Yes

Representation ID: 96445

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Christina Deakin

Development on non-green belt land offers a more favourable approach to sustainable growth, respecting the principles of environmental preservation and community planning.

Other

Representation ID: 96751

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Alcester Town Council

Alcester Town Council, Arrow with Weethley Parish Council, Kinwarton Parish Council, Wixford Parish Council and Great Alne Parish Council (together referred to as Alcester Parishes Group or ‘APG’) has no comment.

Yes

Representation ID: 96966

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 97211

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Squab Hall Farm

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

Squab Hall Farm is a feasible and suitable location for growth. The SWLP should recognise this deliverability and allocate the Site for the outlined development.

No

Representation ID: 97596

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.

Yes

Representation ID: 97665

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Kate Murphy

Opportunity to create a sustainable neighbourhood with enhanced links to the train station . S106 funds would also be substantial to provide amenities and services.
Close to m40 and a46

Yes

Representation ID: 97822

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Jeffery

N/A

Other

Representation ID: 97862

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs cynthia bettany

Again this site is in close proximity to infrastructure and work force, but it would impact on the views from Chesterton Mill and the heritage values of the Fosse Way.

Yes

Representation ID: 97883

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Tracey Hasnaoui

large non green belt area

Yes

Representation ID: 98215

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Teed

Does not include green belt land.

Yes

Representation ID: 98302

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Daine Davis

n/a

Yes

Representation ID: 98421

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Wright

Support development on non-green belt land.

Yes

Representation ID: 98742

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Doug Wallace

N/A

Yes

Representation ID: 99004

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lynda McCarthy

This is an area suitable for develoment as it is close to infrastructure and not designated 'green belt' land

No

Representation ID: 99089

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Whitnash Town Council

we are against more urban sprawl

Yes

Representation ID: 99136

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Jones

Development of an area not containing green belt land.
Size of development opportunity.

No

Representation ID: 99196

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Rawlings

There will be not enough access to GP surgeries.
There will not be enough access to hospitals.
There will not be enough school places. The local schools are already at capacity and have no space for development.
The increase in traffic will create more wear and tear on the roads, cause longer delays getting into Leamington and put more strain on parking facilities in Leamington.

No

Representation ID: 99308

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Martin Phelps

This would swamp the historic village of Bishops Tachbrook and deprive it of the green space which separates it from Leamington; no nearby rail links

No

Representation ID: 99410

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diane Wilson

See previous comments

Yes

Representation ID: 99432

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Tibbles

Appears to be have mediocre service by existing Road Network, Transportation hubs, Healthcare facilities and Education establishments, but with some improvements in capacity and provision, might be suitable

No

Representation ID: 99500

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

Whilst broadly supporting the objectives, this parcel of land is an elongated ribbon of differing character between its western and southern eastern ends, crossing District boundaries. It scores badly at 63.38 and has flooding and landscape issues that make it unusable for development consideration at the southeastern portion close to the hamlet of Chesterton. Furthermore, in terms of the landscape, this is the site of Chesterton Windmill a 17th century Grade 1 listed monument which is one of the premier archaeological features in the county. This location is also the site of many other archaeological features.

Yes

Representation ID: 99727

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Sabrina Hasnaoui

Large development potential of non green belt land

Yes

Representation ID: 99784

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

NA

No

Representation ID: 99796

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Cooper

Will only add to local traffic congestion.

Yes

Representation ID: 99887

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neil Eaton

Support required development on non green belt land

Yes

Representation ID: 99901

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neil Eaton

Support required development on non green belt land

Yes

Representation ID: 100052

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Wall

Development should prioritise brownfield sites over Green Belt land. Urban and previously developed areas already have infrastructure in place, reducing pressure on roads, schools, and healthcare. These sites are closer to transport links and jobs, making them more sustainable. Using brownfield land prevents environmental damage, protects biodiversity, and preserves historic landscapes. It also helps maintain community identity by preventing urban sprawl. Additionally, brownfield areas are often better suited for flood mitigation. By focusing on these locations, new housing can be delivered responsibly without harming the countryside or overburdening local services.

Yes

Representation ID: 100061

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neil Brooker

If more houses are needed this Location is more suitable for development than others in the district.

No

Representation ID: 100094

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Evan Bailey

I think SG11 extends far too far into the countryside. Perhaps the northern-most 10% of the area could be acceptable, but not the rest, and the area south of the Fosse Way should certainly not be developed.

Yes

Representation ID: 100282

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Carter

New development should focus on previously developed sites, not destroy protected Green Belt land. Urban and repurposed areas already have infrastructure in place, preventing additional strain on roads, schools, and healthcare. These locations are also closer to transport links and jobs, making them more sustainable. Using non-Green Belt land prevents irreversible environmental harm, safeguards biodiversity, and preserves important landscapes. It also protects communities from urban sprawl and helps to prevent flooding. By focusing on these sites, new housing can be delivered in a responsible way—without sacrificing the countryside or placing unbearable pressure on already stretched local services.