Testun llawn:
I have studied the facts and was present at the public meeting last night at Milverton Church.
Firstly I would like to say that the officers and of the Council were listened to at length and given every opportunity to state their case but they have not convinced me at all to be in favour of this plan.
I am not against further house building in the locality at all, but I have severe reservations about the estimate of houses needed for the future and certainly where those houses and associate developments should be situated.
In brief:
1. It became clear from an elderly speaker from the audience, that the projections of so many houses being required is not based on any proper use of statistics and something better has to be done than just extrapolate current and recent population ingress into the area as a straight line upwards. In fact I understand that trends in the recent past have indicated that there will not be such a need for more houses in the area.
2. Green Belt is supposed to be inviolate, except in exceptional circumstance. These are not exceptional circumstances and there are white belt sites to the south of Leamington that are available. These I understand were earmarked for development in the earlier plan (2009/2010 was it?). At the meeting the supporters of the plan said that there was no infrastructure there or that it could not be put there. I find that hard to believe and from the floor of the meeting we were told that the developer concerned has stated that the infrastructure can easily be put in. I think that the infrastructure for the developments you propose to the north of Leamington would be much more difficult and expensive.
3. The areas proposed for development contain prime farmland that would be lost for ever. Furthermore, we all know the importance of this for the continuance of food supplies for future generations. One of the proposers seemed to look down on objectors, telling them that "Green Belt" is not the same a "Farming Land". A lot of us knew that anyway but such statements show a lack of respect for the knowledge and intelligence of the objectors
1. The area concerned is much used by local people, and other Warwick and Leamington residents, for recreational activities and this would be lost for ever. Assertions by proposers at the meetings that there would be some sort of arrangement with green corridors is not the same at all.
2. Flooding :The proposed new road (£29 million was it at current estimates ?) and all the rest of it will upset the current balance of water dispersal in the are with consequent damage to properties. I thought we had learnt, but obviously not.
3. The development will upset the current balance in size between Warwick, Leamington and Kenilworth and will tend towards forming a large conurbation, with Coventry.
4. The assertion was made that if this scheme is not approved then a "Government Inspector" will not allow a smaller one. I find that hard to believe given the aforementioned points, especially point 1 above: How do we know as many houses as are envisaged would be required. The idea that if no agreement were reached then developers could "pick off" individual site does not ring true. They would still have Green Belt rules to deal with , and of course, the local people affected.
In fact if this scheme were to go ahead it would give no incentive to developers and others to make use of what other, more suitable land, we have got available for any development required.
The Council needs "exceptional circumstances" to build on Green Belt land. These exceptional circumstances do not exist.
I have grave doubts about the validity of the model used to project future housing needs. This is especially so given the parlous economic state that we are in and will be in for some years.
While some more housing must be planned for, it is a grave mistake to go this far. Once it happened there would be no going back.
What is envisaged clearly goes right against the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework and I object most strongly