H44 - North of Milverton

Object

Representation ID: 69821

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Julie Williams King

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposal: -
- there are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that would create less commuting and congestion
- people living / working in Coventry unlikely to buy houses near Milverton
- sites adjacent to Coventry are of lower green belt value
- no dedicated buses
- too close to Leamington - better if site was adjacent A46
- park and ride unlikely to be used
- lots of car parks available in area with impervious surfaces - runoff and flooding
- railway unviable

Object

Representation ID: 69822

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Paul King

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposal: -
- there are sustainable sites closer to Coventry that would create less commuting and congestion
- people living / working in Coventry unlikely to buy houses near Milverton
- sites adjacent to Coventry are of lower green belt value
- no dedicated buses
- too close to Leamington - better if site was adjacent A46
- park and ride unlikely to be used
- lots of car parks available in area with impervious surfaces - runoff and flooding
- railway unviable

Object

Representation ID: 69828

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Miss Mary Gallagher

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposals: -
- no exceptional circumstances demonstrated for removal of site from green belt
- more appropriate sites within and closer to Coventry
- park and ride inappropriate - no demand or services
- loss of farmland
- adverse impact on local residential and recreational amenity
- adverse impact on wildlife
- loss of open space between Leamington and Kenilworth
- people wanting to live in Coventry won't want to live in Milverton

Object

Representation ID: 69864

Received: 17/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Brian Taylor

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposal: -
- No exceptional circumstances for removing site from green belt
- alternative sites available closer to Coventry
- sites on edge of Coventry of lower green belt value
- reduction of gap between Leamington and Kenilworth
- adverse impact on landscape
- loss of farming land
- adverse impact on recreational amenity
- unsustainable park and ride
- P&R too close to Leamington - should be focussed on A46
- number of car parks in area
- unviable railway station

Object

Representation ID: 69873

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Ms. Natalie Matheson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

If the main driver for removing the green belt is housing, then why choose somewhere that is not close to the recipient area i.e. Coventry?
No-one working in Coventry will want to live in a congested and difficult commute area.
The proposed location is isolated.
Construction will require huge investment in roads etc. to get people in connection with transportation - thus defeating the purpose.

Object

Representation ID: 69874

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Richard Hawking

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

I do not believe there are "exceptional circumstances" to remove the land north of Milverton from the green belt. There are lower green belt value sites nearer to Coventry. A park and ride scheme is not needed in Leamington as there is ample parking in the town.

Object

Representation ID: 69876

Received: 10/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Philip Oliver

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

High performing Green Belt land should not be allocated:
1) exceptional circumstances not demonstrated.
2) low and medium performing green belt land should take priority.
3) land allocated not near Coventry and will therefore increase commuting adding traffic, congestion, pollution and wasted commuting time. Housing for Coventry should be close to Coventry.
4) additional development will increase car usage considerably adding to over-capacity road infrastructure in North Leamington.
5) enough parking in Leamington and not enough of a problem to justify a full park and ride scheme.

Object

Representation ID: 69880

Received: 02/05/2016

Respondent: Mr Nick Corcoran

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposals: -
- modifications 14 & 16, contravene elements of the NPPF
- cannot guarantee that houses will be bought by people from Coventry
- adverse impact on landscape, environment, heritage and recreational amenities
- should allocate land closer to Coventry
- lack of technical evidence to support allocation
- loss of green belt
- loss of agricultural land
- increase in pollution
- proposed park and ride and train station unfeasible
- more appropriate locations available
- safeguarded land a direct encroachment into green belt

Object

Representation ID: 69914

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Lesley Rayner

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

- Object to proposal for development in the Green Belt north of Milverton
- As there is land closer to Coventry (albeit Green Belt) that is available for building it would seem to be more logical to use it
- development would lead to increased congestion along an already busy route (A452)
- Increased pollution.
- Merging of Leamington and Kenilworth would lead to loss of identity

Object

Representation ID: 69999

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Historic England

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

It is not apparent whether evidence has been gathered and applied to inform this allocation and
The Additional Local Plan Site Allocations Historic Environment Assessment Statement (January 2016) highlights the potential impact of future development on the setting of the Leamington Spa Conservation Area.

The Local Plan should set out the desired design approach to demonstrate a positive approach, and great weight, to the conservation of heritage assets in the delivery of sustainable development, one of the core dimensions being the protection and enhancement of the historic environment (NPPF Para 132); and that special attention has been paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the Conservation Area in accordance with S72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 might the Local Plan set out the required design response

Object

Representation ID: 70007

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Colin Quinney

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Development of land in the Green Belt north of Milverton should be deleted because:
- it is high quality, with significant amenity value and should therefore be the lowest priority for housing development
- it would encroach on a narrow belt of open land between Kenilworth and Leamington
- there is a more sustainable solution by co-locating more dwellings closer to Coventry's jobs.
- land at Kings Hill and Westwood Heath could be developed faster

Object

Representation ID: 70021

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Julene Siddique

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The lands proposed for development are currently used for farming/local business. They are also community grounds. This violates environmental conservation of the Warwickshire Green Belt. The proposed development and removal from the green belt is not sound and not in accordance with the democratic will of the Milverton community

Object

Representation ID: 70058

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: CPRE WARWICKSHIRE

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Need for housing will rarely be sufficient to constitute the very special circumstances required for inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
North of Milverton (H44) would constitute a substantial northward extension of Leamington Spa into the Green Belt, bringing it significantly closer to coalescence with Kenilworth. The Kenilworth Road is an important entry to the historic town and the Conservation Area extends to the built-up area boundary here. The safeguarding of a large area of additional land to the west for future development (DS New 2) makes the present proposal just the thin end of the wedge. The dualling of the A452 is not feasible and may not be affordable. The proposed H44 Milverton housing area is about 21 hectares in extent. (No area measurement is given in the Plan Modifications.) The land south of Edgehill Drive and west of the Stratford Road is very similar in extent, about 20 ha. However after more than a decade Tournament Fields remains largely undeveloped. The reason for the lack of developer interest is that the price required for the Tournament Fields land to achieve a return for the current land-holder is higher than could be justified by a developer of the land for employment uses. Other less expensive locations are available in the sub-region for buildings for employment use. The only way that Tournament Fields can be developed viably is for housing.

Support

Representation ID: 70069

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Stagecoach

Stagecoach supports the Proposed Modification allocating this site.

The evidence makes clear, this site benefits from being well located with respect to employment and services in Warwick and Leamington on the one hand, and Coventry on the other.

Stagecoach would add that the site would both deliver, and be able to take advantage of, the Park and Ride facility, and associated comprehensive improvements to the A452, including bus priority.

This is a highly credible location for the "virtual Park and Ride" concept to be delivered, which needs no reliance on a bespoke bus service

Object

Representation ID: 70105

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs Michele Miller

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to allocation H44: -
- changes are irrational and unreasonable
- proposals not consistent with NPPF approach to green belt protection
- boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, and development is inappropriate
- to demonstrate exceptional circumstances, all other options should have been considered - not achieved here
- sustainable sites available closer to Coventry with lower green belt value
- such sites would better meet the needs of Coventry residents
- A452 between Leamington and Kenilworth already overcrowded and dangerous -additional housing will exacerbate traffic

Object

Representation ID: 70107

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: Professor Christopher John Miller

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to allocation H44: -
- changes are irrational and unreasonable
- proposals not consistent with NPPF approach to green belt protection
- boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, and development is inappropriate
- to demonstrate exceptional circumstances, all other options should have been considered - not achieved here
- sustainable sites available closer to Coventry with lower green belt value
- such sites would better meet the needs of Coventry residents
- A452 between Leamington and Kenilworth already overcrowded and dangerous -additional housing will exacerbate traffic

Object

Representation ID: 70109

Received: 16/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Charles Mulraine

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to H44: -
- exceptional circumstances do not exist to remove land from green belt
- lower value sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference
- WDC should not promote commuting from old Milverton to Coventry
- loss of open space between Kenilworth and Leamington
- park and ride could result in flooding from runoff and is unlikely to be used as there is sufficient parking in Leamington
- A452 already congested - will be worsened by additional traffic

Object

Representation ID: 70111

Received: 16/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Ann Mulraine

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to H44: -
- no exceptional circumstances to remove land from green belt
- green belt sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference
- encourages commuting
- loss of open space between Kenilworth and Leamington
- A452 already at capacity - additional traffic will cause more congestion
- flood problems caused by hard surface runoff will be exacerbated by park and ride
- sufficient parking in Leamington for shoppers
- Coventry needs should be met in vicinity of Coventry

Object

Representation ID: 70113

Received: 05/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Philip Parker

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to H44: -
- no exceptional circumstances to remove site from green belt
- site too far from Coventry to meet needs
- land available nearer to Coventry that is more suitable
- loss of open space between Leamington and Kenilworth
- loss of farmland
- park and ride unsustainable - sufficient parking available in Leamington

Object

Representation ID: 70116

Received: 05/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Geraldine Parker

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

object to H44: -
- no exceptional circumstances that justify loss of green belt
- site will not support Coventry's need
- lower value locations available nearer to Coventry without impacts on roads, congestion etc.
- park and ride scheme unnecessary - parking available in Leamington
- loss of open space between Leamington and Kenilworth
- loss of farmland
- adverse impact on amenity

Object

Representation ID: 70137

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Barton Willmore

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

OLD MILVERTON
Agree with allocation in principle.
Larger allocation could be delivered on the proposed safeguarded area of the Site within the Plan period - Site under the control of Taylor Wimpey.
Number of infrastructure requirements identified - don't dispute contributions in principle but further discussions required, particularly over park and ride and railway.

Object

Representation ID: 70146

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Edward Anthony Snedker

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

In total 72ha are being removed from the green belt. If it is assumed that 45ha is required for housing (at 30dpa) and further land is required for infrastructure, this still leaves 20ha for commercial development. This is mis-use of Green and cannot be justified.
The Park and Ride has no dedicated bus and is therefore just a car park. The Park and ride in this location is likely to make congestion on the A452 worse unless dualling is proposed which will increase costs. The P&R therefore should be close to the A46.

The proposed station is not viable. It is on a single track railway and stopping can only be erratic if at all possible. Doubling the track would be very expensive and would require rebuilding of the A46 bridge. The cost could not be justified for a relatively small station. The allocation is therefore based on ideals and has not been thought through. The loss of green belt is not therefore justified.

Object

Representation ID: 70148

Received: 20/04/2016

Respondent: Maggie Coleman

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Land is in the green belt and should not be removed.
High scoring area in terms of air pollution. Development will increase problem.
Plenty of brownfield sites closer to Coventry available, to house Coventry people who will otherwise commute to work adding to congestion.
Traffic at a standstill by Old Milverton roundabout at peak times.
Character of county towns would be changed to city conurbations.
Old Milverton will cease to retain its separate identity.
Wildlife and the quality of life of residents of Leamington will be adversely affected

Object

Representation ID: 70154

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Ben Wesson

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Exceptional circumstances required by the NPPF to remove land at north of Milverton from the green belt have not been demonstrated by WDC.
How will this support Coventry's housing need? People who work in Coventry are unlikely to buy houses north of Milverton.
There are lower value green belt sites closer to Coventry which should be used in preference.
Bad planning to promote commuting and irresponsible to cause traffic congestion.
The 'green lung' between Leamington and Kenilworth will be less than 1.5 miles

Object

Representation ID: 70155

Received: 15/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Norman Sharvell

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There should be exceptional circumstances to remove land from the green belt. These have not been demonstrated

Object

Representation ID: 70164

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: M.B. Winn

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The removal of land from the green belt north of Leamington is not compliant with the NPPF as the exceptional circumstances have not been demonstrated by Warwick District Council.
The proposed housing is to meet Coventry's housing need and the Milverton site is too far from Coventry. This housing would be best re-located nearer Coventry/ edge of Coventry.
There is very little green belt land left between Coventry and Leamington and the two towns must not be allowed to merge.
The land north of Leamington is good for farming and locally sourced food options are high on the governments agenda. It should not be lost to development.
The area north of Leamington is also a valuable recreational resource and is used by many locally. Accessibility to green spaces is an important matter that should not be overlooked.
the land in question is also subject to flooding, new building will exacerbate this matter with more run -off from built development. Alternative housing sites should be utilised.

Object

Representation ID: 70193

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. John James

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to proposal: -
- no exceptional circumstances to remove land from green belt
- sustainable sites nearer and within Coventry preferable to Milverton
- loss of valuable agricultural land
- loss of open space between Kenilworth and Leamington
- park and ride scheme is unsustainable - adequate parking available in Leamington
- adverse impact on protected species, wildlife and habitats
- loss of land used for recreational activity
- traffic congestion along A452 / A46 at peak times

Object

Representation ID: 70196

Received: 21/04/2016

Respondent: Mrs. Christine James

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to allocation: -
- no exceptional circumstances for loss of green belt
- new housing should be closer to Coventry - minimise congestion
- loss of gap between Kenilworth and Leamington
- adverse impact on recreational amenity
- adverse impact on wildlife including protected species
- traffic congestion will be exacerbated

Object

Representation ID: 70198

Received: 19/04/2016

Respondent: Ms. Mary Heslop

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Exceptional circumstances for removal of land north of Milverton from Green Belt have not been demonstrated.
The proposal is to support the needs of Coventry, but there are sites closer to Coventry that should be used in preference to reduce unnecessary commuting, and congestion and road building.
It is unlikely that people who want to live and work in Coventry will buy houses here.
The value of potential green belt sites should be taken in to account and those of least value removed from the green belt -sites on the edge of Coventry are lower value.
The proposal would mean the green lung between Kenilworth and Leamington would be reduced to less than 1.5 miles.
The picturesque entrance in to historic Leamington would be destroyed.
Highly productive farmland would be lost along with established wildlife sites.
the area is highly valued by local people for recreation.
The proposed park and ride is unsustainable as it will have no dedicated bus service, is too close to Leamington, would be better sited closer to the A46, would not service employment to the south of Warwick, would not be used by shoppers and it would reduce the ability of the land to absorb rainfall.
The proposed railway station is not viable.

Object

Representation ID: 70199

Received: 22/04/2016

Respondent: Mr. Brijinder Gupta

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to H44: -
- development required for Coventry needs
- more sustainable sites closer to Coventry
- site will generate unnecessary traffic / pollution
- loss of environment
- won't benefit Coventry as people won't commute this far
- unsustainable park and ride
- loss of open space and green belt
- development of Thickthorn can continue focussed on A46 roundabout