I am writing to add my voice to those of the many objectors to the new local plan.

Having attended the recent meeting at Trinity School and subsequently studied the plan, I am mystified and appalled, in equal measure, by the council's plan to sacrifice Green Belt land in Old Milverton and Blackdown. What is the point of designating an area as Green Belt, if it can so easily be released for housing development? Surely our local council should be protecting residents' interests, rather than kow-towing to the demands of developers, for whom this is a prime building spot? Furthermore, once the Milverton/Blackdown area has been built on, there is nothing to stop further development to the South of Leamington. The whole area risks becoming one huge urban sprawl.

Please listen to the voices of local people and review this ill-conceived plan.

Before this site can be finally allocated, there needs to be a thorough review of the requirement for new housing and another analysis of how housing can be distributed, as per my representations against 7.1 and 7.2.
If Greenfield sites are required, this site helps to balance new development across the district and provides homes near proposed new employment land at Coventry airport. Green belt legislation was put in place to prevent the urban sprawl of cities towards smaller communities and therefore, regrettable as it is to have to build on any rural land there should be no special sensitivity to building on this rural land as opposed other non green belt rural land of a similar quality.

Proposed Development of Greenbelt land at Blackdown & Old Milverton

I object to the above development as this is the only area which exists for walking offroad and greenbelt should mean "greenbelt".
Should this development take place Kenilworth & Leamington would more or less be joined together

The proposed buildings development at Old Milverton and Blackdown.

I hope yourselves~Warwick District Council, has a change of mind regarding its wish for a large-scale housing development on these two sites!. I am not blind to the fact, that it must be a nightmare for W.D.C to find suitable land to build-on, to such a large scale as is wanted, without upsetting the periphery communities of the proposed sites. I am Leamington~~born and bred and I would not know where to build-on in such a large scale anywhere in town or its surrounding area. I don't like to see a beautiful area of countryside or large arable land, built-on in grand scale! and we just happen to have a lot of countryside and arable land around us, here. I could warble-on! so I will end by asking~Is this giant development of houses and roads a real must-need?.

SAFEGUARDING THE GREEN BELT
I write to object most strongly on the proposed developments that are planned for the Milverton/Blackdown area.

I feel that not enough consideration has been given to if these houses are actually required and whether there are people wanting to move to the area to take up jobs that are on offer. There is an economic down turn at present.

I do not think that WDC saying to us the voters that if we do not accept the proposed plans then the govenment could enforce them. I am sure this too will bring strong opposition from those of us that say the green belt should stay green belt.

WDC should look again at what they proposed in 2010 in relation to development and planning in the Warwick/Leamington Spa area and at legislation surrounding green belt land.

My name is Rebecca. I am 6 years old I like the field and horse s where I live. I would be very sad if they were not there. The horses would be sad too. I like the fields. Animals live in them and they look pretty. There are rabbits too. I live on lester lane in leamington in england and I like it.

I would like to take this opportunity to object to the proposal to develop the land at Old Milverton and Blackdown . We as a family have had many years of pleasure walking in this wonderful area . it's a very unique area with many years of memories that me and my family cherish .

I object to the lovely rolling countryside to the North of Leamington being permanently changed and therefore lost as we know it when there is a better alternative to build on less desirable land to the south of Leamington, ideally nearer to the M40 routeway.

This proposed development will impact the lovely existing amenity. Along with many others I regularly walk through the fields to Old Milverton. The proposal will replace some of these fields with urban sprawl stretching even closer to Kenilworth. It is a backward step for those interested in preserving the better quality green belt countryside for coming generations.

I would like to express my protest at the new proposals to allow development in the green belt area of Blackdown, Kenilworth and Old Milverton as these plans

* Reduce the" Green Lung" between Leamington and Kenilworth to less than 1 1/2 miles.

* Reduce everyone's ability to walk, ride, cycle and enjoy this important green space.

* Have a detrimental effect of the picturesque northern gateways to Leamington and Kenilworth, turning them in to another Europa Way and contributing to these Towns losing their identity.

* Result in a "Northern Relief Road" which has no purpose other than to take new home owners quickly on to the A46 and to jobs and shopping opportunities away from our Towns.

* Be another blow to independent retailers in Leamington, Kenilworth and Warwick who make the area attractive places to live. Further "Out of Town" shopping will take trade away from the Towns.

* Not help traffic flows. At peak times the delays on the A452 result from commuters wanting access to the Town centres. Making it a dual carriage way will not help.

* Not comply with the Government's National Planning Policy Framework for development in the Green Belt.

* Violate an important nature corridor along the River Avon.

* Involve construction on the flood plain at Leek Wootton.

* Result in the loss of a significant amount of high quality agricultural land.

* Ignore the views of residents. In response to a previous consultation nearly 60% of respondents opposed development in the Green Belt

I hope you take into account all the above issues and look at your policy again.

I am writing to voice my strong objection to the proposals to build on green belt land in and around leamington, Blackdown and old Milverton. I am perplexed at the reasons put forward and would like to know what the exceptional circumstances are that the council feel give them the excuse to build.
I am not against developments when they are appropriate and necessary and particularly when they are well thought through after extensive research and consideration of alternatives. This does not seem to have happened in this particular case. I live on Leicester lane and have done so for over 10 years. We currently have the development of the old North Leamington School site which will provide 100's of new homes, just up the road in Cubbington you have a brown field site where the Thwaites plant currently is, lots of derectict unused buildings, hard standing and heavy plant, this whole site would remove the heavy plant using the old road, stop disturbing the residents and provide for 100's of more homes. The existing plant could be relocated to another industrial site.
The south of the town affords more brown belt with harbury Lane being a previous preferred site with developers ready to develop 100's if not 1000's of homes. These would be near the M40, train station and the major shopping retail park.
I ask you to reconsider your plans which do appear to be profit driven and consider saving our 'Important' Greenbelt.
I would appreciate acknowledgement of this email and a detailed response.

Crawford I am emailing to raise my opposition to the proposal to build new houses on Green Belt land in Leicester Lane.

-------
I am disappointed that Brown Field available sites are being overlooked and are not in the proposal for development. Can you please respond to this email as it has been said that no resident from Leicester Lane is opposing the proposals to build on Green Belt on Leicester Lane and that is not the case.

--------

I am greatly opposed to the new development plans in our area. It will destroy the natural beauty and countryside that make it a great place to live.

Dont destroy our countryside.

----------

I am writing to voice my concerns over the proposed plans-

I think it ridiculous that you plan to build almost 3000 new houses - and for who?

This is not a welcome change.

If these proposals must go ahead it would be more logical for the development to be located in the south on the available land.
The land is nearer public transport , nearer the town centre where you can access local services like the railway station, shops etc.
Eating up any more green belt should be a last resort. Apart from losing more of our beautiful countryside, it means building more roads and hence more traffic which in my view we do not want.
We should be focusing on coordinating and improving our public transport system as part of a long term strategy.
No more road development please, I see no future in it. It ultimately leads to less freedom for all us and more stress.
What is proposed in North Leamington sounds like a bit of a nightmare along with a highway and surely is a short term fix.

I would like to register my objection to the proposals to build new housing to the North of Northumberland Road and in the Blackdown area.

Not only are these supposedly protected green belt areas, but the land is used extremely frequently by local residents for walking, jogging and dog exercising.
Furthermore, the traffic in the area is already overcrowded, and any increase would cause enormous problems.

I therefore suggest alternative locations are found where there are not such potentially serious consequences for both the local and more distant populations.

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.

Further, the proposal to build a new northern relief road is utterly ludicrous. Thought should be given to upgrading the A452 from the M40 all the way to the Myton Road rather than looking to add one extra lane with a tidal flow type system. In a morning both before and during the rush hour the traffic queues all the way to the motorway because the existing road clearly has insufficient capacity to cope with the volume of cars seeking to drive into town. Such a scheme could also incorporate a display of public art on the roundabout where presently there is a rather unattractive area of landscaping thus creating a proper gateway that would enhance visitor experience to Royal Leamington Spa.

I would like to register my severe concerns about the proposed development of Old Milverton and Blackdown in Leamington Spa. I object to this development for the following reasons:

1. The land is incredibly valued by our local community and is used throughout the year by cyclists, dog walkers and joggers, including myself and my family and neighbours.

2. The National Planning Policy Framework states that the government attaches great importance to Greenbelt land as it prevents urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. The main purposes of of the Greenbelt as set out by the NPPF are fulfilled by this land as:
- it prevents the unrestricted urban sprawl of Leamington to the north
- it prevents the merging of Leamington and Kenilworth
- it helps to safeguard the countryside from encroachment
- it preserves the setting and character of the historical town of Leamington

3. There are other sites which can be developed other than this cherished Greenbelt land. 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, making the use of this land preferable.

4. The NPPF states that Greenbelt land should not be developed only in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites this means that the development of Old Milverton and Blackdown will not be done in exceptional circumstances.

Aside from these practical reasons that I have set forth, I must also allow my own personal feelings to take precedent. I have been a citizen of Old Milverton for my entire life and I spent all of my childhood playing safely in the stunning Greenbelt land. I believe that due to this setting, I had a wholesome upbringing and am now a responsible and respected citizen. Your proposed plans will destroy the opportunity for future children to enjoy their childhood in a beautiful surrounding. While I understand the need for housing and employment opportunities, there are far more suitable and less destructive sites for development.

I urge you to reconsider your decision and please allow the Greenbelt land to remain intact.

I am writing to notify you that I object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Council's Preferred Options for the Local Plan.

As a local resident who has lived in a number of parts of the Leamington area for a number of years, I believe that the Green Belt land earmarked as part of the Preferred Options has substantial recreational value to the local and indeed wider community.

As you will be aware, the area is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists both within the immediate locality and beyond.

Above and beyond that, there are a significant number of families who use the area as an important means of getting quality family time together as well as exercise. Having such an area within central Leamington enables families to get out into the country without having to use transport to do so. This consequently reduces the carbon footprint of those families who would otherwise have to travel to nearby villages to do the same.

It is also an integral part of the character and attraction of the local area and has been pivotal in attracting a number of residents to the area. Many of those residents are business owners/senior managers within business whose presence in Leamington is of real value to the local business community and economy.

Further, visitors to the area often comment upon the approach into Leamington via Old Milverton, Northumberland Road and their charm. To develop the Greenbelt would in my view adversely impact upon the attraction of the town as a whole to visitors.

As I understand it, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that the Government attaches great importance to Greenbelts.

The Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the five purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF and therefore should remain as open Greenbelt land.

It is my view that it:

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

I understand that there are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt and within the District.

These sites, which are mainly to the south of Leamington, were included in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). Furthermore, employment opportunities and infrastructure already exists here, and this land should be used in preference to the Greenbelt without the same overall impact on amenities and the character of the area.

The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. As there are alternative sites with existing infrastructure, 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, within the consultation period, to object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Council's Preferred Options for the Local plan.

I live at the edge of one of the proposed areas and regularly walk in some of the areas proposed. En route I meet many local residents and people from a little further afield. It's clear to me that this land has great recreational value to the local community. This is so important that I feel I must draw your attention to some issues with the proposals that will need addressing.

Firstly, 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. It is also my understanding that the Greenbelt in Old Milverton and Blackdown fulfils the purposes of Greenbelt set out in the NPPF. It:
* prevents the unrestricted sprawl of Leamington Spa to the north
* prevents the merging of Leamington Spa and Kenilworth
* helps safeguard the countryside from encroachment
* helps preserve the setting and special character of Leamington Spa

Furthermore, the proposed development is contrary to the NPPF and goes against Warwick District Council's own study of the Green Belt land at Old Milverton and Blackdown, which concluded that these areas had high Green Belt value. 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. The development also puts Old Milverton at risk of being absorbed into Leamington Spa.

Second, The NPPF states that Greenbelt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances. I understand that the special circumstances cited here are essentially that there is nowhere else for homes to be built. However I understand there are other sites which can be developed that are not in the Greenbelt. These sites, which are still available, are mainly to the south of Leamington, and were I believe identified in Warwick District Council's previous plan (the 2009 Core Strategy). 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 as well as existing out of town shopping facilities and good access to the town centre. Developing here will support the fifth purpose of Greenbelt in the NPPF, ie to help urban regeneration, recycling derelict/other urban land. As there are alternative sites, I doubt your ability to justify those exceptional circumstances that explicitly require the harm caused to the Greenbelt by the development to be outweighed by the benefit of the development.

Additionally, 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".

Third, Warwick District Council argues that 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. As far as I understand it, in planning matters consideration cannot be given to homeowners that fear loss of value to their property due to development. This is an important principle that means choices of where to develop are based on what is needed by the community and the balance between need of the housing, and the impact on the surrounding area. Well the same must be applied to the argument here. Warwick District Council cannot argue for one choice of development over another on the basis of developer profit.

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 Greenbelt land at Old Milverton and Blackdown in the proposals

Please reconsider your Preferred Options and keep this land permanently open.

Having read the Local Plan for North leamington I would like to register my objections as follows:

* Areas selected for development are Green Belt Land
* According to the National Planning Policy Framework principles - Green Belt Land should only be used in exceptional circumstances
* There are no exceptional circumstances - previously identified non Green Belt land within the district is available, sufficient for future housing needs
* We need to protect our local countryside wherever possible to conserve an important amenity & avoid urban sprawl

I am writing to express my opposition to the District Council's plans to develop on Green Belt land as shown in their 2012 Preferred Options booklet.

My grounds for objecting are numerous but I'll focus this letter on three areas as follows:

1. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy as set out in the Government's NPPF is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open.

The NPPF 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 of both Leamington and Warwick.

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 do not exist.

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. Personally I'm shocked to think that consideration of the developers' "financial gain" rates so highly with the Council.


2. Proposed New Roads

Turning the A452 between Leamington and Kenilworth into dual carriageway will not help traffic flows. At peak times the delays on the A452 result from commuters wanting access to the town centre. Building nearly 3,000 houses to the north of Leamington will simply increase the levels of congestion, whether there is a park and ride system in place or not.

A "Northern Relief Road" (budgeted cost £28m) is not required. Traffic flows tend to be north to south rather than east to west. If the proposed development does not go ahead this road will not be required anyway.

The proposed "Northern Relief Road" will need to be built across the flood plain near Saxon Mill and will violate an important historic corridor along the River Avon as evidenced by the number of archaeological finds reported over the years between Old Milverton and the A46 junction with Leek Wootton - exactly on the route of the proposed road. Not far away look what has been allowed to happen to Gaveston's Cross - since the A46 was built access is now virtually impossible. How can this be allowed to happen in a locality apparently proud of its historical heritage?

Alternatively, if development were concentrated in the south of Leamington, or to the west of Warwick, there is an existing road network (leading to the M40 and A46) that could be upgraded at considerably lower cost than the £28m allocated to construct a "Northern Relief Road". Access to the railway stations at Leamington Spa and Warwick Parkway would also be much easier for commuters.



3. Farming, Wildlife and Recreation

The land between Old Milverton and Blackdown is prime fertile agricultural land that is actively farmed and brings with it several spin-off benefits.

First, the area is a haven for wildlife - foxes, pheasants, woodpeckers, bats, buzzards and kestrels as well as numerous garden birds, some of whom are reported by the RSPB to be in decline.

Second, the area provides much needed, and well used, country access to hikers, dog walkers and cyclists who routinely use the pathways across the fields from Northumberland Avenue through Old Milverton and on to the River Avon at Guy's Cliffe/Saxon Mill.

If the proposed HS2 High Speed Rail line does go ahead this would be an additional blow to those who value and enjoy the countryside between Leamington/Warwick and Kenilworth/Coventry. I believe Warwickshire is already been "forced" to pay too high a price through its loss of Green Belt countryside and that the District Council should be doing everything in its power to protect what is left for the benefit of both current residents and future generations.

I sincerely hope that the District Council reconsiders its "Preferred Options" for future development of the area, taking into account the views of its residents and fully adhering to the guidelines of the NPFF, rather than trying to "second guess" Government housing growth expectations and trying to tempt developers with "juicy" tracts of land stolen from the Green Belt.

We wish to express our fear and concerns over the proposed development planned for the green belt land in North Leamington. This surely must violate the conservation of the green belt - which once lost will never be regained and can only be detrimental to the whole community. Leamington and Kenilworth will each lose their own identity if sprawl is allowed and the two become merged.

Can the infrastructure really support such development in this area - roads, schools etc would further erode the surrounding countryside and also the cost would be prohibitive - the plans are surely unsustainable.

We therefore beg the council to seriously reconsider these proposals for the good of the countryside and maintain the quality of the environment and its people.

I am writing to protest strongly about the plan to develop green belt land in Blackdown and Old Milverton in Warwick District Council's preferred options for the local plan.
I have taken specialist legal and planning consultant advice in putting together my objections. I do understand the need for affordable housing in the area but I object to these being planned for the Blackdown and Old Milverton green belt land.
I object on a number of grounds:
I believe there are viable non-green belt alternatives as identified in the 2009 plan. There would seem to be no compelling planning reasons or 'exceptional circumstances' to justify the development of the green belt land in Blackdown and Old Milverton.
This green belt land fulfils the 5 purposes of green belt and in paragraph 16 of the government document ' Strategic gap and green belt policies in structure plans' clearly indicates that if there is a choice between green belt and green wedge then green belt is more important to preserve. So what I cannot understand is that if the choice is to either reduce the greenbelt land to the north of Leamington or reduce the green wedge in the south then the latter option must be the choice.
In the previous preferred options the green belt land at Blackdown was eliminated for further study ( point 7.32) and so Warwick District Council seem to have abandoned these conclusions from their own greenbelt study. In 2009 Warwick District Council conducted a substantial investigation and a public consultation and adopted a development plan for a similar number of houses which did not require ANY release of greenbelt. I have been told that at a meeting with councillors the reason for the change from this plan was given as 'everyone needs to share the pain' My barrister says this is not a legal planning argument!!
There are alternatives, mostly in the south of Leamington on non- green belt land.
The land just south of Heathcote could have 1200 houses and this is an area previously deemed suitable. The Radford Semele site could accommodate 565 houses instead of the 100 proposed. I am led to believe that the argument against developing Radford Semele to this level is the gas pipeline but I have had this looked at by a planning expert who believes that the pipes would still be far enough away to accommodate the higher level of houses.
It would seem to me to make much more sense to develop land to the south of Leamington that is nearer public transport links and closer to employment opportunities.
New housing to the north would significantly increase traffic on the A46 and A445 and would require a new expensive road to be built. Again I find it surprising when there are other alternatives.
There also seems to have been no consideration given to the loss of productive farming land that is planned to be sacrificed.
In summary, I strongly object to the development of greenbelt in Blackdown and Old Milverton as I believe there are more attractive alternatives to the south of Leamington which make much more sense from a planning perspective.
Having taken advice already, I feel so strongly that this plan is flawed and would be prepared to mount a legal challenge should it come to that.

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

1) The NPPF Guidelines

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


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.

2) Recreation & Green Space Strategy
This land has great recreational value to the local community. It is enjoyed by many runners, riders, walkers and cyclists and already fulfils the many ideals specified in the Green Space Strategy

I do not believe that the Social value of the green spaces for local residents has been objectively assessed through a specific public consultation following the advice in the "Draft Green Space Strategy". I, and new residents who have moved here in the past couple of years, have all mentioned the special area as a draw to live.

The greenbelt is a key draw for locals and visitors - groups strolling in hiking boots passed the house at weekends and the parking spaces at this end of Guys Cliffe are regularly occupied as it offers an excellent opportunity for recreational walking to other areas of North Leamington and beyond with through fields to the Saxon Mill (a 20 min walk vs a 10 min drive) and the historic links to Blacklow Hill

The fields are safe and convenient - also recommendations in the Green Space Strategy.

The paths are ready made corridors and networks that offer attractive access for pedestrians (as set out in 4.1.7 of the Green Space strategy).

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.


3) The Projections that are driving the Preferred Options.

Basis for Development - Location and Population Requirements
From the information in the evidence base I do not see similar case for developing on Greenfield site and that the rational for the number of homes required and their location.

I hope that the National Planning Policy Framework is not just being used because it can rather than of necessity.


4) Alternative to Greenbelt
* 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 "2009 Core Strategy" 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.

Consideration of the developers' financial opportunity in developing Green Belt, rather than land available in South Leamington is not a "very special circumstance" to permit unnecessary development in the Green Belt.

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.

5)The Proposed New Roads & Transport Strategy

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 and to Coventry, Kenilworth or Stratford - which may have more attractive parking for motorists

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 centre. Building nearly 3000 houses north of Leamington will simply increase the congestion.
* That rail access is further away from the preferred options, with fuel prices and environmental concerns, building developments further from the local rail services seems counter intuitive and could result in more people chosing to use their cars to drive to stations - causing further congestion.

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 there, 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 object to the Warwick District Council Preferred Options, New Local Plan. I thought the detail prepared and presented was thorough, informative and clear. But as a result I it highlighted errors in decision making which strike me as proposing "policy based evidence" not proposing evidence based policy.

First, residents of Leamington Spa (indeed Warwickshire), take into account Green Belt when deciding where they can and aspire to live. To propose a plan which arbitrarily ignores current boundaries, redraws them and reconstructs the balance of Green Belt is poor planning (and negligent). The Green Belt is there for the opposite of your proposal - to protect urban sprawl. The current plan does not demonstrate evidence of "exceptional circumstances" necessary to build on Green Belt as required by the National Planning Policy Framework. Please answer why you have chosen to ignore land east of Europa Way and South of Heathcote towards Bishop Tachbrook which you previously identified as available, from the Preferred Options. Until sufficient and available sites outside the greenbelt have been used it is not valid to propose development on the greenbelt.

This leads to a second point of objection. Why does the council invent a need in the Preferred Options Plan of development on the greenbelt by generating housing requirement projections in excess of population and demand projections? It appears that the council is using the Preferred Options Plan as a trojan house for providing developers prime locations for development - regardless of necessity, as once the Local Plan is set it would be nearly impossible for developers to move into these valuable areas in the future if not included. Preferred Options based on Developer Preferences is not a Planning Policy, it's a political policy. Equally the proposal to develop "around" Leamington (many have used the term "spreading the pain" - I will too) is a political policy rather than respecting Planning laws and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Which brings into question the financial decisions of the plan. Why would the Preferred Options Plan generate a dependency / necessity on a £28m North Leamington relief road? You wouldn't need a relief road if you didn't plan to develop the Green Belt, and if you didn't need a relief road you wouldn't spend £28m of tax payers money unnecessarily. This is irresponsible, worse in the current climate when bins can only be emptied every 2 weeks.

I live in North Leamington, but equally have lived (and still own property) in South Leamington, I am a resident of Leamington Spa, not just Lillington Road - even I know, day to day that North Leamington infrastructure cannot support these proposals - even with a £28m relief road. The Local Council has ensured all supermarkets including a new Morrisons are in South Leamington / Emscote. Why generate another 2000+ households who need to traverse the town centre for their weekly shop? The train station, Motorway access, trading estates, industrial units are in South Leamington - why generate housing for 2000+ who need to traverse Leamington to access work, transport and services in these areas? Whilst I am interested in the Coventry development options for industry, there will be equally competitive plans from Coventry authorities to attract residents to South Coventry for these employment areas with which Leamington does not need to compete. You can argue that the plan will a new station in North Leamington, however the recent failure to open a station in a whole town without one (Kenilworth) makes this proposal a platitude to handle objections to the plan not a commitment to infrastructure. Finally, the sacrifice of even more Green Belt for the proposed Northern Relief Road is a further ingress into land which should not be scarred in the first place by the housing proposals.

Finally, the Local Plan proposals go against Planning Policies designed to protect the very aspects which make Leamington, Kenilworth, Warwick and many towns in the region unique, attractive and valuable in terms of quality of life and premium GDP generation. Planning policy to prevent urban sprawl must be taken into account. The planning authorities can act in a detailed enough way to prevent a Lillington Road neighbour developing on their property because it would negatively affect the unique sightline and character of the streetscape in the area - but the Local Plan proposes to blight the Green Belt, create urban sprawl and coalescence of the local towns of Leamington and Kenilworth and generate a traffic flow the infrastructure cannot hold - it seems hipocritical, and political rather than an evidence based plan respecting law and policy. All this whilst development opportunities outside the green belt, with better infrastructure capacity, transport options, access points and employment zones exist elsewhere and do not form part of the plan.

In summary, I object strongly as a resident of Leamington Spa, a taxpayer, a voter and an informed member of society to the Local Plan Preferred Options proposal. The Plan is flawed, creative and needs significant changes to stay within the policies set out at National Level, starting with the protection of the Green Belt. Once towns like Leamington Spa start to flout such policies and intents we set an example we cannot expect to put in reverse when future, more aggressive proposals come forward. The Council has a duty, empowered by the voter to protect Green Belt, protect taxpayer money and manage the uniqueness of the towns we live in until all viable alternatives can be evidenced as exhausted. The Local Plan Preferred Options is contradictory to this in too many respects and I demand it is revised.

I am writing to you to formally object to the proposed development in Old Milverton and Blackdown contained in Warwick District Councils' Preferred Options for the "Local plan".

I have a number of specific objection to both the basic nature and the scale of the Preferred Option as follows:

1) This land is used by my family and many of our friends for recreational activities - dog-walking, cycling, running, bird-watching etc. It is of huge value to the local community. My family use it virtually every day and meet people from all over Leamington when we do so. The impact the plan will have on people's general well-being cannot be underestimated.

2) This is Greenbelt land that serves a very specific purpose. I am sure that you must be aware 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. These purposes are

* 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

3) 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.

4) The building will completely change the nature of the small area of countryside left after the proposals are implemented, making it effectively unattractive and useless for any of its current users.

5) Communications links into the area will need significant changes and upgrades to cope with the massive increase in local traffic. The costs and general environmental impact for the areas surrounding will be considerable. The additional traffic will also make the current traffic issues seen on Kenilworth road into Leamington much worse - it will obviously be gridlock at busy times

6) Sites to the south of Leamington are significantly more suitable for building due to existing infrastructure and communications links. There is also a significant opportunity to develop "brownfield sites" rather than encroaching into Green Belt.

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.

Overall I also wonder at the integrity of the Council that has made this decision. It does not make any sense and the only reasons that logically come to mind are that there decision-making here has not been supported by the correct due diligence, or that there are some vested interests at play.

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 including myself and grandchildren.

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.

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 including myself and grandchildren.

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 wish to object most strongly to the proposed local plan for Warwick District. My main reasons for objection are as follows:

National Planning Policy Framework requires "Very Special Circumstances", and these are not met
* 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.

The Green Belt should be maintained
* 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 should be maintained
* 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 would be inappropriate
* 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 would be inappropriate
* 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 high quality Agricultural Land would be inappropriate
* 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 is unnecessarily high
* 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 wish to register my objection to any plan to build on Green Belt land in or around North Leamington.
- Green Belt Land should not be developed when there is other more suitable land in the Leamington area available.
- This land must be protected for future generations to enjoy for exercise and recreation.
- WDC has not demonstrated 'exceptional circumstances' necessary to build on Green Belt land under NPPF.

I write to register my strong objection to the preferred Options Plan currently in Community Consultation.
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 WDC'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, this proving the special circumstances put forward by WDC are wrong. WDC'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 population 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 find agricultural countryside.
3. The Northern Relief Road is not required (budget c £28m) 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 form the jobs, shopping and econonic 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 i.e. about one person per home.
In summary, the Preferred Options lan 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.

We are shocked and disturbed that there are plans to build a huge 'estate' on the beautiful Milverton /Blackdown green belt land.
We have seen many new builds go up around my own house since living in Milverton (26 years)and have never objected to any of them, but the size of the current plan would completely change the character of a huge area for thousands of current residents


My main reasons for objecting are:

1)It is and should remain an important green belt area. It is used widely by the local community for recreation; walking/running/cycling/wildlife enthusiasts/photographers etc. Other areas that are not set aside as green belt are available and should be considered. Can we not build more smaller developments on unused/little used urban and derelict sites?

2) The development will be the start of the 'merging' of Leamington and Kenilworth and Old Milverton, as Warwick is now merged with Leamington, leaving an ugly urban sprawl that will cause even more congestion which the towns cannot cope with. Even with a new dual carriageway.

3)The proposed businesses within the plan will take yet more customers from existing shops etc forcing even more closures of small businesses in the area. This is bound to have a detrimental effect to the look and feel of our beautiful, much visited town.