No

ID sylw: 95508

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Dave Maxted

I believe that the current housing developments sprouting up all around Kenilworth, together with the planned development of two ex-school sites and others lined up are more than enough for our town. These developments are already straining local facilities like surgeries, schools, car parks. New households will inevitably create more traffic in and around the town, as they will not be self-sufficient in terms of entertainment places, shops, cafes, pubs etc. Even with the current developments there is a lack of connecting infrastructure - cycleways, footpaths, forcing more people into cars to access the town. Enough is enough.

Yes

ID sylw: 95870

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Hannah Hannah Holland

n/a

Yes

ID sylw: 95924

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Nixon

This area is partly green belt but also includes brown/grey land. Largely Warwick University partly blighted by HS2. It has benefits of proximity to employment with A46/A45 connectivity and shopping and health infastructure would make it sustainable. Good connectivty to Coventry.
The southernmost part of the site (SW) should remain green belt to sustain biodiversity gap between Coventry and Kenilworth

No

ID sylw: 96021

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr John Clayton

This area needs to be kept as green belt as a border between Kenilworth and Coventry. I feel its important for both Kenilworth and Coventry to have a boundary with access to Green Belt areas for mental Well being.

Yes

ID sylw: 96026

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Andrew Chilton

Excellent infrastructure already Ian place or can be added to

Yes

ID sylw: 96205

Derbyniwyd: 04/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Sinclair

Mix of green belt and non green belt land. Arguably the development of hs2 has already impacted significantly on green belt therefore impact of further building would be less.
Provides large residential potential between Coventry and Kenilworth so reliance of infrastructure could be spread between the two areas.
Local employment opportunities via Warwick University and Coventry
Already established bus routes that serve university with train stations nearby with access to London and Birmingham
Provides more than 3.6 times the capacity of Sg04

Yes

ID sylw: 96278

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: John Dinnie

Meets the demand in the Coventry area

No

ID sylw: 96652

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs G Wood

Too many developments a) without sufficient infrastructure b) so much so the schemes will potentially be within touching distance and thereby transforming a collection of semi-rural and small town areas into a large metropolis. That's more change than the areas can or should be enduring.

Other

ID sylw: 96740

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Alcester Town Council

Alcester Town Council, Arrow with Weethley Parish Council, Kinwarton Parish Council, Wixford Parish Council and Great Alne Parish Council (together referred to as Alcester Parishes Group or ‘APG’) has no comment.

Yes

ID sylw: 96948

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

N/A

Other

ID sylw: 97008

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs R Douce

Green belt is essential here to prevent further urban sprawl to the south of Kenilworth and preserve the integrity of the village of Leek Wootton. Lack of infrastructure is also a problem and would cause increased congestion on Warwick Road.

No

ID sylw: 97117

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Kyn Aizlewood

My views align with local Parish and Town Council objections to the SG01 proposal, which threatens community identity by removing Green Belt land between Coventry, Burton Green, and Kenilworth. A Parish Council survey found over 90% of residents value this protection.
Over 650 people have signed a petition to reinstate the Safeguarded Land to Green Belt, as Coventry’s reduced housing needs mean the land is unnecessary for development.
Key arguments include the loss of vital Green Belt functions, high-quality agricultural land, the impact on nature, lack of infrastructure, and evidence showing SG01 is unsuitability for development compared to other options.

No

ID sylw: 97436

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Maurice Caspar

I do not agree because it’s vital to protect this valuable stretch of land between Coventry and Kenilworth. The area holds natural beauty, supports diverse wildlife, and provides essential green space for the community. Removing it from the Green Belt was a mistake and the pressure on local infrastructure — from traffic to schools and healthcare — is already too high. Reinstating this land into the Green Belt will preserve our countryside, and maintain the character and wellbeing of Burton Green and surrounding areas.

No

ID sylw: 97512

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Ms Samantha Lawrence

I object to SG01 for the following reasons:
- Green belt land - beautiful countryside, agricultural land and a very important local amenity for the well-being of Coventry, Burton Green and Kenilworth residents
- Create urban sprawl with virtually no distinction between Coventry and Kenilworth
- Create intolerable local road congestion and pollution - public transport infrastructure inadequate, car parks at local train stations at saturation point
- Insufficient capacity in local services (inc. schools, GPs, dentists, commercial facilities) to accommodate increase in housing.
- Detrimental effect on nature reserve and ancient woodland - loss of character of the area

Other

ID sylw: 97513

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Dr Jill Andrews

SG01 SG02 And SG03 should combine to be a new settlement as there is potential for jobs and link to motorway and train stations, but need the additional infrastructure to go with this eg schools, doctors etc. Use of other 'infill' areas is just fudging the issue and detrimental to roads and facilities already at breaking point and beyond capacity - eg poor Clopton Bridge.

Yes

ID sylw: 97522

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Clarke

No

No

ID sylw: 97523

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Peter Clarke

No, overdevelopment

Yes

ID sylw: 97620

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Melanie Elkington

This provides a large capacity for housing, the green belt area has already been decimated by HS2. It has a significant existing infrastructure plus there is plenty of employment nearby.

No

ID sylw: 97671

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: mrs susan bergin

Kenilworth has already allocated significant areas for new housing development ongoing.
Kenilworth is a historic town defined by a green border between all neighbouring towns, this should be maintained as green belt.
Warwick university and developers are the driving force behind SG01 development. This is a predatory move.
The university has a huge spacious campus, which could easily contain any development they claim necessary, without encroaching on what is left of the green belt between campus and Kenilworth.

No

ID sylw: 97680

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Ann Turner

Too much development leaving no green space between Kenilworth and Coventry

Yes

ID sylw: 97826

Derbyniwyd: 05/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Gary Jeffery

N/A

No

ID sylw: 98080

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Julie Swinsco

No! As Stratford cannot cope with such a huge amount of new people, re current facilities, doctors, dentists, town infrastructure and traffic is gridlocked already! Plus why kill green land?

Yes

ID sylw: 98155

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Miss Lesley Andrews

Coventry has already had a huge injection of money spent on it to improve roads and the university. Infrastructure for truffle and jobs are already in place.

Yes

ID sylw: 98273

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Daine Davis

Provides the biggest residential capacity in Coventry & Kenilworth. Northern portion outside green belt. There is significant existing infrastructure. HS2 has already damaged green belt, reducing its value and attractiveness in this area. Close to major employment centres at Warwick University and Coventry.

No

ID sylw: 98307

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mrs Anne Teed

A large proportion of this area is green belt and with HS2 being the main destroyer of land in this area a green belt needs to be maintained to prevent Kenilworth and surrounding area merging with the City of Coventry.

Yes

ID sylw: 98312

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Garry Rollason

The site has very good transport links. Near to populated areas so minimises commuting.

Yes

ID sylw: 98448

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Simon Wright

Provides the biggest residential capacity in Coventry & Kenilworth on mixed land designation. SG01 provides more than 3.6 times the capacity of SG04 (land South of Kenilworth).
SG01 has mixed land designation, with the northern portion outside green belt. HS2 has already damaged green belt in this area, therefore reducing its value and visibility.
Significant existing infrastructure and close to major employment centres at Warwick University and Coventry.

Other

ID sylw: 98578

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: SupremeTech

Asiant : Delta Planning

Whilst SupremeTech does not have a view on the specific Strategic Growth Location options put forward as part of the consultation, SupremeTech considers that, if SG01 is to be brought forward as a strategic growth location, Land off Princes Drive, Kenilworth should be included as part of SG01 moving forwards to complement the offer and mix of uses which could be proposed as part of this growth option. Land off Princes Drive, Kenilworth could deliver much needed SME units to serve the local employment market.

Please refer to our full response for further details.

Yes

ID sylw: 98728

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Mr Doug Wallace

N/A

No

ID sylw: 98809

Derbyniwyd: 06/03/2025

Ymatebydd: Burton Green Parish Council

Burton Green Parish Council strongly opposes SG01. The assessment clearly shows that this is an unsustainable option.
Specifically:
•SG01 clearly meets the criteria for Green Belt designation
•Insufficient weighting (6%) is given to Green Belt weighting
•SG01 consists largely of ALC2 which should be retained under advice in the NPPF.
•SG01 is not a sustainable location for 4800 new homes e.g. Sustainability report and previous assessments.
•BGPC urges the reinstatement of Safeguarded Land into the Green Belt, backed by a petition with 675 signatures.
•SG01 performs less well on assessment than most other proposed development zones(ref HELAA-B)