Yes

Representation ID: 96404

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Bearley Parish Council

The SWLP has 12 sites, 5 of these are Green Belt land and seven are non-Green Belt land. These seven non-Green Belt land sites have room between them for 46,500 dwellings. This includes south of Leamington. The existence of these sites means that there are no ‘exceptional circumstances’ to develop any Green Belt site.

In order to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework 2024, all for these non-Green Belt sites such as south of Leamington should be developed before any Green Belt site.

Yes

Representation ID: 96439

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Bearley Wilmcote Action Group

All non Green Belt sites should be developed first!

Yes

Representation ID: 96574

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Julian Burnell

The location has good rail and road links through Leamington and Warwick (although it should require some additional development to Leamington Spa station)

Yes

Representation ID: 96620

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Nickie Newton

Good routes

Other

Representation ID: 96787

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: 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

Representation ID: 96798

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Prudence Kalinski

I spend a lot of time over this side of Leamington, and the extra development that has happened so far, around the Whitnash area, has lead to a real increase in community and in footfall into Leamington. Hopefully further development will keep shops and bars in Leamington open and help to revive the community which has become somewhat flat since Covid.

Yes

Representation ID: 96805

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Le Page

Site not Green Belt

Yes

Representation ID: 96898

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

Near Chiltern Rail line with excellent connections to Bimingham and London
Not in Green Belt
Close to M40 so very good road connection
Close to employment

Yes

Representation ID: 97446

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Andrew Gaston-Ferrett

Suitable site with good networks

Yes

Representation ID: 97508

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lisa Donovan

All sites outside the green belt have to be developed first, before green belt sites

Yes

Representation ID: 97530

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Toni Sharp

X1 and X2 are the most suitable local sites for development. They're adjacent to the motorway and a new junction could be easily built. They're prime areas for strategic growth and the nearby Park and Ride could serve new homes and take people to Leamington station. The station could be developed as a perfect bus/rail interchange and the large car park is mostly empty. It's a far better site with least impact for South Warwickshire. It's close to many facilities and transportation links and there's space for a hospital. It makes sense to develop areas that have infrastructure in place.

No

Representation ID: 97606

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Ms Anna Avino

Leamington has already exploded in the past five years. The roads are jammed, the services are overstretched and the vast housing developements and population explosion is changimg the character of the area and making it unpleasant. Infrastructure cannot cope with all the new 29,000 homes being concentrated in a few massive developments in the area particularly south Leamington and Whitnash which is gridlocked. These houses need to be fully dispersed across the whole of warwickshire with every town and village taking a handful of them. This would be a fairer, more sustainable appproach as the infratrusture will always play catch-up.

Yes

Representation ID: 97688

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Melanie Elkington

New settlement would be ideal as they can be built with all the necessary infrastructure reducing the strain on the other towns in Warwickshire which are already overstretched

Yes

Representation ID: 97820

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Jeffery

Good employment opportunities. Main line rail transport and proxmity to M40. Not in green belt

Yes

Representation ID: 97919

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Beth Evans

I feel that the land south of Leamington Spa/Whitnash is more suitable because it is not in the greenbelt and also because of the proximity to the motorway and major roads - more in keeping building here than in a small village.

Yes

Representation ID: 97984

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Benjamin Sharp

This is a much more suitable site for a new settlement as it is not situated within the Green Belt, can sustain a new motorway junction., and could support excellent transport links to Leamington Spa railway station. In addition, the impact on existing communities would be nowhere near as devastating as there are very few nearby residents.

Yes

Representation ID: 98443

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Garry Rollason

This is an excellent choice for a new settlement because of its location to the M40 and the key rail interchange at Leamington Spa. X2 together with adjacent Strategic Growth Areas provide an opportunity to develop a park / ride facility to Leamington and for the site to be a truly sustainable settlement - much more so than other potential new settlement sites. It has the added advantage of not being in the Green Belt. Infrastructure costs are likely to be lower than for other potential new settlement sites.

Yes

Representation ID: 98488

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Simon Wright

The development of a new settlement provides the opportunity to build amenities which will support the new housing. Rather than trying to use existing already over-stretched amenities in existing towns and villages.
Spatial Growth areas have not taken into account the 'availability of access' to amenities in a 20-minute walk. Simply saying that a school is located in the desired area does not provide a true picture, when the school is already full and has a long waiting list!

Yes

Representation ID: 98502

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Katie Walker

If the desire is to build housing in close proximity to existing developments/towns, this is a good site as is not green belt land.

Yes

Representation ID: 98624

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: X2 New Settlement Consortium

Agent: Mr Jack Barnes

The Consortium support the inclusion of the X2 New Settlement as a significant opportunity for the South Warwickshire Councils' to help meet the housing trajectory for a large proportion of the Plan period and beyond.

Yes

Representation ID: 98971

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Wyatt

This land has little recreational attraction and because it is bounded by Warwick/Leamington on one side and the M40 on the other, it is of little importance to wildlife. It is a logical extension to the existing development areas and its location with M40 is ideal for a new motorway junction. Therefore transport links are excellent. Easy access to Warwick / Leamington. Ideal opportunity for building a large hospital complex and out of town retail park.

Yes

Representation ID: 99378

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Charlie Craddock

This new development would be close to a large and existing town where infrastructure is sufficient for a development of this size
There is already an established community with resources to match
Far better transport links
Close to other large developments which shows the suitability for the area
Local resources are more established so would be able to handle the increased population

No

Representation ID: 99435

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diane Wilson

See previous comments

Yes

Representation ID: 99511

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Tibbles

With some expansion of transportation, this seems a reasonable site to expand existing conurbation and local services. Being located near a large town with suitable provision for emergency services, healthcare and education, it seems a reasonable site for expansion

No

Representation ID: 99704

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Stratford upon Avon District Council

I do not agree with this location. My reasons are primarily that it is not in conformance with Strategic Objectives of the SWLP (SO1, SO2, SO3, SO4, SO5, SO6, SO9, SO11, SO12), with which I broadly agree. I reference those objectives

Yes

Representation ID: 99713

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Peter Delve

Under the National planning policy framework (NPPF) 2024 (see paragraph 144) it states development on green belt is only permitted where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced are justified. On the basis that 46,500 homes are available via 7 of the proposed new settlement sites (E1, F1, F2, F3, G1, X1 and X2) which aren’t on green belt land. Therefore these should take preference to all other new settlement locations.

Yes

Representation ID: 99916

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Simone Delve

Under the National planning policy framework (NPPF) 2024 (see paragraph 144) states development on green belt is only permitted where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced are justified. On the basis that 46,500 homes are available via 7 of the proposed new settlement sites (E1, F1, F2, F3, G1, X1 and X2) that are not in greenbelt these should be prioritised and supported above all other proposed settlements.

No

Representation ID: 100084

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Cooper

Will create housing occupied by those that will have to commute to employment on already busy roads.

Yes

Representation ID: 100214

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

This new settlement would be preferable to development on existing towns/villages. Good road connections nearby via M40. This settlement would avoid urban sprawl into greenbelt land.

Yes

Representation ID: 100255

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr John Kalinski

This proposal avoids development on the already reduced greenbelt of Warwick and Stratford, and aligns with the stated order of preference. Very strong transport links compared to other proposed developments, particularly for active travel and public transport, which should offset concerns around proximity to other settlements and encourage the establishment of a successful new settlement.