Revealed: 5,000 homes planned for green belt land in Finham and Westwood Heath

[dutchman]

Almost 5,000 new homes could be built on green belt land next to Coventry’s border after a neighbouring council revealed its growth plans for the next decade.


Land in the Kings Hill area, south of Finham.

Proposals have emerged which would see about 4,000 homes built in Kings Hill, next to Finham, and an additional 1,000 homes in Westwood Heath.

Warwick District Council have unveiled the plans which also include an additional 740 new homes in Kenilworth and 45 houses in Baginton as part of a target to build 17,000 homes across the district by 2029.

The move comes as the council prepares to submit its local plan to government.

The document will set out how the town plans to grow and deal with population increase estimates over the next 13 years.

The move to take land around Coventry Airport out of the green belt, as Jaguar Land Rover progresses its expansion plans at Whitley, has also been confirmed in the council documentation.

An initial 1,800 homes are earmarked for the Kings Hill area, but the council has said a further 2,000 homes could be built there in the longer term.

The Westwood Heath plans would see 425 homes built to begin with and the area to the east of the initial development taken out of the green belt to allow another 500 homes to be constructed if required improvements to roads in the area can be made.

Warwick District Council said the homes were allocated to sites close to Coventry because it had to accommodate an extra 6,000 homes to provide for the city’s overspill. Coventry has a shortage of available development land having already allocated space for 25,000 new homes by 2031.

Dave Barber, Warwick District Council’s planning manager, said the developments would be sensitive to the impact on Coventry.

He said: “Kings Hill has some ancient woodlands and listed buildings, development here needs to be done really sensitively.

“We are only building 425 homes at Westwood Heath initially because we understand from the discussions we have had that the roads in that area couldn’t cope at the moment. If that changes, there would be space for an additional 500 homes.”

The proposals will be will be considered by Warwick District Council during a meeting on February 24.

A six week period of public consultation over the plans is due to begin on March 7 and officials hope the plans will be signed off by government early next year.

Coun Andrew Mobbs, leader of Warwick District Council, said he opposed any boundary changes - despite the fact the people living in the new homes would pay council tax to Warwick but be more likely to use services such as schools and roads in Coventry.

He said: “Absolutely no way. We are going to control this development. We are committed to retaining our boundaries.

“It is a selfish point of view, but some of this development on Coventry’s boundary will support Kenilworth town centre.

“These areas are part of our district and have an affinity with us. We want people to live in our district and work in our areas.”

Asked about the loss of green belt land - including the area around Coventry Airport, Coun Mobbs said: “We have to strike a balance when it comes to where we want employment land and where we want growth.

“The Whitley South plans obviously underline JLR’s presence in the area, and that overrides other concerns.

“That doesn’t mean we haven’t got concerns throughout our district about the balance of green belt - but 80 per cent of our district is green belt and we’re very proud of that.”

[dutchman]

MP 'shocked' by plans to build 5,000 new homes on green belt near Finham and Westwood Heath

Concerns have been raised over plans to build almost 5,000 homes on green belt land bordering Coventry.

Warwick District Council has included proposals to build the houses as part of its local plan, which sets out the town's growth plans for the next decade.

If approved, the local plan would see about 4,000 homes built in Kings Hill, next to Finham, and an additional 1,000 homes in Westwood Heath.

But Jim Cunningham, Labour MP for Coventry South, has hit out at the proposals suggesting there would be problems with the road network and existing infrastructure was not up to scratch.

He said: “I am shocked at the large scale of the plans put forward to develop green belt land in the King’s Hill area.

“I understand the urgent need to find suitable plots for housing developments but all plans must consider both the impact on the environment and the burden placed on existing local infrastructure.

“Bulldozing green belt land and placing the infrastructure burden on Coventry - while retaining future council tax receipts in Warwickshire - mean that these plans do neither.

“I call on Warwick District Council to reconsider these proposals and to look first at other sites away from protected land and to consider fully the long-term implications of such large scale developments on the surrounding area.”

Mr Cunningham has also arranged a debate on the plans at Westminster Hall on Tuesday, March 15.

[dutchman]

Councillor calls on Coventry MP to ‘put money where his mouth is’ and stop Green Belt development

A COVENTRY councillor has called on local MP Jim Cunningham to ‘put his money where his mouth is’ and urge Labour councillors not to sell Green Belt land for development.

Councillor Allan Andrews, deputy leader of the Coventry Conservatives and ward councillor for Earlsdon, is urging the Coventry South MP to use his influence over local Labour councillors to convince them not to sell Green Belt land off Kings Hill Lane to Warwick District Council.

Coun Andrews’ comments follow Mr Cunningham’s branding of Warwick District Council’s plans to build more than 4,000 homes near Finham as ‘audacious and disgraceful’.

But, the land in question – off King’s Hill Lane and right on the Coventry-Warwickshire border – is actually owned by Coventry City Council.

This means ruling Labour councillors could prevent development on the land by simply not selling it to neighbouring Warwick District Council – a fact Mr Cunningham did not point to in his scathing remarks.

Mr Andrews said: “When I heard Jim’s comments – a man who I respect a lot – I thought he would go on to lobby the council not to sell the land.

“But the fact he does not seem to want to do that makes it seem that he is happy to attack the Conservative-run Warwick District Council, but is not willing to look at his own Labour-led council.

“I would urge him to use his influence over the local party not to sell the precious Green Belt land land, because if they refused to sell it the development would simply not be able to go ahead.”

A spokesperson for Mr Cunningham said while he had written a letter to Coventry City Council asking for Brownfield sites across the city to be used instead of Green Belt land – like that at the King’s Hill site – the MP believed the decision ‘ultimately belongs to the council’.

They added Mr Cunningham noted the proposals were still subject to a six-week long consultation by WDP and had yet to be confirmed.

But Coun Andrews said it is not good enough and encouraged the MP to engage in ‘meaningful and constructive’ dialogue with his Labour Party colleagues.

He added: “For Jim to speak publically on a matter which affects the people he represents in parliament, but then not take real action on it is not fair.

“It is incumbent upon Mr Cunningham to have real discussions with the Labour councillors and stop this development in its tracks.

“Selling this land would set further precedent that Coventry council shuts down meaningful consultation on planning matters like this and feeds into a growing view that city councillors are not working for their residents or listening to their concerns.

“Mr Cunningham has raised the alarm, which the Coventry Tories welcome and we would happily join him in lobbying for this land to not be sold.

“I only hope Mr Cunningham will not play party politics with an issue which affects thousands of people across Coventry.”

[rebbonk]

A COVENTRY councillor has called on local MP Jim Cunningham to ‘put his money where his mouth is’ and urge Labour councillors not to sell Green Belt land for development.

Councillor Allan Andrews, deputy leader of the Coventry Conservatives and ward councillor for Earlsdon, is urging the Coventry South MP to use his influence over local Labour councillors to convince them not to sell Green Belt land off Kings Hill Lane to Warwick District Council.

Bl**dy NIMBYs

[dutchman]

Green light for 2,500 homes despite fears



PLANS to build 2,500 homes and two schools on green belt land next to Kenilworth have been given the green light by Warwick District Council.

Despite objections from five town and parish councils, along with more than 100 residents, permission has been given to Lioncourt Ltd to build a development the size of around 200 football pitches on the site on Kings Hill Lane, off Stoneleigh Road.

The site, known as Kings Hill Park, has eventually been earmarked for some 4,000 homes to take Coventry’s unmet housing need.

Concerns had been raised by Historic England about the impact the development would have on an ancient monument – a buried, deserted medieval village adjacent to the site. They said despite no homes being built there it would result in ‘harm to its significance’.

Warwickshire County Council’s Archaeology department said they believe the site could hold prehistoric, Roman or Anglo Saxon remains and recommended further investigative work be undertaken.

Kenilworth Town Council also objected to the application with concerns about vehicle access, flooding from Finham Brook and loss of greenbelt.

A spokeswoman said: “Members raised major concerns about the effect of construction traffic damage to infrastructure and the environment. This has regard to the amount of simultaneous development due to take place, including HS2.

“Members very much regret the loss of green belt in this very narrow corridor between Kenilworth and Coventry. They appreciate this is to hold overspill from Coventry but have yet to see any signs that Coventry requires overspill.”

A ‘Save Our Green Belt’ petition calling for Coventry to review its local plan – which shapes the future of the city until 2031 – was signed by more than 4,000 people.

Many objections said the huge development was flawed as it did not adequately take into account three other major developments in the area – Gateway South, HS2 and a new technology park.

But the council approved the application for 2,500 new homes – including 1,000 affordable properties – a primary and secondary school, shops, leisure facilities and open space.

It will now be considered by Coventry City Council’s planning committee on Thursday (December 19).

[dutchman]

Final piece of plans for 2,500 home estate on former green belt land approved



A new roundabout and bus gate will be built to serve a controversial new 2,500-home housing estate on the edge of Coventry.

Councillors voted narrowly in favour of the application after a heated meeting which saw the city council’s planning committee chairman Cllr Lindsley Harvard threaten to throw out members of the public if they did not allow officers to speak.

There were cries of ‘shame on you’ from protesters in the public gallery as the committee voted five to three in favour of the application.

The committee was reminded several times that they were not voting on the principle of the housing estate itself – permission for which has already been granted by Warwick District Council – but to decide whether to allow the new access points.

These include a limited access junction for buses and emergency services on the southwest side of Green Lane, just to the north of Finham Primary School, and a new roundabout junction at the existing cross roads of St Martin’s Road, Green Lane and Howes Lane.

The committee heard from a number of councillors and members of the public who spoke about their objections, ranging from concerns relating to congestion, air pollution and road safety, as well as a suggestion to place traffic lights at the junction instead of a roundabout.

They were also presented with a petition signed by 1,009 people against the plans.

But the committee also heard that the new junctions were designed to minimise impact and improve traffic flow – and that the housing estate plans came with Section 106 promises of huge amounts of funding, alongside other provisions such as two new schools and open spaces.

Highways officers had also not objected to the plans.

After a discussion lasting almost two hours, the committee voted in favour of the plans, with Cllrs Seamus Walsh, Pervez Akhtar, Naeem Akhtar, John McNicholas and committee chairman Cllr Harvard voting in favour. Cllrs David Skinner, Roger Bailey and Allan Andrews voted against. Cllr Catherine Miks was unable to attend the meeting and Cllrs Randhir Auluck and Lynette Kelly declared an interest in the application, and did not vote.

Presenting the petition on behalf of residents, Cllr Mattie Heaven, who represents the Wainbody ward, said the junction plans would mean pollution would increase ‘significantly’ from already high levels. Cllr Tim Sawdon, also a ward councillor, blasted the plans as ‘irresponsible, un-costed and unworkable’ and Cllr John Blundell, a third ward councillor said the junctions would cause ‘untold misery for people’ and that the development itself was ‘neither needed nor necessary’.

[dutchman]

Dispute over major housing development that 'will fill gap between Kenilworth and Coventry'

A Warwickshire countryside charity have challenged the council over a major housing development.

CPRE Warwickshire have raised concerns over the planning application which will see 2,500 homes built at King’s Hill.

The charity has claimed that traffic consultants Arup, and Coventry city council, have not fully considered the impact of the development in the area.

Chairman of CPRE Warwickshire, Andrew Watson, has written to MP Jeremy Wright to raise ‘grave concerns’ about traffic around King’s Hill.

A spokesperson for CPRE Warwickshire said: “Kings Hill, when built, will threaten the separate identity of Kenilworth.

"If this development is built, it will fill the gap between Kenilworth and Coventry, and one day, Coventry will very likely push to annex Kenilworth.

“The homes are not needed - they are planned as overspill homes for Coventry.

"Coventry and Leamington have an air quality emergency - and are among the 31 worst places in the country for NO2 and small particulates.

“Thousands more cars on the local roads, even electric cars which still produce PM2.5 particles from the tyres and brakes, will make it much worse.”

The charity feels that the development will cause more traffic, pollution and put pressure on Warwick Hospital.

A CPRE spokesperson claimed that Arup ‘closed their eyes’ and ‘moved the goalposts’ during the assessment.

They added: “Arup cherry picked the inputs as the models did not include traffic from major developments in the emerging local plans, such as Eastern Greem’s 2,500 to 3,500 homes.

“They have not fully considered safety and admit there have been a ‘relatively large number of accidents.’”

[rebbonk]

“Arup cherry picked...

Don't they always?

“They have not fully considered safety...

They rarely do

We are currently fighting a development, every dirty trick in the book is being used. The local authorities involved are being complicit in trying to deceive those against the development.

[dutchman]

I went to school in that area in the 1960s and even then couldn't imagine anyone 'wanting' to live there. There are few local facilities and access to the city centre via public transport is extremely limited. I'll go further than that, even if I was around in the 1930s when the area was a lot more active than it is today I still wouldn't have wanted to live there.

My biggest concern though is who the new homes will actually go to. Will they go to any of the 14,000 families currently on the council waiting list (don't laugh) or anyone born or brought up in the city? I think we all know the answer to that.

[dutchman]

Plans for 2,500 houses and two schools on huge site near Coventry take a step forward



Controversial plans to build 2,500 houses and two new schools near Coventry took a major step forward after the developer agreed to invest in the local area.

Warwick District Council's planning committee voted in favour of a huge housing development, featuring a shopping centre, primary school and secondary school, just outside Stoneleigh back in December 2019.

But the application is set to move forward now Worcester-based applicant Lioncourt Homes has officially gained permission for the development in Kings Hill Lane.

A section 106 agreement, which requires developers to invest in the local area to offset the impact of building thousands of houses, was signed in December.

Six parish and town councils and hundreds of residents were said to have objected to the contentious application which forms part of a wider 4,000 homes scheme in Warwick’s Local Plan.

Critics have argued that traffic consultants did not fully consider the impact on the roads network.

Wainbody ward councillors in Coventry were among those who wrote to former housing secretary Robert Jenrick MP in early 2020 requesting a government ‘call-in’.

But the government refused and said it was "content" plans should be determined by the local authority.

Speaking to CoventryLive in August 2020, Lioncourt's strategic land director Andy Faizey said: "We were surprised that this had been the subject of a call-in request given the proposal has been considered by both Coventry City Council and Warwick District Council and that the inspectors to both of their Local Plans had found this to be sound.

"Equally, both councils have considered the planning applications submitted to them and both voted to approve the planning applications.

"Given the above we were pleased, but not surprised the Secretary of State has decided there was no reason for the applications to be called-in as in essence this development meets the government’s housing agenda.

"We continue to work with all three councils – including Warwickshire County Council – to arrive at a Section 106 Agreement which in turn will release the planning permissions to us."

Warwick District Council said the time taken to conclude the agreement had been due to 'the complexity of the agreement and the number of parties involved'.

Lioncourt must still submit a detailed planning application for the council to approve before any houses can be built.