South Warwickshire Local Plan

Gwrthwynebu

Preferred Options

ID sylw: 48586

Derbyniwyd: 08/07/2012

Ymatebydd: Chris Langley

Crynodeb o'r Gynrychiolaeth:

The proposeals will result in loss open recreation space. There is no justification for using green belt land, especially as alternatives exist. This is inconsistent with the NPPF.
Given the economic climate, the Council's projections for housing growth seem excessive.
If areas not included in the preferred options get planning permission on appeal, this could lead to overprovision of housing.
The proposals will significantly close the gap between Kenilworth and Leamington.
Infratsructure in the north is less good than in the south and would be more expensive and damaging to provide.
North Leamington has no significant retail or recreational amenities

Testun llawn:

I wish to register my objections to the proposed development in North Leamington.
I tried to register on your website, but there appears to be an error and could not reach the relevant page!

* The land are in North Leamington contains many open space walks and relaxing recreation opportunities used by myself and others nearby. There is no accessible alternative provided by existing public areas. The proposed development will mean the Council is taking this open recreation space away.
* This is North Leamington land area is Green Belt. I cannot see justification for building on this land when the Council's own analysis shows 'sufficient' alternative land available that is not classed as Green Belt. Therefore I do not see that this meets the criteria of the NPPF as the alternative options means this is not 'exceptional circumstances'.
* The alternative land east of the A452 is not Green Belt but is within the alternative land area identified by the council, so would seem to meet the criteria of the NPPF and the Council.
* I accept the need to provide sufficient housing for the needs of our local area, however, the Council's predictions seem excessive given the economic climate and hence difficulty in expecting to create new employment. Within the Council's own alternative options areas, there is significant opportunity to add new housing without encroaching on Green Belt.
* As the Council has identified quite significant areas of land that has potential for development, but not included this in the 'preferred option'. I would expect the land owners or developers of those other areas to want to appeal for development planning which could lead to over provision of housing. As the Council has identified this other non Green Belt land as an option, it seems likely that any such planning appeal would be difficult to argue against.
* The land area in North Leamington currently creates a green barrier between nearby villages and Kenilworth. If the North Leamington area was developed it will significantly close the gap leading to merging between the areas, especially Kenilworth to Leamington. This is contrary to NPPF.
* The infrastructure in the North Leamington area would need significant investment, £28 million according to the Council's own assessment, and would massively negatively impact Old Milverton. The investment and impact do not seem justifiable.
* In the Council's own assessment access to major routes such as M40 and rail links is important. The land area to the North of Leamington is furthest from the M40 and does not provide access to rail links. The area to the east of the A452 provides a much better opportunity to more easily reach the M40, and if needed could gain easier access to Warwick Parkway rail station.
* North Leamington area has no significant retail or recreational amenities nearby, residents typically have to go into Leamington centre or beyond to reach the retail park on Europa Way. The land area to the east of the A452 would have easy access to the existing established amenities, and the infrastructure could be more easily developed to support this.