No

Representation ID: 86017

Received: 11/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Pashley

The proposed location covers green belt land, so I consider this location inappropriate for development.

No

Representation ID: 86045

Received: 12/01/2025

Respondent: Sandy McCaskie

N/A

No

Representation ID: 86270

Received: 18/01/2025

Respondent: Ms Ruth Buckley

As in previous years' plans, this risks in due course the joining of Kenilworth, Old Milverton and Leamington/Warwick into one. None of us wants that - these clearly defined communities all want and need to retain their individuality. In addition, we are weary of the constant threats to high quality green belt land between these communities with each Local Plan over the past years.

No

Representation ID: 86399

Received: 23/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sheila Chennells

Sgo4 Kenilworth. What road ways will be built and where. Where will additional primary schools be placed. Can kenilworth school cope with the additional numbers and doctors dentist shop etc. the answer is no
I think this large building plan is too big for Kenilworth. It will change the whole feel of the town and add additional stresses to its locals who have been here for many years. The wildlife will suffer too. The roads, streams, trees and roadways need up keeping as they are not at the present. Reflection and reduction is needed.

No

Representation ID: 86435

Received: 24/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Traynor

Please do not build on green belt land. The centre of Leamington is already clogged on a daily basis with traffic, if more housing is built on the periphery of Leamington, this will exacerbate the problem. The green belt is very important for the health and wellbeing of the current population.

No

Representation ID: 86488

Received: 27/01/2025

Respondent: Mrs C Dempster

Leamington is already overcrowded in terms of doctors and public transport.
We cannot absorb any more people.
Leamington is a nice place to live and it will be ruined by this development

No

Representation ID: 86538

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Rory Hawkins

Leamington and the surrounding areas simply don't have the road infrastructure to cope with additional housing so close to the town centre. A significant amount of housing has already been added in the south of Leamington/Warwick which has caused a significant increase in congestion in getting in/out/around the the local area during peak hours/weekends. Given the location of the A46, getting in/out of north Leamington/Kenilworth is already quite challenging at those time as well, without adding more traffic. New housing would be better suited in new the new settlement format where it won't add to the already overloaded infrastructure.

Yes

Representation ID: 86552

Received: 28/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Bridgewater

Reduces travel time and pollution by keeping development to the borders of already developed areas.

Yes

Representation ID: 86661

Received: 29/01/2025

Respondent: Mr Oliver Murray-Bates

It seems a sensible place to expand with reasonable road infrastructure already in place

Yes

Representation ID: 86995

Received: 02/02/2025

Respondent: S Gardner

This is seems a relatively good development and maintains a green corridor with leek wooton..

No

Representation ID: 87072

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Christopher Robottom

Building to the south of Kenilworth, carves-up valuable greenbelt and reduces the greenbelt distance between Kenilworth and Leek Wootton, risking losing valuable habitat and wildlife. There is no obvious corridor for road networks meaning that local roads will become congested, risking increased pollution, noise and accidents. It is also unclear how additional facilities would be accommodated for health, wellbeing and education resulting from the increased population, placing more pressure on existing facilities. It is essential that brownfield sites take priority over building on the greenbelt.

No

Representation ID: 87086

Received: 03/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Seedhouse

SG04 is an isolated area of land that encroaches on the Green Belt. It has no connection to any other development in that part of town and does not fit with expansion elsewhere in Kenilworth. This would mark a complete change in development around Kenilworth and given previous, ongoing and future development already planned for Kenilworth is not a good fit. Other than providing developers and land owners with a significant profit, it does not seem a good fit for Kenilworth.

No

Representation ID: 87128

Received: 04/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Julia Clayton

This Plan has been raised previously. We still don't support it now. In our opinion Green Belt as the words suggest is Green Belt and should in no circumstances be built on. Farmers should be given more incentives to farm land and grow vegetables for the good of the people now and in the future. In our opinion brown land should be used primarily and there is a lot of this type of land in Warwick District, who can't cope with the utilities, etc. it already has, without resorting building on fertile green belt land. This is environmental vandalism.

No

Representation ID: 87148

Received: 05/02/2025

Respondent: Frank Edwards

My objections are ; First , traffic. Having nearly been killed by a speeding car at the left hand bend past the railway bridge I think the road is completely unsuitable to handle additional traffic. When Kenilworth road is shut the extra traffic causes delays at the Rugby road. Secondly, the proposed development of Potterton site and what it actually became , I am sceptical of plans versus reality.
Final objection is this stretch of land provides a ideal gap between Leamington and Kenilworth and would prevent the urban sprawl we have seen in recent developments.

No

Representation ID: 87159

Received: 05/02/2025

Respondent: Mr John Wilson

Development of this land will effectively merge Leek Wootton into Kenilworth which I believe would be detrimental.

Other

Representation ID: 87219

Received: 06/02/2025

Respondent: Arina Cirstea

I partly agree, as this includes the former Kenilworth School site, which should be seen as a priority location for any future housing or office development plan for Kenilworth. However, other areas included in this location represent green belt, so seeing a range of extensive housing developments are already under way in this small town, I think there is no need to further disrupt the green belt in the next 25 years.

Yes

Representation ID: 87223

Received: 06/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Chris Rusbridge

Will definitely require adjustment to services and transport to make sense.

No

Representation ID: 87283

Received: 07/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Heather HOLMES

I do not live in this area however I do not agree with any further destruction of the green belt in Warwickshire whilst other options are available.

No

Representation ID: 87289

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Heather HOLMES

I do not agree with proposals to develop the green belt land south of Kenilworth or North of Leamington. This green belt land is preventing urban sprawl and the merging of the two towns, protecting their individual character.


At a time of climate change and increased food insecurity I do not feel that the unnecessary development and loss of natural habitats and agricultural land is appropriate or will meet the Local Plans goals in relation to biodiversity, healthy populations, and beautiful areas in which to live and visit.

Yes

Representation ID: 87336

Received: 08/02/2025

Respondent: Cllr Andrew Day

Sustainable location, close to good amenities

No

Representation ID: 87518

Received: 09/02/2025

Respondent: Michaelina Jakala

I do not support - too much development with too little infrastructure.

No

Representation ID: 87824

Received: 11/02/2025

Respondent: Mr David Hotten

There are no exceptional circumstances to warrant development in the green belt as there are sufficient strategic growth locations outside of the green belt.

Other

Representation ID: 87980

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sharon Quantrill

If it is greenbelt then no it is unclear from the map whether it is part of the urban area or not.

Other

Representation ID: 87981

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Quantrill

No if its in greenbelt. Unclear if it is.

No

Representation ID: 88065

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jeanette Ray

This is green belt land.
Kenilworth doesn’t have the infrastructure to cope with more houses and people.
Roads are not adequate for increased traffic

No

Representation ID: 88107

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Cheryl Scott

The infrastructure roads, gp hospital cannot support this development in this area

Yes

Representation ID: 88132

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Parry

No objection.

Yes

Representation ID: 88164

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rozanne Harris

SG04 is either already in or directly adjacent to a highly populated area. The road infrastructure is already in place

No

Representation ID: 88376

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Viki McNulty

We do not need more houses spoiling our surroundings and adding additional pressure to our roads and networks

Other

Representation ID: 88535

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kathryn Lawry Kennedy

Only if houses are built to the highest specs of insulation to net zero, with easy active travel connections to the facilities in town and supported by adequate infrastrucfure (shops, medical facilities, schools, green spaces).