No

ID sylw: 97425

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Daniel Hatcher

Assuming exceptional circumstances exist to release Green Belt, Policy Direction 7 omits to consider the case for smaller scale sites. Rosconn Group considers it essential for the Part 1 SWLP to also include allocations on small and medium sized sites to maintain a 5 year housing land supply in the early part of the Plan period. If exceptional circumstances exist, then a similar approach should be adopted when identifying suitable sites in sustainable locations.
The Stage 2 Review needs to reflect the revised NPPF and PPG in respect of 'Grey Belt' land, which are sequentially preferable to greenfield, Green Belt.

No

ID sylw: 97479

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Wendy Anthony

Only brownfield sites should be built on. England and Wales have enough existing homes that can be utilised (1.5 million are empty) and this will save our landscapes and finances.

Yes

ID sylw: 97559

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Brenda Stewart

no comment

No

ID sylw: 97584

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Toni Sharp

A lot of this goes against Government Guidance on Green Belt Land! Environmental damage would be devastating and impossible to reverse.

No

ID sylw: 97674

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Susan Leonard

There are far too many reasons used to over ride the sanctity of greenbelt land. Land that has been preserved as greenbelt eg the land which separated Kenilworth from Coventry has been targeted for HS2. A sense of space at the cost of the mental health of children and adults is being lost.

Other

ID sylw: 97717

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Melanie Elkington

Difficult to tell exactly what you mean . Green Belt should be protected on the whole. I understand for New Settlements that may not be possible but you are gradually allowing building to take place everywhere . I dont think you should even consider Green Belt land until everywhere else has been developed - the empty houses, empty schools , etc

Other

ID sylw: 97803

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Gary Jeffery

Proposed settlements at B1, E1 and X2 are more suitable and do not impact on the green belt as would development at BW totally

Other

ID sylw: 97871

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Paul Hibbert

Greenbelt land should never be built on when brownfield land is available. Without protection of greenbelt land urban sprawl will increase. Areas of greenbelt land next to existing nature reserves should be permanently safeguarded against development to protect wildlife corridors. This would be in keeping with the 'overarching principles' of South Warwickshire which include maintaining "a beautiful South Warwickshire" and creating "a biodiverse and environmentally resilient South Warwickshire".

No

ID sylw: 97923

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Tracey Hasnaoui

Housing needs can be met without utilising green belt land.
Green belt land should be protected at all costs and plays an important role in maintaining separation of settlements and therefore the wider Warwickshire landscape and countryside.
Use of green belt land leads to encroachment and merging of towns/villages.
The use of green belt land is not justified and sustainability appraisal used for some of these areas is inaccurate.
Suggesting use of green belt development is needed in 'Exceptional circumstances' should be highly scrutinised and accurate evidence gathered.
Reduction in biodiversity and reduction of agricultural land

No

ID sylw: 97940

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Charlotte Careless

Green belt land should be protected, it is there for a reason - such as to help restrict urban sprawl.
Brown land is available so that should be used first.

No

ID sylw: 97989

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Richard Bowater

Whilst other brownfield sites are still available then greenbelt areas should not be considered. New settlements would be more ideal as they will put less strain on already crumbling and strained exhisting infastructure.

No

ID sylw: 98012

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Helen Little

All brown opportunities should be used to preserve the benefit of green belt and the rural natural of south Warwickshire

No

ID sylw: 98014

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Benjamin Sharp

I disagree with the government's recent changed approach to the Green Belt, and the possibility of the Council adopting a more lenient approach. Just because it may appear to be the simplest, cheapest solution to building houses, does not mean it is the morally acceptable decision. Non-Green Belt options must be absolutely exhausted before Green Belt release is considered. I contend that the destruction of the Green Belt can never be considered a "sustainable" act by definition. It is precious, protected land for very good reasons and we cannot risk losing it forever for future generations.

No

ID sylw: 98026

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: E Innes

A sequential approach to allocating areas for growth is a good idea but needs to start with redevelopment of existing urban areas of low density with higher density solutions which limit sprawl into green belt. Creating new green belt doesn't seem like a practical approach given the constant and increasing need for development sites. As such more effort should be made to retain existing green belt which cannot be replaced by simply changing a designation of another area.

No

ID sylw: 98062

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Janine McComiskey

No! The green belt is protected by law for reasons which our green belt area meets. Green belt should only be built on in exceptional circumstances. Consider the loss of food production, biodiversity, WELL-BEING of residents Other areas identified in the plan satisfy the building needs, so this is NOT exceptional circumstances! New housing needs to be within towns, not on the edge, to ensure that people can walk to their work, shops, doctors, railway station, etc, maximising infrastructure and creating a vibrant community. Building on Green belt is going to benefit the developers, not the people who live there!

No

ID sylw: 98094

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Elias Topping

The draft policy needs to be updated to ensure compliance with the new Planning Policy Guidance in respect of Grey Belt land issued on 27 February 2025; reference should be made to the release of potential Grey Belt sites in the sequential approach listed in the draft policy. In particular it should be noted that the guidance in respect of the Green Belt preventing neighbouring towns merging into one another relates specifically to towns, not villages or other small settlements.

No

ID sylw: 98106

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Julie Swinsco

You need to protect the green belt even more than stated

No

ID sylw: 98276

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Barry Elkington

There is sufficient land NOT in the Green Belt to meet all the housing requirements so these boundaries should not be changed. Even if “well performing Green Belt” is not considered an absolute constraint, a 6% weighting in the assessment appears very low. Specifically for SG04, the Green Belt Review Stage 1 judges KEN9 as making a strong contribution to safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. It is essential that in the areas of Kenilworth, such as SG04, that have no natural or man-made boundary (e.g. the A46), the Green Belt is preserved to prevent further outward spread of the town.

No

ID sylw: 98363

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Daine Davis

Of 24 Spatial Growth areas in the plan, 12 are on non-green belt land, 2 area mixed designation, and 10 SG are purely green belt. The volume of land required to meet South Warwickshire’s housing needs can be fulfilled without using any green belt land. The plan appears to favour green belt sites because developers prefer them for low cost high profit development.

No

ID sylw: 98444

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Holly Farm Business Park

Asiant : The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

* The consultation has been overtaken by events in light of the December 2024 NPPF and should be rerun at a later date taking account of responses. This would also enable, for example, detailed policy wording to be added.
* Notwithstanding that, it is clear that an analysis of the purposes of Green Belt for the land identified at Holly Farm Business Park for potential development would not contribute strongly to purposes a), b) and d) of Green Belt.

No

ID sylw: 98463

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Simon Wright

There are sufficient sustainable non-green belt sites provided in the plan to meet the remaining housing need, therefore no green belt land is required and should be protected in all cases.

Other

ID sylw: 98466

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: E Booth

The greenbelt must be protected which means SG06 should not go ahead. There are other options available.

This greenbelt must remain in order to:
to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; - Leamington
to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; - Leamington, Warwick and local villages would merge.
to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; - the country side would be encroached
to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; - the character of Old Milverton and the Milverton area of Leamington would be destroyed.

Yes

ID sylw: 98477

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Philip Sykes

If some Green Belt is used for development, is it possible to create a Policy that seeks to replace the area elsewhere in South Warwickshire for example non-affected Green Belt or the Cotswold National Landscape.

Other

ID sylw: 98492

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Lucy Flynn

Asiant : Stansgate Planning

The approach of Policy, and the allocation of sustainable sites within the Green Belt in Stratford and Warwick Districts to meet future development needs, is strongly supported.
That notwithstanding, the SWLP Preferred Options does not currently conform to national planning policy and must be redrafted to reflect the guidance in the PPG on Green Belt, published on 27 February 2025. In particular this requires Councils not only to assess Green Belt but also to identify what land within the Green Belt is grey belt, and to prioritise the allocation of grey belt sites ahead of other Green Belt land.

In respect of Stratford and Warwick Districts, there is insufficient previously developed and underutilised land, and opportunities to increase density on existing sites, to meet the identified housing needs. It is not reasonable for land to be allocated in neighbouring local authority areas (indeed Stratford and Warwick will be required to assist their own neighbours). Greenfield land will be required instead.
The thrust of national planning guidance is that land to be allocated must be sustainably located. Given historic development patterns, many of the most sustainable locations are now within the Green Belt and this should be acknowledged by removing land from the Green Belt to meet future housing needs. The Part 2 Green Belt assessment will confirm this.
To consider this further, the current Local Plans focused development on areas outside of Green Belt and have used many of the available opportunities for allocations in such locations. For example, in Warwick District, substantial allocations were directed to the areas south of Warwick and Leamington, providing housing close to existing employment areas. Further development in the same location will extend the settlements away from their core centres leading to an imbalance of growth and extending travel distances back to the centre. Development on other edges of the settlements would be closer to local service and facilities, shops, schools, employment and have a greater range of sustainable transport opportunities and must be fully explored, particularly where development will have limited impact on the Green Belt across the area of the plan (as required by Framework paragraph 146)

No

ID sylw: 98564

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Robert Macvie

The Clopton Quartee part of SG18 lies adjacent to the Welcombe Hills and should be permanently safeguarded against development to preserve this beautiful part of South Warwickshire. Green belt land should not be considered for development when brownfield land is already available. The infrastructure within Stratford upon Avon cannot cope at the moment without any new housing developments.

Other

ID sylw: 98581

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Alice Hibbert

o Green belt land should not be considered when brownfield land is available that fulfills the housing and infrastructure needs.
o Green belt should be safeguarded to restrict urban sprawl, particularly in areas of importance to the community.
o The Clopton Quarter part of SG18 next to the Clopton Park and Welcombe Hills Nature reserve should be safeguarded against development to preserve this vital community asset for those who come to the area to be in the scenic open space.

No

ID sylw: 98584

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr N Brown

There is no justification for reviewing those villages washed over by the greenbelt to remove their current designation. If this was to occur it is likely that the character and rural nature of these villages would be irreversibly harmed particularly through building on gardens of existing properties.

Other

ID sylw: 98607

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Nicola Hambridge

How do you expect people to understand what you are proposing? I don't understand what you are saying about Green Belt. I assume you are trying to redefine it to make way for more development. I object to any change to Green Belt that allows you to build on it. We must protect what is left of our countryside separating our towns and villages.

Have you considered how overly complex this website is and the pages and pages of policy information and planning information that the average person like me doesn't understand?

No

ID sylw: 98767

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Helena Foreman

Green belt land should only be considered for development when there are no viable sites outside of the green belt. Even in such cases, priority should be given to sites that can be clearly and convincingly identified as 'grey belt' before any green belt land is considered. Only after these sites have been exhausted should the Council contemplate the limited release of green belt land, ensuring that any such release has the least possible impact on the core principles of green belt policy as outlined in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

No

ID sylw: 98793

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Roger Shimmin

The restrictions on the development on green belt land must be made stronger to prevent "easy options decisions" being made.