park-and-ride scheme is unsustainable because:
 There will be no dedicated buses, so users will have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable. Most of the buses have long journey times to Coventry.
 The site is too close to Leamington. It would be better if the site was focused on the A46 roundabout with the A452, which could form part of the Thickthorn development, and provide for Leamington, Warwick, Kenilworth, Warwick University and potentially Coventry.
 Much of the traffic using the A452 crosses to the south of Leamington where there are the major employers
 Shoppers are unlikely to use the park and ride when there is plenty of parking in Leamington
 Oxford appears to have the only park and ride scheme in the country which really works and this is because there is such limited parking in Oxford city centre.
 There are already a lot of car parks in this area of Green Belt with impervious surfaces all of which reduce the areas ability to absorb rainfall and contribute to flooding
A railway station is unviable because the railway line is in a deep cutting in Old Milverton and there are only express Cross Country trains running along the line along with freight trains but no local service.

Removal of land north of leamington from the green belt is unsound for several reasons. It is reducing the clear rural definition between leamington spa and kenilworth towns, and spoils the approach in to leamington from the north. Access in and out of leamington spa along the kenilworth road is very congested especially at peak times, and I do not feel that the infrastructure could cope with the additional traffic that such a development would generate.

Removal of land north of leamington from the green belt is unsound for several reasons. It is reducing the clear rural definition between leamington spa and kenilworth towns, and spoils the approach in to leamington from the north. Access in and out of leamington spa along the kenilworth road is very congested especially at peak times, and I do not feel that the infrastructure could cope with the additional traffic that such a development would generate.

I object to the removal of land north of Milverton from the green belt (Mod. Policies Map Number H44).

Warwick District Council have not demonstrated the Exceptional Circumstances required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt.

I understand this proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. However, precedence from releasing land from the Green Belt requires the 'value' of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account, and those with the least value to be removed first. Warwick District Council has worked with Coventry City Council and identified sites on the edge of Coventry being of lower Green Belt value. These sustainable sites closer to Coventry should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, pollution, congestion and the risk of further road construction.

The residents of local towns will be deprived of an area which is highly valued and sustainable for walking, running, cycling, riding, bird watching and also used by local schools for educational visits.
The green lung between Leamington Spa and Kenilworth will be reduced to less than one and a half miles.
The picturesque northern gateway to the historic town of Royal Leamington Spa will be destroyed.
Highly productive framing land will be lost together with long established wild-life habitat.

Removal of land from the Green Belt at Hatton Park - H28 and H53 - has not been shown to be justified by 'exceptional circumstances', in my opinion.

1. The EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
2. Precedence for releasing land from the Green Belt requires the "value" of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account and those with the least value to be removed from the Green Belt first. WDC, in cooperation with Coventry City Council, has assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value. Even if development at Old Milverton was acceptable as a sustainable location for development, there are sites with a lower Green Belt value that should be used in preference to the land north of Milverton.
3. The proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion, further road construction and resulting detrimental environmental impact.
4. The "green lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth will be reduced to less than 1 1/2 miles.
5. Highly productive farming land will be lost together with long established wild life habitat.
6. The residents of local towns will be deprived of an area which is highly valued and sustainable for walking, running, cycling, riding, bird watching and is also used by local schools for educational walks.
7. The picturesque northern gateway to the historic regency town of Royal Leamington Spa will be destroyed.
8. In practice it is unlikely that people who choose to live and work in Coventry will buy houses on land North of Milverton and therefore this development proposal will not support Coventry's housing need.
9. The proposed park-and-ride scheme is unsustainable because:
* There will be no dedicated buses, so users will have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable
* The site is too close to Leamington. It would be better if the site was focused on the A46 roundabout with the A452, which could form part of the Thickthorn development, and provide for Leamington,Warwick, Kenilworth, Warwick University and potentially Coventry.
* Much of the traffic using the A452 crosses to the south of Leamington where there are the major employers
* Shoppers are unlikely to use the park and ride when there is plenty of parking in Leamington
10. There are already a lot of car parks in this area of Green Belt with impervious surfaces all of which reduce the areas ability to absorb rainfall and contribute to flooding
11. A railway station is unviable because the railway line is in a deep cutting in Old Milverton making construction impractical

1. The EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
2. The proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion and further road construction.
3. Precedence for releasing land from the Green Belt requires the "value" of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account and those with the least value to be removed from the Green Belt first. WDC, in cooperation with Coventry City Council, has assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value. Even if development at Old Milverton was acceptable as a sustainable location for development, there are sites with a lower Green Belt value that should be used in preference to the land north of Milverton. Just looking at a google map of Coventry, I estimated that probably up to 1/5th of Coventry is still undeveloped. Surely Coventry City Council should be looking to 'infill' these areas (which are surely of little environmental and no agricultural value) instead of offloading its housing problems onto other local areas?
4. The "green lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth will be reduced to less than 1 1/2 miles.
5. The picturesque northern gateway to the historic regency town of Royal Leamington Spa will be destroyed.
6. Highly productive farming land will be lost together with long established wild life habitat. Having known the farmer for several years and working in the industry I definitely know this to be true. The world has an impending food crisis. The worlds population is set to nearly double from 6 to 11 billion by 2050. We cannot feed the current world population now and we are not 'self sufficient' in food production in this country. We can ill afford to turn farmland over to housing
7. The residents of local towns will be deprived of an area which is highly valued and sustainable for walking, running, cycling, riding, bird watching and is also used by local schools for educational walks. We walked through the proposed development area on the afternoon of the 2nd April. During our 10min walk through the area we counted 28 people using the footpath! There must be hundreds, if not thousands of local residents who enjoy this beautiful area of greenbelt regularly who would think the same.
8. In practice it is unlikely that people who want to live and work in Coventry will buy houses on land North of Milverton and therefore this development proposal will not support Coventry's housing need.
9. The proposed park-and-ride scheme is unsustainable because:
* There will be no dedicated buses, so users will have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable. In my opinion this would be a waste of time. The buses between Leamington and Kenilworth are usually 75% filled anyway. This plan would not IMO reduce the number of people coming from Kenilworth/Coventry by car. A much better solution would be to increase the number of buses running between these 3 places allowing residents a better option than driving to Leamington.
* The site is too close to Leamington. It would be better if the site was focused on the A46 roundabout with the A452, which could form part of the Thickthorn development, and provide for Leamington, Warwick, Kenilworth, Warwick University and potentially Coventry.
* Much of the traffic using the A452 crosses to the south of Leamington where there are the major employers. I doubt these people would be using Public transport since most of them work for a large, local car manufacturer and have been given company cars!
* Shoppers are unlikely to use the park and ride when there is plenty of parking in Leamington. I have never had a problem parking in Leamington on the numerous occasions I came to the town when I lived in Princethorpe, even after the council decided to restrict street parking in the area to the north of the town centre to residents only. If there really is perceived to be a problem with parking, then maybe these restriction should be lifted?
* Oxford appears to have the only park and ride scheme in the country which really works and this is because there is such limited parking in Oxford city centre.
* There are already a lot of car parks in this area of Green Belt with impervious surfaces all of which reduce the areas ability to absorb rainfall and contribute to flooding

10. A railway station is unviable because the railway line is in a deep cutting in Old Milverton making construction impractical

Green Belt North of Leamington. i object.
I object because:
1.The Exceptional Circumstances required by the NPP Framework to justify removal of greenbelt land have not been demonstrated. Other , better and nearer sites to support Coventry's housing needs. have already been identified by WDC in conjunction with Coventry CC
The Green Belt land at Milverton should be one of the last on the list of what is available

2. If the houses are for Coventry's needs then they are in the wrong place, leading to more traffic congestion in traveling to Coventry.

3. The proposed railway station will not work as there is a deep cutting where it is proposed

4. The proposals include some light industry. What relevance is that to Coventry's perceived housing needs

5. The area is great for walkers The prime farmland important resource as are the wildlife habitats.

6. The green space between Leamington and Warwick will be further reduced . the pleasant approach to the North end of Leamington Spa will be seriously affected. Green Belt is what it is: a "green belt' separating one area of development from another and should not be eroded

I believe that the proposed modifications to the local plan and the removal of land north of Milverton from the green belt are unsound for the following reasons:

The EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
The proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion and further road construction.
I have lived in Leamington Spa for over four years and commuted into Coventry for three of these. The current road system can not cope with the volume of traffic on the A452. It often used to take me longer to travel the 4 miles out of Leamington as to travel the subsequent 10 miles to get into my place of work in Coventry. The one joining road to the major highway of the A46, the A452 is narrow, with banks on either side, two roundabouts to navigate and a bridge over a river so there is no obvious way to widen this to cope with additional traffic from a new housing estate or park and ride scheme. The road is also prone to flooding. In addition, the town centre is grid locked in the morning with traffic travelling from north to south Leamington as there are again two bridges to navigate and several major employers in South Leamington.

I choose and can afford to live in Leamington Spa but the reality is the land to the immediate north of Leamington Spa in North Milverton carries a large premium and as such it is unlikely that people from Coventry will be buying these houses and therefore this development proposal will not support Coventry's housing need.
Precedence for releasing land from the Green Belt requires the "value" of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account and those with the least value to be removed from the Green Belt first. WDC, in cooperation with Coventry City Council, has assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value. Even if development at Old Milverton was acceptable as a sustainable location for development, there are sites with a lower Green Belt value that should be used in preference to the land north of Milverton. These sites are closer to Coventry and will cause less impact on local communities.
Currently the residents of Leamington, Warwick and Kenilworth use the North Milverton green belt area for walking, running, cycling, riding, bird watching and it is also used by local schools for educational walks. The area provides a picturesque northern gateway to the historic regency town of Royal Leamington Spa and separates Leamington Spa as a town from neighbouring Kenilworth.
This land has long established wild life habitat and highly productive farming land. While I understand the need to build new houses it does not make any sense to build on such a lovely area, which gives so many local people so much pleasure when there are alternative sites available closer to Coventry. What legacy are we leaving for future generations if we destroy green belt land simply because it carries a premium for developers when there are real alternatives?

With regard to the proposed park-and-ride scheme I believe the proposed site of this is unsustainable because:
 _The site is too close to Leamington, as per my points above, it would simply add to existing traffic congestion. It would be better if the site was focused on the A46 roundabout with the A452, which could form part of the Thickthorn development, and provide for Leamington, Warwick, Kenilworth, Warwick University and potentially Coventry.
 _Much of the traffic using the A452 crosses to the south of Leamington where there are the major employers
 _Shoppers are unlikely to use the park and ride when there is plenty of parking in Leamington

Exceptional Circumstances required by NPP Framework not demonstrated. Other areas , near Coventry available and should be used first. If houses for Coventry needs then more traffic congestion from traveling.
Green space between Kenilworth and Leamington will be further eroded. That is not what green belt is for

Modification 16
Plan to remove land north of Milverton from Green Belt is unsound precisely because it contravenes the purpose of Green Belt land, namely to prevent urban sprawl and maintain the essential characteristics of the openness and permanence of English countryside. This stretch of land is the entrance to the ancient Regency town of Leamington Spa and the land itself provides countryside walkways through the quintessential Old English village of Milverton. This is not just useable land but part of the beautiful English landscape that should be preserved for future generations.
Furthermore, any plan to further merge the distinctive historic towns of Kenilworth and Leamington Spa is unacceptable: the present plan would result in the green lung between Leamington and Kenilworth being reduced to less than 1 1/2 miles.
Proposed modifications are unsound as Exceptional Circumstances do not exist in this case: the proposal aims to meet Coventry's housing needs when it has been demonstrated that there are sustainable sites closer to Coventry which are of a lower Green Belt value than the land north of Milverton. Why plan for a development which would increase the need for commuting, road construction, congestion, pollution when the need can be met closer to Coventry? Will the people of Coventry choose to live in Leamington anyway or would the implementation of this plan lead to a development that would change the nature and character of North Leamington while making little or no difference to Coventry?

The EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES required by the National Planning Policy Framework to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.

The proposed development is to support Coventry City Council's housing need. There are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to the land North of Milverton to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion and further road construction and would be contrary to Coventry's local plan to avoid adding to these issues. Currently getting from the edge of Leamington to the A46 which is less than 2 miles takes over 10-20 mins at peak times or over an hour on really bad days

In practice it is unlikely that people who want to live and work in Coventry will buy houses on land North of Milverton and therefore this development proposal will not support Coventry's housing need.

Precedence for releasing land from the Green Belt requires the "value" of potential sites to the Green Belt to be taken into account and those with the least value to be removed from the Green Belt first. WDC, in cooperation with Coventry City Council, has assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value. Even if development at Old Milverton was acceptable as a sustainable location for development, there are sites with a lower Green Belt value that should be used in preference to the land north of Milverton.

The "green lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth will be reduced to less than 1 1/2 miles.

Highly productive farming land will be lost together with long established wild life habitat.

The residents of local towns will be deprived of an area which is highly valued and sustainable for walking, running, cycling, riding, bird watching and is also used by local schools for educational walks.

The proposed park-and-ride scheme is unsustainable because:
* There will be no dedicated buses, so users will have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable
* The site is too close to Leamington. It would be better if the site was focused on the A46 roundabout with the A452, which could form part of the Thickthorn development, and provide for Leamington, Warwick, Kenilworth, Warwick University and potentially Coventry.
* Much of the traffic using the A452 crosses to the south of Leamington where there are the major employers
* Shoppers are unlikely to use the park and ride when there is plenty of parking in Leamington all year round so where is the business case for this need?

A railway station is unviable because the railway line is in a deep cutting in Old Milverton making construction impractical and will create unnecessary access issues. Where is the business case for this option surely it would be better value to improve existing stations and their accessability?

The potential for employment land would surely be better focused on utlising existing areas such as stoneleigh and deer park and the like improving the infrasturer to support these areas which are currently poorly supported