Other

Representation ID: 96958

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

N/A

No

Representation ID: 97085

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Peter and Sheila Lewin

No! It risks Leamington and Kenilworth eventually becoming one large urban area.

Yes

Representation ID: 97206

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: John Dinnie

Close to existing development

No

Representation ID: 97222

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Hannah Driffill

Poor road infrastructure and no local transport links that are in close proximity. Lack of amenities including access to shops which are based in the south will cause increased congestion on poorly maintained and collapsing roads. They are building on green belt land which offers mental and physical health benefits. The large swath of building with encompass the current area and settle habitat of local creatures.

No

Representation ID: 97310

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Oliver Bowden

This area provides an open space to the north of Leamington which is accessible to all. If you remove the farmland around the public right of way between Northumberland Road and Old Milverton residents will be forced to walk up the Kenilworth Road to access the rights of way around Hill Wootten to gain a similar experience. Apart from the walk on the pavement along the Kenilworth Road being not particularly pleasant, for the young or elderly this may simply be too far.

No

Representation ID: 97354

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Daniel Russell

Leamington / Blacktown / Old Milverton are distinct geographic entities which would be impacted by the ‘infilling’ that SG06 would cause. Maintaining the integrity of the ‘Green Belt’ in this location will prevent that. The existing road infrastructure would struggle to cope with the scale of proposed housebuilding. As there are no major retail outlets or supermarkets in Leamington North it would place an unacceptable burden on the roads to the town centre and the five river crossings. An increase in traffic would also result in an increase in air pollution through the town centre.

No

Representation ID: 97488

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Rachael Abbey

It is green belt land so it shouldn’t be built on if there is somewhere else that can be built on instead.
2 miles of rural footpaths that are used daily by local people and their dogs, this massively helps reduce obesity in humans. Obesity causes a lot of health issues and puts strain on the NHS. I am a veterinary surgeon working in Warwickshire and I see firsthand how this will impact the local dogs’s health too if you get rid of all of these countryside footpaths and therefore reduce people exercising.
Home to diverse habitats and protected species

No

Representation ID: 97590

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Anna Avino

Leamington has already exploded in the past five years. The roads are jammed, the services are overstretched and the vast housing developements and population explosion is changimg the character of the area and making it unpleasant. Infrastructure cannot cope with all the new 29,000 homes being concentrated in a few massive developments in the area particularly south Leamington and Whitnash which is gridlocked. These houses need to be fully dispersed across the whole of warwickshire with every town and village taking a handful of them. This woudl be a fairer, more sustainable appproach as the infratrusture wil alsways play catch-up.

No

Representation ID: 97633

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Melanie Elkington

THis are is in Green Belt and must be protected

No

Representation ID: 97667

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kate Murphy

Development of the Blackdown area and area around north leamington school would require significant changes to the road network losing hedgerows and trees . This site is also not with walking distance of services . Has 15 minute neighbourhoods been coincided and comments from Active travel England ? This is an unsustainable location compared with merits of other sites .

No

Representation ID: 97690

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alexandra Wiltshire

The Green Belt around North Leamington continues to fulfil the stated purposes of Green Belt land. South Warwickshire’s housing need can be met without building on green belt land. Strategic Growth Locations and New Settlements, which are NOT in the green belt have capacity for 48,500 dwellings and 6,000 dwellings respectively. Development of the land in question would involve a substantial expansion of the built up area into currently open countryside to the north of Leamington. It would have a significant adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt, the character of the town and appearance of the area.

No

Representation ID: 97704

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Leonard

Another green area being obliterated and losing country paths and balance for the people of Leamington.

Other

Representation ID: 97747

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Jeffery

N/A

No

Representation ID: 97856

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Professor Steven Brown

I am a resident of North Leamington (CV32 5LS), and the land under threat, SG06, is an oasis of nature to escape the built up town. This was invaluable during the COVID pandemic to countless residents.
From Table 3, I note that 28,257 new houses need to be found in South Warwickshire. However, from Table 5.1 and Table 6.1, I count up that there are over 50,000 houses possible in non green-belt land. Thus, there is no reason why the sacrosanct principle of the green belt should be revoked to meet this target.

No

Representation ID: 98008

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Oliver Forster

My objection is due to the site being unsustainable, demand can be met by not impacting the greenbelt, it was necessitate huge increases in car usage which the town cannot handle and will exacerbate a major loss of natural space in the area which local people rely on and forms part of the character of the town.

No

Representation ID: 98032

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Forster

I strongly oppose the loss of greenbelt land at site SG06 for several reasons. I feel the loss of the greenbelt, which is hugely important to the local area and its residents given there is little other green space in North Leamington, is not necessary to provide the level of housing required for the area and is highly unsuitable given the size of the area proposed. The site’s lack of accessibility via public transport, lack of amenities and provision make it highly unsustainable and there are available sites in the area able to provide the government’s targets for housing.

No

Representation ID: 98073

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Janine McComiskey

ombparish.org.uk:
The Local Plan's own Sustainability Appraisal shows that:
• Strategic Growth Locations which are NOT in the green belt have capacity for 48,500 dwellings (Table 5.1).
• New Settlements which are NOT in the green belt have capacity for a further 6,000 dwellings (Table 6.1).
This means that it is possible to meet housing need without building on green belt land. Sufficient capacity exists at
Strategic Growth Locations outside the Green Belt to meet the Local Plan dwelling requirements to 2050. Therefore,
exceptional circumstances cannot be met to release green belt sites to meet the housing requirements.

No

Representation ID: 98175

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Louise Wood

1. South Warwickshire’s housing need can be met without building on green belt land.
2. SG06 is not a ‘sustainable location’.
3. The Green Belt around North Leamington continues to fulfil the stated purposes of Green Belt land.
4. The Green Belt plan informing the review is flawed
5. The farmland is high quality agricultural land providing a critical contribution to sustainability and food supply security
6. These same proposals were rejected by the planning inspector in 2017
7. SG06 counts to SWLP principles “healthy, safe and inclusive” and “biodiverse and environmentally resilient.”

No

Representation ID: 98222

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Jennifer Boileau

I oppose the proposal to build new dwellings on the 360-acre site in North Leamington's Green Belt. This land should remain untouched as it is high-quality agricultural land and serves as important recreational space for locals. The existing infrastructure is insufficient, and new homes would exacerbate traffic congestion in already crowded areas. The proposed development does not align with the District Council's sustainability goals, and the distance from the railway station would necessitate car use. As a long-term resident of North Leamington, I feel compelled to voice my strong opposition.

No

Representation ID: 98265

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Teed

Green belt land will be destroyed.

No

Representation ID: 98282

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Janet Everett

Green belt land should not be built on unless no suitable alternative exists.
Land is in much needed agricultural use
Numerous public footpaths well used and enjoyed by residents and visitors
Home to a wealth of wildlife and plant life
Does not support sustainability as long walking distance from train station
Road network barely able to support existing use and would be severely congested by further development of the area.
Local infrastructure such as chools shops and health services would be severely impacted by large increase in demand.

No

Representation ID: 98291

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Daine Davis

Although this is a relatively small parcel of land adjacent to an existing urban area, it is green belt and there are no "exceptional circumstances"

No

Representation ID: 98369

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Michael Gray

I fully support the views of Old Milverton and Blackdown Parish Council in their entirety. I also contend that the Arup Green Belt review of 18.09.24 is fundamentally flawed. Its assessment of parcels LSP1 and LSP2 on pages 116/117 in particular does not stand up to scrutiny. The assessment that these parcels make a 'weak contribution' to Green Belt purposes does not flow from the assessment. This land makes a strong contribution - see arguments of above Parish Council. Therefore, I most strongly oppose the Plan. (BTW - 100 words is hardly enough to make an argued case).

No

Representation ID: 98410

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Laura Hillyard

This is Green Belt and should be protected - other areas outside of the Green Belt should be used before this is even considered.
Traffic will increase in the area - there is no local work or industry of any significance, thus the congested road network will be added to.
The area has already been blighted by the development of HS2.
Local services are already stretched - the nearest doctor is in Lillington, schools are over-subscribed and the nearest large shops are to the south of Leamington, getting to which would add to the already congested roads.

No

Representation ID: 98412

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs ANNA BULL

I am opposed to the proposed growth for the following reasons -
1) Green belt land is protected for a reason and alternative sites must be sought. They serve to protect urban sprawl and maintain the characteristics of our town.
2) Transport links are already stretched and additional building in this area would acerbate that, leading to increased noise and air pollution.
3) The agricultural land is ALC grade and should be protected as a means of sustainable food production.
4) Green belt land is essential in maintaining biodiversity and contributes to mental and physical well being.

No

Representation ID: 98420

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Hillyard

This is Green Belt and should be protected - other areas outside of the Green Belt should be used before this is even considered.
Traffic will increase in the area - there is no local work or industry of any significance, thus the congested road network will be added to.
The area has already been blighted by the development of HS2.
Local services are already stretched - the nearest doctor is in Lillington, schools are over-subscribed and the nearest large shops are to the south of Leamington, getting to which would add to the already congested roads.

No

Representation ID: 98446

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Newman

SG06 would promote car use than reduce it. The growth of Leamington is constrained by the need to cross the 2 rivers and the railway line which divides the town north to south. The roads infrastructure does not meet the need. All the shops are on the south side of the town. I dont understand the need to build on green belt land which is in use as farmland and also provides enjoyment for locals because of the use of its public footpaths. Its a wonderful area to walk through, you see buzzards, kestrels, deer and foxes.

No

Representation ID: 98451

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: E Booth

1) Greenbelt - other options available. Still needed for sprawl and town separation.
Violates local plan priorities:
2) Reduces biodiversity and unsustainable - removes hedgerows, fields, damages rivers, replaces porous land with concrete and promotes car use.
3) Removes most beautiful walks and views - including graveyard.
4) Damages health, health equality and quality of life. Very popular for walking, running, cycling and swimming - all free.
6) Destroys Old Milverton's and Leamington's Milverton's identity and heritage.
5) Not '20 minute development' - train station, school and unsustainable traffic with dangerous junction.
7) Active agricultural land.
8) Rejected in 2017

No

Representation ID: 98497

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Laura Hillyard

This is Green Belt and should be protected - other areas outside of the Green Belt should be used before this is even considered.
Traffic will increase in the area - there is no local work or industry of any significance, thus the congested road network will be added to.
The area has already been blighted by the development of HS2.
Local services are already stretched - the nearest doctor is in Lillington, schools are over-subscribed and the nearest large shops are to the south of Leamington, getting to which would add to the already congested roads.

No

Representation ID: 98550

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Tawna Wickenden

I strongly believe that SG06 should NOT be included as a preferred option site as it is part of the West Midlands Greenbelt and home to diverse plant species and wildlife, including endangered species.
Wildlife habitat and biodiversity has already been greatly impacted in our local surround by HS2 construction without irreparably damaging this ecologically valuable area which also provides immeasurable benefit to residents' mental and physical health as well as having the highest concentration of very good quality agricultural land making it a valuable resource.It is possible to meet housing needs WITHOUT building on greenbelt land.