See attachment

Burton Green Parish Council (BGPC) notes the timing of the Local Plan and response date is running out of synch with the work being undertaken by BGPC in developing a Neighbourhood Plan. The Neighbourhood plan will include a full consultation with the community on the potential housing options and the 'planning environment' within Burton Green. As the outcome of the Neighbourhood Plan process will not be delivered until after this Local Plan consultation closes, this response is an interim response based on evidence collected via the Parish Plan and housing Needs Survey's collected in 2013. BGPC will continue to engage with WDC over the Local Plan through the Neighbourhood Plan process and present further evidence following the Neighbourhood plan event in February.

Key themes that arose from the Parish Plan questionnaire were that residents valued the rural location, open views and pleasant location. Residents are also concerned by the impact of HS2 on the sustainability of the village and in particular are concerned that it could drive families away leading to the closure of the school. Most people did not want development at all in the village and those that did preferred schemes which did not intrude on the principles set out below. See extracts from Parish Plan appendix 1 attached.


Taking the above points into account, criteria that the BGPC believe is important to Burton Green:

* The existing nature of the village is maintained i.e. open aspect, rural views, low density housing.
* Burton Green remains a village/independent identity and that Coventry developments do not spread. i.e the 'Crackley Gap' is maintained.
* That the village is enhanced by any future development and that it adds to the long term sustainability of the community; such as a new improved village hall, improving parking at the school and creating recreational and open space.
* That the impact of the Local Plan, HS2 developments and local needs are considered holistically.


To this end we have the following comments:

Theme: Scale of development

Burton Green is a ribbon development consisting of 387 properties. When first presented the WDC Local Plan proposed 50-80 houses in the village, which at the time we considered a significant increase. With the latest version the number of proposed properties has grown to 70- 90 properties, which has an even more significant impact on the village targeting nearly 25% growth, and BGPC has a concern that development of that scale would alter the linear nature of the village as it is unlikely that those properties could be accommodated within the current ribbon development as evidenced by the sites highlighted in the Local Plan document. Also the proposed numbers were to take into account properties destroyed by HS2, current HS2 proposals have a much smaller number of properties impacted than previously thought. Therefore any new developments should be below or at the lower end of the scale proposed.

Theme: Environmental and Character impact

The existing rural and open character of the village needs to be maintained as this is highly prized by current residents. Therefore, maintaining as much as the current greenbelt is paramount, which the Local Plan appears to do.

Within the original Local Plan draft a peri-urban park was proposed, which would have ensured an important green space between Burton Green and Coventry and enhanced the local environment and habitats. We are therefore disappointed that the wildlife corridor plans appear to have been shelved, as we believe it is imperative to retain a green corridor to prevent the urbanisation and the coalescence of settlements and in some way redress the damage of HS2.

As noted above residents favour developments which would help to maintain the character of the village. None of the 7 options considered totally achieve this objective.

However, having heard from representatives in relation to sites numbered 1, 2 and 7 as set out in the Council's Consultative document we can see advantages in site number 1
It could create a new heart for the village by bringing the school, village hall and a village green together whilst avoiding urbanisation with Coventry. It would also alleviate to some degree parking problems associated with the school and the greenway. However we would argue for a smaller development, than the 75 properties proposed. This would ensure low density housing to maintain the rural village nature and minimise the impact on the local views and amenities. Within such a development there is a need for low cost housing to encourage young families to support the school, bungalows to allow elder residents to downsize, and there is an opportunity to provide housing to replace the existing almshouses that are likely to be demolished by HS2. Our main concerns about the preferred site other than the number of properties are the interaction with HS2 construction which will require careful planning and coordination, safe access off Red Lane and sufficient screening off the site and throughout it to maintain the rural feel.

By restricting the number of houses on the preferred site further smaller developments could also be progressed over time if the right land is put forward. Sites 2 and 7 though smaller than any proposed on development site 1 cannot in our view create a village centre, that is a hall, playing field/village green and parking, and provide housing at the same time. We expect to have more information on this following the Neighbourhood Plan consultation.

At present there is no real consideration for HS2, any development that is needed to address the housing need arising from HS2 demolitions, including the Village Hall, needs to be completed before HS2 work starts. Also as this plan is for the long term it needs to address land released by HS2 post construction. For example, there should be consideration given to using the land above the tunnel to provide green space, such as community orchards, allotments, skate parks or nature reserves which are some of the suggestions from the Parish Plan.

In summary, we broadly support the Local Plan but are concerned about:
* The number of properties proposed for the village.
* Getting the development right on the preferred site.
* Interaction and coordination with HS2.
* Capturing Neighbourhood plan input into the process


It is also the view of the Council that within Burton Green the green belt should extend to cover gardens associated with dwellinghouses to deter a development of those gardens on a piecemeal basis.

I would prefer not to have any new housing in Burton Green as it will have a huge impact on the infrastructure e.g roads. Cromwell Lane already takes a huge amount of traffic and building 75 houses will create circa 150 further vehicles (based on two cars per household) using Cromwell Lane. Also this will take away the village environment, which is why I came to live here!

SUPPORT

If I have to choose one it would be 1. Burrow Hill Nursery - Preferred option by Council. This will not have such a significant landscape impact and keep the ribbon development as is.

My own interpretation of the requirements is that consolidation of housing for future developments could best be achieved at the Westwood / Tile Hill end of the village where access to the Tile Hill station, shops, amenities and schools (all unavailable in Burton Green) is more readily available without he use of vehilces. The availibility of housing within closer proximity to Eon and National Rail Westwood may also help to reduce the significant rush hour congestion down Cromwell Lane (ref impact on traffic & highways). The statistical decline in 15 year olds within the village is purely down to lack of secondry school provision, with young families moving to fall within catchment areas for prefered schools. Since distance to schools is the primary factor in allocation of spaces, this should be of consideration in locating future development of the village as near as possible to local secondary schools and in particular those which are least oversubscribed.
I am trying not to be NIMBY and if, the local primary school is undersubscribed, then I submit that the preferred option one site is viable, and as such could be considered as a bridge between the primary school and the village. As such, it should be developed to include safe walking and cycling routes for children from all areas of the village to reach the school (the top of Red lane is currently very unsafe for both)
However this area should not be redeveloped as a new centre to the village i.e by moving village hall, as this could encourage ribbon development down Hob Lane & Red Lane which would not be beneficial to surrounding agricultural landscapes, hedgerow habitats & significant trees.

My own interpretation of the requirements is that consolidation of housing for future developments could best be achieved at the Westwood / Tile Hill end of the village where access to the Tile Hill station, shops, amenities and schools (all unavailable in Burton Green) is more readily available without he use of vehilces. The availibility of housing within closer proximity to Eon and National Rail Westwood may also help to reduce the significant rush hour congestion down Cromwell Lane (ref impact on traffic & highways). The statistical decline in 15 year olds within the village is purely down to lack of secondry school provision, with young families moving to fall within catchment areas for prefered schools. Since distance to schools is the primary factor in allocation of spaces, this should be of consideration in locating future development of the village as near as possible to local secondary schools and in particular those which are least oversubscribed.
I am trying not to be NIMBY and if, the local primary school is undersubscribed, then I submit that the preferred option one site is viable, and as such could be considered as a bridge between the primary school and the village. As such, it should be developed to include safe walking and cycling routes for children from all areas of the village to reach the school (the top of Red lane is currently very unsafe for both)
However this area should not be redeveloped as a new centre to the village i.e by moving village hall, as this could encourage ribbon development down Hob Lane & Red Lane which would not be beneficial to surrounding agricultural landscapes, hedgerow habitats & significant trees.

My own interpretation of the requirements is that consolidation of housing for future developments could best be achieved at the Westwood / Tile Hill end of the village where access to the Tile Hill station, shops, amenities and schools (all unavailable in Burton Green) is more readily available without he use of vehilces. The availibility of housing within closer proximity to Eon and National Rail Westwood may also help to reduce the significant rush hour congestion down Cromwell Lane (ref impact on traffic & highways). The statistical decline in 15 year olds within the village is purely down to lack of secondry school provision, with young families moving to fall within catchment areas for prefered schools. Since distance to schools is the primary factor in allocation of spaces, this should be of consideration in locating future development of the village as near as possible to local secondary schools and in particular those which are least oversubscribed.
I am trying not to be NIMBY and if, the local primary school is undersubscribed, then I submit that the preferred option one site is viable, and as such could be considered as a bridge between the primary school and the village. As such, it should be developed to include safe walking and cycling routes for children from all areas of the village to reach the school (the top of Red lane is currently very unsafe for both)
However this area should not be redeveloped as a new centre to the village i.e by moving village hall, as this could encourage ribbon development down Hob Lane & Red Lane which would not be beneficial to surrounding agricultural landscapes, hedgerow habitats & significant trees.

I have viewed the recent village housing options for Burton Green and I am pleased to see the council taking a common sense approach to the future development of the village. I have received correspondence from other members of the village asking for our opposition to these plans which I will not be doing. Re development of existing land seems to me to be by far the most appropriate option for further development. I am very pleased that the plans have taken into account the rural aspect of the village and are minimising the encroachment onto working agricultural land and utilising an existing site. I am also pleased that the preferred plan will have the least significant impact onto the existing residents of the village and the outward aspects of their properties. I do have some concerns that 75 houses for such a small village does seem excessive and would need justification considering there is not even a convenience store within walking distance.

see attached

Consultation on new local plan

This response is only concerned with the plan for Burton Green, which if I have to declare an interest is where I live, although it also the case that none of the consultation sites directly affect me personally and I have no financial interest in any of them.

In my opinion the requirement for the village to accommodate a further
70-90 homes is somewhat excessive as this represents a large step change in the population, but if that is what we have to deal with then so be it. However this change must be handled sensitively and with complete transparency to avoid it becoming a source of controversy within the village - as such I am slightly disappointed that this consultation was not more widely publicised, and also that the tone of the documentation is very much that the decision has already been made (within Burton Green we have also had input from the potential developer of the preferred site, which is probably inappropriate).

Looking at the possible sites I would largely agree with the opinions stated within the documentation dismissing the options at the north end of the village (plots 2,5,6) and would additionally comment that these would act to make the village part of Coventry rather than Warwickshire - this is not where the green belt should be impacted. I also agree that the plots on Red Lane (3,4) would reinforce the historical ribbon development and hence again should be discounted. Of the two remaining sites the preferred one at Burrow Hill Nursery does appear to be the best however site 7 (behind houses on Hodgetts Lane and Cromwell Lane) also offers the possibility to 'thicken' the village around the central region and appears comparable assuming that suitable access is available. On this basis my personal preferred outcome is that the housing requirements are divided between site 1 and 7, hopefully helping to maintain a relatively open aspect/lower density for the new housing in order to fit well within the current village. Note that should HS2 happen site 1 will probably be worst affected than site 7 as it will experience the greater construction impacts and operating noise, but in this case it probably becomes even more important that the development is split between the two sites to reduce the concept of living the wrong side of the tracks.

I would further comment that it would be helpful if some of the building plots are made available for self-build so that we do not end up with an 'estate' feel (however nice) but can maintain the illusion of organic growth and preserve the rather random housing styles currently within the village.

Dr Andrew Gibbs

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

see attached

Consultation on new local plan

This response is only concerned with the plan for Burton Green, which if I have to declare an interest is where I live, although it also the case that none of the consultation sites directly affect me personally and I have no financial interest in any of them.

In my opinion the requirement for the village to accommodate a further
70-90 homes is somewhat excessive as this represents a large step change in the population, but if that is what we have to deal with then so be it. However this change must be handled sensitively and with complete transparency to avoid it becoming a source of controversy within the village - as such I am slightly disappointed that this consultation was not more widely publicised, and also that the tone of the documentation is very much that the decision has already been made (within Burton Green we have also had input from the potential developer of the preferred site, which is probably inappropriate).

Looking at the possible sites I would largely agree with the opinions stated within the documentation dismissing the options at the north end of the village (plots 2,5,6) and would additionally comment that these would act to make the village part of Coventry rather than Warwickshire - this is not where the green belt should be impacted. I also agree that the plots on Red Lane (3,4) would reinforce the historical ribbon development and hence again should be discounted. Of the two remaining sites the preferred one at Burrow Hill Nursery does appear to be the best however site 7 (behind houses on Hodgetts Lane and Cromwell Lane) also offers the possibility to 'thicken' the village around the central region and appears comparable assuming that suitable access is available. On this basis my personal preferred outcome is that the housing requirements are divided between site 1 and 7, hopefully helping to maintain a relatively open aspect/lower density for the new housing in order to fit well within the current village. Note that should HS2 happen site 1 will probably be worst affected than site 7 as it will experience the greater construction impacts and operating noise, but in this case it probably becomes even more important that the development is split between the two sites to reduce the concept of living the wrong side of the tracks.

I would further comment that it would be helpful if some of the building plots are made available for self-build so that we do not end up with an 'estate' feel (however nice) but can maintain the illusion of organic growth and preserve the rather random housing styles currently within the village.

Dr Andrew Gibbs

see attached

see attached