BASE HEADER

I am writing, within the consultation period, to object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Council's Preferred Options for the Local plan.

I live at the edge of one of the proposed areas and regularly walk in some of the areas proposed. En route I meet many local residents and people from a little further afield. It's clear to me that this land has great recreational value to the local community. This is so important that I feel I must draw your attention to some issues with the proposals that will need addressing.

Firstly, I understand that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that the Government attaches great importance to Greenbelts and that the fundamental aim of Greenbelt is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. It is also my understanding that the Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF. It:
* prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington Spa to the north
* prevents the merging of Leamington Spa and Kenilworth
* helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
* helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington Spa

Furthermore, the proposed development is contrary to the NPPF and goes against Warwick District Council's own study of the Green Belt land at Old Milverton and Blackdown, which concluded that these areas had high Green Belt value. The proposals will reduce the" Green Lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth to less than 1 1/2 miles encouraging the merger of these two towns and their loss of independent identities. The development also puts Old Milverton at risk of being absorbed into Leamington Spa.

Second, The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. I understand that the special circumstances cited here are essentially that there is nowhere else for homes to be built. However I understand there are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are still available, are mainly to the south of Leamington, and were I believe identified in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). The assessment performed by Warwick District Council shows that this land is easier to develop and already has a substantial amount of infrastructure (roads etc) to support the development, and the new residents who will live there. It is close to the M40 and there are existing employment opportunities as well as existing out of town shopping facilities and good access to the town centre. Developing here will support the fifth purpose of Greenbelt in the NPPF, ie to help urban regeneration, recycling derelict/other urban land. As there are alternative sites, I doubt your ability to justify those exceptional circumstances that explicitly require the harm caused to the Greenbelt by the development to be outweighed by the benefit of the development.

Additionally, if the proposed development is concentrated in the South of Leamington there is an existing road network that could be upgraded at considerably lower cost than the £28m allocated to construct a "Northern Relief Road".

Third, Warwick District Council argues that land in the South of Leamington is not as attractive to developers because concentration of development in that area may result in the developers making less profit. As far as I understand it, in planning matters consideration cannot be given to homeowners that fear loss of value to their property due to development. This is an important principle that means choices of where to develop are based on what is needed by the community and the balance between need of the housing, and the impact on the surrounding area. Well the same must be applied to the argument here. Warwick District Council cannot argue for one choice of development over another on the basis of developer profit.

Warwick District Council has added nearly 1400 homes to the number that it anticipates will be required so as to include a "buffer" in the forecasts. If this "buffer" is removed from the forecast there is no need to include the Greenbelt land at Old Milverton and Blackdown in the proposals

Please reconsider your Preferred Options and keep this land permanently open.