Council clears the way for homes to be built on green belt

[dutchman]

Coventry's green belt lost due to wrong population estimate



Coventry has wrongly lost swathes of green belt land for development because the housing need for the city was over-estimated, campaigners say.

The 2021 Census shows a population shortfall of about 40,000 compared to data the council must use from from the Office of National Statistics (ONS).

Up to 10% of green belt was removed for the city's local long-term housing plan which angered green campaigners.

The council said it knew ONS data is "flawed" but houses were still needed.

There are about 345,000 people living in Coventry according to the newly-released data from the 2021 Census, which is an increase of about 28,000 over past 10 years.

The council used government figures when it drafted its local housing plan 10 years ago, which has over estimated the number of people living in the city.

Campaigners say they now want all planning applications on former green belt land to be halted.

Merle Gering, chairman of Keep our Greenbelt Green, said there had been a "spectacular failure in the city to have anything like the population growthy expected".

"People should have known it. It was obvious... The repercussions are that some of the best and most beautiful land in the county and the city has been taken away from green belt and allocated for housing."

He added: "Right now we need a moratorium on any planning decision on anything that was green belt or green field for at least six months or even a year."

[dutchman]

Controversial homes scheme near Coundon Wedge approved by councillors



Highly divisive plans to build 345 homes on green space cherished by generations of local residents have today (14) been approved. The future of the site in Browns Lane, close to Coundon Wedge, has been a hot topic of conversation ever since plans for houses there were first unveiled several years ago.

The matter was fiercely debated by people on both sides of the argument during a well-attended Planning Committee meeting at the Council House. Committee members heard from countless opponents of the scheme with representations made from as many as five separate petitions during an item that lasted for close to two hours.

But committee members put the city's 'dire' housing need in front of various concerns about environmental pollution and road safety; approving the scheme with six votes for and two against. Committee chair, Councillor Lindsley Harvard, said all of the evidence heard had impressed on him to 'support this thing,' subject to conditions and Section 106 agreements.

Addressing the passionately contested point as to whether the land actually sat within the green belt, Cllr Harvard said: "This is not green belt land. It is not the Coundon Wedge, it is bordering with Coundon Wedge.

"It was allocated in 2017 for housing and a lot more than is being proposed here. That's a product of the public consultation that's taken place."

Cllr Harvard added: "The number of people that require housing; there's a real dearth there. The last figures I saw on the waiting list, I was told it was 13,500 families. That's one heck of a lot of people in dire need of housing and there's a lot of younger people wanting to get on the property ladder."

The site was approved for development some years ago when the local authority gave Jaguar the green light to focus its expansion there. But Jaguar turned its attention to Whitley, where Jaguar Land Rover is now headquartered, and the land was never built on.

Opponents of the scheme claimed the site should have been returned to green belt in the eyes of planning law and argued that permission for development had only ever been reserved for the car maker's growth proposal. Committee member Cllr Jackie Gardiner said the community 'justifiably feels cheated' adding that the site had been allocated for housing, 'even though this wasn't the reason for its removal from the green belt'.

"The Local Plan identifies the application site as a brownfield allocation for housing," Cllr Gardiner said. "As a former member of the Royal Town Planning Institute, I agree brownfield sites should be developed before greenfield ones.

"However, brownfield is a planning designation given to land that has already been developed and is now available for reuse. Any visit to the application site would reveal it is undeveloped and remains the agricultural land it has always been.

"Its brownfield designation is therefore a nonsense when it is clearly green, unspoilt countryside. This Local Plan process is meant to not mimic Alice in Wonderland by challenging the basic facts of existence and reality.

"The application site is clearly a greenfield site and therefore should be low down on the priority list for development." Committee member Councillor Ryan Simpson said approval would shatter Coventry residents' trust in local democracy.

"When the council says it is being strong-armed by national government, people know it is you (the city council) who is selling the land," he said. "This is a political decision made by you alone.

"I will tell you now, if you approve this application you will destroy any and all trust that exists between this city council and people living in Coundon, Allesley and Browns Lane and the wider communities of Coventry North West.

"You will signal to developers, in the midst of a Local Plan review, that Coundon Wedge is up for grabs. For all this, you will never be forgiven."

The development, which will join Browns Lane in the west to Coundon Wedge Drive in the east, will incorporate a mix of two, three and four-bedroom homes with 25 per cent allocated to affordable housing. During the many petitions read out, those against the plan said it would have 'devastating consequences' for people living in the area as well as the local ecosystem, natural habitats and wildlife.

They said it would increase traffic, noise and air pollution, stretch local schools and surgeries to breaking point and contribute to drainage problems in the area.

[dutchman]

Huge piece of Coventry farmland to be sold for housing despite outcry



Calls by councillors and residents to stop Coventry council selling old farmland in Coventry for housing were rejected at a meeting yesterday (20 December.) More than 1,000 people signed a petition in September asking the council to stop the sale of land at Browns Lane for development.

Their appeal said: "We, the people of Coventry, own the land at Browns Lane, which is locally considered to be a part of Coundon Wedge." It said the council's plan to sell the land to a developer means they can control whether building takes place.

"We call on them to respect local wishes and stop the sale," it concluded. But at a meeting to discuss the appeal yesterday, a previous decision to sell the site was backed by Labour councillor Jim O'Boyle, the cabinet member for jobs, regeneration and climate change.

It means the land, with planning permission for 345 homes and a care home, will now be sold for housing by the council. Outline plans to build on the site at Brown's Lane got the go-ahead from the council's Planning Committee in September despite many objections from residents and councillors.

At the meeting, petition organiser Cllr Ryan Simpson from the opposition Conservative group said selling the land is a "political choice". Cllr Simpson, who represents residents in Coundon, told the meeting the issue is about "trust" and bigger than just one piece of land.

"It's about the rest of Coundon Wedge because I don't trust you with the rest of it, we don't trust you with the rest of it, and the people of Brown's Lane don't trust you with the rest of it," he said. Local councillor Steven Keough, also Conservative, said the land has historical significance as part of the Jaguar car works and holds "value beyond monetary considerations."

"It's an integral part of Coventry's heritage and I believe the decision to sell it to residential development goes against the principles of preserving our city's legacy," he said. "While I acknowledge the need for housing and the potential economic benefits that may arise from the sale it is essential to consider the broader impact on our communities and environment."

Homes on the site "may compromise the character of the area," he added. He urged Cllr O'Boyle to reconsider the recommendations and "listen to the voice of community."

Cllr Simpson and his fellow Conservative councillor Jackie Gardiner also presented documents they said showed the land is part of Coundon Wedge. But members of the ruling Labour group and council officers told the meeting why the sale and development of the land should go ahead.