Testun llawn:
We are writing to express our objections to the proposed housing and other development plans being suggested for the north of Leamington Spa, on green belt land. Whilst we appreciate the need for the council to develop new and affordable housing, we fail to see satisfactory reasons why this needs to be on existing green belt land in Milverton and Blackdown, particularly when alternative sites are available.
The proposals to develop houses, schools, superstores and a new road system around Old Milverton and Blackdown would change this area permanently and open the way for further erosion of the green belt in the future. This area between Leamington and Kenilworth provides a natural environment for wildlife, agriculture and rural activities, enjoyed by many for exercise and enjoyment as well as protecting animals, plants, birds and trees. Indeed, this area is accessed by people across the district and not just those who live in the immediate locality. There are very few areas of natural rural land around Leamington and Warwick which are so accessible for a broad number of people. Many people particularly enjoy access to the area around Old Milverton for walking, fishing, bird-watching, cycling, gardening and horse riding as well as the simple pleasures of just being in the countryside. Indeed it is hard to think of any other alternatives with such easy access from the town, providing a natural unspoilt area. The increased traffic and new road scheme proposed in the plan would have a devastating and permanent impact on the nature of this rural area.
Currently, this green belt land constitutes a natural distinction between the two towns and any development of this area, combined with expansion of Kenilworth will significantly blur the boundaries between the two towns and is yet another example of urban sprawl. The West Midlands has numerous examples of urban sprawl, with little distinction already between Coventry, Birmingham and Solihull and it is imperative, in our view that any green and open spaces are protected. We are not convinced that the council has provided sufficient evidence of the existence of any 'very special circumstances' as required to meet the Government's National Planning Policy Framework
There are sufficient alternatives in the district that would be more suitable such as the land East of Europa Way and next to Heathcote. In these areas, there is an existing infrastructure, including easy access onto the M40, access to superstores and existing primary and secondary schools, some of which have space for expansion to accommodate increased cohorts. Indeed, the original proposal to provide a primary school on the Warwick Gates estate could be re-instigated, thus addressing an existing shortfall and provide a much needed service for existing children living in the area. Surely it would make more sense to build-upon an existing framework without the need to build another large modern estate with accompanying infrastructure requirements.
In 2009, at substantial cost, a public consultation was undertaken by Warwick District Council and a development plan adopted which did not require release of this land. At a meeting in Old Milverton held on Monday 16th July, there was no satisfactory explanation offered to justify why these original plans have been changed. For example, the land near Grove Farm has now been removed. The reasons given regarding mergence with Bishops Tachbrook seem somewhat disingenuous as it is hard to see why this issue should be of more importance than mergence with Old Milverton and Blackdown. Indeed, the area around Grove Farm already has an available infrastructure and its development would not have such a great impact upon accessibility to countryside for the local population.
The population data and projections as presented as the basis of this plan do not appear to provide sufficient justification for the need to over- develop Warwick District. In recent years Leamington and Warwick did experience a population expansion in the "boom" years which led to a large and rapid re-development of significant areas around both towns to meet the needs of those moving into the area. However, in more recent years this expansion has slowed and many businesses and industries have closed or moved away from the area. The anticipated growth in employment and productivity alluded to by Councillors at the meeting was vague and only loosely linked to the national economic strategy for growth. In addition, with a fairly static birth rate and a growing elderly population, there is limited detail in the plan to show how the housing provision will aim to address the shifting demographic nature of the local population over the next century. Therefore, justification for such a large housing development in this side of the District is not evident and we question the data used by the council in their decision making.
To conclude, we believe these proposals constitute a flawed approach and urge you to protect our precious green belt by re-considering alternative options where development may be a more positive contribution to the district.