Document scanned.

Document scanned.

As attached

I have been given to understand that there is a proposal to build houses and employment facilites on the designated Green Belt area north of Leamington Spa in the Blackdown/Old Milverton Area.
This is a terrible idea to deliberately set out to erase an area of green belt with yet more bricks, cement and tarmac. It is also a betrayal of trust. I understood that the green belt, agreed at both national and local levels, underpinned by an Act of Parliament, was there to provide a permanent lung of much needed open land, not just for agriculture but also for urban dwellers to have access to the countryside.
1,980 houses and a major highway through Old Milverton is, I believe, a proposal that sets out to destroy valued countryside. I would even suggest parts of Warwickshire are already over developed; the growth around both Leamington and Stratford has been phenomenal of late putting enormous strain on local road systems. The highway through Old Milverton will lead immediately into already heavily trafficked roads, the A445 Rugby Road to the south and the A452 Kenilworth Road to the north. Which means those living in the proposed development will be joining those already commuting to Coventry, Birmingham, via the Warwick By Pass and the M40. Think of possibly 2000 more cars.
Growth in the proposed area brings Leamington closer to Kenilworth. I thought green belts were agreed to prevent urban sprawl?
There are also questions it seems to me about infrastructure; provision for education and health, with its schools and medical surgeries and access for the emergency services? And shops. Supermarkets are on the other side of town.
With the mention of local employment the question that springs to mind is of what kind and how much? There still seems to be acres of vacant land on a designated site for industrial development west of Aylesford School off the Stratford Road, the A429.
Whilst there is possibly a great need for the provision of housing in the Warwick District I'm left asking the question of about how much of the development will be for first time buyers, will there be a mix of council housing or is all for independent, private developers?
I suggest you return to the drawingboard before thrusting a building plant into green belt.

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.

My wife and I wish to lodge our strong opposition to development of houses off Leicester Lane

The prime objection is on the grounds of road safety and further peak time congestion

Leicester Lane is a road where the 40 mph limit is regularly ignored and where, over the years, there have been a number of accidents and near misses as vehicles are hit from behind while waiting to turn into their own drives. My wife was a victim of such an accident when a car crashed into the rear of her car. The police attending the accident esimated that the other vehicle was travelling well in excess of 50 mph

At this present time a police presence would result in large numbers of speeding offences

An increase in the "local" traffic to additional housing would greatly add to this problem and, being a main access route to and from Leamington, would add further to the peak travel time congestion

We moved from London about 4 years ago, and regularly enjoy the refreshing and uplifting walk from Leamington Town centre to neighbouring villages and pubs through Old Milverton and Blackdown. As Londoners, it is a major feature of our enjoyment of living here that we can do this. We are upset to learn that there are plans to destroy this area of natural beauty by building on it.

As such, I am writing to oppose the District Council's plans to develop on Green Belt Land as shown in their 2012 Preferred Options booklet. Nothing has changed since the 2009 Core Strategy, so there cannot be any justification for these fundamental changes now.

This is my letter of objection to building on Green Belt Land in Blackdown and Old Milverton as shown in the 2012 Preferred options Plan. This area is an asset to Leamington Spa. It is enjoyed by many walkers, runners riders and cyclists and should be preserved at all costs. It would be awful to lose an area of such natural beauty; there are so few areas like this left around Leamington. There must be other options to explore before destroying such a glorious area.

I have recently learnt of the proposal to develop the area of Black Down and Old Milverton thereby requiring a Northern Relief Road.

I wish to register my objection to this ill thought through proposal for the following reasons.

1) The development is the wrong side of Leamington/Warwick with the result traffic will increase to get it over to the southern side where business parks, shopping malls and the motorway are located. This is evidenced by the recognized need to build a new relief road. An unnecessary expense and environmentally wasteful.
2) Appropriate development land exists on the southern side. Lower cost, right location.
3) The development will use green belt land, ignoring previous District Councils findings it should be protected


The cost and environment appears to be ignored and one is suspicious this is driven by local interests hoping to profit from the development


I have lived in Warwickshire for over 25 years and understand the need for more housing development but believe this proposal is totally inappropriate.

When we receive relatives from the USA, they find it incredible how much countryside we in the UK have, considering how small the UK is, compared to its considerable population. A visit to the USA, Los Angeles a fine example, sprawls for over 80 miles to the north and south confirms,the major planning errors made there.
Our forefathers, gave us the country we enjoy today. Towns and Cities contained, even in times of massive industrial growth,.leaving open defined countryside. It is our responsibility, to maintain this for future generations to come. The UK population is increasing and needs to be housed,brown field sites should be used first, and it is only fair our town of Leamington Spa plays its part. It is essential the green belt is maintained, but could be carefully expanded. When looking at the proposed areas around Leamington, it is to the south of the town that creates less impact on the greenbelt, being quite some distance from Stratford on Avon, compared to a short distance from north Leamington to Kenilworth.
So lets hope common sense prevails, and vested interests are not allowed to fudge the issue. Its far to important.

I am writing to vehemently oppose the DC's plan to develop upon Green Belt as shown in their 2012 Preferred Options booklet. There is absolutely no change in conditions which call for any changes over the 2009 Core Strategy, a mere three years ago.

The new plans are not only unnecessary but would do untold and irreversible damage to precious Green Belt which not only serves to separate urban areas but maintains historical characteristics of our area. The proposals

The resulting destruction of this protected area would result in ridiculous levels of congestion requiring massive amounts of infrastructure whereas there are already sites which have been previously identified which are better located for traffic and services infrastructure.

I am committed to campaigning against these plans and make public the terrible lack of judgement they convey.

We are writing to you in objection 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. It improves the quality of living of the whole surrounding urban areas. It
provides character to the surrounding historical towns and environmental benefits such as filtering
the effects of noise and improving air pollution from the ever increasing transport traffic. Indeed
the plan proposes to destroy what is in effect a rare and perfect example of a Greenbelt area, which
should instead preserved and replicated.
We wish to remind 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 listed below and
set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land for ever as 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 as 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 am stongly opposed to building new housing developments on greenbelt
land. I want to live in a town surrounded by nice countryside and
wildlife, NOT by urban sprawl. By all means build new developments,
but do them on brownfield sites: e.g. Ford Foundry, Queensway.
Please don't just build supermarkets (we don't need any more, regardless of whatever fat sweetner they pay you) on these sites -
build houses too. A list of other arguments follows. I do hope
take this into account and listen to the electorate.
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 write to register my objections to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils's Preferred Options for the Local Plan.
The reasons for my objections are as follows:-
* The land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists.
* The land in question is designated Greenbelt. Plans to build upon it are against the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which 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 purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF by
* Preventing the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington to the north
* Preventing the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
* Helping to safeguard the countryside from encroachment
* Helping to preserve the setting and special character of the historic town of Leamington .
* 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 exist 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.
I ask therefore that the options be reconsidered.

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
Our objections relate to Locations 4 & 5 and 7.

The New Local Plan suggests concreting over the rapidly disappearing green belt between Leamington and Kenilworth. Once that step is taken, it is irreversible.

Our objections are as follows:

1. The land is very valuable for exercise and recreation. It is the closest green land available to us which allows users to get away from the town as it is walkable.
2. There is far more suitable land for development particuarly around Europa Way.
3. There are no exceptional circumstances to build on this green belt.
4. There are alternative non green belt sites elsewhere.
5. On page 4 of the Preferred Options booklet, you state "we want to make sure we avoid growth which could lead to existing settlements merging' but that is exactly what will happen if locations 4, 5 and 7 are developed.
6. It will drastically change the nature of the environment.

Leamington merged into Warwick many years ago. We are sure that was not what was planned. And yet your current plan ensures it will merge go on into Kenilworth. The green belt is too important for future generations to be lost forever. Please, please do not allow this to happen.

As a resident of North Leamington, I am writing to object to the Council's plan to allow housing to be built on green belt land near Milverton and Blackdown on the following grounds:-
* The countryside between Kenilworth and Leamington needs to be preserved in order to maintain Kenilworth and Leamington as 2 distinct towns and avoid the threat of urban sprawl which has seen the virtual merger of Leamington and Warwick along Emscote Road.
* It is an attractive area of countryside which provides an important local amenity for walking and other outdoor activities.
* Given that there is alternative land available to the south of Leamington, I do not not accept that the Council can show "exceptional circumstances" as to why precious green belt land should be used. It is all too tempting to allow developers to use green belt as such land is generally easier to build on and more profitable for the builders.
* The village of Old Milverton has a distinctive rural character which will be lost if the development is allowed
* The main road between Leamington and Kenilworth already becomes congested at peak time and new housing will only add to this. I understand that the Council propose building a relief road but this will only further damage the rural nature of the area in question and would be a waste of public money.
Overall the development proposals for this area are misconceived and I urge the Council to reconsider its plan and look for other areas more suited to the building of new housing.

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.

I am writing with regard to the new local plan and specifically the proposed development of the Green Belt land to the north of Leamington, including land between Old Milverton and Blackdown.

As a resident living in this area, we are already feeling the consequences of the proposed new local plan, as the local housing market is very static, due to the uncertainty cast by such a huge proposed development.

We would like to draw the Development Policy Manager's attention to the fact that the land being considered is Green Belt, and as such is a vital and vibrant area for recreation including walking, running, cycling by many local residents and others who drive to north Leamington in order to use the land. Any development would directly impact upon an enormous number of Leamington's resident's quality of life.

North Leamington is in danger of being overdeveloped and marginalised by the proposed new local plan, the HS2 proposed route and the proposals surrounding the development of Coventry Airport. These are three massive changes, that will singularly impact the local area to its detriment, and together risk destroying an area that is currently a very pleasant place to live and low maintenance for the Authority to manage.





Currently the roads running around the proposed area for development are, at times, very busy, with Northumberland Road junctions congested. Whilst the plan addresses the main roads in North Leamington, it does not, and cannot ease the potential hazardous increased traffic on these smaller roads. The road and pavement users are largely children, from North Leamington, Milverton and Brookhurst schools, along with elderly people living in the increasing number of care homes in the area.

Finally, whilst we understand from the presentation of the proposed new local plan, that planners are keen to balance Leamington between development to the North and South, we feel this is not sufficient justification in itself to override all the other factors outlined above. There are some fantastic brown field sites in the centre of Leamington that lend themselves to affordable and well located housing, giving genuinely attractive quality of working and recreational life.

We look to the Development staff at Warwick District Council to adjudicate and manage the development companies and organisations who are keen to populate our town and take prime brown field sites for non-housing purposes, such as Ford Foundry for a Hotel and yet another Supermarket.

If we can manage to hold onto our green spaces around Leamington, and creatively use existing space and buildings to create more housing, then it will continue to be a thriving and appealing town. If we simply cross hatch fields using a map, we will lose our unique spaces. We understood that Green Belt is sacrosanct and as such we look to the development staff, who are the towns peoples appointed respresentatives, to uphold that belief.

I write to register my strong objection to the Preferred Options Plan currently in
Community Consultation.
There are three major areas of required process in which Warwick District Council
and its executive need to offer significant improvement:
1 The Preferred Options Plan includes Greenbelt but offers no "very
speCial circumstances" as required in the National Planning Policy
Framework. WOe's apparent reason of "nowhere else to go" is
insufficient and made invalid by their own recent identification of
development land in the Core Strategy 2009.
2 The Preferred Options Plan has not been produced as an evidence
based planning document, despite repeated statements by WDC and
its officers that it has been. Councillor Doody on 16th July at Old
Milverton Parish Council meeting stated clearly that the housing target
figure was "the minimum we could get away with".
3 The Preferred Options Plan does not offer the community any options.
To date the consultative process has shown little listening by WDC and
its officers, and much pressure by them on the community to accept it
as it is. It is unacceptable in our democracy to have the community
consultation process so poorly executed, run apparently only to
achieve a pre-agreed result and therefore only to a level of "going
through the motions."
There are in my opinion six areas of major planning weakness in the Preferred
Options Plan, resulting in it being a meagre and insuffiCient document which does
not propose any thoroughly supported substance.
1 The fundamental aim of Greenbelt policy in the Government's National
Planning Policy Framework is to keep land permanently open to
prevent urban sprawl. The "very special circumstances" required by the
NPPF to use Greenbelt land have not been stated in WOe's Preferred
Options Plan. The NPPF requires the benefit of development to
outweigh the harm caused to the Greenbelt. Where is this case? The
previous Plan (2009 Core Strategy) is direct evidence that there are
alternative areas for development, thus proving the special
circumstances put forward by WDC are wrong. WOe's argument that
the land previously identified to the south of Leamington is less
profitable to developers is not a "very special circumstance" to permit
unnecessary development in the Greenbelt.
2 The WDC study assigns high Greenbelt value to the land at Old
Milverton and Blackdown, but this is ignored in the Preferred Options
Plan. These areas have high Amenity and Recreation use as green
lungs for the populations of Leamington, Warwick, Kenilworth and
further afield in Warwick District, and should not be sacrificed for the
poorly defined "green wedge" approach. Managed parkland is a very
poor substitute for access to fine agricultural countryside.
3 The Northern Relief Road is not required (budget c f28m) since traffic
flows tend to be north to south. It is proposed across a flood plain with
the aSSOCiated high cost, violates the Avon nature corridor, and will if
permitted provide a natural barrier to encourage further encroachment
of the Greenbelt, coalescence of towns, and detract from the
picturesque northern entry to Leamington and the southern entry to
Kenilworth. If built, it will provide the residents of 3000 houses a quick
route to get away from the jobs, shopping and economic well-being of
Leamington, and Kenilworth. The existing road network in south
Leamington could be upgraded at considerably lower cost to meet the
needs of development on the identified land there.
4 The out of town retail operations proposed are an inappropriate blow to
the independent retailers in Leamington, Kenilworth and Warwick who
make the area attractive to live in.
5 The use of a significant quantity of high quality agricultural land which
is currently Greenbelt, is inappropriate in the world of rising food prices
and a requirement to increase the green credentials of the economy.
6 There is a lack of clarity, a paucity of evidence and self inconSistency in
the housing, jobs and homes model used for the Preferred Options
Plan . The 1400 homes added as a buffer by WDC on top of the
modelling are not evidence based. If they are removed, there is no
need to include the land at Old Milverton and Blackdown. I would
expect that a properly drawn plan should be numerically consistent,
and not include a quantity of homes which appears to relate to a
similar population increase ie about one person per home.
In summary, the Preferred Options Plan is a very poor plan. It neither has the
support of the community, nor has it adequate compliance to the National
Planning POlicy Framework. I commend the rapid creation of a suitably sound plan
which has significant community support, to provide a relevant guide for the next
decades of Warwick District.
To do this well, the current consultative process must be seen to be working,
both in the actions of WDC at the conclUSion of the process, and in the revised
Plan which should emerge

Dear Sir/Madam

As a resident of Leamington Spa, I strongly object to the proposed development around Old Milverton and Blackdown set forth in the Warwick District Council's Preferred Options for the Local plan. Having spoken to many people about this I can assure you this is not the 'preferred option' for the locals I have spoken to.

The National Planning Policy Framework stipulates Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered under "very special circumstances". I don't believe the proposed plans for the area constitute exceptional circumstances. Greenbelts must be preserved in this country and are in place so that that sprawl is restricted, so that the countryside is protected and in this case so that the special character of a town such as Leamington is safeguarded. The fundamental aim of the NPPF is to prevent urban sprawl and keep the land permanently open. The proposed plans go against this completely.

The proposed "out of town" retail operators will also cause further damage to Leamington, Warwick and Kenilworth High Streets and retailers that are already struggling to turn a profit in this economy and with the rise in online shopping may not survive. The Leamington high street (and surrounding streets) in particular has seen many closures in the last 12 months. Large retailers are having to bow out, not to mention small independent retailers that don't have as much backing to begin with. Empty shop fronts in a town the size of Leamington stand out like a sore thumb and with each new shop that closes the town loses a little of it's character and buzz. A realistic fear is that this will happen at an accelerated pace if new shops are introduced where the Greenbelt stands.

Thank you for considering these views.
Bree Norton

*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. According to Warwick District Council the special circumstances are that there is nowhere else for the homes to be built.
* However, 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

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

We were horrified to learn of the Warwick District Council's Preferred Options Local Plan, which threatens to engulf Blackdown in a major new development, and reduce it to just another part of a town.

The reason we moved here some 36 years ago, was that we agreed with the statement by the real-estate agents that our property was in the most unique rural, most sought after location near the beautiful town of Leamington.
We did move here, and stayed that long, because we felt, and were told, that the Green Belt laws and regulations would never allow any developments of the kind you are presently proposing, to spoil the unique nature of this small settlement.

We studied the details of the proposal, and discussed the details with our neighbours and others concerned with the proposed breach of the Green Belt rules and regulations, and contributed to the list of points in the attachment to this email, which we fully support.

These points were thoroughly researched, and , even already supported by earlier legal analyses and studies by the Warwick District Council itself, especially where the Green Belt issues, and the rejection some years ago of the dual-carriage-way A452 project for practical, jusifiability, and cost reasons, were concerned.

In addition, the enlargement of the Stoneleigh road between Sandy Lane and Bericote Lane , would mean cutting the its old trees down, and make us lose forever this unique setting of Blackdown in the English countryside, while there will be no noticable improvement of the trafic flow on that road.

Based on the above , my wife and I strongly oppose the proposals , and beg you to review this matter again in great detail to find a better solution to the development and housing problems you are facing.

Please note our objections to the above

GREENBELT
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 proposals appear to ignore the purposes of Greenbelt land being to prevent urban sprawl of built up areas, to prevent neighbouring towns merging, to protect the country side from development thus preventing merging of the two very separate towns on Leamington and Kenilworth as they exist at present with their own culture and identities.


RECREATION VALUE
As frequent walkers and cyclists, wee do not want a 'relief road' damaging our country routes, increasing pollution and traffic congestion within this area when there are alternative opportunities within Warwick DC which could be used I.e Ford Foundry site which has been resold for commercial use rather than for housing. We also have the local development, on the former Potterton site, which is only partially complete and is now in danger of becoming derelict due to under occupation.

Old Milverton is one of the last surviving villages close to Leamington that has not been absorbed into the greater conurbation.


INTENDED NEW ROADS
Instead of, turning the A452 between Leamington and Kenilworth into dual carriage way what are the plans for developing the rail route I.e building a station at Kenilworth and also developing a safe cycle route between Leamington and Kenilworth.

Building nearly 3000 houses north of Leamington will simply increase the congestion, air, noise and light pollution, put a strain on natural resources I.e damaging the water table and local amenities and services will also be affected as there are not enough schools, GP practices, Dentists to meet the needs of the proposed increased population

LOSS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND in Blackdown and Old Milverton. This will in turn increase carbon foot print, produce which is sourced from even further afield and from other countries.

I am writing to register our objection to the proposed development of greenbelt land on the north of Leamington Spa.

In our opinion the greenbelt land currently provides an important barrier to urban sprawl (as per National Planning Policy Framework) and the Blackdown and Old Milverton greenbelt preserves the countryside rural character and keeps Leamington separate from Kenilworth. We have already seen how the Warwick and Leamington have effectively merged into one another and the subsequent negative impact on traffic, retail and loss of individual character.

Warwick district council has not demonstrated the "exceptional circumstances" necessary under NPPF rules to build on greenbelt as alternative land with superior infrastructure already exists south of Leamington.

As the North Leamington land is greenbelt it would require substantial additional expenditure to establish the extensive infrastructure required to support such a large scale housing development. This would destroy the local amenity and provide no open recreational space for the new or existing residents. Additionally the Northern Relief road would require an estimated £28m of public resources to be diverted when the alternative south Leamington site already has superior existing infrastructure to support an existing housing development. Further development of Heathcote appears to make more sense given the existing employment and infrastructure such as retail parks to be used by new residents.

There also appears to be over provision of housing which results from the council using projections from a past period of exceptional growth which is not sustainable. Even using these exceptionally high population and demand projections the greenbelt land could be deleted without causing a deficit.

Overall the greenbelt land in England should be protected especially to preserve the character of Leamington, Kenilworth and surrounding areas. The NPPF rules need to be followed correctly to protect the countryside from development and ensure other more suitable sites are fully utilised before destroying Greenbelt for urban sprawl.

I was dismayed to read about your proposed plans for green belt land between Leamington Spa and Kenilworth.

I object totally to the building on the green belt land in the proposed new plan.
Better use of existing brown field land for housing instead of providing more supermarkets would be a better way of meeting housing quotas.

Were more apartments in the style of the town architecture ever considered in place of blanket modern housing changing the style of this lovely Spa town forever?

In summary I feel your current proposals are an assault on the countryside which will result in permanent loss of natural environment in what is after all known colloquially as 'leafy Warwickshire' for short term aims which will benefit relatively few and destroy much.

I would like to object most strongly to the developments proposed in your "New Local Plan"

1) The number of houses required. I believe the number of new houses that are required has been grossly over estimated. The data you have used for continued growth is out dated and fails to take in to account several new factors. Including but not exclusively, recent trend for Eastern European immigrants returning home, the increasing number of the boomerang generation (children returning to live with parents after college), the forecasted reduction in further education places following the introduction of tuition fees, the proposed new government policy of not giving under 25s housing benefit, therefore reducing the numbers of "have a baby to get a house mums".

You only have to look at Ireland at the impact of getting your numbers wrong, empty new housing estates. If there was this demand know why have we so many empty properties available to rent or buy in the district. Surely the better approach is to build fewer houses and then reassess the situation in say 7-8 years time.

2) There are in particular three areas of greenbelt land proposed to be built on, Kenilworth, Milverton, Blackdown. The government has just recently re-emphasised its protection for the Green Belt in the new NPFF. In order for the development in these areas to go ahead the council would have to produce heavy weight arguments to convince an Inspector before encroachment in to the Green belt will take place. As there need to be "exceptional circumstances" these simply aren't present. In fact the council has already published it's "2009 core strategy" which is contra to the current proposal and certainly demonstrates there are no "exceptional circumstances".

3) The north Leamington Relief Road. What is the purpose, there is simply no case for it unless you like to destroy natural beauty. As a regular user of the local road network, there are no significant delays in the area. Comparing the traffic to the likes of Birmingham where I worked for 20 years the roads run freely. There are some proposed road improvements to the A452 which would help the traffic flow at peak times in addition to the ones proposed I would say no right turn in to Hill Wootton Road. Rather than build new roads we should be first exploring cycle routes and giving bus routes priority, or indeed a new train station in Kenilworth. The only thing that will happen with the proposed new road would be to draw traffic off the Rugby road and up Old Milverton Lane and produce a "rat run". There are a number of school routes along this road is this what we really want, accidents are bound to follow and how would that make the planners feel ! All for the benefit of saving a couple of minutes off journey times madness !

4) An out of town shopping centre to the North of Leamington, would be a further dagger wound to our town centres, we should support our town centres not close them. Who wants another Curry's, Mothercare, Supermarkets etc we have more than enough already. Who would shop there anyway? as it's hardly likely to attract visits other than the immediate locale.

5) If the Relief Road was to go ahead, what routes have been considered. I can only find reference to one. Why build it there decimating the countryside, has thought been given to building it to the East of the railway and sweeping in to connect with the existing B4115 which is already connected to the A46?

I would also add that from an expense point of view I am prepared to fight this all the way, better change your minds now rather than go another 2 years down the line and be forced to do it then after considerably expense for both sides.


Further Representations (see attached):

02 August 2012

* 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 am writing today to object to the development of the North Leamington Green Belt. My reasons are as follows.

1) Greenbelt should not be developed on when other suitable land is available. Warwick council has not demonstrated the execptional circumstances necessary to build on Green Belt under the National Planning Policy Framework. Warwickshire council has identified land east of the A452 and south of Heathcote. The NPPF clearly states that the purpose of Green Belt is to prevent urban sprawl, it appears to have been ignored.

2) This development will ultimately lead to the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth. This will result in the loss of both towns identities, this destroys the uniqueness and general appeal of the area to all, including business and tourism.

3) The land proposed for development provides an important local amenity for exercise and recreation as there is very little publicly accessible open space in this area. It would be a great shame for this area, and the whole of Leamington Spa to lose this wonderful space.

4) Even with the current population and demand projections the units proposed for the Green belt could be left out even if no alternative sites were substituted. Having identified non Green Belt land as suitable for development it's possible the owners of the suitable land could apply for planning permission on appeal resulting in over provision of land.

All in all it is blindingly clear that these plans are flawed, and as a result I must object in the strongest terms.

I plan to fight this injustice with everything at my disposal, with money, time and contacts. This can only end in embarrassment for the Council, and most certainly a change in leadership if this were to be forced ahead.

I very much hope the council will reconsider on this matter.

I heard recently of the District Councils plans to develop on Green Belt Land North of Leamington as shown in their 2012 Preferred Options Booklet.

We would like to register that we strongly oppose these developments. This proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown is just beyond belief, why ruin more of our precious countryside when other sites could be utilised?

1.I wish to register objection to the proposal for the development of 810 houses on the land "North of Leamington" and 1,170 houses on "Land at Blackdown".

2. I recognise that there will be a need for more houses in and around Leamington in the period 2019 to 2029. I do not have sufficient information to judge whether the number required will be anywhere near the number envisaged by this planning proposal.

3. I believe however that the proposals that I mention above do not comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPFF). The NPPF expects that brownfield sites and other land not in the green belt should be developed in priority to green belt land, and requires that exceptional circumstances must shown before planning allows construction on Green Belt land. I do not believe that the Council has demonstrated that there is insufficient suitable and available sites outside the Green Belt.

4. The NPPF does not mention any acceptable policy of "spreading development around", so any actions based on that would be outside - and thus contrary to - the NPPF.

5. The NPPF clearly expects that Green Belt land will protect against urban sprawl - and in particular urban coalescence - and is to be protected for that reason. The danger of coalescence with Kenilworth, especially if development southwards from Kenilworth is also permitted, is very real.

6. The existing infrastructure, especially the road network, could not cope with the additional traffic from the proposed developments. It barely copes with the present traffic at peak times and even either side of the peak. The construction of the roads that would be necessary to support the proposed housing developments would be costly to construct and significantly damaging to the local countryside and community.

Please acknowledge that you have received this objection.

After many years of living in Leamington Spa and using the northern approach road from Kenilworth, I together with all of my friends and acquaintances throughout the area, am staggered to hear of the proposed release of land for upwards of 2000 new homes in the north of the town.

Hearing over the years from many visitors to the town, one of Leamington's most beautiful assets, is the stunning tree lined approach, through the Blackdown area, and the long straight wooded stretch of the Kenilworth road with its many delightful period homes.

For this proposed development to blight this magnificent approach in any way, would destroy forever the first and lasting impression of wonderful Royal Leamington Spa, for all its residents and certainly for all its needed visitors.