Mod 16 - para 2.81

Any decision to lift Green Belt status on this land and agree planning permission for 425+ homes, initially with more in the future, allied to additional development in Burton Green & Cromwell Lane would be highly irresponsible unless and until substantial new provision was made to accommodate the increase traffic that would result.

Any policy makers should first visit the area and witness the traffic queues that already arise along Westwood Heath Road from Cromwell Lane to Kirby Corner roundabout on weekdays mornings as traffic attempts to access:
* Westwood Business Park
* Cannon Park and the A45
* Warwick University and the Kenilworth Road / A46
Likewise in the evenings, queues form back from Cromwell Lane down Westwood Heath Road as people make journeys back to Balsall Common, Kenilworth or Tile Hill.

You should fully take into account that the road across the University of Warwick campus is now restricted to 20 mph and the frequent stops made buses dropping up 80+ plus students at a time cause tail backs not only along Westwood Heath Road but back up to Cannon Park and the A45.

An alternative access route from Westwood to Kenilworth along Crackley Lane, which is already used a 'rat run' to avoid the University Campus is highly unsuited to an increase in traffic and already dangerous to both vehicular traffic and especially cyclists, due it's narrowness, sharp blind corners, and extensive pot holes especially along the verges that cause cyclists and vehicles to utilise the middle of road resulting in close misses, as I am frequently aware of as both a cyclist and driver.

Any development at Westwood would surely require the widening of Crackley Lane as an absolute minimum.

I would also suggest that the route across Warwick campus would need to be re-considered, removing the 20 mph limit, erecting barriers to protect pedestrians and construction walkways across the road instead of having students walking out in front of vehicles as they do today.

The University also now propose a new Sports complex near Kirby Corner which in itself will result in more traffic in the local area.

Furthermore you should be aware of the frequent instances of 'unlit' student cyclists around Westwood Heath, which would become even more of a danger with a rise in traffic. You may refer to the Police Liaison Team at the University to validate that issue / concern.

Finally I would invite the planners to visit the Banner brook development in Coventry and the surrounding roads where the Massey Ferguson plant once existed, on any weekday morning or evening to witness and experience the traffic congestion that has arisen following a similar large scale housing development with no foresight or appreciation of the impact on local traffic and residents. If residents aren't away from their properties by around 8 am and travelling to Westwood Park / Warwick Uni they might as well stay at home until past 9 am, or sit in a queue for an hour. The same fate would face residents of Westwood and Burton Green.

Yes we are told that new homes are required, but great thought and consideration as the infrastructure required to support such developments must be undertaken.

Site H53 - Brownley Green Lane

Preparation - Site H53 was not previously included in the Local Plan by WDC and, therefore, we believe that there has not been proper consultation with the local community concerning this particular site.

Soundness - Site H53 lies within the green belt boundary. This should only be changed in "exceptional circumstances". We do not believe that this condition has been met for this site.

A Housing Needs Survey for the Parish of Hatton in which Hatton Park is located, was carried out in 2014. This was an extensive survey which highlighted the need for 12 dwellings. These findings, suggest that development of H53 for a proposed 55 homes is not needed, therefore not sustainable and certainly not demonstrating exceptional circumstances for removing the land from the Green Belt. The smaller number of houses identified as needed by the Parish survey could easily be developed within windfall and brownfield sites.

The Green Space team from Warwick District Council has very recently notified us that some of the grassland at Hatton Park has been designated a Local Wildlife Site. This follows surveying carried out by Warwickshire County Council in 2014 and 2015. After Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Local Wildlife Sites are the most important. The survey found 99 species of vascular plants, five of which are notable in Warwickshire. It also recorded ten species of butterfly, a high number for a relatively built up area. A Peregrine Falcon and Hobby were observed hunting overhead. The question has to be asked, what detrimental effect will there be on these wildlife sites, supposedly classed as important by WDC and WCC, from the proposed development in Hatton Park?

Hatton Park Residents' Association (HPRA)

For the record, Hatton Park is an estate of houses created on the brownfield site of the previous Hatton Psychiatric Hospital. The estate has a very small family run shop, a small police post and no other significant amenities except a village hall sited together with its car park, a child play area and a fenced netball/football court. The land, the village hall and its car park were gifted to the HPRA in 2003 under the S106 requirement by Bovis Homes and AC Lloyd. There is no school or doctors surgery nearby. Hatton Park is not a village in any sense of the word; it is a housing estate with only two points of vehicular access onto the A 4177.

The village hall and its dedicated car park are owned and operated by the HPRA which is a registered charity of which all committee members are the trustees. The charity has recently resurfaced the car park at a cost of £25,000 which included contributions from the National Lottery Fund and the Rural West Community Forum.

Hatton Park Village Hall is located at the edge of the Hatton Park estate directly adjacent to the proposed H53 site. It looks out over the site below and the
proposed access to H53 would run through the existing hall car park and its current access to Barcheston Drive. The proposed road entrance and exit to the
development is adjacent to the only play area on Hatton Park, which consists of a fenced netball/football court, and the young childrens' play area.

The proposed H53 amendment local plan is not sound because:

* The proposed access and egress from Barcheston Drive to the H53 site will be through land owned by the HPRA. The ownership of this land has not been mentioned in any documents or communications relating to H53 nor has there been any communication from WDC and we are not willing to sell.

* Developing this site in the manner proposed will cause a very significant loss of amenity to the Village Hall, child play area and fenced netball/football court.

* Moreover, these are the only such play areas on the entire Hatton Park estate and their access point will be the road carrying construction traffic to and from the H53 site. This poses significant traffic-related safety issues both during and after the construction phase.

* Demolition and relocation of the Village Hall car parking and access will have a significant and detrimental affect on the overall amenity of our Village Hall and significantly affect its use for family events such as wedding receptions, birthday parties and other community events. This will have a serious impact on the financial viability of the Hall.

* Furthermore, during the construction phase of H53 with construction traffic using the access within a few metres of the Village Hall building, it is highly unlikely the charity would be able to rent out the Village Hall to the community while this development work was going on. This will increase the likely financial loss to the charity and loss of amenity to the current community living at Hatton Park.

We understand that the National Planning Policy Framework requires that exceptional circumstances have to be established by Warwick District Council to remove the land North of Milverton from the Green Belt. This criteria has clearly not been established in a way that stands up to close examination.

The proposed development has been justified in order to support Coventry City Council's housing need. The foundation to these proposals is highly questionable. We understand that the Government stipulated that each local authority with planning powers had to make plans to build a certain number of homes. The number that each local authority had to plan for was prescribed by the Government. It is therefore surely reasonable to assume that the Government felt that the number of homes they expected to be planned, by each local authority, could be built within that council's boundaries. For a local authority to just pass on this requirement to a neighbouring authority, which also has its own Government target to reach, is unfair in the extreme.

Even if this passing on of some of Coventry's target for new homes to Warwick District Council is deemed the only way forward, then it can only make sense if these houses are built on the edge of Coventry and not on the edge of Leamington Spa. If these homes are destined for people currently living and working in Coventry, then it is only rational if they are as close to Coventry as possible to reduce unnecessary commuting, inevitable congestion and further road construction with the resulting environmental damage.

What kind of logic is it that says we have to provide for Coventry's housing needs by building those houses on the edge of Leamington Spa? It is a well-known fact that commuting is bad for the individual concerned and bad for the environment. This 'plan' would force people into making long commutes across the remaining green belt to their place of work,

When considering releasing land from the Green Belt, it has been established that the value of potential sites to the Green Belt must be taken into account and those with the least value prioritised for removal from the Green Belt. We understand that WDC and Coventry City Council have assessed sites on the edge of Coventry as being of lower Green Belt value than the Old Milverton site. It is therefore perverse, when there are sustainable sites closer to Coventry, that land north of Milverton should be first choice.

The whole rationale for the Green Belt was to protect "green lungs" between conurbations. The green lung between Leamington and Kenilworth would be reduced to less than 11/2 miles if this development was allowed, seriously undermining its value. The attractive and pleasant northern entry to the historic regency town of Royal Leamington Spa will be irretrievably damaged. Highly beneficial and productive land will be destroyed together with a well-established wild life habitat. The green belt also exists to protect the character of towns and cities and the character of Leamington Spa, with its Regency centre, is based on its being the size it is now and not to become a dormitory area for Coventry.

The residents of the wider Warwick District area will be deprived of an area which is highly valued and sustainable for all manner of pursuits, such as rambling, jogging, cycling, riding and bird watching. This proposal will be a disaster for Leamington Spa.

The park-and-ride scheme as proposed, is unsustainable because:
* There will be no dedicated buses, so users will have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable and face not being able to board buses which may be full at peak times.
* 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 is destined for the south of Leamington where the major employers are situated.
* 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 making construction impractical.

In summary, we believe the land north of Milverton should remain in the Green Belt.
The development proposed on the land north of Milverton should be reallocated to alternative sites closer to Coventry which have a lower "Green Belt" value and are capable of delivering the required housing.

As a resident of Coventry who has lived on the border of Warwick District Council for 40 years I am writing to place on record my objection to the plan to build on the area known as site ref H43 (Kings Hill).
I have listened to all the arguments both "for" and "against" and I can see no justification for building within this area. I request that these plans are reviewed and turned down on the basis that Coventry has more than enough of its own "brown field" sites to accommodate this house building plan.

I want to object to 2 modifications:
Allocation of land North ofMilverton for development
Mod number 14
Paragraph policy DS15
Mod policies map number H44

And

Modification: removal of land north of Milverton from the green belt
Mod number 16
Paragraph number 2.81
Mod policies map number H44

Please register my objections
This is because there has been little/no consultation on what is planned to be built where.
Your web site is terrible to use and lodge objection.
What proviso have you made to consult residents whose first language is not English?

Ref. Modification: Removal of land North of Milverton from the Green Belt.
Mod. No.16. Paragraph No 2.81 Mod Policies Map No. H44

Ref. Modification: Allocation of land North of Milverton for Development.
Mod No.14 Paragraph No. Policy DS15 Mod.Policies Map No H44

We agree in every particular with the objections submitted by The Old Milverton and Blackdown Joint Parish Council.

see attached

as attached

Regarding proposed increase in new homes from 100 to 245., at the above location it will hugely increase the population, and strain the infastructure.

Both locations are Green Belt, I understand that David Cameron pledged protection of Green belt. What sort of a legacy are we leaving for future generations if we build on Green Belt.????? In the Mansion House speech, George Osborne stated in 2014 that there is enough Brown field land in England for 2.5 million new homes , a large proportion of which are in London , so why not build on them???? Also he stated we are a small crowded island keen to protect our green spaces.

There are ALWAYS infastructural issues here with, water leaks, drainage and sewer problems , roads and narrow lanes with potholes , school, and doctors surgery .
Flooding on 9th March on A46 , and the Budbooke Road, caused traffic to come to a standstill all around here, there have been no improvements at all over the years we have lived here , and we now have M40 producing more traffic on all adjacent roads and lanes with the pollution and noise that goes with it., plus Warwick Parkway Station. Train users park all over the place in Hampton Magna causing obstruction. All we have is a country lane in and out of the village unable to cope with all this traffic., and a confusing traffic lights sequence at the junction on the Birmingham Road. A4177. If there was to be a major emergency think the fire, ambulance and police would have difficulty arriving quickly here.

What are your reasons for not considering land off Hampton Road 43 Acres SP2663 3057 which was available for purchase round about August 10th 2015.???? or land at Stanks Farm adjacent to Warwick Parkway. Both of these sites are nearer to the main roads and Motorway.???? and will interfere much less with Hampton Magna .

Instead of viewing beautiful GREEN BELT, green fields, vegetation, hedges and trees, visually the new housing will cause gross disturbance while it is being built, visually it will be unattractive as we look down on field H51, and we will be exposed to much much more air pollution, noise pollution. Instead of hearing sky larks and seeing many wonderful birds, including swallows swifts and house martins . Yesterday I saw 2 buzzards and a wren, sparrows, starlings dunnocks, blue tits, longtailed tits and great tits , and wildlife, we have bats ,which we see every summertime, plus frogs, toads, moles, shrews and field mice,hedgehogs , grass snakes and deer. Also the wild flowers along the hedgerows. Where will all this wild life disappear to???????

There has been a huge increase in noise levels particularly the last 10 years or so from the M40 and of course more traffic on the A46,, particularly in the summer when we would like to be in our garden and be able to leave a bedroom window open overnight, unfortunately because of too much traffic noise we are unable to do this anymore , this can only get much worse ,

Public safety issues. Hampton Magna is a village of pensioners who have lived here since Hampton Magna was built as a new 60,s village on the Budbrooke Army Barracks. home of the Warwickshire Regiment .., They may have visual, hearing or mobility issues and there are lots of young families., where the children can play safely outdoors.
.It has always been a safe place to live., no dangerous avenues or roads, very little crime ,theft, vandalism and drug issues. We would very much like to keep it that way.




HOW THIS AFFECTS US PERSONALLY

Our property at one point is not much more than a meter from the hedge boundary.
Our house at the back is facing SSW we have 5 windows and 3 french windows overlooking H51 what about our gross lack of privacy .
Gross loss of day light and sunlight.
House would be overshadowed by this development.
Street lights will be blasting out instead of a dark open space .
Increased risk of vandalism and crime because of the public footpath along the length of the hedge, as will end up being a cut through instead of a pleasant fields and hedgerows and public footpaths for ramblers, dog walkers and families.
Woodway Avenue will become a dangerous road too for adults and children alike due to the extra daily volume of traffic , already with residents cars, visitors cars, school parents cars , tradesmen and cars from the Station parked all over the place it is becoming more congested....






I accept that there is some need for new housing in Warwickshire, but NOT the huge amount that seems to be happening all over the county, why cant you build on Brown Field sites first.????

In Hampton Magna certainly a small amount of housing suitable for first time buyers might be appropriate plus some sort of suitable dwellings for older couples and singles,WITH some outside space, maybe with a balcony . NOT rabbit hutch size retirement dwellings or flats.. If you want to encourage residents out of their nice 3 and 4 bed houses here in Hampton Magna you need to build something that will have appeal, freehold too. that they can buy . There are many many folk here that have lived in Hampton Magna since it was built nearly 50 years ago. and have no intention of moving away from here. great care and thought should go into the final plans of what is chosen to be built here.

Do hope that this can be sorted out. We are really concerned about the future ,once Green Belt is built on it has GONE FOREVER, for future generations , we are custodians of this beautiful green and pleasant land and should respect and look after it.. All this construction on Green Belt in Warwickshire., and the rest of the country., just cannot be the right way to do things.

After attending the Parish Council meeting, the thought that I came away with was why we should suffer because Coventry fell short with new builds.

We bought our House for the reason that Hampton Magna is what it is, a rural friendly Village, why should we suffer because of shortfalls from other Councils and our Village life become part of a Town.
The traffic when problems occur on the bypass already make Hampton Magna a 'Rat run', more cars will not only make this worse, but there is pollution and safety to consider, we already have a cross section of ages in the Village and at the moment it is safe for the Young and the Elderly to walk/cross roads, there are also many domestic animals to consider. The parking around the School is already at a premium, where will all the new cars park?
The Doctors at present is a small friendly practice where they will if possible always try to accommodate you as soon as possible, how will this happen with an extended demand?
The proposed new build will also dramatically affect the Wildlife and Public footpath in the fields along with for many residents a wonderful rural view, why should that suffer, does the word 'Greenbelt' have no meaning?
The Lorries that would be a continuous blight on our lives for many years whilst the building takes place will have a long term detrimental effect on all the residents with both noise and mess along with traffic delays as the Village only has one way in and out, which then also has an effect on our day to day working life.
I really don't think this has been thought through properly, there are other sites, that are not Villages in Warwickshire that could be built on and I am very disappointed that they are not being considered instead.

I should like to request that this proposed development be reviewed with a view to finding an alternative site for Coventry overspill housing.
I do not live in this part of Leamington Spa but nonetheless appreciate the "Green Lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth and consider it important to maintain for the well-being of urban dwellers. The green fields and countryside, the allotments and village communities around the town contribute to the quality of life of its inhabitants. The countryside is also an important natural habitat for wild life. People like to and need to be able to go walking, dog walking, running, cycling and/or riding to relax in their free time - the environs of Leamington as they are still permit this - even without a car.
There is evidently a shortage of housing but for some twenty years we have mostly seen developments of luxury housing and buy-to-lets. This does not address the needs of most ordinary people. It may be that it is time to consider the development of a new town rather than endless brown fill and green site development projects. The density of the town's population and accompanying traffic pollution must be a consideration.
It is arguable that if this housing proposal is to alleviate the Coventry housing crisis, that it would be preferable to make the development nearer Coventry.
More houses around this part of Leamington will add volumes of traffic to an already busy commuter part of town.
Please think again.
Only the builders will benefit from this and they are rich enough.

Please note my objection to the increase in house numbers for land H27 and H51 in Hampton Magna.
I understand that new houses must be built and raised no objection to previous plans. The revised plans more than double the original plans to 245 homes and appear to offer no improvements in infrastructure or services.
I would be more accepting of the plans if improved vehicle access were to be built, ideally from the A46. This would of course add huge expense but this would help me consider accepting new plans. Perhaps another access route could be considered, maybe from the farm by the station.
I have concerns over increased numbers for the surgery and school.

I would like to register my objection to the proposed development plans for Hampton Magna.
I have looked at the plan and the information which has been made available and have many objections which I list below:
1) The plan breaches the guidelines set down by the government which indicates that the green belt should not be built on unless there are exceptional circumstances.
2) We currently have quite a good doctors surgery which generally gives good access to a doctor when needed, the development will certainly change this situation fairly dramatically. Being aware of the general shortage of doctors it's difficult to see how the service could be maintained at its present standard.
2) The traffic within the village and with the three routes out of the village are very high at peak periods and the increase of the numbers in the plan will have a very big detrimental effect. Within the village there is a bottleneck starting at the junction of Styles Close and the Fieldbarn road and extending up Slade hill and down Woodway Avenue as far as the Daly Avenue junction. The congestion is particularly bad during the morning rush period and pick up time at the local school and due to the high numbers of parents dropping and picking up children from other surrounding villages. I know that on occasions the local buses have difficulty getting down Slade Hill due to the parking. Any increase in capacity will inevitably draw in more pupils from the outlying villages which together with the increase as a result of this development would be very problematic.
On the routes out of the village the Budbrooke Road has a major problem with the one way traffic light system at the station and at the lights onto the A7177. It also occasionally floods during heavy rain fall. When you have negotiated these hold ups you invariable join a traffic jamb which extends all the way into Warwick and beyond. The route through Hampton -on - Hill has single lane bottlenecks and problems with speed. The route going west and exiting at Ugly bridge has issues with joining the A7177.
3) I believe that there are issues with the sewers and concern that the sewage farm at Stanks farm is close to capacity and unlikely to cope with an increased demand.
4). HM30 land together with the adjacent field verges and footpaths are used by many of the dog owners in the village and others as part of a circular route for exercise. Loss of this would erode the amenity which is currently enjoye

I am very worried about the proposed massive development of 4000 houses to be built on King's Hill. This is low-lying green belt land and the major concern for me is the fact that, as the lowest part of Coventry, it is already susceptible to flooding around Finham Brook. So many houses on that land, will cover the earth where drainage would occur, and water draining off houses, paved drives and roads will have nowhere to go. With climate change and increased rainfall, this can only get worse.

Finham Sewage Works treats sewage from Kenilworth and Stoneleigh, as well as the whole of Coventry. As someone who lives in the area, I can tell you that it is not dealing adequately with it now. Certainly, when you walk past, the smell is quite overpowering, and on hot Summer days, the smell reaches the houses in Finham. How is it going to cope with another community of so many extra houses?

There is no convenient access to King's Hill, unless the enclosing roads are widened dramatically. This would destroy ancient protected hedgerows and oak trees. The old Leamington Road already carries a lot of traffic and is completely congested if any of the surrounding trunk roads and motorways are closed, and they frequently are!

The development will take years to be carried out, involving bulldozers and lorries driving up and down narrow roads - a danger to children - while the extra sewage, gas, electricity, telephone, and water services are installed. Then the bricks, slates, insulation etc. necessary to build the houses themselves will need to be ferried in.

A lot of research has been done by the Finham Resident's Association, which I know you have received - in depth, careful research. Can you honestly say that your modifications cover all their objections adequately? I don't want Finham sinking under sea of flood water and sewage in ten years time, when it is too late to do anything about it.

I wish to register my objections to the above revised

1 My prime strong objection is to the loss of Green Belt land for future generations , when more suitable sites exist.

2 Infrastructure is not in place for these new homes and we are told that this does not take place until after the homes are built. Not much planning there then.

3 The land proposed for 120 houses H28 has been flooded for most of this winter, and has flooded in previous years.

4 I am assured that local schools cannot cope with increased numbers, and from what I read in the local press, neither can the local Hospitals.

My last concern is the pollution which will come from the further traffic levels on A4177

Please listen to local people, and put forward our concerns.

see attached

I am writing to register my vehement opposition to Warwick District Council's proposed removal of the land north of Milverton from the green belt and development plans in the immediate area as sited in modifications 14 and 16(Policy DS15). As a long standing resident and tax payer of North Leamington I am proud to have such a special area of protected land in the green belt area around Milverton and Old Milverton and as a member of the congregation of St.James church in Old Milverton I find the peace and serenity to worship in such a setting a true blessing. As a keen nature lover I regularly frequent the village and surrounding fields in my free time for walking,bird watching and enjoying the beauty held there as I know many other individuals,families and school groups alike do. The land is also a site of highly productive farming and a long established wildlife habitat which we should all fight to preserve. Development would forever spoiling village life for those who have long lived and visited there . I do not believe that developing this land to produce housing would prove desirable or practical to provide the housing needs of those who want to live and work in Coventry and,if developed,the damage to this beauty and habitat would be irrevocable. I do not believe that the 'exceptional circumstances' required to remove the land north of Milverton from the Green Belt has been demonstrated by Warwick District Council and I feel that other sites assessed by WDC and Coventry City Council of a lower Green Belt value on the edge of Coventry would be not only wiser in terms of the lesser environmental and recreational value but also more practical in their proximity to Coventry,reducing the need for unnecessary commuting,inevitable congestion of an already heavily travelled route . Surely those sites with a lower Green Belt value should be used in preference to that North of Milverton! The green lung between Leamington and Kenilworth would be reduced to 1 1/2 miles were development be allowed and the picturesque northern gateway to regency Leamington Spa would be lost to urban sprawl.
In regards to the proposed park and ride scheme I believe that this would be unsustainable as there are no dedicated buses planned so users would have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable,something which regular commuters would be less likely to do than casual visitors and the site planned is too close to Leamington and would create further gridlock near the town. It would be better sited near 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 major employers. I also believe that shoppers are unlikely to use the park and ride scheme when there is plenty of existing parking in and around Leamington. Furthermore,there are already numerous car parks in the proposed area of Green Belt with impervious surfaces,all of which reduce the area's ability to absorb rainfall and contribute to flooding,something which is already a regular occurrence in heavy rainfall.
I cannot convey strongly enough my opposition to the proposed plans,both on a practical and emotional basis and hope that Warwick District Council will heed the views of its residents before making the mistake of causing irrevocable change and damage. Thank you for your consideration of my views.

see attached

See attached

See attached

I am writing to object to the provision in the revised draft of the Local Plan to remove about half of Old Milverton from the Green Belt, and subsequently to allow development of the land along Old Milverton Lane, between the Nuffield Private hospital and the railway bridge in Old Milverton.
These proposals are unsound because they do not comply with national policy with respect to the development of land in the Green Belt. Warwick District Council has failed to demonstrate the "Exceptional Circumstances" required to allow land to be removed from the Green belt. During the revision of the draft Local Plan the land north of Milverton was included for development to help meet the housing needs of Coventry, despite the fact that there is land nearer to Coventry, with a lower "Green Belt Value" than the land in Old Milverton. Use of land in Old Milverton to meet the housing needs of Coventry, rather than land closer to Coventry, will lead to higher commuting costs, associated traffic congestion and pollution. Hardly sustainable development, rather ill conceived, irresponsible and bad planning.
The Green Belt has been very successful in preventing Leamington and Kenilworth merging. The proposed development would reduce this green space to less than 1.5 miles and set a dangerous precedent for further large scale development north of Leamington and so leading eventually to the two towns merging and loss of community identity.
Other reasons for keeping the land in Old Milverton in the Green Belt are the agricultural and amenity values of the land involved. The land is productive arable land, while large numbers of people walk (and run) from north Leamington to Old Milverton across the footpaths from Northumberland Road and the bottom of Guys Cliffe Avenue, both during the week and at weekends, providing considerable health benefits to the participants (and some dogs).
Commuters, often crossing the town and going to and from places of employment south of the town, and the daily school run, are the causes of local traffic congestion and associated pollution. The layout of the town precludes major new road construction to cope with the increasing traffic and it is difficult to see how the proposed Park and Ride scheme in Blackdown can help address this problem. There will be no dedicated buses so potential users will have to fit in with the bus timetables, making the scheme unattractive. The decriminalisation of parking offences and the current parking provisions (space and price) have greatly improved the availability of parking for shoppers in Leamington compared with ten years ago, so shoppers will have no incentive to use the proposed Park and Ride scheme.

See attached

See attached

I totally support the submission by Hampton Magna Action Group and have added my name to that submission.

I would though like to add some personal comments:

1. Hampton Magna was built in the 1960s on the footprint of the Budbrooke Barracks, home to The Royal Warwickshire Regiment, and has pretty much remained unchanged since then, with generations growing up and still living in the village. There is a strong sense of community and the environment of Green Belt surrounding the village plays an important part.

2. The addition of a further 30 houses at Site H27 and the addition of 115 houses at Site H51 will destroy the character of the village, bring dangerous amounts of traffic, increase noise pollution and annihilate forever the aspect and health benefits that the proximity of Green Belt affords to villagers and myriad others taking advantage of the public footpaths and country walks, and goes against the Council's stated objective to protect and enhance the natural environment.

3. The main reason for the revision at Site H27 and inclusion of the previously rejected Site H51appears to be to take up the shortfall of housing in Coventry. The City of Coventry is some 12 miles away from Hampton Magna and if it is the case that a high percentage of people employed in Coventry have to live elsewhere, then as the only viable way of travelling to Coventry from Hampton Magna is by car that is surely creating a need to travel rather than reduce it, and as such has to be in direct conflict with the Council's stated aim to reduce the need to travel.

4. A recent report by the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England suggests major flaws in the assessment of housing need in Warwickshire, Coventry and Birmingham and the lack of adherence to government planning guidance policy. The Council has failed to prove exceptional circumstances to justify removing land from the Green Belt and more appropriate sites in closer proximity to Coventry have not been fully assessed.

5. Amendments to the Green Belt as now proposed at Sites H27 and H51 should only be made in exceptional circumstances for sustainable development. The infrastructure in Hampton Magna will struggle to cope with the already approved 100 houses at Site H27. The increased 30 houses at that site and the additional 115 houses at Site H51 will bring a huge increase in traffic (an increase in extra vehicles from 174 under the old proposal to 426 if the revisions are approved). This will not only affect the residential roads in the village, which already experience parking problems around junctions and at the school, but will have a major impact on the three country roads which are the only routes in to and out of Hampton Magna.

6. The three country roads mentioned above are accessed either
* from the A425 Birmingham Road by an ancient road bridge over the canal followed by a sharp blind bend into a road with a hill where vehicles even now experience difficulty in passing (Ugly Bridge Road)

* from the A425 Birmingham Road leading to Warwick Parkway, controlled by four-way traffic lights and leading into a single carriageway under the height restricted railway bridge

* from the A4189 Henley Road coming up through the adjoining village of Hampton-on-the-Hill with its mostly single carriageway main street with traffic calming measures, and leading to a rural road with passing place for buses or other large vehicles leading to a sharp blind bend up to Hampton Magna.

7. These totally unsuitable roads are already the route of choice to get to Warwickshire County Council or other places of employment in Warwick, Aylesford School & Sixth Form College, or to the Longbridge Island and the M40. The expanding development at Chase Meadow, also in south Warwick, means of course that these roads are extremely busy in the other direction as well, i.e. from Warwick, Stratford-upon-Avon, and the M40 cutting through Hampton-on-the-Hill and Hampton Magna to get to the A425 and on towards Birmingham and Solihull, or to get to Warwick Parkway station. Traffic on these roads will also increase when the 17,000+ houses are built in Warwick.

8. The revisions do not take account of already at capacity water, electricity, sewerage or drainage systems or the increasing flooding situations in and around the villages. The proposed development at Site H51 and the increase in development at Site H27 is therefore not sustainable, and there are no exceptional circumstances to warrant it.

I would submit, therefore, that new Warwick District Local Plan is unsound.

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

In connection with the proposed additional housing to be provided at Hampton magna we have the following concerns to raise:-

Adequacy of the Infrastructure

The original development of Hampton Magna was permitted as this was previous M.O.D. land and the infrastructure that was put in to support this development only as the surrounding area was designated green belt. The services at present are stretched to capacity and unable to support additional houses.

Access Routes

Three access routes are available onto Hampton Magna all of which reduce to a single track in places and all have bad vision splays in certain locations. Last week two accidents were narrowly avoided by my wife breaking abruptly to enable a bus to proceed, Farm vehicles also use these roads and additional traffic will only exacerbate this situation.

School, surgery, shops etc

The plan includes for 40% affordable housing which will generate additional pressures on the existing primary school, the surgery and shops. Parking problems are experienced at peak hours and this will be increased by the additional houses and those proposed at Hatton Park.

Greenbelt

Erosion of the greenbelt has a knock on effect on global warming increasing the carbon emissions. Adequate provision would need to be made to offset these additional carbon emissions. If, Heaven forbid, this additional housing is erected what measures will be put in place to prohibit this becoming an Urban Sprawl and encroaching further into the greenbelt.

Coventry Overspill

The basis of the additional housing needs has been stated as being necessary to cater for Coventry housing needs. Hampton Magna is over 10 miles from Coventry which would necessitate additional traffic on the A46 already congested in peak hours. If the need is for Coventry Overspill provision locations nearer to the City should be considered to reduce travel distances and thus carbon emissions. Additional housing provided at Chase Meadow to support Warwick's needs have resulted in homes being purchased by London Commuters. The presence of Warwick Parkway adjacent to Hampton Magna would make this scenario likely to happen here with the consequential increased parking and traffic problems.

We would earnest suggest that further thought is given to the proposals and the basis of the need for these additional houses.

See attached