No

Representation ID: 104200

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: South Warwickshire Foundation trust

As this development is on green belt land, we would not support this site as a priority for development, unless there were significant steps taken to avoid or mitigate any loss of biodiversity and carbon sequestration/climate change mitigation.

No

Representation ID: 104225

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Furlong

1. There is no need to build on green belt land to achieve the housing targets.
2. The proposal would not meet sustainable travel policies. Employment, retail, supermarkets, and access to M40 are located south of Leamington, so development of SG06 would lead to greater reliance on cars, with additional cross-town traffic. SG06 is 35-60 minute walk to the train station.
3. SG06 is located on high quality farmland, which must be kept for high value sustainable food production.
4. It would negatively impact biodiversity and wildlife. I have seen roe deer, bats, badgers, and skylarks in this area.

No

Representation ID: 104286

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kate Haines

The area is rich in bird life and walking the bridle path daily I've seen red polls, goldfinches, greenfinch, yellow hammers, redpolls, skylarks and once crossbills. There are also foxes, rabbits, badgers and deer. Losing this land to housing would really impact biodiversity. Presently local roads are very congested so extra houses would mean even more congestion. Local schools are also full so I feel the infrastructure is not in place to support this development. As a valued green space there are many people who use the bridle path and fields to walk or walk their dogs.

No

Representation ID: 104311

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Hannah Moseley

I object to the proposed housing development in North Leamington. My concerns include the strain on local infrastructure, such as roads, schools, and healthcare services, which are already under pressure. The development could lead to increased traffic congestion and environmental damage, particularly in relation to local wildlife habitats and green space. Additionally, there is a risk of overdevelopment in the area, reducing community quality of life. I also question the lack of affordable housing provision and the potential for exacerbating flooding issues. I urge a reconsideration of this proposal.

No

Representation ID: 104355

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Samuel John Moseley

I object to the proposed housing development in North Leamington. My concerns include the strain on local infrastructure, such as roads, schools, and healthcare services, which are already under pressure. The development could lead to increased traffic congestion and environmental damage, particularly in relation to local wildlife habitats and green space. Additionally, there is a risk of overdevelopment in the area, reducing community quality of life. I also question the lack of affordable housing provision and the potential for exacerbating flooding issues. I urge a reconsideration of this proposal.

Other

Representation ID: 104408

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Jess Maidwell

With sufficient traffic management and enough provision, this could be okay.

No

Representation ID: 104434

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kay Millman

Sites such as SG06 - North of Leamington Group should never have been selected on the basis of representations by developers and landowners who by definition would prefer to build on Green Belt land.

Likewise, the ranking of the sites by criteria such as their impact on carbon emissions is deeply flawed because no account was taken of the margin of error in producing estimates for the next 25-50 years. These must exceed 10% and in all likelihood, 25%. Consequently, it is meaningless to rank sites on the basis of differences which in most cases are less than 5%.

No

Representation ID: 104436

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Julie Tidd

SG06 should not be included in the proposed strategic growth plan for the following reasons:-
(1) it is high quality agricultural land needed for our sustainable food production
(2) The area has a variable water table which floods periodically and causes a huge lake to form
(3)it is beautiful wide open scenery that is enjoyed by the local community every day
(4) It is needed to separate Kenilworth from Leamington to keep our town's unique identity
(5) Much wildlife is present - muntjac deer, foxes, and many species of birds including cuckoo, woodpecker, kestrels, heron, skylarks, sparrows and starlings

No

Representation ID: 104466

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Oliver Nicholas

The local Road network can't cope currently and new development here would exacerbate this.

Some parts of cubbington already can't access some of the local schools and this would make it worse.

This area is a key walking and exercise route enjoyed by the local community

No

Representation ID: 104542

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kay Williams

This is green belt land. We should not build on green belt land when there are non green belt options available.

Other

Representation ID: 104543

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Dunning

YES ONLY IF the development is high density, linked with public transport and active travel infrastructure.

Do not build detached homes anywhere.
Painted bicycle gutters are NOT active travel infrastructure.
A bus is a bad public transport solution.

No

Representation ID: 104614

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Dunning

Stop building sprawling car-dependent suburbia. You are killing people with these decisions. Cars kill people, stop making people have to get in their cars to get to places. Build high density walkable neighbourhoods with active travel infrastructure.

Paint is not cycling infrastructure.
Buses are bad public transport.
Don't build any detached houses.

No

Representation ID: 104644

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Susan Ingleby

This is an unacceptable encroachment onto green belt land with an attractive footpath crossing it. Surely, sites for housing can be found without Leamington expanding into the countryside?

No

Representation ID: 104675

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Melissa Bennett

Local Plan can meet housing needs without building on green belt land.

SG06 is not a sustainable location due to distance from public transport, exacerbating unsustainable reliance on cars.

Green Belt around North Leamington fulfills purpose. Legal precedent clear that green belt land to north of Leamington makes strong contribution to Green Belt Purpose A.

Farmland is high quality, important for food security.

Same proposals rejected in 2017. Arguments for maintaining the Green Belt’s contribution to openness of countryside, food production and biodiversity stronger now than in 2017.

SG06 contributes to SWLP's principles of health, safety, inclusivity, biodiversity, environmental resilience.

No

Representation ID: 104678

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jamie Emmerson

South Warwickshire's housing need can be met without building on green belt land.
This location is in no way a suitable site for sustainable development.
The green belt land continues to fulfil the 5 stated purposes.
The review used in the plan is flawed.
The land is high quality agricultural.
These proposals were rejected in 2017 and should be again.
This area contributes greatly to the healthy, safe and inclusive and biodiverse and environmentally resilient principles of the local plan.

No

Representation ID: 104801

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Jean Nixon

Green Belt and NO exceptional circumstances to justify.
Development of SG06 is urban sprawl from North of Leamington, Blackdown to Old Milverton towards Leek Wootton and Kenilworth.
Most major facilities ( main shops, employment parks, rail station and most secondary schools) are in South Leamington. Not 20 min neighbourhood and will encourage car travel.

No

Representation ID: 104883

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Constance Lerpiniere

As someone who has grown up enjoying the fields and using the footpaths every day, I disagree with the inclusion of SG06 for many reasons, including wildlife diversity, quality of life for locals, and traffic congestion in the area.

No

Representation ID: 104910

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms M

SG06 must be excluded from future development considerations for the following reasons:
1. Environment and sustainability: it is unlawful to build on green belt land if capacity can be met elsewhere, development will disrupt wildlife and remove green space and footpaths that is vital for community well-being.
2. Preservation of Heritage: SG06 encompasses historical and cultural significance which must be protected.
3. Strategic Fit within the Plan: SG06 is not a 'sustainable location' - other locations demonstrate stronger potential for integrated growth, connectivity, and sustainability.
4. Infrastructure strain: SG06 cannot handle more people and cars - nearby roads already gridlocked.

No

Representation ID: 104913

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Charlotte Holme

This is green belt land and should not be built on

No

Representation ID: 104964

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr T .

SG06 is important green belt land to the local community - it is unlawful to build on green belt land when capacity can be met elsewhere so other locations should be prioritised instead - preferably locations that are more sustainable with better connectivity and infrastructure in place. This area is crucial to local wildlife, provides green space that is vital for exercising and mental health, is of cultural and historical significance. Please do not take this land away from the local community.

No

Representation ID: 104976

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Jo Lazar

There are other areas that could be built on without using beautiful green belt land. This area is composed of quality agricultural land and provides habitats for a wide variety of animal and bird life including sparrow hawks, buzzards, fieldfares, owls, woodpeckers, bats (to name a few), with extensive hedgerows and old oak trees. It has many public footpaths and is well used and loved by local residents for exercise and leisure and the area would be greatly diminished if it were to be built over for housing. The area continues to fulfil the stated purposes of Green Belt land.

No

Representation ID: 105000

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mike Bevan

Do not build on this land as it is unsuitable; more suitable sites can be found elsewhere where infrastructure is already in place.

No

Representation ID: 105003

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Prof Suzy Moat

SG06 in its current form plays a important role in promoting good physical and mental health of residents of Leamington and provides a much-needed barrier between towns of Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. Development of this site would not only lead to a loss of this considerable existing value, but would also promote reliance on car travel and lead to a further increase in the already unsustainable levels of car traffic between north and south Leamington. This runs strongly contrary to the core importance that the SWLP has rightly placed on sustainability.

No

Representation ID: 105022

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Tobias Preis

SG06 in its current form plays a important role in promoting good physical and mental health of residents of Leamington and provides a much-needed barrier between towns of Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. Development of this site would not only lead to a loss of this considerable existing value, but would also promote reliance on car travel and lead to a further increase in the already unsustainable levels of car traffic between north and south Leamington. This runs strongly contrary to the core importance that the SWLP has rightly placed on sustainability.

No

Representation ID: 105030

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms M

SG06 is so important to the local community and promotes many mental and physical health benefits.
The environment and wildlife must be protected.
Development on SG06 could increase the likelihood of flooding in surrounding areas.
SG06 does not have adequate roads, utilities, or transport links. Other areas that have been suggested that are more suitable and sustainable. Building on Green Belt land requires "exceptional circumstances" to justify breaking planning rules, I can't see how this will be justified when there are brownfield sites or locations with existing infrastructure (e.g., SG01, SG02, SG03) that could be included instead.

No

Representation ID: 105080

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Andy Daniels

I support the aims of the proposal but believe including SG06 is a mistake that should be reconsidered. This area of countryside is crucial for Leamington residents and wildlife, providing a vital space for relaxation and exercise. Developing SG06 is contradictory to three of the five overarching principles and some strategic objectives (4, 5, 9, 10 and 11) of the plan, such as creating beautiful spaces, promoting health and well-being, and enhancing biodiversity. Additionally, housing needs can be met without encroaching on greenbelt land, and the area’s high-quality agricultural land and rich biodiversity must be preserved for sustainability and community health.

No

Representation ID: 105108

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Roger Johnson

I fully endorse the seven arguments presented by Old Milverton and Blackdown Joint Parish Council against the Green Belt proposals in SG06. I believe similar debates are happening across England, as local communities strive to protect their countryside from such incursions. Many housing proposals are unnecessary if the government acknowledges that high immigration levels contribute to the ongoing housing crisis. There is a strong local sentiment for reducing immigration, and any legitimate protest on this matter should be supported.

No

Representation ID: 105183

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Louise Goold

I object to the proposed sites north of the town for several reasons. They are situated in a designated green belt area, which would destroy the natural habitat of many animal species and lead to urban sprawl, merging surrounding villages. Additionally, these developments would exacerbate traffic capacity issues on already congested roads, increasing the likelihood of accidents. Furthermore, they would diminish residents' mental wellbeing by limiting access to open spaces, contributing to a claustrophobic environment and worsening air pollution, ultimately affecting physical health as well.

Other

Representation ID: 105223

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

North of Leamington Group – SG06 – NO OBJECTION

No

Representation ID: 105350

Received: 20/02/2025

Respondent: Mr David Stevens

I understand the argument for building new houses in North Leamington, but the proposals for SG06 overlook several crucial factors. Residents would face long journeys to supermarkets and schools, leading to increased congestion on busy roads. The Kenilworth Road would struggle with traffic from 5,000 new houses, and local doctors’ surgeries lack capacity. The public footpaths in the area, particularly the one from Bamburgh Grove, are vital for walkers and dog owners, and their loss would impact many. I believe that alternative housing proposals would better meet our needs without sacrificing important amenities.