If you have any views about this, please E-mail your views to newlocalplan@warwickdc.gov.uk and also leave a comment at the bottom of this post. Responses sent to Warwick District Council must be received by January 24th.
From Peter Stanworth, 12th January:
I expect that you have seen or heard about the Local Plan issued by Warwick District Council (WDC). If you do not have a copy of the plan it can be found on line at Warwick District Council Local Plan
In Burton Green it is proposed that we should have 75 houses concentrated on one site, the preferred Option number 1, at Burrow Hill Nursery (see pages 40 & 41). We do not understand how this figure of 75 is determined. This increases the housing stock by 28%. This is by far the greatest increase required in any of the villages in Warwickshire, Cubbington for example is only 7.7%. A more reasonable figure would have been the original one of 35.
There is a strong feeling in the village that:
- 75 additional houses is far too great a number for the village to absorb. 35 would be much more reasonable.
- Additional housing should be spread around the village and not concentrated on one site.
If you disapprove of the plan please complete the Local Plan Village Housing Options Response Form 2013 that was included with the Plan (a suggested response is attached) saying that you do not want an additional 75 houses, a lesser number of 35 would be more appropriate, and these should be spread around the village.
Peter Stanworth
This is Peter Stanworth's suggested response (click to enlarge)...
 |  |
From The Chairman of the Parish Council, Ian Cox, 17th January:
Following the intervention of Peter Stanworth and others last Sunday evening, as Chairman of the Parish Council I must make clear to you the position of the Council in the matters raised by Mr Stanworth.
Warwick District Council has asked for responses to their proposal as to where new housing should be built within the village.
Individuals and village organisations can take part in this consultation.
The Parish Council is under a duty to represent Burton Green as a whole and not the interests of individuals or groups of individuals.
Any response from the Council needs to be considered carefully and objectively. Indeed the Court of Appeal in a case heard just before Christmas reaffirmed that “Planning decisions are to be arrived at in the public interest, balancing all relevant factors”.
Mr Stanworth has incorrectly given the impression that the Council is doing nothing. This is not the case and Mr Stanworth knows this.
The Council has received requests from representatives from sites numbered 2 and 7 to present at the next Council meeting. The Council has already heard from Cala Homes in relation to site number 1.
The Council will hear those representations on the 20th January. The Council remains willing to listen to anyone who wishes to address it.
At the meeting on the 20th January there is an agenda item in which the Council will consider its response (if any) to the consultation process.
In the interests of transparency Mr Stanworth made an appointment to see me at my home on the evening of the 6th January. He immediately told me he was not in favour of site number 1 and identified another site as his preferred option. He mentioned no other sites. I told him that the Council had not yet come to a view but was in the process of considering all matters. I asked him to put his views in writing. This he did, again favouring one site in particular but also suggesting housing on all of the 16 sites within the village.
The Council is therefore considering its response and is putting in place the mechanics whereby the neighbourhood plan can be produced.
The impression given by Mr Stanworth is erroneous. I have given him the opportunity to correct his mistake but so far he has declined.
I would urge all residents to respond to the consultation but only after consideration of all factors and circumstances. The views of others who may or may not have interests of their own to pursue should be seen precisely in that light.
Ian Cox
The Short-Listed Areas
This is a copy of the map, from the District Council Plan. The plan says "There has been considerable interest from developers and landowners in presenting possible housing options in the Burton Green area. 16 options have been reduced down to 6 recently discounted options and 1 preferred option."
The 6 short-listed, but discounted, options are shown on the map hatched in blue. The preferred option, Burrow Hill Nursery, is shown yellow.
The detailed reasons for discounting 6 of the short-listed areas are given in the Plan document (here).
Previous Discussion About Housing Plans
In 2012, there was a discussion about planned housing in the Westwood Heath area of Burton Green. You can read about that here: Proposed Building Site - What Do You Think?
What Do You Think?
If you have any views about the latest proposal, please express them to Warwick District Council. You can submit a response on-line here: http://warwickdc.jdi-consult.net/ldf/; or simply E-mail your views to: newlocalplan@warwickdc.gov.uk. Responses sent to Warwick District Council must be received by January 24th.
You can also comment, informally, just below. It is helpful if you can add a comment below, as that provides some public visibilty of residents' views. You can read the comments made so far, or comment yourself. Simply click on 'comments', just below.
What do you think?
Isnt that area just greenhouses now. There would be no loss of countryside. Some might think its an improvement. A lot of houses and a community center there would be the new village hub.
ReplyDeleteMight not be a bad idea. Could be a lot worse.
I think the choice of Warwick District Council is a very sensible one of the preferred option chosen. The village and school would be well linked and traffic could at least disperse in three directions instead of all pouring out onto Cromwell Lane if any development was to go ahead at the Westwood Heath end of the village. CALA Homes gave a presentation of the proposed site at the Parish meeting in November . It would appear that there are plenty of good reasons to support the preferred option site ie. re location of village hall, much needed parking spaces for hall and the school and recreation fields for the school and residents. I support the Councils decision.
ReplyDeleteI am a resident and was slightly concerned by the letter I received a couple of days ago - and the text above - that states 'There is a strong feeling in the village..' opposing the Council's preferred scheme. I don't believe that the letter we received, nor this website, represent the views of the population of Burton Green - and I don't recall anyone from the residents association asking our views before making this assumption.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am delighted with the comments above in support of the Council's preferred scheme. Our family also believes that Burton Green lacks a focus, and that since the Red Lane store closed some years ago, the 'village' is merely a number of through roads with little feel of a community from the perspective of the younger generation in the area. At present there is only a village hall catering primarily to the older population of Burton Green. It would be great to move away from the current ribbon development of Burton Green and create a much needed focal point and 'village' feel, and I greatly support any development of the Burrow Hill Nurseries site which would include at least a shop for the local community. The site is ideal and would avoid losing any of the beautiful surroundings we all hold so dear, whilst making the very best use of the site. We fully support the Council's decision.
With reference to the above post, we also received the letter through the door and were slightly put out that we were being informed how to fill out our forms especially as we are in favour of Warwick District Council's preferred option site. If development in the village is to be linear only and in small clusters, would this risk the opportunity of Burton Green getting any affordable homes for the younger generation such as myself who has lived in the village most of my life. The idea of creating a heart and community within Burton Green is exactly what the village needs and by encouraging the younger generation to remain in the village will hopefully sustain the village school and ensure the future of BG. The presentation made by CALA Homes in November emphasised many positive bonuses of having the houses built at the preferred option site, Burrow Hill Nurseries. It is located in a beneficial area to pull the village together. Can I suggest anyone posting blogs on here should also log on and post them on Warwick District website.
ReplyDeleteI should like to clarify that the sentiments expressed in Peter Stanworth's letter represent the view of him, and the other signatories to his letter. They do NOT represent the views of this website.
ReplyDeletePeter Stanworth's letter was posted on here for exactly the same reason that Paul Thorton's criticial letter was posted some time ago. The subject raised is a matter of public interest and needs airing.
The Chairman of the Parish Council has also sent out a letter, this morning (Friday 17th). The text of that letter has been appended to the post.
I am aware that Peter Stanworth's letter makes claims that are unsubstantiated.
There has been a recent survey of Resident's views. These housing plans have been in the pipeline for some while. The survey should have asked residents exactly what they do think about this proposal. So that policy can be based on facts, not speculation.
Peter Stanworth's sugested response was ciculated to residents in paper form. I do not know who was responsible for doing that, or whether the Residents Association assisted in that.
All of the letters above, and the post, say that you should make your views known to Warwick District Council.
In my opinion, it is also very helpful if you express your views in a comment right here. The comments posted so far all suggest that Peter Stanworth's letter does not reflect the majority view within the community.
We are residents of Burton Green and are against option 1 and prefer option 7 for housing, with option 2 for village hall.
ReplyDeleteThe proposed option of building 75 houses at site 1 is unacceptable. The amount of houses is much larger than was mentioned earlier and does not fit with housing needs identified in the parish plan. It is clear that such a concentration would change dramatically the nature of the village. This comes on top of the grave pressures put on Burton Green from HS2, which is splitting literally the village into two. Building on site 1 is enhancing this split. It is absurd that Burton Green is considered to be a growth village, when the HS2 threat makes it the place people want to move from.
If we are to build any houses in Burton Green, we strongly believe that option 7 should not be discounted so easily. The corner of Cromwell Lane and Hodgett’s Lane is the natural heart of the village. The upheaval from HS2 will impact heavily there and this plan offers an opportunity to regenerate that area and move the village hall, if not at site 7 then at site 2. Option 7 would represent a shifting of that part of the village away from the rail-line which preserves best the current character of the village. Access to site 7 should not pose a problem as the HS2 development is creating a fluid situation where houses can become available that can be demolished.
We both agree that ribbon development should be avoided at all cost as we do not want to shut off views of and access to the nature around us. In many ways Burton Green has already suffered enough ribbon development (e.g. extension from Tile Hill through Cromwell Lane). We disagree with the views expressed by others that if something has been done in history (i.e. ribbon development), one should copy and continue with it. What remains of the village where people came to settle for a peaceful countryside should not be altered to the point of causing more distress to its residents facing the HS2 threat.
The boundary of the village should encompass the gardens of people. As we both are against development at site 1, we would not include it in the village boundary. We agree that the boundary should not extend into Hob or Red Lane as to preserve the area as green belt and avoid ribbon development.
Thanks...
ReplyDelete