Yes

Representation ID: 99106

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Martin Phelps

Nearby rail links

Yes

Representation ID: 99132

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Natalie Wride

One of the largest strategic growth areas proposed. close to local employment hubs such as Warwick University and closest to more areas of Business such as Birmingham outside the region.

No

Representation ID: 99173

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Rawlings

There should not be any development on the Green Belt.
This area will nearly join Kenilworth with Coventry.

No

Representation ID: 99222

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr James Kennedy

The development of this area will in effect remove the last strand of greenbelt between Coventry and Burton Green / Kenilworth. The greenbelt has already been severely damaged and curtailed by the construction of HS2, and any further reduction in the area will mean that Kenilworth becomes a suburb of Coventry. The University of Warwick is planning an Eco Park on their portion of this land. Connecting this up with the existing areas of woodland on the site into new habitats to enhance nature would both increase biodiversity and ensure the essential greenbelt corridor between Coventry and Kenilworth remains.

Yes

Representation ID: 99236

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Tracey Hasnaoui

Area is a mixture of green belt and non green belt but the greenbelt portion has already been changed as HS2 now runs through it. It provides more than 3.6 times the capacity of SG04 and has significant existing infrastructure. It is also close to large employment centres of Coventry and Warwick University.

No

Representation ID: 99399

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diane Wilson

See previous comments

Yes

Representation ID: 99400

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Tibbles

Appears to be well serviced by existing Road Network, Transportation hubs, Healthcare facilities and Education establishments

Yes

Representation ID: 99722

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

Part of Coventry.

Yes

Representation ID: 99729

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

Part of Coventry.

Yes

Representation ID: 99738

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Cooper

Close to A46

Yes

Representation ID: 99774

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Sabrina Hasnaoui

Opportunity for large residential capacity, 3.6x that of South Kenilworth land
Despite this being partly green belt land, the development of HS2 in this area needs to be considered, as the environmental and landscape impact in this area is already present. HS2 also serves as a man made barrier to prevent Kenilworth and Coventry merging, while close proximity of this area to Coventry increases sustainability with good transport routes (including good university bus network) and employment opportunities.
The overall plan has not taken into account hs2 when assessing suitable areas and I believe this needs to be strongly considered.

Yes

Representation ID: 99974

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Evan Bailey

Makes sense to allow university to grow. Good for economy, education and employment, and more student housing is required on campus to ease impact on Coventry and Leamington.

Yes

Representation ID: 100013

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Neil Brooker

If more houses are needed this Location is more suitable for development than others in the district.

Yes

Representation ID: 100041

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Susan Harrison

Seems sensible

Other

Representation ID: 100153

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Philip Wall

Mixed land development offers a better alternative than SG04, even with some Green Belt loss. SG01 provides the largest residential capacity in Coventry and Kenilworth—over 3.6 times that of SG04. Its northern portion lies outside the Green Belt, and significant infrastructure is already in place. The area has already been impacted by HS2, reducing its environmental value. Additionally, its proximity to major employment hubs like Warwick University and Coventry ensures a more sustainable development with reduced commuting needs. This option maximises housing potential while minimising unnecessary harm to untouched Green Belt land.

Other

Representation ID: 100319

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Carter

Even with some Green Belt loss, mixed land development is still a far better alternative to SG04. SG01 offers over 3.6 times the residential capacity of SG04, providing the largest housing potential in Coventry and Kenilworth. Its northern section is outside the Green Belt, and much of the area already has key infrastructure in place. HS2 has already damaged parts of the land, significantly reducing its environmental value. Additionally, SG01’s proximity to Warwick University and Coventry makes it a much more sustainable location, reducing the need for long commutes and protecting Green Belt land elsewhere.

Other

Representation ID: 100393

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Aimee Carter

Even with some Green Belt loss, mixed land development is still a far better alternative to SG04. SG01 offers over 3.6 times the residential capacity of SG04, providing the largest housing potential in Coventry and Kenilworth. Its northern section is outside the Green Belt, and much of the area already has key infrastructure in place. HS2 has already damaged parts of the land, significantly reducing its environmental value. Additionally, SG01’s proximity to Warwick University and Coventry makes it a much more sustainable location, reducing the need for long commutes and protecting Green Belt land elsewhere

No

Representation ID: 100551

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Joe Rukin

You have completely ignored the impact of HS2 in this area and the fact that this fundamentally changes the Green Belt between Coventry and Kenilworth. You have invented a methodology which pretends the statutory protected Green Belt is not a thing at all! Your assessments could not be more fundamentally compromised. The Green Belt was designated specifically to stop urban sprawl and the connection of large built up areas, yet SG01 is designed purely for urban sprawl and connecting of existing settlements.

The real problem with this consultation is that you've got 100 words. [Text redacted]

No

Representation ID: 100649

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Maureen Rawlings

This is Green Belt land and should not be built on.

Yes

Representation ID: 100771

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Taylor

This appears to provide the most appropriate site for development.

No

Representation ID: 100802

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Adrian Stokes

1. SG01 will not provide sufficient capacity to be categorised as a development area.
2. The status of SG01 as 'well performing Green Belt' is given insufficient weighting in the area assessment methodology.
3. SG01 contains good quality agricultural land which, according to The National Planning Framework, should be avoided for housing development.
4. SG01 has insufficient infrastructure for the proposed housing development and there are no measures to address this.
5. SG01 is very close to other planning jurisdictions. It essential that developments are considered in relation to functionally meaningful configurations of housing and infrastructure.

No

Representation ID: 100808

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Croucher

Concerned about loss of green belt: nearly a third of West Midlands green belt is part of Warwickshire intended to prevent "unrestricted sprawl of urban areas".

Yes

Representation ID: 100844

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Collyer

Linking housing to employment options makes a lot of sense as does building near major road networks.

Yes

Representation ID: 100986

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Nicola Sawle

there has been a large scale structural development of that area allowing significant road and rail access, along with lower flood risk and environmental impact

No

Representation ID: 101026

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Zoe Leventhal

• Object to removal of part of this site from GB. Would merge Kenilworth & Coventry, contrary to Green Belt aim to prevent towns merging.
• Significant areas prone to flooding; no building on floodplain, and plan for climate change (NPPF p48) and put in place a blue/green corridor as part of a sustainable drainage system (PO p 133).
• SG01 performs poorly in many aspects in the SA; a lower priority for development.
• Important biodiversity remains despite HS2.
Also residents amenity will be majorly impacted here by building houses close to HS2

Yes

Representation ID: 101072

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land

Agent: Marrons

Hallam Land support the inclusion of land South of Stoneleigh Road / Kenilworth Road, Kenilworth (HELAA Reference 103 and part of SG01) within the Plan for the following reasons:

- Alignment with the Spatial Growth Strategy -The Site lies entirely within Priority Area 2 in close proximity to Coventry.
- Alignment with the Overarching Principles
- Having regard to the definition of grey belt and guidance within the NPPG, the Site does not strongly contribute to purposes a), b), or d).

Further detail is provided in the attached PDF.

No

Representation ID: 101481

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vincent Rollason

This development is not good for the area

Yes

Representation ID: 101604

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Hallam Land

Agent: Marrons

Hallam Land support the inclusion of land South of Stoneleigh Road / Kenilworth Road, Kenilworth (HELAA Reference 103 and part of SG01).

Yes

Representation ID: 101733

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Miss Janet Neale

Support this area. Student accommodation should be focussed here to free up family homes in Leamington Spa and remove the significant problems the University buses cause.

No

Representation ID: 101985

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Moore

Encroaches on land designated as green belt, ancient woodland, nature reserves. Close to a flood risk area. Added development on this currently green space will contravene all of these and add to the risk of damaging floods. Extra pressure on services and infrastructure that are already over-stretched. Loss of demarcation between Coventry and Kenilworth.