BASE HEADER
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 7- Green Belt?
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 85962
Derbyniwyd: 10/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Graham Ball
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) allows Green Belt boundaries to be altered when exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified. It seems 5 of the 12 proposed new settlements are on West Midlands greenbelt. 5 new settlements are not "exceptional". Moreover, West Midlands greenbelt makes up less than 5/12ths of the South Warwickshire so the number of new settlements proposed per acre of greenbelt land is greater than the number of settlements proposed per acre of non-greenbelt land, again implying new settlements are not "exceptional". In fact, both these points imply show that the council is ignoring greenbelt policy.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 85997
Derbyniwyd: 11/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Sian Corrie
Green Belt is sacrosanct, small settlements 'washed-over' by Green Belt need to be preserved. It is fundamental to preserve the Green Belt to prevent urban sprawl. Any changes to Green Belt should only be allowed following local public consultation.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86026
Derbyniwyd: 11/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Oliver Jacobs
Agreed to outlined approach, bit this does not appear to have been considered in all proposed sites eg BW site 673
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86037
Derbyniwyd: 12/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Dr Jean-Pierre Laake
No to building on SG18 and greenbelt land:
1. Previous planning applications in SG18 have not been supported by councillors.
2. High land of SG18 overlooks Bishopton, Shottery Conservation Area and the Racecourse and will irreparably damage natural surrouding views
3. SG18 is valued as green leisure space by existing residents
4. SG18 is too many miles from town centre to promote active transport
5. SG18 is segregated from town by a46 and the western relief road
6. There are better brownfield sites closer to the town centre including disused poor quality architectural retail space and SG19
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86060
Derbyniwyd: 12/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Sandy McCaskie
N/A
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86090
Derbyniwyd: 12/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Clive Corrie
The Green Belt must at all cost be retained unless there are pressing loca needs and the scale and type of development is agreed at a local level.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86187
Derbyniwyd: 14/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Jonathan Freeman
Green Belt land was protected for a very good reason and it should remain safe and it will be lost forever just to line the pockets of property developers. WHy are you not exploring existing brown belt land to build on rather than rip up swathes of beautiful countryside?
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86329
Derbyniwyd: 21/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Andrew Ashcroft
The building of new settlements in the greenbelt should be avoided wherever possible, providing an important purpose to preventing inappropriate development. Once built upon it will be lost forever and allow future development on the back of it changing the whole character of the area.
Also, in considering development in the greenbelt , the feasibility of infrastructure should be considered and whether that has an impact on the wider greenbelt in facilitating development.
Finally, the feasibility of the development of Wood End station should be fully considered given the current access and availability of land surrounding it for expansion
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86404
Derbyniwyd: 23/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Sheila Chennells
Please do not build on our green belt with the number of houses you propose
Consider removing a large number looking at your proposals above. Keep our Green belt in Kenilworth
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86450
Derbyniwyd: 25/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Carole Johnson
Further development proposals will wash over villages such as Hampton Magna, Hatton Park and Hatton. They will no longer be villages but an urban area of Warwick and also Leamington Spa.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86524
Derbyniwyd: 27/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr justin kerridge
sensible idea but....
this should be done with close cooperation with parish councils and communities. not a top down directive
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86589
Derbyniwyd: 28/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Bridgewater
The Green Belt is important as an initial consideration. However, it is not sacrosanct and sustainable transport and low carbon development should take a high priority.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86779
Derbyniwyd: 29/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr russell gillott
Green belt should also be considered protected with respect to nature, wildlife and habitats that support biodiversity. Not just protecting against urban sprawl!
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 86901
Derbyniwyd: 31/01/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Arthur Hogan-Fleming
There is already a significant flooding problem. Green belt must be left as green belt. No more development
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87007
Derbyniwyd: 02/02/2025
Ymatebydd: S Gardner
We need to resist national policies that erode green belt land and green corridors, Warwickshire is a beautiful county. You need to designate more land as protected land, and, honour green belt provisions, HS2 has already significantly impaired this,
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87052
Derbyniwyd: 03/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Judith Corless
With the growth in population and the amount of houses that need to be built, some building in the green belt should be allowed.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87168
Derbyniwyd: 05/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Bryan Hay
Green Belt should be considered sacrosanct.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87194
Derbyniwyd: 06/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr R M Boorman
Proposals are set out that build on farm land. We have seem hugely un popular development of solar farms on viable farm land already and it is clear these developments are visually intrusive and despite local opinion in favour of rejection, have been passed. This is prime agricultural land which should not be lost to building development. We need to preserve some agricultural land to grow the crops for now and future generations. It is also beautiful green belt countryside with a rich variety of plant and animal species.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87241
Derbyniwyd: 07/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Christopher Howarth
Green Belt should be maintained to help with wildlife , nature and general wellbeing in the communities.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87250
Derbyniwyd: 07/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Katrin Gilbert
Green belt land will disappear and towns and villages will be amalgamted into bigger urban areas when alternative sites and more creative ways of building should be considered.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87296
Derbyniwyd: 08/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Richard Hewitt
We need housing and lots of it. Time for a post WW2 type housing programme to provide homes for the young people who need them. Get the houses built.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87379
Derbyniwyd: 08/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Cllr Andrew Day
Good idea and sensible policy
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87562
Derbyniwyd: 09/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Michaelina Jakala
No I do not support - there will be other ways that these policies will ensure the green belt will be 'washed over' or dismantled.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87563
Derbyniwyd: 09/02/2025
Ymatebydd: mrs susan morris
As different types of green belt land are included only low grade land should be used to build houses if no other land is available
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87658
Derbyniwyd: 09/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Michael Enness
I support the identification of new green belt - the current definition makes no sense to me, as many local towns are sprawling in size, making lifeless places with no boundaries. There is not enough investment in higher density, more space-efficient housing in the town centers, where people could live and work without needing cars to drive everywhere.
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87669
Derbyniwyd: 10/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mrs Jo Lancashire
I want to uphold the importance of Green Belt land. For a very long time Warwick DC has upheld all planning regulations regarding Green Belt building or extending to a very high degree. It seems to completely go against the appeal that rural Green Belt locations hold to disregard the allocation completely. I would counter that the density is the most crucial and most impactful factor here. If you were to force a VERY low density of housing on former green belt land, this would be much more in keeping with the location.
Yes
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87714
Derbyniwyd: 10/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr justin kerridge
yes
Other
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87735
Derbyniwyd: 10/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Kim James
1. SWLP must fully reflect the significant changes introduced in the 2024 NPPF, particularly the new concept of "Grey Belt" land.
2. While the reclassification of certain Green Belt land may provide flexibility for development, it is essential that this does not lead to an automatic presumption in favour of development.
3. SWLP must continue to uphold the fundamental principles of Green Belt policy—preventing urban sprawl, protecting the countryside, and encouraging regeneration of brownfield sites within urban areas first.
4. SWLP to direct growth to the most sustainable locations while maintaining the integrity of the wider Green Belt.
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87775
Derbyniwyd: 10/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Mr Samuel Sharples
Greenbelt should be left alone and not changed in terms of classification to enable people to build houses
No
Preferred Options 2025
ID sylw: 87783
Derbyniwyd: 10/02/2025
Ymatebydd: Miss Katarzyna Wielis
Greenbelt should be left alone and not changed in terms of classification to enable people to build houses