No

Representation ID: 87966

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Thomas Pallister

Further residential development in this area will put unacceptable pressure on local services such as medical and educational on the north of Leamington. This will place huge pressure on already crowded routes through town as many of the services such as shopping and leisure tend to be on the south side of town. These are already under pressure from the current developments south and east of Warwick. All of this will encourage people to travel further to access services waisting more money and causing pollution. A better solution would be a new town for Warwickshire with dedicated infrastructure and services.

No

Representation ID: 88022

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Dr. Irene Paxton

I object for the following reasons:
1. Other non greenbelt areas are available to cover needs.
2.Not near enough to local services.
3. Currently amply fulfils aims of greenbelt land
4.Will Negatively affect recreation, physical and mental health, rural employment, biodiversity and the environment.
5.Loss of good agricultural land for food production, increasing cost of importing.
6.In 2017 this proposal was rejected for reasons that still apply. Compounded by Local HS2 construction increasing the encroachment on rural land.

No

Representation ID: 88028

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Deborah Robinson

South Warwickshire's housing need can be met without building on green belt land. SG06 is not a 'sustainable location' i.e. local services for example a train station are over a 30 min walk. The green belt around North Leamington continues to fulfil the stated purposes of Green Belt Land and the Green Belt review informing the plan is incorrect which excludes Leamington, Warwick and Stratford from the definition of a 'large built-up area' - this should be corrected. The farmland is high quality agricultural land and national policy states these should be protected. This same proposal was rejected in 2017.

No

Representation ID: 88056

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Sam Broster

Please refer to https://ombparish.org.uk/localplan/ for numerous arguments but also the roads and transport infrastructure could not handle more houses in the SG06 Area.

No

Representation ID: 88057

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Melanie Kesler

As a local resident, I strongly oppose SG06’s proposed development. This would destroy greenbelt land, harming biodiversity and depriving Leamington's residents of vital outdoor space used for walking, exercise, etc. HS2 has already disrupted Leamington area. Infrastructure, including roads, schools, and healthcare, is overstretched, and further growth will worsen congestion and strain services. Sandy lane is already too fast and unsafe for children walking from North Leamington School. The local areas will no longer be in catchment for North Leamington School adding to the pressure on the roads for travel to schools. Please reconsider SG06 and protect our pressured community.

No

Representation ID: 88070

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs vivien bryer

With reference to the fields north of the A445, Leicester Lane, between Westfield Lane and sandy Lane. Data in Arup habitat audit not accurate- uses remote-sensed data from Living England and on-ground data from Warwickshire Wildlife Trust which it admits is more than 10yrs out of date. Thus fails to register that for many years large swathes have been planted to annual and perennial wildflowers and over-wintering seed-bearing plants. Adjacent to woodland in grounds of houses on Stoneleigh Road, providing rich habitats and food-sources.
Also brooks, hedges, 15 ancient oaks, 1 ancient sweet chestnut, 1 ancient ash, disused quarry

No

Representation ID: 88075

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs vivien bryer

SG06 Local primary schools and the secondary school are all full. Traffic on A445 terrible at rush hours and busy at any time. Amenities not within walking distance so increasing use of cars.
Prime agricultural land (Grade 3a with some pockets of 2) needed for food security. Excellent habitats- skylark hotspot, buzzards, ravens, sparrowhawks, woodpeckers, tawny owls. Large swathes of wildflowers with pollinators, hedgerows, brooks, veteran trees. Carbon sequestration 2.5.
Beautiful visual aspect on key approach to Leamington (tourism) Greenbelt used by hundreds of people every day all year round enhancing physical and mental well-being.

No

Representation ID: 88097

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Carwyn Stokes

No infrastructure at all to support housing here. Traffic traveling to South leamington/warwick is already ridiculous, often taking over 45mins to get to a supermarket (shires retail park etc), the train station, hospital. If more houses are to be built in North Leamington then we need a retail park, hospital, train links schools etc etc to support the increase in population. These must be built first, the building of new housing developments should not be at the detriment of the current local resident. This area is designated green belt and should remain so!

No

Representation ID: 88100

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Sarah Knight

Additional housing in this area will increase traffic. There are no large shops within walking distances. All large supermarkets are on the south side of the town. The train station is an hour away if walking, longer for the elderly, small children and wheelchair users. People will get in their cars. The roads already gridlocked. Journeys will take longer. Emissions from vehicles will rise. Air quality will suffer. This is more encroachment on the countryside surrounding Leamington.
There is sufficient capacity to meet the housing need using strategic growth locations and other areas that are NOT in the green belt.

No

Representation ID: 88106

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Oliver Startin-Field

South Warwickshire's housing need can be met without building on green belt land. SG06 is not a 'sustainable location' i.e. local services for example a train station are over a 30 min walk. The green belt around North Leamington continues to fulfil the stated purposes of Green Belt Land and the Green Belt review informing the plan is incorrect which excludes Leamington, Warwick and Stratford from the definition of a 'large built-up area' - this should be corrected. The farmland is high quality agricultural land and national policy states these should be protected. This same proposal was rejected in 2017

No

Representation ID: 88113

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Cheryl Scott

The infrastructure roads, gp hospital, schools cannot cope with this plus the loss of countryside is not acceptable.

Yes

Representation ID: 88133

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Anne Parry

No objection.

No

Representation ID: 88160

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Rebecca Miles

It is not necessary to build housing on this well-loved green belt land - housing demands can be met without this. The site would rely heavily on people travelling by car, further contributing to existing traffic issues in leamington and being unsustainable. Finally, this is high quality farmable land which should be used for food production and the biodiversity in the wildlife should also be protected. As a local resident, I am extremely concerned about and opposed to these plans.

Yes

Representation ID: 88166

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rozanne Harris

SG06 is either already in or directly adjacent to a highly populated area. The road infrastructure is already in place

No

Representation ID: 88208

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Marion Smyth

Road infrastructure to accommodate extra traffic not possible - the road from Old Milverton village to the junction with Kenilworth Road is not suited to increased traffic. Lack of amenities would promote car use rather than reduce it. Valuable agricultural land. Loss of green belt land cannot be undone. Damage to wildlife habitat and loss of well-used recreational opportunities. Planning Inspector rejected proposals in 2017 - what has changed? Are these proposals desk-based - it would appear that nobody has visited this proposed site to assess the suitability or the obstacles would be apparent.

Other

Representation ID: 88233

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Ida Marjorie Brown

Housing

No

Representation ID: 88249

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Julie Bevan

SG06 is not suitable for housing for a myriad of reasons. It has diverse wildlife, habitats and rural footpaths for the public to enjoy the countryside, and there are no other green spaces north of the river (it is necessary for the health of the people already living there). This is where food is grown for the country every year without fail. Building here would create traffic problems on the already too busy roads, overload schools and doctors and it is at least a 30 minute walk to the train station. There are no supermarkets in North Leamington for food.

No

Representation ID: 88268

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Valerie Lees

This is an area of farmland used to grow crops to help feed the nation. It is an attractive area surrounded by hedges giving shelter to birds and insects. In recent times traffic has increased locally and any development here would make the issue even worse. Given that major supermarkets are in south Leamington an increase in traffic in this area would create further problems and congestion.

No

Representation ID: 88274

Received: 14/02/2025

Respondent: Miss Melanie Astell

IT IS NOT THE RIGHT LOCATION...HOW MANY MORE TIMES WILL THIS MATTER COME UP - IT WAS REJECTED IN 2017 - COMMON SENSE PREVAILED ! - WHAT HAS CHANGED TO KEEP BRINGING UP SG06 - NOTHING !

No

Representation ID: 88300

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Jon Harris

I’m concerned that areas SG05&6 do not represent appropriate land for building houses. Areas of concern are:

Road capacity to new proposed area including the already overcrowded A46

Water drainage from land could send too much surface water through dragon fields stream

Destroying green belt land which is preserving local wildlife and Leamington Spa resident wellbeing walking area.

The area is too far from Leamington Spa town centre services - transport /shopping.

My recommendation would be to be to continue to build in the Gaydon area - close to industry and recent developments to fully establish a new town conurbation.

No

Representation ID: 88302

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: Mr James Jessamine

Provides immediate access to countryside, for all local communities. Linking to wider walking areas. Taking away greenbelt and adding stress on to an already over subscribed infrastructure. Develop brownfield first.

No

Representation ID: 88328

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Steven Heald

Hosing need can be met without building on green land. The green belt review 2024 was flawed in its assessment.
SG06 is not a sustainable location and will promote the use of motor transport.
Location SG06 adds to a biodiversity and environment resilience of the local area.
Similar plans previously rejected in 2017 set a precedent on the importance of this green belt land

No

Representation ID: 88378

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Viki McNulty

We do not need more houses spoiling our surroundings and adding additional pressure to our roads and networks

No

Representation ID: 88386

Received: 15/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Hayes

Housing needs outlined in the Plan can be met without building on Green Belt land. There is sufficient capacity at locations outside the Green Belt to meet stated housebuilding requirements to 2050. Accordingly, there are no circumstances that would justify release of any part of SG06 for development.
The land in SG06 continues to meet the criteria for preservation as Green Belt. The farmland is good quality agricultural land that is in continuous use for that purpose, and helps sustain sustainable food production. The Government has stated that land of this type should not be lost to unjustifiable development.

No

Representation ID: 88483

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Annabel Sims

Loss of green belt amenity
Lack of school places, doctors/dentists
Lack of supermarkets in north of Leamington
Poor road infrastructure- terrible congestion through Leamington.

No

Representation ID: 88490

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Mr Brijinder Gupta

SG06 is important green belt land providing a necessary natural divide between Leamington and Kenilworth.
It is high quality agricultural land, contributing greatly to the natural environment and the beauty of Leamington Spa.

The land has been subject to the Local Plan on several occasions before and has been rejected, on the grounds that is not necessary to build here given that there are plenty of other non green belt sites that can meet Leamingtons Housing needs.

Please do not give into very greedy developers who will make millions of pounds from the development but then will just walk away.

No

Representation ID: 88499

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Pauline Pears

As far as I know, this is green belt land. Leamington needs green belt to avoid the air quality getting even worse.
My main concern is the risk that the allotment sites that SG06 surrounds would be included - even though they are currently not marked as such on the plans. This site has been allotments since the early 1900s, and has enormous benefits for biodiversity, Sustainability, local food production and local amenity.

No

Representation ID: 88514

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jane Neale

Additional traffic on Leicester lane leading to increased pollution.
Roads are currently poorly maintained.
Impact on schools, doctors, police and hospital services

No

Representation ID: 88521

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Ms Sukhbinder Sidhu

Sgo6
Office public footpath. Access to natural wildlife. Mental health well-being not just the locals of people who drive there to walk their dogs

No

Representation ID: 88529

Received: 16/02/2025

Respondent: Mrs Karen Mothersdale

1. South Warwickshire's housing needs can be met without building on greenbelt land
2. SG06 is not a sustainable location (too far from services and train station)
3. This site meets all 5 requirements for green belt land
4. The farmland is high quality agricultural land and makes an important contribution to food sustainability and supply
5. The proposals were previously rejected in 2017
6. It contributes to a healthy, safe and inclusive environment in South Warwickshire and also to a biodiverse and resilient one.