1: Conurbation
Development of this site would represent a substantial advance in the closure of the 'gap' between Coventry and Kenilworth and further progression towards a 'Linear City' - a potential grisly urban sprawl extending from Nuneaton in the north to Stratford in the south.
Further, the proposal represents the antithesis of the principles set out in the 'Executive Summary' on page 1 of the WDC Core Strategy, June 2009; specifically the requirements ".. to avoid incursion into the West Midlands Green Belt... in order to maintain separation between towns and villages" and "...to protect the most important areas of Green Belt that separates the town (Kenilworth) from the urban area of Coventry to the north." It would also adversely prejudice Warwick University's future expansion opportunities (see p2 'Preferred Options').

2: Loss of Amenity
Development would result in the loss of another green field site/ agricultural land - an amenity and 'buffer' much valued by residents and wildlife.

3: Inadequate Infrastructure
Current peak hour traffic congestion demonstrates the inadequacy of the local road network.
The consultant Engineer's traffic report commissioned by Warwick University in support of its planning application for expansion classifies much of the existing infrastructure as being 'critical'. Further, it considered the 40% expansion of the campus in isolation and without regard to additional traffic attributable to proposed nearby major schemes [doubling the size of Tesco (+5 shop units + 60 flats), Canley regeneration (+3500 houses?), off-campus W.U residences (+1000 units?), Westwood Business Park, additions to science park etc]
CPCA believes that the modest road modifications planned as part of the university expansion are sufficient to sustain growth of the campus to the scale proposed. They will not, as is claimed, effectively "...mitigate the impact of traffic congestion in the area..."
Superimposed on the above is the threat of further huge increase in traffic attributable the possible development at Hurst Farm: it is neither feasible nor acceptable.
If this development was to proceed then inevitably there would be a further large draw of traffic from Stoneleigh/ Gibbet Hill Road and the A45 to the site. Congestion on Gibbet Hill Road/ Stoneleigh Road will force traffic to use Westwood Heath Road, Kirby Corner Road and Sir Henry Parkes Road to access the A45 and the city centre. Extensive peak hour gridlock is readily predictable.

4: Lack of Transparency
CPCA believes that, instead of generalisation and before being invited to comment, residents should have been advised re:
- The probable scale of the development (possibly 3000 houses?)
- The type and scale of employment development envisaged
- The approximate number, probable size and category of house units
- Any limit on height. Number of storeys (the site is adjacent to W.U)
Similarly, whether or not it is intended to preserve character by conserving e.g. Whitefields Coppice and Roughknowles Wood.
Intentions are not known: WDC has a duty to inform - it is not for the public to guess

5: Affordable housing content
Hurst Farm is an edge-of-city site. Coventry C.C's requirement for affordable housing (i.e. housing association, shared equity etc) is 25%; WDC apparently insists on 40% - shortly, we are advised, to be increased to 50%.
A higher proportion of affordable housing in rural districts is to redress a perceived shortage and to enable the lower paid, to continue to live in their locality. We consider the converse appertains to this site, located as it is adjacent to Coventry which, we believe, has a surfeit of such units - but a dearth of 'aspirational' housing.
We detect the intention to play the 'numbers game' with a high % of affordable (small units, low space standards, high density, low specification) housing to achieve government targets whilst the disproportionate effect on traffic/ congestion is conveniently over looked.

6: Purpose
The stated purpose of this development is "...for future housing and employment development to meet the District's long term needs".
We consider the Hurst Farm proposal fails this objective. It does not provide for the District's employment needs; it does not provide affordable housing in rural areas; it is an attempt by WDC to divest a large part of its housing commitment onto Coventry's (we believe disproportionately large and self imposed) numerical obligation.

Warwick University which abuts this site is service by a rural road designed for the horse and cart. The issue of an inadequate infrastructure has never been addressed and despite the consultant's stated concerns the planning authorities approved a 40% expansion of the campus. Disturbingly that application, like those for other major developments in the locality (para 3 above) appear to have been considered each in isolation by the planning authorities, without regard to juxtaposition, adequacy of infrastructure, cumulative effect, or impact. This matter is currently the subject of formal complaint to CCC, WCC and WDC.
Further, we believe that, whilst approving W.U's expansion, WCC and WDC have effectively vetoed associated infrastructure proposals which would have alleviated - including 'Sprint' the planned rapid transit system linking Nuneaton/ Bedworth - Coventry - W.U - Kenilworth - Leamington, similarly park and ride facilities remote from campus and a possible road link with the A46.
An illogical prepossession with numbers appears to have overridden rational consideration of the essentials of demand/ need for employment development/ infrastructure.
CPCA objects to the development of Hurst Farm for the reasons stated.
CPCA requests that this letter is copied to each member of any Council Committee prior to it considering any proposal to develop the Hurst Farm site.