No

Representation ID: 104833

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Elizabeth Heath

I believe green belt land must be protected. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify its removal, as per the NPPF. Other sites are more suitable for development.
•No existing boundary for redesignation, reducing the gap between Kenilworth and nearby villages.
•It’s the second lowest housing capacity yield.
•Loss of productive farmland.
•Essential services, including the secondary school, are too far away and already overstretched.
•Increased traffic would negatively impact safety and access to well-used footpaths.
•The landscape quality and biodiversity would suffer, and important historical views would be lost.
Developers shouldn't influence site selection based on ease and cost.

No

Representation ID: 104911

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Charlotte Holme

This is green belt land and should not be built on. It would be a huge shame and a great regret to develop this land when there are surely more suitable sites for building on. This area is also at risk of flooding and building on it will certainly cause water management challenges in the area as a result of the development

No

Representation ID: 104919

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Nikala Kumari

*no exceptional circumstances to remove green belt
*not sustainable
* traffic already a problem, this would have a huge impact. Warwick Rd and Rouncil Lane are not adequate to cope
*no infrastructure to support more homes
*schools already oversubscribed
*join up leek wooten and Kenilworth? Just widening the boundary, not enough amenities
*shouldn't be selecting sites based on who wants to sell their land but consider wider impact on community

No

Representation ID: 104958

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Zoltan Geiszt

Proposed development would seriously reduce the gap between Kenilworth and Leek Wooton risking the loss of the latter's identity.

Also, entryways to Kenilworth are already strained with traffic and choking one of them with a housing estate would further impair the situation and would also place the resident of the new housing into a sad state.

Schools and GP surgeries would also struggle to handle the increased load.

No

Representation ID: 105002

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jolene Barrett

The green belt land requires protection, the development would breach the 'line of sight' from Kenilworth castle. It fails the 20-min neighbourhood test with no nearby GP, public transport, or secondary schools, which are already oversubscribed (the primary ones are struggling now). Local infrastructure (healthcare, drainage - already has problems on Rounds Hill) is inadequate. Development would harm biodiversity - we see birds of prey, woodpeckers, owls, herons and much more, destroy ancient trees & hedgerows, damage an Arden Special Landscape Area with historical significance, impair countryside access affecting community wellbeing, increase traffic, endanger cyclists and pedestrians.

No

Representation ID: 105074

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Kenilworth St John's Lib Dems

I wish to object to the use of SG04 for housing development due to several concerns. Firstly, it would harm the Greenbelt and facilitate urban sprawl between Kenilworth and surrounding areas. Secondly, the site has low housing capacity and would result in the loss of productive farmland. Thirdly, it would negatively impact the cultural heritage of Kenilworth Castle and the Arden landscape. Additionally, the site lacks essential services for a 20-minute neighbourhood and would strain existing infrastructure. It is also a vital recreational area that supports wellbeing and would harm local biodiversity.

No

Representation ID: 105112

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Paul Ablett

I am responding to the consultation on the proposed building plan for Kenilworth Green Belt, specifically SG04. I propose a 15-year plan instead of a longer one, as many factors can change in that time. The area from Farm Road to Spinney caravans is entirely Green Belt and building here is unsustainable. This plan appears to prioritise developer profits over sustainable housing, increasing car use and straining infrastructure without addressing the need for schools and GP services. It also overlooks environmental considerations for active travel and would negatively impact Kenilworth's cultural heritage. I oppose building on the Green Belt for the above stated reasons.

No

Representation ID: 105132

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: David Scanlan

I am saddened to contact the council regarding the South Warwickshire local plan. Having lived in Kenilworth for over forty years, I see the town transforming into an urban sprawl with new housing developments, particularly near Rouncil Lane, encroaching on green belt land. This growth lacks necessary infrastructure improvements, such as better roads and healthcare facilities. I strongly object to any development near Oaks Farm, as it threatens local wildlife and green spaces vital for residents' health. I urge the council to prioritise brownfield sites instead of green belt areas to preserve our town's character and beauty.

No

Representation ID: 105149

Received: 01/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Young

I am very disappointed that the greenbelt area behind Rounds Hill, where I live, is under consideration in the Local Plan. The footpath nearby is popular with walkers from Kenilworth and beyond. Developing this land into a large housing estate would greatly affect protected trees, hedges, and wildlife, as well as have a significant visual impact. Additionally, the existing infrastructure is inadequate, with full schools and struggling GP surgeries, and the increased traffic would pose public safety risks on already busy roads. I strongly object to this development.

No

Representation ID: 105189

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Ted and Zbigniew Jasinski

I strongly oppose the development of SG04 due to its potential disruption to the historic setting of Kenilworth Castle, a Grade 1 listed building. The development would negatively impact views and conflict with national and local planning policies aimed at protecting heritage assets. Additionally, the SWLP undermines green belt protections with insufficient data on sustainability ratings. There is no existing boundary for redesignating green belt land, which would reduce the separation between communities. Furthermore, it would adversely affect access to footpaths and result in the loss of important biodiversity.

No

Representation ID: 105203

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Kim Garner

I appreciate the chance to voice my concerns about the proposed developments around Kenilworth, particularly site SG04. As a resident and allotment holder, I worry about the impacts on biodiversity, infrastructure, and the aesthetics of Kenilworth Castle. I believe the council should consider shorter planning periods to avoid further green belt development and protect our environment for future generations. Redeveloping brownfield sites would demonstrate a commitment to long-term sustainability. Additionally, the proposal risks damaging local habitats and increasing traffic, which poses risks to residents. I urge careful consideration of these issues.

No

Representation ID: 105204

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Nigel Garner

I have serious concerns regarding the proposed development of green belt areas, particularly SG04. The loss of productive farmland, like Oaks Farm, threatens our food security and biodiversity, especially protected species like skylarks. I believe that building on green belt land should only occur under exceptional circumstances, as it may lead to increased pollution and strain on local infrastructure. Additionally, SG04 could negatively affect Kenilworth Castle, a significant tourist attraction. I urge careful consideration of these factors and the long-term implications of such developments on our environment and community.

Other

Representation ID: 105221

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

South of Kenilworth Group – SG04 – NO OBJECTION

No

Representation ID: 105586

Received: 02/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Spencer

I object to the inclusion of site SG04, Land off Warwick Road & Rouncil Lane in the SWLP due to its classification as Greenbelt land, which should not be developed. The site features ancient footpaths that are vital for local residents' physical and mental health, and losing them would harm well-being. Additionally, the existing public highways cannot handle increased traffic, as many residential roads in St Johns Ward are narrow and already overburdened. Kenilworth’s infrastructure, including schools, is insufficient to accommodate any new housing developments.

No

Representation ID: 105732

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Zoe Parker

I am submitting my comments regarding SGO4 - Kenilworth as a proposed site for over 1200 houses I have major concerns about the inadequate road infrastructure, the potential traffic congestion, and the impact on local schools and shops. The current roads, particularly Rouncil Lane and the A46, cannot handle the expected increase in traffic. Furthermore, the development encroaches on Green Belt land without addressing essential infrastructure needs. I urge you to reconsider this proposal unless substantial plans for roads, education, and retail are established. The Plan is not a joined-up approach.

No

Representation ID: 106119

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Jon Redhead

1. The Protection of Green Belt Land.
SG04 is, and remains, designated Green Belt, and should only be developed if exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated. This area of Green Belt has existed throughout my lifetime here at this address, to prevent urban sprawl, and keep the district identity independent, as well as protecting precious natural habitats for much wildlife for all, young and old, to enjoy and benefit educationally from.
2. Loss of Wildlife and the Corridor that exists within (SG04)
The policy of protection of green spaces to preserve ecological connectivity affecting wildlife movement must be respected, as regeneration would not happen once destroyed.
3. Grade 1 Listed Castle Character loss
The protections act: (Listed Buildings and Conservation areas 1990), requires preservation of the setting of listed buildings, of which Kenilworth Castle is Grade 1 listed. The area of land (SG04), is within the landscape and sight of Kenilworth Castle, and any development here would substantially alter the impact of the Castle, with light pollution, noise, and general ambiance, affecting the whole visitor experience, and Kenilworth’s rich Historic Character.
4. Destruction of the District Boundaries
Building on SG04 would be a further big erosion of the boundary which retains Kenilworth’s identity separate from Leek Wooton, Warwick, and Leamington. More building work has already compromised boundary in North Kenilworth, and is getting close to the merging of Kenilworth to Coventry threatening urban sprawl. With Kenilworth’s rich Historic Character and unique identity, this development would alter forever the landscape which has made this the Town that it is.
5. Very questionable Boundary Mapping
Any proposed change of use, and severe increase in movement of traffic, and/or people using this driveway for anything other than for what it serves as, would impact my own, and other neighbouring properties’ environment. I would again stress that the boundary line as it appears mapped, crosses my property, and the width, as such, would not support anything but an existing driveway, as it has done since my property was built in 1954. Any development that would be taken on in the Green Belt to the rear of my property, and would seek to occupy land shown on my deeds, would incur a dispute, and be inherently problematic.
6. Public footpath Preservation
The Public Footpath which has run through SG04, and is not very prominently displayed on the interactive map, is widely used by members of the public, dog walkers, ramblers, as well as being a wildlife haven, bordering ancient hedgerows, providing precious viewing of greatly reducing species.
7. Existing Infrastructure would not cope
Present road network is already crowded, and struggling to cope with increased traffic, brought on by existing completed new house building in Kenilworth South, as well as building on the former Sixth form Castle High School site, for which the increase in traffic has yet to be factored in. Public transport links are poor here, and at present, would incur a 47-minute walk from the proposed site. Any Healthcare and School services are already overburdened, and even with proposed plans to accommodate more places at schools like St John’s, and the all-new Kenilworth Academy School in Glasshouse Lane, whose places are at near full capacity, the proposed wider building of dwellings cannot be justified, as the relevant infrastructure criteria would not be met.
8. The HS2 work through Kenilworth
The impact that HS2 has had on the character of Kenilworth, cannot be overstated, but has hardly been mentioned in all of the proposals concerning the need for new sites. This ongoing railway networking has led to the irreplaceable loss of wildlife habitat, Green Belt land, and has proven, before completion, that it will have done little or nothing to serve the people of Kenilworth, or surrounding villages. The financial cost as well as the greater loss of wildlife habitat, is yet to be fully realised.
9. Housing Allocation can be easily accommodated without the destruction of Green Belt
Conclusion
The development of SG04, is not justified, and I urge Warwick District Council to reject the proposal, and protect the Green Belt, that is so precious, and irreplaceable around Kenilworth. As well as serving the wishes of the majority of our neighbourhood in protecting Kenilworth’s Historic character, for future generations. Alternative Brownfield sites must be a priority, and there are more than adequate numbers of these in order to meet the needs of allocation.

No

Representation ID: 106121

Received: 15/01/2025

Respondent: Peter Rea

1. This is a greenbelt and is the reason we bought the property in the first place in good faith. You can't just wave your hand and make the green belt disappear.
2.Building all those homes will create massive traffic problems plus all noise and light pollution, plus poisonous exhaust fumes.
3. House prices will be drastically reduced by building on the green belt at the rear of the homes in Rounds Hill.
4. The overall character of Kenilworth will change forever if this massive development happens.
5. The local greenspaces built on will be lost forever to the detriment to the people of Kenilworth.
6. What about the impact/devastation on the wildlife in the designated area?

No

Representation ID: 106122

Received: 15/01/2025

Respondent: Susan Rea

1.This land designated as greenbelt and that is why we purchased the property in the first place in good faith. You can't just ignore the fact that it is a Greenbelt area.
2. With the new leisure centre in Fishponds there is already a big increase in traffic flow to add houses would further impact the houses leading to new sites, plus noise and light pollution. It will also affect the house prices in the immediate vicinity.
3. Kenilworth is outgrowing itself already-traffic queues to get out of Kenilworth is already stretched without the inclusion of 1,000 of new dwellings.
4. What about the impact/destruction on the wildlife in the designated area?

No

Representation ID: 106169

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Dr Cameron and Mrs Elizabeth Meades

Number of people: 2

We would argue in the strongest terms against development of the SG04 area. The area is important for those in the St John’s area to easily access a green space. This area is vital for a connection to the natural world for all who live this side of Kenilworth. This area is of as much recreational importance as Abbey fields and others across the town, as development would be detrimental to enjoyable use of footpaths and bridleways used daily by residents from across Kenilworth, Leek Wootton, and Warwick. Building on this area would be visible from Warwick Castle, an unacceptable infringement on the cultural heritage of our town’s Grade I listed building.

Further development would close another green corridor for wildlife already on the brink, as well as walkers, cyclists and horse riders. This huge number of houses would add enormous burdens to the road network in the local area. This would be insufferable for commuters and would require an unacceptable amount of investment to turn into even a remotely plausible option. This investment could be better spent in more suitable areas.

No

Representation ID: 106233

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Terry & Jacqui Jefferson

Number of people: 2

Please find below my comments to the South Warwickshire Local Plan Consultation. My focus and associated comments are targeted at the development south of Kenilworth, SG04. It is understood and accepted that there is a need for development of sustainable housing in the area. SG04 has been identified as one of the areas, but I believe there are significant issues around this identified land as it is currently identified as green belt, therefore should not be utilised:
1. Environmental Preservation: Green belt areas are crucial for maintaining biodiversity, providing habitats for wildlife, and serving as green lungs for urban areas. Developing these lands can lead to habitat destruction, loss of wildlife, and a decrease in natural green spaces.
2. Urban Sprawl: Kenilworth is relatively spread out currently, and this development on green belt land can encourage urban sprawl, leading to uncontrolled and unsustainable expansion of cities. This can result in increased traffic congestion, longer commutes, and higher carbon emissions.
3. Flood Risk: Green belt areas often act as natural floodplains, absorbing excess rainwater and reducing the risk of flooding. Building on these lands can increase the likelihood of flooding in nearby urban areas, particularly towards the castle and ford, causing damage to homes and infrastructure.
4. Agricultural Land Loss: This is prime land utilised for agriculture, providing local food and supporting rural economies. Developing these lands can reduce the amount of available agricultural land, impacting food production and local farming communities.
5. Community Impact: This green belt land is utilised by the community with a number of footpaths, walkways, bridal paths, cycling routes from Kenilworth areas for local communities, offering opportunities for outdoor activities and improving the quality of life. Building on these lands can limit public access to these spaces and reduce the overall well-being of residents.
6. Heritage and Landscape: This area and this green belt identified in SG04 contain historic sites, scenic landscapes, and cultural heritage that contribute to the identity and character of a region. Development on these lands can lead to the loss of these valuable assets and diminish the area's cultural significance.
7. Access and Increased traffic level: There will be a significant detrimental impact on the traffic and highway usage. The access into and out of this area (predominantly via Rouncil Lane, Rounds Hill and Leek Wooten) are at times extremely busy and congested presently. The proposal for development on SG04 will add to this already congested area and due to the restrictions of the current infrastructure and housing locations, make increasing assess extremely difficult. This will also impact on potential health and safety concerns due to increase in traffic levels.
8. Sewerage and Public Services: There are currently significant issues with the sewerage, drainage, etc around Rounds Hill and Rouncil Lane. The development of SG04 will make this significantly worse.
9. Access to Amenities, Shops, Schools: SG04 is significantly away for the main hub of the town and therefore away from the associated amenities such as shops, schools, etc. This will have a detrimental impact on sustainability and the green requirements moving forward as the distance will necessitate greater use for vehicles for access into the town as walking difficult due to the distance. Also, the greater usage of vehicles will add to the congestion within the overall town.

No

Representation ID: 106549

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Derek Simpson

Re SG04 proposed Development Kenilworth

I would like my objection to this proposed development considered when a decision is made whether to allow for the construction of housing on this green belt land.

Kenilworth is a semi rural town which has seen erosion of its green belt land to the point when it is fast becoming a “medium sized” town without the facilities to support it. any further development will exacerbate the problems that are even now too evident.

The ascetic value of the area is at risk of being destroyed, this development would effectively join Kenilworth with Leek Wootton taking away the purpose of green belt.

There has been considerable recent development in the Kenilworth area which has already put a strain on local infrastructure. Schooling is already at full capacity, medical services are strained ( there are 2 surgeries which I understand are now finding difficulty in coping with demand). Maintenance of local
authority park areas is poor, complaints often result in the reply “we’re too busy”.


Over the past few years local roads are difficult to negotiate because of pure volume of traffic. Warwick Road, the main road through the town is frequently gridlocked resulting in residential roads utilised as rat runs by drivers attempting to make progress.

I understand the need for further housing but there are other areas that would be more suitable to satisfy demand. I quote as an example the old Kenilworth School which is lying in ruins awaiting redevelopment.

No

Representation ID: 106720

Received: 10/02/2025

Respondent: The Club Company

Agent: Hancock Town Planning

The HELAA suggests an indicative capacity for The Warwickshire land of 150 dwellings. Allocation of The Warwickshire land as part SG04 would allow for a corresponding reduction in capacity of land identified for development on the southern edge of Kenilworth, closest to the village. This would allow for greater physical separation between Kenilworth and Leek Wootton.

As acknowledged in the current Warwick District Local Plan (2017), the village of Leek Wootton is a sustainable location for future growth, as evidenced by the two residential allocations at the Police Headquarters site and the overspill car park at The Warwickshire. The land at The Warwickshire is directly opposite a primary school, and the large service centre of Kenilworth is easily accessible. The HELAA assessment includes errors and misinformation based on the 'broadbrush' nature of the assessment in terms of agricultural lad classification, BaselineThe inclusion of Site 02 within SG04 would also allow scope for greater retention of the especially important visual and psychological gap between Kenilworth and Leek Wootton.

We therefore request that Site 02, land at The Warwickshire, be identified as part of SG04. Habitat Values, Transport Assessment.

Other

Representation ID: 106780

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Clark

Cultural assessment of proposed building around Kenilworth town have been ignored eg Kenilworth Castle v Oaks Farm.

Area SG4 is 100% green belt. Government ruling states that “ Greenbelt land can only be built on in exceptional circumstances”

No

Representation ID: 106787

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Susan Munday

Loss of Green Belt land.
This will virtually join Kenilworth to Leek Wootton.

Loss of agricultural land and the inevitable loss of wildlife, trees and vegetation. We need agricultural land to grow food.

Problems with infrastructure.
Kenilworth is already being overdeveloped with lack of facilities for the growth in population;
schools, doctors surgeries, shops, parking and congested roads at almost all times of day.

Other

Representation ID: 106912

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Historic England

POTENTIAL OBJECTION: development would harm the significance of Kenilworth Castle, as the site includes part of the deer park to Kenilworth Castle that contributes to the significance of the castle. The deer park pale is a well-preserved earthwork visible on the ground and on LiDAR (may have been a
number of alignments as medieval deer parks expand and contract over the period of their use).

Also, high level of concerns: development here has the potential to cause harm to the setting of Kenilworth Castle LB (GI) and RPG (GII*).

Recommend: HIA prior to allocation. However, we would prefer this SGL not to be carried forward into the Reg 19 Plan in its current form and for the areas that contribute to the significance of Kenilworth Castle to be removed.

Yes

Representation ID: 107113

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Marvelly

Agent: Sworders

We strongly agree with Strategic Growth location SG04 being located on the edge of Kenilworth within Priority Growth Area 2 and would support Strategic Objective 1. The location is within close proximity to the A452 and A46. SG04 is well located between Kenilworth and Warwick and Leamington Spa and is supported by high levels of existing infrastructure including the main train line between Coventry and Leamington and close proximity to the A46/A452 intersection. As such SG04 supports the 12 Strategic Objectives and the SWLP five over arching principles.

Yes

Representation ID: 107415

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Moreton Morrell Parish Council

No objection

No

Representation ID: 107726

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Maggie Hufton

I am strongly against the proposed developments around between Kenilworth and leek Wootton (around Rouncil lane). The views of kenilworth castle from these fields and from the castle when looking out towards these fields are beautiful and it will severely impact the beauty of this English heritage site and potentially the number of visitors.

As well the impact on the historic castle, the local shops and school system cannot sustain anymore housing. The traffic around this estate is already a nightmare with castle farm leisure centre and in the morning with the commuters trying to get on the A46. This additional housing will make the traffic even worse leading to huge tailbacks from the A46 into Kenilworth and towards leek wotton.

From an environmental point of view, surely there are better brown field sites around Warwickshire that could be used without eating into the green belt.

Other

Representation ID: 108484

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: Lesley O'Connor

The site near Broad Lane caravans, in Leek Wootton mentions over1200 new dwellings. This would join Kenilworth & Leek Wootton, destroying most of the green belt & countryside in this area, impacting on wildlife, trees, hedgerows & farm land.

No

Representation ID: 108491

Received: 03/03/2025

Respondent: John Osborn

I Have just of the proposal for1271 houses to be built off Leek Wootton. I must firstly say that is criminal. It will ruin the small village. Firstly, there are no facilities close by. There would be a need for shops to service the new town, there would be a need for a doctor's surgery, the Kenilworth surgery's must be at breaking point already, there would also be a need for a local pub restaurant or other like amenity' It would also take farm land that cannot be replaced . The extra housing would also put a strain on water electric and gas supplies It would also increase the traffic through Leek Wootton and Kenilworth. Kenilworth already has traffic problems, increasing the traffic through Kenilworth in particular is not acceptable.