My own view is that the proposed development is unacceptable in planning terms and that it contravenes a number of important policies.
When the original Town Centre Local Plan was prepared in the mid-1980s, a perceived problem was that too much shopping had become concentrated in the northern section of the Parade and that the Plan should promote shopping facilities that would provide better balance. This was done by the development of Site D (now Royal Priors) placing the scheme in the middle of the town centre fully integrated with existing shopping streets.

A further aspect of the policy was that shoppers should then be steered to the southern part of the Parade via development through Site E - now implemented as Regent Court.

The Royal Priors floorspace was deliberately restricted to 86,000 sq ft because of fears that too large a development would have an impact on existing shopping areas and shops. This was successful. No such restraint has been imposed on the Chandos Street/Guy Street development which proposes a floor area of more than double the size of Royal Priors. It also reverses the policy of providing for a balanced development of the town centre.

A further factor is that the Rock Townsend Report on design and architecture for the town identified a hierarchy of streets with those such as Parade and Warwick Street forming main street frontages capable of taking larger developments and services streets such as Guy Street and Chandos Street which were at a lower level in terms of scale and usage. Council policies in the previous and the new Local Plan require all developments to harmonise with their surroundings and be in scale and character with them.

As was pointed out in a letter from the Leamington Society, the scale of this development is very great indeed and totally out of keeping with this service street status and the existing buildings around the site.

The justification for this development is feeble. The idea has been floated that it is intended to attract a department store but the drawings negate this. A decent department store would need to occupy the entire site and is unlikely to be attracted bearing in mind that Leamington already has a House of Fraser department store. Rents paid by department stores are lower than those paid by unit shops and hence this development provides a larger number of unit shops and a 'department store' about the size of a small supermarket. It is likely to be a single use store such as a larger clothing shop than others in the development.

A large number of new unit shops in the development seriously opens up the concern that its effect will be detrimental to the town centre as a whole. It seems inconceivable that the shops would be occupied entirely by firms from outside since Leamington is already well represented by national multiples. It would, therefore, seek to attract retailers from existing units in the town to the considerable detriment of the town centre as a whole. It also ignores loss of trade to the internet.
As for the fear of losing trade to the Banbury/Solihull, if this development does not proceed, previous correspondents have already indicated how nonsensical this is. Leamington has an excellent mix of national retailers and local trades and any trips to other towns would be for leisure purposes or for a store such as John Lewis which does not exist in Leamington but these would be occasional visits. It certainly does not justify the scale of development proposed at Chandos Street.

Finally, the development is being inserted into a residential street and will totally overpower the sheltered housing scheme opposite.
There will be considerable pollution from cars accessing the shopping centre to the detriment of the health of existing residents and shoppers. - Geoff Wilson, Arlington Mews, Leamington.