'Green Lung' proposed development at Old Milverton

We would like to place on record that we totally oppose the Warwick District Council's building development proposal at Old Milverton.

Save our countryside!

I walk everyday across the beautiful fields past the allotments, to the saxon mill. It's peace and tranquility is what I believe keeps people sane. We need to be able to feel these places, even if we dont know we are doing it. The value to people far out weighs any material financial gain!

Protect our precious green belt land.

I think it is despicable the way the council wants to take away the place I feel free, the place were I share so many precious memories and the place I see as a 'play ground' for my mind to be released. Don't we have enough houses, schools, stores and duel carriageways that are took advantage of? So why do our gorgeous countrysides have to be spoilt for the financial benfit of people who don't even need it.

I am writing to voice my objection to the new development plans to the North of Leamington Spa (Milverton and
Blackdown area) on the grounds that the land provides an important local amenity for walking. There are very few
public walks nearby.

housing development plans for the Milverton area.

I wish to object strongly to WDC's proposals for building new houses in North Leamington.
I live in Range Meadow Close, which I understand will not be directly affected, but I live close to a Green Belt area, which will be completely spoilt. I have chosen to live in a semi-rural location partly for health reasons. The air is purer on the edge of town and since living here my previous condition of chronic bronchitis has completely gone.
But also, the whole nature of this area will be spoilt for everyone living here by the extra buildings, which as I understand will include schools, shops, new roads and an altogether unacceptable level of urbanisation in what is now a semi - rural location.
I question the numbers of new houses that the government seem to require, in one small area of the country. The population will surely not expand to the levels these figures suggest, if multiplied to a national scale. Has anyone queried these figures?
I cannot understand why new houses cannot be built to the south of Leamington in the Europa Way area. This is not Green Belt and already has the roads, the industrial estates, the retail park, also schools, which could deal with the extra population, not to mention traffic flow.
Driving along Heathcote Road, onto the A 425 just south of Warwick yesterday afternoon I was amazed at the very small amount of traffic on this stretch.
So different from trying to struggle from Leamington to Warwick along the Emscote Road, which seems to be congested all the time these days. There are at least nine sets of traffic lights between Binswood Roundabout in Leamington and St John's at Coton End in Warwick. A distance of barely two miles!
It would make much more sense to make better use of the Heathcote infrastructure, which is already in place, and under-used.
Please let us keep our Green Belt to the north, as a haven of peace and relative tranquility in these stressful times, not just for those living nearby, but for the whole area, which is fast losing it's pleasant Country Town image and risks degenerating further into just another concrete jungle.

My family and I strongly oppose the planned Blackdown and Milverton for many reasons- overcrowding/crime/ruining our semi-rural setting/ being joined to yet another town etc

Scanned Response Form

I have only just heard about the District Council's plans to develop on Green Belt Land North of Leamington as shown in their 2012 Preferred Options booklet. I am strongly opposed. Nothing has changed since the 2009 Core Strategy, so there cannot be any justification for these fundamental changes now.

It would be unforgivable and irresponsible of planners to damage this area of North Leamington, when with a little effort and thought they could find other more appropriate sites such as Brown or White field sites. They owe it to the residents of Leamington Spa, Warwick,Kenilworth and all those who appreciate and enjoy the area.

Scanned Letter

Dear Sirs,

I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown specified in Warwick District Council's 'Preferred Options for the Local Plan.

I am a resident on Leicester Lane(no. 64) and have lived on this road for the past 10 years. I regularly enjoy walking and running in this area, along with many of the other local residents, whereby many families can be seen walking dogs or cycling. This land has great recreational value to many families and locals. If this land is built on, it would mean having to get in my car and drive to somewhere for recreation. Some people will not have the means to do this. Removing local recreaction would have a negative impact on health and well being.
Building on this Green Belt would not only encroach on the beautiful countryside to deprive us of recreational use, but would encourage the sprawling of Leamington to the north side, allowing it to merge with Kenilworth. I fear Leamington will lose the charm and character that make it a special and beautiful town.

It is my understanding the Government's National Planning Framework requires there to be "very special circumstances" for development in the Green Belt. It is also my understanding that Warwick District Council state there is nowhere else for these home to be built. I would like to contest this as it has been brought to my attention that there are other areas of non Green Belt land still available to build on as identifed in the "2009 Core Strategy". This previous plan and assessment by Warwick District Council showed it was easier to develop with more infrastructure already in existence. This area is closer to the M40 with existing employment opportunities South of Leamington, along with existing out of town shopping and good access to the town centre. So why haven't these areas been persued? Surely this negates the "exceptional circumstances" to build on Green Belt.

This proposal concerns me because even more Green Belt would be lost to implement the necessary infrastructure, which does not currently exist. The financial cost to build roads etc. would surely be greater if this plan were to go ahead in preference to the sites in South Leamington.

I believe that Warwick District Council argues the land in South Leamington is not as attractive to developers as they would not make as much profit. I feel this does not make for "very special circumstances" to build on Green Belt! Financial gain for developers is not a reason to destroy our Green Belt.

Whilst I fully understand the need for new housing, I am surprised by the number of homes proposed. I understand that Warwick District Council have added approximately 1400 homes as a "buffer" for future needs. I have to query whether this number is actually too high, especially given the current climate of recession. If this "buffer" were to be removed, there would be no need to build on Old Milverton and Blackdown. Building on Green Belt would have a detrimental impact on the ambiance and therefore the amenity value of the land.

In the wake of the latest floods and amounts of rainfall lately, my thoughts have been drawn to the fact that the Green Belt offers the facility as a floodplain. If the land was built on, surely there would be more "run off" water that would contribute to increased local flooding.

I urge you to please reconsider your Proposed Options,

Yours sincerely,

Linda Castle

Dear Sir / Madam,
>
> I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils's Preferred Options for the Local plan.
>
> This land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists.
>
> 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.
>
> The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the 5 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever. It
> * Prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north
> * Prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
> * Helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
> * Helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington (a historic town)
> * Helps urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
> There are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt.
>
> The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites, there are no exceptional circumstances which outweigh the harm caused by altering the Greenbelt boundaries in Old Milverton and Blackdown and allowing development on this land.
>
> Logic and rationale aside, finally, this area is loved by all the residents as it is and provides great pleasure to this very close community. Given the more appropriate development sites I truly hope that the voices of this community are heard and that you reconsider this disasterous proposal. Please reconsider your Preferred Options.

I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils's Preferred Options for the Local plan.

This land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists.

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.

The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the 5 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever. It
* Prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north
* Prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
* Helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
* Helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington (a historic town)
* Helps urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
There are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt.

The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites, there are no exceptional circumstances which outweigh the harm caused by altering the Greenbelt boundaries in Old Milverton and Blackdown and allowing development on this land.

Please reconsider your Preferred Options.

I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils's Preferred Options for the Local plan.


This land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists.


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.


The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the 5 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever. It
* Prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north
* Prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
* Helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
* Helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington (a historic town)
* Helps urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
There are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt.


The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites, there are no exceptional circumstances which outweigh the harm caused by altering the Greenbelt boundaries in Old Milverton and Blackdown and allowing development on this land.


Please reconsider your Preferred Options

I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils's Preferred Options for the Local plan.
This land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists.
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.
The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the 5 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever. It:
* Prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north;
* Prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth;
* Helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment;
* Helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington (a historic town);
* Helps urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
There are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt.
The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites, there are no exceptional circumstances which outweigh the harm caused by altering the Greenbelt boundaries in Old Milverton and Blackdown and allowing development on this land.
Please reconsider your Preferred Options.

I would like to object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils's Preferred Options for the Local plan.

I enjoy this land regularly walking with my children, grandchildren and dog and it is a rare area of beauty within a reasonable distance of my house in Coventry.
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.

The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the 5 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever. It:
Prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north
Prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
Helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
Helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington (a historic town)
Helps urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

There are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt.

The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites, there are no exceptional circumstances which outweigh the harm caused by altering the Greenbelt boundaries in Old Milverton and Blackdown and allowing development on this land.

Please reconsider your Preferred Options.

Dear Sir / Madam,

I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils's Preferred Options for the Local plan.

This land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists.

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.

The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the 5 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever. It
* Prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north
* Prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
* Helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
* Helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington (a historic town)
* Helps urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land
There are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt.

The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites, there are no exceptional circumstances which outweigh the harm caused by altering the Greenbelt boundaries in Old Milverton and Blackdown and allowing development on this land.

Logic and rationale aside, finally, this area is loved by all the residents as it is and provides great pleasure to this very close community. Given the more appropriate development sites I truly hope that the voices of this community are heard and that you reconsider this disasterous proposal. Please reconsider your Preferred Options.

See attachments

See attachment

I would like to express my objections to the new local plan for North Leamington Spa. This is for the following three reasons:

1) About five years ago (if I am not mistaken back in 2007), there was a heavy downpour in Leamington and its surrounds. During this Lillington Road became a fast moving torrent of
water. The Close in which I live became a six inch deep stream lapping ever more closely to my front door. Thankfully due to the slope of the road the water kept moving down the road
to drain into the Leamington Cricket Ground. This soon became a vast pool populated by land gulls and ducks. At the time several areas and houses in nearby Cubbington had been flooded.
With the proposed development the run-off after even a much smaller rain fall will be greatly increased leading to more flooding in the area.

2) The traffic situation driving out of and into Leamington via Kenilworth Road is already extremely busy during any time of the day but especially during the rush hour. Increasing the population by what
is being proposed in the development plan is going to make the situation far far worse.

3) There are few 'green lungs' left in Leamington. With the proposed massive development the few nearby green areas are going to be built over to change the character of Leamington from a
'leafy suburb' to just any other over-built town.

I do understand the need for more houses, but I hoper this can be done in a much more sensible and environmentally sensitive way not only for the well-being of the present residents of Leamington
Spa but also for the future residents.

We provide comments on the proposed local plan in regard of proposals for housing in North Leamington.

Respecting the fact that the District Council needs to have an approved plan, out principal points are

1. The areas for housing are on Green Belt land. The question asked is what are the "special circumstances" for allowing development on such designated land.

The primary concern is the erosion of the green belt without clear justification.

2. Whilst allotment land to the rear of Mosspaul Close is not included in the proposed housing area (which is welcomed), the concern is that the "housing" area will creep and take in that green space. We have an allotment and it is crucial that this land is protected from development at all costs. Not only does this land have high amenity value as allotments, it also provides a green space separating development areas. The allotments provide valuable environmental areas for wildlife and flora and fauna, and important leisure activity for many, producing sustainable produce. We need allotments and we need green space.

We trust these comments will be duly considered in the planning process.

I am contacting you to express my concern at the proposals to build on the Green Belt north of Leamington.
I strongly object to this use, especially as there is more suitable land with the infrastructure already in place.

I write to express strong objection to the plans to build on Green Belt land near Old Milverton and Blackdown.

I was brought up in this part of Leamington and used and enjoyed the local rural environment throughout my childhood until I left the area to study. Although now resident in London, I visit frequently to share the same space and experiences with my own children and their grandparents who still live in the same house.
It seems highly irresponsible to even consider spoiling a part of this historic town, eroding the green space between Leamington and Kenilworth, as well as vastly reducing opportunities for residents and their visitors to use the space for recreation and exercise when existing Brown Field sites could be used. (Dont think the area really needs a huge bottom-of-the-range supermarket on the old Ford Foundry for example. Surely that would have been ideal for housing close to both station and motorway)
I urge you to look harder at finding areas NOT in the Green Belt that can be used.

This mail is to register my strong objection to what I believe are seriously flawed plans. These 'preferred options' do not protect the community or the green belt to the north of leamington. Given that there is sufficient land to the South of Leamington where the infrastructure already exists there should be no reason to consider destroying the green belt. Further to this the local plans are not in line with the principles of the NPPF and there is a lack of demonstration by the council as to the 'exceptional circumstances' necessary to build on this green belt. I am not convinced that the current infrastructure will support the new development and the significant additional cost of £28m to pay for the proposed Northern Leamington Relief Road will not only divert resources but also ruin Old Milverton, a valued local amenity for exercise and recreation used by many leamingtonians and warwickians - not just those from the North of Leamington.

* I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Council's Preferred Options for the Local plan.

* This land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists.

* 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.

* The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the 5 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever. It

o Prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north
o Prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
o Helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
o Helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington (a historic town)
o Helps urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

* There are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt.

* The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites, there are no exceptional circumstances which outweigh the harm caused by altering the Greenbelt boundaries in Old Milverton and Blackdown and allowing development on this land.

* Please reconsider your Preferred Options.

I wish to register my strong objection to the new development plan. It would be a crime to damage this area of North Leamington when other Brown or Greenfield sites could be found. This area is green belt and the fundamental aim of this is to prevent urban sprawl.
Please reconsider and safeguard such precious countryside, the home of rare species, bats,butterflies, newts, frogs etc. . Leamington sprawling to join Kenilworth is not an option when alternatives have already been put forward in the 2009 plans.
Surely this current proposal can be bettered

This letter is in response to requests for comments about the future house building plans for Warwick District. We are residents of central Leamington and are therefore not directly affected by these proposals.
However we would like to make the following points:

a. Building on Green Belt land should not be countenanced where other alternatives exist as they do in this case. The justification for the green belt land north of Leamington is as valid now as it has ever been.

b. The proposals if implemented will lead to a coalescing of Leamington and Kenilworth leading to the loss of identity of each and to the detriment of both.

c. The scattering of the developments in several places around the district will increase disproportionately the costs of the additional infrastructure needed e.g roads, utilities and schools. Building to the north of Leamington will require the creation of major new road infrastructure whereas there are existing links to the main arterial roads to the south of Leamington.

d. The future need for retail space in the district is going to decrease because of the rapid increase of internet shopping and the scale of the existing out of town centres. Any future house building plans should take account of the fact that the reduction in retail space will provide opportunities for provision of housing.

e. An alternative to the present plans would be the development of a new satellite town or village on non-green belt land and with good links to the existing transport infrastructure.

In respect to the recent decision to develop from Greenbelt to housing the Old Milverton and Blackdown area I would like to strongly object to this proposal.

I have lived at 64 Leicester Lane since 2003 which is opposite the proposed site to develop, it has always been a Greenbelt designated site which I believe is critical to maintain as such. The whole idea of Greenbelt land is to prevent the expansion of housing and to gurantee areas of land that will never be developed into housing or other development types (eg factories). The proposed new infrastructure to accommodate the increase of housing proposed will put an additional strain on an existing infrastructure (eg road traffic) that will take it above acceptable levels increasing the dangers to the population, including my children.

Greenbelt should as per the Government standards only be altered in extreme circumstances, this is not one of those. There are other alternative sites that are not close to existing housing areas that could be used. This area of Leamington Spa will lose its character and natural beauty by this proposed development.

In addition this area is used by many people for recreational activities like running, cycling and walking. We need to maintain areas like this for the current nearby residents.


Please can you consider using an alternative site and leave Old Milverton and Blackdown as a Greenbelt area.

I am writing to express my strongly held view that "The Local Plan Preferred Options"
document is not compatible with the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the West Midlands.
In particular I am objecting to the inclusion of the fields between Northumberland Road and
Old Milverton being included in the plan, for the reasons expressed below these must be
removed and if the housing is still required, then that housing should be located elsewhere
in the district.
When I examine the evidence base for your plan, and in particular the Strategic Housing
Land Availability Assessment I note that almost all the suggested rural areas are discounted
because they conflict with RSS policy point RR1. It is clear that overwhelming importance
has been placed on the policies in this document. This must be balanced with the important
policies expressed in the National Planning Policy Framework which rightly protect the vital
importance of greenbelt land.
However this RSS document includes policy QE14 that states that "Development plan
policies should create and enhance urban greenspace networks by ensuring adequate
protection is given to key features such as parks, footpaths and cycleways, rivervalleys,
canals and open spaces". It is not recorded in the Strategic Housing Assessment that a
footpath crosses the land between Northumberland Road and Old Milverton, but there is
most definitely one there, marked on OS maps, and heavily used as a local amenity to
people living in urban areas including Leamington Spa; this provides important health and
lifestyle benefits. In the Regional Spatial Strategy each policy is given equal standing and
therefore this policy is as important as RR1 which you have already used to discount so
much other possible development land. It only therefore stands to reason that this
greenbelt land too (as QE14 protects more than just the physical path, but also the green
land around it) should be removed from the preferred options plan. Indeed the proposed
sites L07 and even more so L03 are in my opinion some of the most highly used footpath
and recreational natural green space areas in the district and must be protected as such.
The suggestion of ignoring QE14 and building on the greenbelt, yet leaving the footpath is
logically unacceptable. The QE14 protects GREENSPACE, therefore there must be
GREENSPACE around the footpath. (This is essential to it's use). The policy identifies that
footpaths and parks are different and must both be protected. It is therefore unacceptable
to put the footpath into parkland as this is entirely different. The footpath and the
greenspace around it must be therefore be protected in their current form!
Furthermore the RSS also states in policy QE6 that; "Local authorities and other agencies, in
their plans, policies and proposals should conserve, enhance and, where necessary, restore
the quality, diversity and distinctiveness of landscape character throughout the Region's
urban and rural areas by: protecting and, where possible, enhancing natural, man-made and
historic features that contribute to the character of the landscape and townscape, and local
distinctiveness." The greenbelt to the North of Leamington is quite clearly a natural feature
of the landscape that contributes greatly to the character of North Leamington, Old
Milverton and the surrounding area, and is essential to the local distinctiveness of these
areas. This is clearly demonstrated in the huge number of signatures in petitions returned to
the Council surrounding the proposed construction on these areas.
Furthermore the protection of villages under RR1 is quite inconsistent; land is being used
incredibly close to Old Milverton for housing and particularly in the construction of the
Northern relief road. It is been ignored that Old Milverton should be protected by RR1:
"rural areas which are subject to strong influences from the MUAs and which are relatively
prosperous and have generally good access to services. For these, the main priority will be
to manage the rate and nature of further development to that which is required to meet
local needs, whilst ensuring that local character is protected and enhanced." It is clear that
Old Milverton is as strongly influenced as other Warwickshire villages from the key MUAs, it
is relatively prosperous and the residents are quite contented with their access to services.
Therefore just as development sites, for instance those neighbouring Radford Semele (and
still contacting the Leamington Fringe), have been rejected on the basis of RR1 so should the
developments between North Leamington and Old Milverton - neither these houses, nor
the relief road, nor the infill that would surely follow the construction of these two things
are meeting local needs, the character is certainly not protected nor enhanced.
In discussion with Daniel Robinson at Warwick District Council he informed us that the Old
Milverton to Northumberland road site is labelled as "an extension of urban land that
happens to come close to Old Milverton", not as a rural site in itself, this is not consistent
with sites eg R46 which is equally an extension of urban land that happens to come close to
Radford Semele but is protected by policy RR1 in the RSS document. These inconsistencies
persist throughout the SHLAA.
A final point I would like to make is that development on the land between Northumberland
road and Old Milverton is Green-belt land, which under the National Planning Policy
Framework should not be built upon unless exceptional circumstances exist. I personally do
not believe exceptional circumstances exist; for among other things because the 2009 Core
Strategy plan for the region did not involve development on this land, the fact that a £28
million relief road would be needed to make that land accessible, and that other land in the
South is identified as suitable for development with less investment required than here to
correct shortcomings. Therefore for this national policy reason in addition to the reasons
stated under the RSSthis land between Northumberland Road/Bamburgh Grove and Old
Milverton should not be developed. Furthermore if such arguments are not sufficient then I
firmly believe that the RSSbeing a regional policy document should not prevent some
additional development in rural areas not in the green belt (and despite RR1) as this too
does not warrant exceptional circumstances to allow construction in the green belt (a
national policy). Indeed as 38% of the district population live in rural areas, yet only 10% of
the development is located within rural areas then there is a strong argument that these
areas are not meeting their local need for housing.
In conclusion the location of the Leamington to Old Milverton footpath must be included in
the consultation and Strategic Housing Assessment. The New Local Plan is not consistent
with the Regional Spatial Strategy for the West Midlands, due to policies RR1, QE6 and
QE14, as well as the National Planning Policy Framework. For these reasons no land to the
North of Northumberland Road and South of Old Milverton should be used as this would
appear to demonstrate both cherry-picking and double-standards when it comes to the
decision making process of the council, and result in the plans being rejected by the
National Inspectorate.

Please find below my objection to the proposal to use greenbelt land in North Leamington to build over 2000 houses:-

National Planning Policy Framework requires "Very Special Circumstances" (I'm not convinced that there are any!)

The fundamental aim of* Greenbelt policy as set out in the Government's National Planning Policy Framework is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open.

The Government's National* Planning Policy Framework requires there to be "very special circumstances" for development in the Green Belt. It also requires the harm caused to the Green Belt by the development to be outweighed by the benefit of the development. I believe that there are many other areas in South Leamington i.e Europa way that could sustain such building work, in the "2009 Core Strategy" (the previous plan adopted by Warwick District Council) land south of Leamington (not in Green Belt), was identified and is still available, for development. 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 South of Leamington as well as existing out of town shopping facilities and good access to the town centres.
Therefore, the previous plan (the* 2009 Core Strategy) is direct evidence that there are alternative areas for development other than the Green Belt and that the "special circumstances" put forward by Warwick District Council are wrong.
Warwick District Council argues that the 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. Consideration of the developers' financial gain is not a "very special circumstance" to permit unnecessary development in the Green Belt.

The Green Belt
The proposals ignore Warwick* District Council's study of the Green Belt land at Old Milverton and Blackdown, which concluded that these areas had high Green Belt value
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out five purposes* for Greenbelt land. In summary these are, to prevent urban sprawl of built up areas, to prevent neighbouring towns merging, to protect the country side from encroachment, to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns and to assist urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of urban land. The Greenbelt land identified for development in the Preferred Option does carry out these purposes and its development would therefore be contrary to the NPPF.

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.

Recreation Value of Old Milverton and Blackdown
The land at Old Milverton and* Blackdown is enjoyed by many walkers, runners, riders, and cyclists. It provides a countryside environment close to the centres of Leamington and Warwick. Both the proposed building development and the "Northern Relief Road" would substantially reduce the amount of land that is available to be enjoyed and have a detrimental impact on the ambience and hence the amenity value of the land. Turning some of it into a maintained park land would detract from, rather than enhance its value.
Old Milverton is one of the last surviving villages close to* Leamington that has not been absorbed into the greater conurbation. If the proposals go ahead it is only a matter of time before it is also absorbed by Leamington.

Proposed New Roads
Turning the A452 between* Leamington and Kenilworth into dual carriage way will not help traffic flows. At peak times the delays on the A452 result from commuters wanting access to the Town centres.
Building nearly 3000 houses north* of Leamington will simply increase the congestion.
The dual carriage way will have a* detrimental effect on the picturesque northern gateway to Leamington and southern gateway to Kenilworth.
A "Northern Relief Road"* (budgeted cost £28m) is not required. Traffic flows tend to be north to south rather than east to west. The road will serve no purpose other than to take new home owners quickly on to the A46 and to jobs and shopping opportunities away from our Towns. If the development does not go ahead the road will not be required.
A "Northern Relief Road" will* form a natural barrier and encourage further development in the green belt up to this new road. It will need to be built across the flood plain (at considerable cost) and will violate an important nature corridor along the River Avon.
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".
* New Out of Town Stores
The proposed "out of town" retail operations will be another blow to* independent retailers in Leamington, Kenilworth and Warwick who make the area an attractive place to live. Further "out of town" shopping will take trade away from the Towns.

Loss of Agricultural Land
There will be a loss of a significant amount of high quality* agricultural land in Blackdown and Old Milverton

Number of Homes included in the Forecasts
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 land at Old Milverton and Blackdown in the proposals

Proposed Development in Old Milverton and Blackdown Contained in Warwick District Council's Preferred Options fot the Local Plan

I strongly object to the proposed development of the Green Belt land in Blackdown and Old Milverton as outlined in the preferred option for the Local Plan.

There is no justification in law for the District Council to alter the Green Belt land in question and they will be acting in contravention of The National Planning Policy Framework as the Green Belt land actively fulfils all of its functions in this area. It has prevented the merging of Kenilworth and Leamington and the associated urban sprawl, it has helped preserve the special character and setting of Royal Leamington Spa. The land has immense recreational value to the local community and is heavily used by walkers, horse riders and cyclists in an area which has very little access to alternative rural landscape.

The District Council has not demonstrated that there are any "exceptional circumstances" as required by the NPPF, before consideration can be given to altering Green Belt land. There are other areas of land available which are not in Green Belt and which were included in WDC's previous plan, which are well served with infrastructure and employment opportunities. WDC's widely reported wish to "spread the misery equally" is not a valid planning reason to approve their option as it is a political and not a planning consideration.

The Council state that the available alternative sites are not as desirable to developers because the pre-existing housing would make the new houses less saleable and less profitable than houses built in the Green Belt. The maximisation of developer's profits is not a valid "very special circumstance" justifying the sacrifice of Green Belt land for unnecessary development.

I urge you to reconsider this poorly thought through, ill conceived, and unjustifiable plan as the preferred option.