Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:22 pm
Melisandre wrote: Do they think we are all still thick.
Tue May 09, 2017 5:31 am
Plans for 1,500-home village on Coventry green belt could be resurrected
Developers are trying to resurrect plans for 1,500 new homes on green belt land near Walsgrave.
Plans for homes to be built on land just off the A46 were shelved by Rugby Borough Council late last year but the developer is keen to get them back in the local plan.
The proposal to create a new village called Walsgrave Hill was largely welcomed but had to be replaced with a new garden village which did not propose building on green belt.
The fresh plan would also include a new access road for ambulances into the rear of Coventry’s University Hospital and a new car park for the site, helping solve its ongoing traffic problems.
The masterplan for the site also includes industrial parks capable of creating 2,000 jobs. Business leaders have recently warned that the region needs more land earmarked for employment to stop firms relocating elsewhere and moving jobs out of the area.
A new primary school is also included in the plans along with major improvements to the A46 near Walsgrave, for which Highways England has already pledged some funding.
Councils across Warwickshire have been asked to help meet a shortfall of homes in Coventry, and this development was due to help Rugby meet its target. The site falls on the border of the city - between the hospital, Coombe Country Park, Ansty Park and the M6 junction 2.
Charles Blake, development director for Roxhill, the developer told the Telegraph: “To us this makes good sense and it was originally in the draft local plan.
“We need to get them to consider whether they will change their draft local plan and we will be pushing for this scheme as an option.
“We think they are making a mistake not choosing it and we will be working hard to get this put back into the local plan.”
To make the development possible, the current Walsgrave roundabout would be upgraded in a scheme, which Highways England has agreed to fund 50 per cent of the costs.
In order to remodel the roads to provide access to the new development, it is likely that there would be significant traffic disruption in this area, which is a key route for commuters travelling into Coventry.
Also, due to the proximity of the development to Coventry, Cllr Kevin Maton, Coventry City Council’s cabinet member for education and skills, who at the time had responsibility for business, previously said careful consideration needed to be paid to how things would work in reality.
Business rates and council tax would be paid to Rugby Borough Council but it would be likely that the residents living in the new development would use Coventry’s services.
A spokesman for Rugby Borough Council said: “Walsgrave Hill was not included in the publication draft of the Rugby local plan following a call for sites earlier in the plan-making process and the identification of a more suitable alternative site.
“Councillors will consider the submission draft of the Local Plan, and the sites that should be included, at a meeting to be held on 21 June.”
Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:43 pm
Plan for 25,000 homes - including THOUSANDS on green belt - given green light
Swathes of green belt in Coventry are set to be lost after the government rubber stamped plans for 25,000 new homes in the city.
Coventry City Council's local plan, which sets out how the council plans for the city to expand between now and 2031, has now been signed off.
It has huge implications, with 10 per cent of the city's green belt set to disappear over the next 14 years.
However, 17,000 homes are allocated to existing brown field sites.
Areas around Keresley and Eastern Green will be the hardest hit as the council seeks to find a way of accommodating the city's expanding population.
As well as the 25,000 homes planned inside Coventry, a further 18,000 needed to house the city's estimated future population have been allocated to areas of Warwickshire .
The council says the local plan allows the authority to retain some control over where houses are built, suggesting failure to produce a local plan would have resulted in a free for all.
Councillors have also previously said that not all of the houses on the plan would be built if the city's population does not increase in line with estimates.
Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:48 pm
25,000 new homes plan for Coventry to affect 'almost every area of city'
Plans for 25,000 new homes, which will completely reshape Coventry and affect almost every area of the city, have been labelled as “great news”.
Labour’s Cllr Linda Bigham, Coventry City Council’s cabinet member for community development, said she was pleased the city’s Local Plan - which will also see the loss of 10 per cent of the city’s green belt - had been signed off by the government .
But Gary Ridley, the leader of the Conservative opposition, said the plans, which set out how the city plans to expand between now and 2031, amounted to a “developers’ charter” and would result in the loss of important green spaces forever.
The council says the Local Plan allows the authority to retain some control over where houses are built, suggesting failure to produce a local plan would have resulted in a free for all.
It has been drawn up to show how the local authority expects to be able to deal with forecast population growth over the next 15 years.
The key points under the plan would see:
- 3,000+ homes in Keresley, quadrupling its size
- 2,000+ homes in Eastern Green
- 900 homes in Walsgrave
- 1,000+ homes in Foleshill and Holbrooks
- 475 homes in Bablake
- 285 homes in Longford
- 250 homes around Tile Hill
Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:48 am
Coventry's 'fake population growth' as birth rates fall and green belt released
COVENTRY’S “fake population growth” has been exposed by figures revealing a fall in child births, children entering schools and ‘traditional families’.
The evidence-based claim comes from Warwickshire councillor Keith Kondakor.
He has uncovered key data to challenge plans to build homes on Green belt land, including on sites over the city border to accommodate population ‘overspill’.
The council’s Labour leaders want to grow the city by nearly a third to around 420,000 people over two decades, and make Coventry a “top ten city.”
The council’s Local Plan to achieve these ambitions – which includes releasing Green belt – is set to be rubberstamped by the ruling Labour cabinet on November 28 and by the Labour-dominated full council on December 5, after a planning inspector gave the green light.
The council has partly used official Office For National Statistics (ONS) estimates for its population growth assumptions, based on previous trends.
But Green Coun Kondakor has obtained Coventry City Council’s own figures which reveal a FALL in schools intake, alongside a decline in the birth rate.
Coun Kondakor, in an internet article entitled ‘Coventry’s fake population growth’ writes: “It is shocking that almost everyone in Coventry and Warwickshire is believing the story of massive population growth in Coventry.
“It is a bit like the emperor’s new clothes. While it is clear that the population is growing and changing, there does not seem to be evidence that new populations are growing exponentially.
“There is a clear lack of extra new births in the city which were expected.
“What is more, the latest school applications data shows that the number of children in reception year is falling sharply.
“The city council has put so much effort into selling the growth story that nothing is coming out about the decline in traditional families.”
Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:12 am
Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:47 pm
Thousands of homes to be built on green belt - even though councillors admit numbers don't stack up
Plans which will see thousands of new homes built in the city, and swathes of green belt lost, have been rubber stamped during a heated council meeting.
The new Local Plan, which sets out how the city will grow over the next 14 years, will come into force from tomorrow after councillors voted to approve it at a full council meeting today.
It clears the way for 25,000 homes to be developed in Coventry, resulting in an area of green belt land twice the size of Coombe Abbey Country Park being lost – that’s approximately 10 per cent of the existing green belt land in the city.
Of the planned housing, 17,000 homes are allocated to existing brown field sites.
But campaigners, and the Conservative opposition on Coventry City Council , have long questioned the population growth estimates the housing figures have been based on - suggesting student population figures have been miscounted and the effects of Brexit on immigration have not been fully taken into account.
The proposals split councillors, with all of the Conservative members voting against the plans.
They were joined by independent Cllr Glenn Williams, but the Labour Party used its majority to force through the proposals.
The final vote ended with 31 in favour and 15 opposed and was greeted with dismay from green belt campaigners in the public gallery, with audible shouts of “shame” as the result was announced.
Temperatures boiled over at one point earlier in proceedings when the Lord Mayor, Cllr Tony Skipper, threatened to have a member of the public removed from the public gallery for heckling.
Conservative councillors seized on recent comments from Labour finance chief Cllr John Mutton who branded population figures used to produce the housing numbers in the plan “stupid”.
Cllr Mutton repeated that assertion today when he said: “I don’t want houses on the green belt.
“We have been forced to use figures, that are stupid, by the government.
“If we hadn’t have done, the planning inspector would not have signed off our local pan and the whole of the green belt would have been in jeopardy.
“That’s why I’m supporting this, because I don’t want development on the green belt and I want to stop money-grabbing developers from developing the green belt when there are brown field sites that can be developed.”
But opposition members, including Cllr Gary Crookes, questioned why a plan based on “stupid” numbers was being pushed through.
He said: “You had the opportunity, during the build up of the plan, to get those figures changed. You have made no effort to get those figures changed.
“I think, what that makes you, is stupid.”
Conservative leader Cllr Gary Ridley said the predictions on population growth in the city are “ridiculous”
He said: “These figures show we will be growing faster than Birmingham, that is unprecedented.
“We have to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to remove land from green belt. That simply hasn’t been the case. We can deliver 17,000 homes on brown field.
“Once the green belt is gone, it’s gone forever. There is nothing stopping us having a brown field first policy.
“We cannot, and will not, support this developers’ charter.”
Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:38 pm
Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:08 pm
Revealed: Coventry's great shrinking green belt land
Land designated as green belt in Coventry has shrunk from 3,020 hectares in March 2017 to just 1,480 hectares in March this year, government data shows.
Before that, the green belt in Coventry had stayed the same size as it had been since at least March 2010, when the Government's green belt data records start.
Warwick also lost seven per cent of its green belt, with the amount of protected land falling from 20,550 hectares in 2017 to 19,070 this year.
The drop in Coventry is the largest proportional loss of green belt land seen anywhere in the country - just nine other councils including Warwick agreed to reduce their green belt in the last year, and many of those were by negligible amounts.
The aim of green belt land is to prevent urban sprawl and safeguard the countryside from encroachment, as well as preserving the setting and special character of the landscape.
The government says it attaches “great importance” to green belt land and that, once set, it should only be altered in “exceptional circumstances”.
National planning guidance states: “When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the green belt.
“‘Very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the green belt, by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.”
Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:45 pm