|
News
Here
are our recent press releases and articles.
Older
press releases can be found in archive
A NEW CHAMPION FOR OUR COUNTRYSIDE
(Our
article in Warwickshire Life, June, 2009)
We
aim to protect the countryside; who better to run our branch
than a practising farmer? Meet James Steele, our new chairman,
who has lived on the land and farmed the land all his working
life.
He comes from a long farming line. A branch of the Steeles
moved to Henley-in-Arden in 1897. A family of twelve produced
four more Warwickshire farmers, one of those four produced
three more and one of the three was James’s father,
George.
George Steele acquired three neighbouring farms, which his
three sons ran in partnership, but in 1986 they went different
ways and James was left with one of them, Bishops Farm, 320
acres of grazing and arable in gently undulating countryside
not far from Ullenhall.
James is just old enough to remember the Dig for Victory years,
so his farming philosophy is essentially down to earth. “I
consider myself a practical environmentalist,” he says,
“a pragmatist, not an idealist,” and he has never
been afraid to embrace the latest technology. He uses pesticides
on his crops, but a skilful rotation ensures that this is
not overdone.

James's
Farm
On the other hand, he has replanted several of the hedges
that his father ripped out in the Sixties. Government policy
changed and he followed it. Then the goal was production;
now it is respect for the environment. He cuts and lays one
of these hedges in the age-old way, so that the branches reinforce
it.
This dialectic between old and new is neatly symbolised by
two features of Bishops Farm. In the late Fifties a line of
pylons marched across the landscape, not a pretty sight, but
James Steele is grateful for the income provided by two that
stand on his land. And, knowledgeable of local history, he
tells me that a charming sunken road between high hedges was
created in the Middle Ages, carved out by the hooves of pack
horses that brought iron to be smelted by charcoal burners
in the Forest of Arden.
The Steeles are Methodists and he himself is a preacher, ready
to take services anywhere. He has preached for over forty
years and as far afield as Carlisle and Cornwall, but now
serves locally.
Unlike many other farms, whose barns have become holiday lets
or offices, Bishops Farm has just a farmhouse, where James
lives with his wife, Jenny, and some contemporary buildings.
Now that his children have grown up, Katherine to research
at Bangor University and Andrew to be an IT specialist, life
can be lonely, so James was pleased to be made County Chairman
of the National Farmers Union.
About sixteen years ago he started to represent the NFU on
our executive committee. We met him; we kept him.
Andrew says that he wants to take over the farm when his father,
who will be a pensioner this year, retires altogether. Naturally,
James hopes that he will, for farming is in the family blood.
WARWICKSHIRE’S
CANALS
(Our
article in Warwickshire Life, May, 2009)
As the eighteenth century gave way to the nineteenth, so the
flatter counties of England acquired a labyrinth of man-made
waterways and a new, cheap way of transporting goods came
into its own. Big horses plodded along towpaths, dragging
barges behind them. In the Midlands coal was a favourite cargo
and Warwickshire with its many collieries built about a hundred
miles of canal.
By the middle of the nineteenth century the railways arrived
and the barges started to decline. Yet they persisted well
into the twentieth and even today there are twelve working
barges in Warwickshire.
My informant is Tony Wright, the lockkeeper at Atherstone,
and he should know for he has devoted his whole life to the
canals. “It’s in the blood,” he says, simply.
“I love it.”
As a child he can remember the last years of the old, leisurely
ways, for his family lived in a cottage beside the Coventry
Canal at Polesworth. His father used to repair the working
barges and decorate them. There was a great pride and mystique
about these decorations and each company had its own designs.
“What did for the cargo boats was the railways,”
Mr. Wright told me. “By 1970 there was hardly anything.”
Yet he became a lockkeeper, for by this time the leisure industry
was getting into its stride. “It really kicked off in
the late Seventies. By the Eighties it was thriving. What
the canals are mainly used for now is holiday traffic. We
average about 7,000 boats a year through Atherstone.”
He remembers a time when few boats used the canals between
October and Easter. Today, the Coventry Canal is well used
and Mr. Wright may see twenty boats on Boxing Day. However,
maintenance is vital so every October the canal closes for
four or five weeks and essential work, such as renewing lock
gates and sealing leaks, is carried out.
This work is paid for by British Waterways, the organisation
that owns the canals. In 2007-2008, the Government gave it
a grant of £67.9 million; this year it may be slightly
less. The C.P.R.E. is interested in the canals and in particular
the future of the many buildings that came with them, the
lockkeepers’ cottages, stables and offices. Most of
them are now in private hands, but British Waterways still
owns the house in which Tony Wright lives and several other
properties. Every year ten to twelve are sold off, but with
restrictive covenants to ensure they are not spoiled by alteration.
Plain brick buildings, but with charm and character, they
are part of the canal history and we should like to see them
properly maintained.
Is the future of the canals assured? If the Government has
enough funds to support them. Meanwhile, public interest is
unabated. With fewer people holidaying abroad 2009 is going
to be a wonderful season for the amateur bargee.
LOCAL
FOOD
(Our
article in Warwickshire Life, April, 2009)
A
supermarket chain wanted to build a store in a Suffolk market
town. It would do no great harm, it was alleged, only two
local shops would be affected. One of our members thought
otherwise. She contacted 81 retailers in the area and discovered
that 67 of them thought they would be harmed by the new store.
The authorities backed her, the application was turned down
and that, eleven years ago, was the beginning of our campaign
to promote local food.
Supermarkets can undercut the prices charged by small shops
and put them out of business, that we all know. As regards
food the problem goes deeper. Supermarkets use long distribution
systems. Their goods come from all over the world and they
generally have little truck with local farmers. With few exceptions,
the big chain stores do not try to sell food grown and produced
in the areas they serve. So they not only harm small shops,
but farms. The whole local economy is threatened.

A
display of food books in Kenilworth Library
The cost of importing food is enormous and long food chains
create pollution. And what would happen if this global distribution
system broke down? What if fuel for the cargo ships and lorries
was suddenly unavailable? Being detached from the farmland
around us is potentially dangerous.
So CPRE is creating maps of food chains all over England,
showing which farms send produce to which shops. When this
project is advanced we will step up our campaign to persuade
supermarkets to stock local food and label it as such, so
that customers know exactly where it comes from. The whole
planning system is currently being revised, so we shall press
for local authorities to include policies in the new planning
documents that will promote local retailers.
To make the party go we are currently holding workshops all
over the country. The other day there was one at Kenilworth.
About thirty people, farmers, producers, shop owners, members
of the public who support local food and CPRE members came
to the Senior Citizens Club for a general briefing and talked
animatedly together for a couple of hours or so.

Some of the CPRE Team
We were welcomed with sustaining mugs of tomato and spinach
soup – made from local produce needless to say –then
settled down in groups to answer such questions as “Does
local food preserve wildlife?”, “Does local food
contribute to local distinctiveness?”, “Does local
food attract tourism?”.

Some of our volunteers
We can all have opinions on these things and what those opinions
are cannot matter a great deal, (though our answers were carefully
correlated and will appear in a long and learned report).
What did matter was that that people who want small farms
and small shops to survive were given a rallying point and
encouragement.
Our concern with local producers and retailers is not a sentimental
yearning for a traditional way of life that has disappeared;
it is vitally important.
CLEAR UP THE CLUTTER….
(Our article in Warwickshire Life,
March, 2009)
A
friendly church spire beckons out of the landscape and soon
we are driving into a typically charming Warwickshire village,
slowing down as we pass the 30 mile an hour speed limit sign.
In fact, there are four signs, with three lines, two lines,
one line and finally the sign proper, and 30 MPH painted in
vast capitals on the road. Another sign lights up. “30
MPH” it says and, rightly or wrongly, “TOO FAST.”
Yet another threatens us with speed cameras. Where? They are
well hidden. Other signs say, “30 MPH: Have you forgotten?”
As we leave, a final sign thanks us, sincerely or with bitter
sarcasm, for driving slowly.
They spoil the beauty of this village, do these signs. There
is a restless quality about them. They tell us that the village
is of no importance; it only exists as somewhere on the road
to somewhere else.
So do the directional signs. At any reasonably important junction
you will find towns on one sign, villages on another, together
with Site of Historical Interest, Give Way, and 30 MPH, or
whatever the speed is, to keep them company.

Wootton Wawen
Signs are essential. We must know how fast to go and in which
direction. But too many defeat their own purpose, confuse
the motorist and cause accidents. So we have joined forces
with the R.A.C. and English Heritage to wage war against this
unnecessary clutter
How many or few signs we really need is debatable. What we
need not at all are roadside advertisements on the sides of
vehicles, allegedly mobile but in practice static. Hideous
in themselves, they hide the countryside and distract motorists.
No long ago there was a crop of these uglinesses beside the
M40, but the Warwick District Council, to its credit, swept
them away.
However, on the M42, at about half a mile north of Junction
3A with the M40, there is a clump of three lorries with advertisements
on them. And so we told the Stratford-on-Avon District Council
three Februarys ago, giving them the grid reference and photographs.
We prodded the Council a second and a third time in 2006,
and gave a fourth prod at the end of 2007. Last year we prodded
again, as did the local M.P., John Maples, until in July the
Council finally said it would take enforcement action. It
sent a strong letter or so to the offenders, but undeterred
even by the threat of criminal proceedings the lorries remain.

As I write this article, the lorries and their unneeded, unwanted
display, are still there. Come on, Stratford! If Warwick can
do it, you can. We want to look at the countryside, not advertising
copy.
Do you know of any place in the county where there is unnecessary
signage or roadside advertisements? Send us photographs and
grid references; we will take immediate action.
CPRE
WELCOMES AN END TO THE
36-YEAR-OLD SERVICE AREA THREAT
(Our Press Release 28th January 2009)
The refusal of permission for Motorway Service Areas on the
M42 in Solihull’s Green Belt after two inquiries ends
12 years of campaigning by local opponents, says CPRE Warwickshire.
In fact, it is 36 years since a Service Area was first proposed
for the M42, so the threat to the critical Meriden Gap between
Birmingham and Coventry has hung over us from that day to
this.
"After
two long inquiries and over 10 years of opposition by CPRE
and local communities, the threat of a commercial development
in the Meriden Gap has at least been ended", said Mark
Sullivan for the CPRE in Warwickshire. "It has been a
long haul because there were three sites promoted –
and one of them, at Junction 4 close to Dorridge, was refused
once and applied for again."
"The
final success is all the more important because a Service
Area was first proposed between the Green Belt villages of
Hampton-in-Arden and Catherine-de-Barnes in 1973. So it has
taken 36 years to finally see off the threat."
"There
are Service Areas on M42 south of Birmingham and where it
crosses the A5 at Tamworth", said Mr Sullivan. "There
is no need for another."
"We
want to see the seventeenth century Grade II* farmhouse at
Walford Hall Farm, which was within the Catherine-de-Barnes
Service Area site, sold as a private house at last",
said Mr Sullivan. Solihull Council has used its powers to
ensure that this historic house does not decay, but it must
now be put on the market and lived in if it is to be with
us in future centuries."
CPRE
Warwickshire is objecting to a proposal for a new, second
lorry parking area on the south side of the M6 Corley Services
near Coventry. This is also a Green Belt location, where an
extension beyond the current boundary was refused before,
in 1988. The additional parking would allow the operator to
make money from overnight parking of lorries which are delivering
goods in the Birmingham area next morning.
Notes
for Editors
A
Service Area was first proposed by the Department of Transport
in 1973, between the Green Belt villages of Hampton-in-Arden
and Catherine-de-Barnes. After public protest and a move by
then Warwickshire County Councillors to overrule their officers’
support for it, the plan was withdrawn in 1974.
An alternative site close to the National Exhibition Centre
was hinted at, but through the 70s and 80s controversy over
motorways in the Midlands delayed any promotion of a Service
area on the M42.
After the private sector was given the freedom to promote
sites, and landowners could make money from leases that produced
incomes, the Catherine-de-Barnes site reappeared as a planning
application in 1997. Contrary to the Green Belt policies,
it was refused by Solihull Council. Two other sites,at M42
Junctions 4 and 5, were also applied for. An Inquiry in 1999
ended with a reluctant recommendation for the original site.
After an interim letter favouring the Catherine-de-Barnes
site in principle, second thoughts set in once its implications
became clearer. The Highways Agency developed plans for Active
Traffic Management on M42 between Junction 3A (M40) and 7
(M6). The Service Area at Catherine-de-Barnes conflicted with
this and was finally refused for this reason as well as conflict
with Green Belt policy.
COMMUNITY SHOPS
(Our article in Warwickshire Life,
January, 2009)
The
village shop, the only shop, in Long Marston was losing money
so the proprietor – but who can blame him? – sold
it, and the surrounding land, to a developer.
Two years later the Parish Council sent a questionnaire to
all the villagers and discovered that everyone badly missed
this shop. The villagers missed the shop for what it sold
and they missed it as a social centre, a place to hear the
latest, blame the government, curse the weather and put up
advertisements.
So the developer was allowed to build, but only if the shop
was reinstated.
Unsecured loans raised £10,000, a grant from Vital Villages
produced £12,000 and with this money the ground floor
of a brand new maisonette was fitted out as a general store
and, after a long struggle with Post Office Ltd., a post office.
And that is how, seven years ago, Warwickshire acquired its
first ever community shop, one owned and run by the residents.

Long Marston
Community Shop
In 2006 Claverdon lost its newsagent’s. Its other shop,
a butcher’s-cum-grocer’s, did not want to sell
newspapers. So a committee was formed and within a year a
portakabin was placed beside the Village Hall. Somebody lent
a refrigerator, somebody else put up shelves, and very soon
nobody was obliged to make a car journey for a newspaper,
or indeed stationery, milk, eggs and bread.
Plans are now afoot to build a new shop in the same idiom
as the Village Hall. It is thought it will cost £120,000,
so the village is looking out for grants and charitable status.
Barford had a small post office and it disappeared. So a spacious
community shop, a great improvement, was added on to the Village
Hall, with exactly the same brick walls, tiled roof and massive,
friendly wooden beams, to the tune of £300,000. It opened
in November and looks as if it has always been there.
Claverdon Community Shop
The Barford shop sells every necessary thing and, moving with
the times, it has a wi-fi hotspot where people can use laptops
free of charge. The vicar often drops in to communicate with
fellow model railway enthusiasts.

Barford Community Shop
Warwickshire’s three community shops have a lot in common.
They are owned and run by the people they serve and the running
is conducted, save for Barford’s manager, by an army
of obliging and unpaid volunteers.
They are consciously valued as social centres, places that
keep their communities alive. In the Barford shop you can
sit down for a cup of tea or coffee. Will Claverdon follow
suit?
They aim to sell local produce of good quality. Barford, for
instance, has bread baked at Wellesbourne, milk from Budbrooke,
eggs from Darlingscott, preserves from Snitterfield, vegetables
from Ebrington and home-made cakes from Chesterton and Alcester.
Here is a new and welcome social phenomenon. When will Warwickshire
acquire its fourth community shop?
"COUNCIL
MUST FIGHT FOR BEDWORTH WOODLANDS AND GRIFF GAP AT REGIONAL
PLAN ENQUIRY"
(Press
Release 10th December 2008)
CAMPAIGNERS
for the countryside, CPRE Warwickshire Branch, have welcomed
the strong support that Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council
is giving to the restoration of Bedworth Woodlands to the
Green Belt.
The
Full Council at its December meeting unanimously resolved
that “This Council confirms its long commitment that
the Woodlands be returned to the green belt”.
“This
shows the strength of feeling that Bedworth Woodlands should
be given permanent protection as the town’s green setting”
said CPRE’s Technical Secretary, Mark Sullivan.
“The
Council will we hope be conveying this strong expression of
its view to the Panel which will be examining the Regional
Plan for the West Midlands next year. Bedworth Woodlands can
be restored to the Green Belt, but it needs a policy provision
in the Regional Spatial Strategy to do so.”
The CPRE is also concerned to see the green gap between Nuneaton
and Bedworth protected. This includes the historic Griff House,
the childhood home of the world-famous Victorian novelist
George Eliot. It is now a hotel.
“The
‘Griff Gap’, despite being in the Green Belt,
was threatened with industrial development in the first draft
of the Local Plan in 2002”, recalled Mr Sullivan. Effective
public opposition saved one part of the gap before the Local
Plan Inquiry and the Inspector recommended the rest stay Green
Belt. The Council agreed and the towns remain separated by
farmland”.
But the Regional Plan now proposes nearly 11,000 new houses
over the next 20 years in the Borough, and suggests that a
Regional Investment Site for more industry may be needed.
“CPRE believes that the housing proposals should be
scaled down to under 7,000 homes, and existing employment
land re-used” said Mr Sullivan. “This would protect
both the ‘Griff Gap’ and Bedworth Woodlands. CPRE
also believes that the attractive Weddington district must
be kept green.”
Note
to Editors
(1)
The West Midlands Regional Assembly’s proposed housing
figures are too high if the Borough’s towns are to keep
their rural setting. The present Local Plan has proved successful
and should not be undermined. Adopted after much public participation,
the 2006 Local Plan:
Ø
keeps Bedworth Woodlands green
Ø
preserves the green gap between the two towns at Griff
Ø
has prevented further spread of housing at Weddington, northwest
of Nuneaton
(2)
The Borough Council’s strong and resolved position that
Bedworth Woodlands should be returned to the Green Belt (it
was shown as part of the Green Belt until the mid-1970s) would
be undermined by the demand to provide for so much extra housing.
The Woodlands meets the tests for inclusion in the Green Belt.
But to ensure that it is given Green Belt status, the Regional
Spatial Strategy needs to provide for this in principle. Then
Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council can then fix a new
Green Belt boundary that puts the Woodlands into the Green
Belt through its Local Development Framework.
(3)
The Phase Two Revision of the West Midlands Regional Spatial
Strategy was submitted by the West Midlands Regional Assembly
to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
in December 2007.
(4)
Motion in Full Council on 3 December 2008,
“This
Council confirms its long commitment that the Woodlands be
returned to the green belt”.
Passed
unanimously on a recorded vote.
A
NIGHTMARE HOUSING SPRAWL SCENARIO FOR RUGBY BOROUGH
Tuesday, 11th November, 2008
Countryside
campaigners CPRE (1) are urging residents of Rugby to express
their views on the latest housing proposals for the borough
or risk a deluge of development that will ruin the area.
In
December last year, the West Midlands Regional Assembly submitted
revisions to the Regional Strategy proposing that 10,800 extra
homes should be built in the borough over 20 years –
a massive increase, over one quarter more houses than there
are in the whole Borough, town and villages, today (2). No
specific explanation of why Rugby had been singled out for
particularly high growth was given.
In
October, the Nathaniel Lichfield Report, commissioned by the
Government, recommended between 13,800 and 15,800 new homes
for the borough – a huge increase, of some 40%, in the
number of houses the Borough has now. As there is very little
room for new development within the existing town, virtually
all the new housing would be on green field sites, extending
the town out into the countryside beyond. The Rugby Radio
Station would be far from the only area affected. CPRE fears
that the careful protection of villages between Rugby and
Coventry, in the Green Belt, would be overwhelmed with new
housing if the Lichfield report was imposed by Government
dictat.
Mark
Sullivan of Warwickshire CPRE said: ‘"hese reckless
proposals from the consultants would seriously damage the
town and the borough. They would change the character of the
town, add to traffic congestion and result in unnecessary
urban sprawl – like an octopus extending its tentacles
out into the countryside. There is absolutely no justification
for development on anything like this scale."
"Rugby
Borough Council have been consulting on ideas for distributing
the new housing, but the overall scale of development will
be decided by the Regional Strategy, so it’s important
that everyone has their say before it’s too late."
CPRE
is urging those who care about the future of Rugby to object
both to the Regional Strategy and to the consultants’
proposals. Objections should be sent to:
Panel
Secretary
West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Examination
Government Office for the West Midlands
5 St Philips Place
Colmore Row
Birmingham B3 2PW
to
arrive by noon on 8th December 2008.
A
NIGHTMARE SCENARIO - HOUSING SPRAWL IN WARWICK DISTRICT
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Residents
of Warwick, Leamington, Kenilworth and surrounding villages
need to express their views on the latest housing proposals
for the district or risk a deluge of development that will
ruin the area, say countryside campaigners CPRE. (1).
In
December last year, the West Midlands Regional Assembly submitted
revisions to the Regional Strategy proposing that 10,800 extra
houses should be built in the district over 20 years –
nearly a fifth as many houses again as there are in the whole
of Warwick District now (2). But two weeks ago, the Nathaniel
Lichfield Report, commissioned by the Government, recommended
between 15,800 and 20,800 new homes – an increase of
up to a third in the number of houses (3). There is room for
only a minority of these within the existing towns. The great
majority would have to be built on greenfield sites, many
of them in the Green Belt, which is supposed to be protected
from development.
Mark
Sullivan, Technical Secretary of Warwickshire CPRE said: "These
reckless proposals from the consultants make a mockery of
the protection green belts are supposed to give and would
destroy the character and quality of the three towns. They
would simply be a recipe for urban coalescence and sprawl,
and more traffic congestion. Warwick, Leamington and Kenilworth
would become little more than dormitory towns for those working
in Birmingham, Coventry and even further afield."
"Warwick
District Council have been consulting on options for locating
new housing, but they cannot control the overall scale of
development. That will be decided by the Regional Strategy,
so it’s important that everyone has their say before
it’s too late."
CPRE
is urging those who care about the future of Warwick, Leamington
and Kenilworth and the countryside surrounding them to object
both to the original Regional Strategy and to the consultants’
latest ideas. Objections should be sent – separate letters
preferably to the Regional Assembly figure and to the Government’s
consultants’ proposals - to:
Panel
Secretary
West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Examination
Government Office for the West Midlands
5 St Philips Place
Colmore Row
Birmingham B3 2PW
to
arrive by noon on 8th December 2008.
A
NIGHTMARE SCENARIO FOR HOUSING IN STRATFORD DISTRICT
Tuesday, 11th November, 2008
Countryside campaigners CPRE (1) are urging residents of Stratford-on-Avon
District to express their views on the latest housing proposals
for the area, which could reinforce pressure for an ‘eco-town’
at Long Marston, or lead to the imposition of a huge housing
estate on the west side of Shottery.
In
December last year, the West Midlands Regional Assembly submitted
revisions to the Regional Strategy's proposal that 5,600 extra
houses should be built in the district over 20 years. This
was in line with the past pattern of housing development in
Stratford District and much would by conversions and infill,
or on small sites – as happens under the present Local
Plan.
But
three weeks ago, the Nathaniel Lichfield Report, commissioned
by the Government, recommended that this figure should jump
to 10,100 – which would be an increase of nearly a fifth
in the housing stock (3). The difference would be accounted
for either by proposed ecotown at Long Marston, if it was
approved, or by an extension of Stratford town out into the
countryside.
Mark
Sullivan, Techncial Secretary of Warwickshire CPRE said: "The
‘Middle Quinton’ proposal does not pass the tests
CPRE nationally has set for eco-towns. Nor would a large extension
of Stratford be acceptable – the plan for housing between
the Alcester and Evesham Roads are appalling, removing the
village character of Shottery . Both these major developments
would jeopardise the precious but fragile character and environmental
quality of Stratford. New housing on this scale cannot be
justified."
"The
overall scale of development will be decided by the Regional
Strategy, so it’s important that everyone has their
say before it’s too late."
CPRE
is urging those who care about the future of Stratford-upon-Avon
to object to the consultants’ proposals for 10,100 houses
by 2026. Objections should be sent to:
The Panel Secretary,
West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Examination,
Government Office for the West Midlands,
5 St Philips Place,
Colmore Row,
Birmingham , B3 2PW
to
arrive by noon on 8th December 2008.
A
NIGHTMARE OF HOUSING SPRAWL AROUND NUNEATON AND BEDWORTH
Tuesday, 11th November, 2008
Countryside
campaigners CPRE (1) are urging residents of Nuneaton and
Bedworth to express their views on the latest housing proposals
for the borough or risk a deluge of development that will
ruin the area.
In December last year, the West Midlands Regional Assembly
submitted revisions to the Regional Strategy proposing that
10,800 extra homes should be built across Nuneaton and Bedworth
over over 20 years – a massive increase, potentially
a 21% increase in the size of the built-up area (2).
Even
if half of these extra houses can be accommodated on brownfield
sites – by redevelopment, infill, conversions - around
5,000 houses would need to be sited on what are now green
fields in the Borough. And much of these are Green Belt.
The
Nathaniel Lichfield Report of last month, commissioned by
the Government to look at how to impose further housing numbers
that it wants local councils to provide for, does not try
to increase the housing target for Nuneaton & Bedworth
still more.
But the Regional Assembly’s level of proposed housing
is itself too high if the Borough’s towns are to keep
their rural setting. They would overturn the tight control
on expansion that the present Local Plan has as key policy.
The present Local Plan, adopted after much public participation:
·
keeps Bedworth Woodlands green
·
has prevented further spread of housing at Weddington, northwest
of Nuneaton
·
preserves the green gap between the two towns at Griff.
The extra 10,800 houses – the target for the 20 years
to 2026 - would threaten all these green landscapes –
each of which has been defended successfully by local campaigners
in the last ten years (3) (4) (5).
The
Borough Council’s strong and resolved position that
Bedworth Woodlands should be returned to the Green Belt would
be undermined by the demand to provide for so much extra housing.
The
Woodlands meets the tests for inclusion in the Green Belt.
But to ensure that it is given Green Belt status, the Regional
Spatial Strategy needs to provide for this in principle. Then
Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council can set a new Green
Belt boundary that puts the Woodlands into the Green Belt
through its Local Development Framework.
Mark
Sullivan of Warwickshire CPRE said: "The Regional Spatial
Strategy’s housing numbers, if imposed, will threaten
the areas which were saved in the last 10 years by effective
local campaigns. They would extend Bedworth west of the A444
bypass, into open countryside ; fill the gap between the two
towns and make them one long conurbation, and replace the
green setting of Weddington with a sprawl of housing."
"The
District Council’s current forward planning work assumes
the 10,800 extra houses. But these are not fixed – if
enough people in the Borough object to this figure it may
be reduced and the green setting of the towns preserved."
CPRE
is urging those who care about the future of Nuneaton and
Bedworth to object to the figure for Nuneaton & Bedworth
in the Regional Strategy, and to call on the Examining Panel
to include provision in principle for extension to the Green
Belt to save Bedworth Woodlands. Objections should be sent
to:
Panel Secretary,
West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy Examination,
Government Office for the West Midlands,
5 St Philips Place,
Colmore Row,
Birmingham, B3 2PW
to
arrive by noon on 8th December, 2008.
NOTES
FOR EDITORS
(1)
CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity
which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural
England . We advocate positive solutions for the long-term
future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000
supporters and a branch in every county. President: Bill Bryson.
Patron: Her Majesty The Queen. www.cpre.org. uk. The Warwickshire
Branch of CPRE seeks to protect the countryside of Warwickshire,
including the Green Belt settings of Coventry, Solihull and
Birmingham.
(2)
The Phase Two Revision of the West Midlands Regional Spatial
Strategy was submitted by the West Midlands Regional Assembly
to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
in December 2007.
(3)
Bedworth Woodlands, the land west of A444 and north of Bedworth
Heath, was designated ‘Proposed Green Belt’ in
the 1960s but was left out of the confirmed Green Belt 10
years later. It was saved from housing development by the
Bedworth Woodlands Action Group, led by Karl Mayer, between
1997 and 2000. Following a public inquiry, John Prescottk,l
then the Government Minister responsible for planning decisions,
refused permission for 100 acres of greenfield housing. The
Local Plan Modifications Inquiry in 2005 was told by Nuneaton
& Bedworth Borough Council that Bedworth Woodlands meets
the tests for inclusion in the Green Belt. But it was too
radical a change for the Local Plan to make by itself.
(4)
The Griff area between Nuneaton and Bedworth was proposed
for major employment development in the draft Local Plan in
2002. Part (Griff South) was deleted following public participation
before the Inquiry. The remainder (Griff East) was dropped
on the Inspector’s recommendation following the Local
Plan Inquiry in 2003, where CPRE gave evidence about the landscape
and the need to keep the two towns separate.
(5)
The Weddington area northwest of Nuneaton has been strongly
defended by local campaigners (‘STING’) since
2000.
DRINK
UP OR THE PUB GETS IT!
(Article
in Warwickshire Life November 2008)
Before
this day is out one or more public houses will probably call
time for the last time.
We are losing fifty-seven pubs a month. There are reasons
enough: rising excise duty, the credit crunch, cheap alcohol
at supermarkets, the smoking ban and the simple fact that
some pubs are badly run.
The loss of any social venue, be it a shop, post office, school,
church or village hall, is a tragedy for any community, but
the loss of a pub is the one that hurts most. The good humour,
social warmth and relaxation, the opportunity to hear the
latest local news, where would community life be without all
this?
Great Alne, a parish of 473 souls, north east of Alcester,
once had a shop, a post office, a social club and a pub. The
first three are gone; the pub may follow.
The Mother Huff Cap, an eighteenth century listed building,
stands on the corner of the main road that runs through the
village, an ideal position. It has generous bar areas, a handsome,
timber-framed restaurant and plenty of parking space.
Unfortunately, it has been allowed to run down. It is badly
in need of refurbishment and repair, and has closed two or
three times in recent memory.
However, Kevin Donegan, who runs three other pubs, including
the Blue Boar at Temple Grafton, intends to bring it back
to life. With him is David Cole, thirty-five years in the
trade and a specialist in restoring derelict pubs. The Mother
Huff Cap reopened in September and restoration is under way.
The bars have been recarpeted, before long the faded signage
will be replaced and by the middle of this month the restaurant
will have started up again.
. “I believe in its heyday it was a fantastic pub,”
Mr. Donegan tells me. “We’ve got to get it back
to where it was in the Eighties, with nice bar areas, an excellent
restaurant and good food.”
The Mother Huff Cap is owned by Punch Taverns. Its business
manager, Colin Hardy, tells me that he is putting together
a scheme for restoring it, to the tune of £200,000,
which he will present to his superiors in a month or so. Meanwhile,
Kevin Donegan is putting his own money into the project.
This pub, once a coaching inn, has served Great Alne since
at least 1645 and its name derives from an expression current
in those days. Huff cap is the best ale, ale so good that
it “huffs one’s cap”, swells one’s
head. The mother was the woman who brewed ale at the pub itself.
What a name, what an opportunity! If Great Alne loses the
Mother Huff Cap it will lose its most important social centre
and much of its community life. Having reopened, it should
stay open for good. Drink to that!

SUPPORTING
LOCAL FOOD
(Article
in Warwickshire Life October 2008)
If
the food is edible, and there is enough of it, and the price
is reasonable, does it matter where it comes from or how it
is produced?
The C.P.R.E. thinks it does. We want to promote fresh, healthy,
affordable food. We want to support farming. We want local
shops to offer alternatives to the mass produced item.
So we have started a project called Mapping Local Food Webs.
Our aim is to research the local food network, from customers
through to shops, producers, processors and suppliers. We
want to demonstrate the interdependence of the system and
the benefits it provides in jobs, social contact and land
management.
Noble intentions. Unfortunately, the mass produced item usually
costs less than the locally produced one. So if you or I patronise
our local shop rather than the supermarket it is, on the whole,
for this reason – it sells a better product.
Nobody knows this better than Jim and Helen Cherry, who run
two local food shops called Taste of the Country in South
Warwickshire.
They graduated from agricultural college and became engaged
on a tour of Australia and New Zealand where they studied
farming on a practical basis. On their return to England an
opportunity arose to farm cows and sheep at a farm just over
the Oxfordshire border. Helen Cherry built up a flock of 200
sheep and they became involved in the Farmers Market at Stratford-upon-Avon,
where they sold beef and lamb directly to the public.
“By doing the Farmers Market,” Jim told me, “we
rekindled the consumer interest in where r food was coming
from and how it was produced.”
The Cherrys moved to South Warwickshire and Jim worked with
a friend who farmed at Cherington. Then he noticed an empty
shop in Long Compton that had been a butcher’s. The
Cherrys re-opened the shop, in 2002, running it initially
with part-time staff.
“The aim of the shop was to sell purely local and British
products,” which indeed they did. 80% of their products
came from within a ten mile radius of the shop.
In October, 2006, they opened another shop, at Shipston-on-Stour,
equipped with a kitchen in which meat dishes, fish pies, lasagne,
Cornish pasties, sausage rolls, cakes, pastries, biscuits,
flapjacks and other items are prepared, mainly with local
sourced ingredients.
“Our ethos,” Jim Cherry says, “is to sell
a product with provenance and good quality. We’re searching
for the honesty in food that has been lost to mass production.
In the last twenty years food has gone so industrial that
people distrust the retail infrastructure that supports it.”
He is very aware of the difficulties ahead. Small businesses
are struggling and the gap between the hand-produced and mass-produced
product is widening. But he thinks he can win. “A growing
number of consumers are looking for our type of food.”
CLEANING
UP WARWICKSHIRE
(Article in Warwickshire Life September
2008)
Have you heard of Bill Bryson from Iowa?
He visited England as a youngster, found a job in a hospital,
married one of the nurses and stayed here.
If you have heard of him you have probably read one of his
books, most likely Notes on a Small Island, the story of a
backpacking trip that took him all over the British Isles.
Our social behaviour fascinated and amused him no end, but
he was rightly scornful of our shortcomings. The service in
pubs and hotels was frequently appalling. He was unable to
travel by bus from one end of the country to the other. Our
architecture and scenery were splendid, but horribly spoiled
by ugly development and neglect.
“It sometimes occurs to me,” he wrote, “that
the British have more heritage than is good for them.”
We should pay a good deal of attention to that remark. We
have the most beautiful architectural heritage in the world,
but how many excellent buildings have we torn down, how many
fine streets ruined by unsuitable replacements? Our countryside
is second to none, but how much of it is marred by pylons,
unnecessary signage and street furniture?
As he loves us and laughs at us, Bill Bryson also chides us
and is most concerned that we should change our ways, which
is surely reason enough for making this anglophile celebrity
President of the C.P.R.E.
As his reign began he was engaged on his latest book, Shakespeare.
Is there anything left to say about this immortal but elusive
son of Warwickshire? Indeed, there is. Mr. Bryson has produced
a commonsensical compendium of what we know, what we do not
know and what we cannot know. It is a witty, friendly little
volume, but quietly, formidably erudite. Anyone reading for
a degree in English should acquire it.
The book came out last Autumn and since then our president
has been giving us a good deal of time and attention, and
to one subject in particular. He thinks we are extremely untidy
and he wants us to pull our socks up.
Perhaps you saw him in a Panorama documentary about fly-tipping
or read articles by him in The Times and the Daily Mail. He
has also been liaising with other groups that want to clean
up the country, such as Keep Britain Tidy, which is having
a special drive this month called The Big Tidy Up. He has
gained the ear of the Minister in charge of Waste and Recycling,
Joan Ruddock, who has promised to write a report on a refundable
bottle scheme.
Needless to say the Warwickshire Branch of the C.P.R.E. wants
to join in the fun. Do you know of any places in the county
where there is fly-tipping? Let us know and we will get out
there, take photographs and alert the powers that be.
POST
OFFICE CLOSURES
(Article
in Warwickshire Life July 2008)
Must we lose still more rural post offices?
To call them facilities is scant justice. We post letters
there, of course, and buy the loaf of bread, tin opener, ball
of string or birthday card that we forgot to buy in the nearest
town. It would be a nuisance to be without them.
But as social animals we need places where we can tell each
other that we are not too bad considering, lament the weather,
blame the government and cast incurious eyes over the handwritten
notices of our fellow citizens who want to sell us a good
condition exercise bike, rent us grazing land, teach us yoga
or help find poor missing Tiddles.
As far as these things go it would be horrible to be without
them. Close the village post office and, if the pub has already
gone, the village is no longer a community.
The value of post offices cannot be measured, but the losses
they make can and they are costing us £4 million a week.
So the Government will close 2,500 of them, by withdrawing
its subsidy and removing the post office equipment.
Aware of their importance to the community, many post offices
have already expanded their activities. Go to the top of the
county and you find that Baddesley Ensor accepts medicaments
from the local surgery, which are collected by local residents.
Go to the foot of the county and you find that Long Compton
sells a wide range of locally grown flowers, vegetables and
fruit.
Is your post office on the proscription list of June 24th?
If so, you have until Monday, 4th August, to tell Post Office
Ltd. why it should be spared. So send a freepost letter to
Network Change Programme Office or an e-mail to network.change@postoffice.co.uk
But unless you can convince this body that your nearest post
office will now be more than three miles away your plea will
be futile.
Happily, the County Council is taking a keen interest in this
matter. It will not subsidise post offices itself, but is
looking for ways to combine them with other, existing facilities
and has already set a good example by relocating the post
office in Brook Street, Warwick, to the Shire Hall in Market
Square.
Your parish council will also be very concerned and may already
have plans to move your post office into the village hall,
school, public house or even someone’s private house.
So if your post office is threatened join forces immediately
with your fellow villagers to ensure that a viable scheme
is blessed by your local M.P., endorsed by the County Council
and becomes a reality.
We should be grateful for this showdown, unpleasant though
it is. Far better to close a fixed number of post offices
all at once than allow many more to slip, singly, into oblivion.
We have been given a challenge; let us take it up.
TOO
MANY HOUSES!
(Our Press Release dated 3rd June 2008)
Unless
people protest, Warwick District could be overwhelmed by new
housing under Regional plans.
“The
housing numbers assumed in the Warwick District Council Core
Strategy are not fixed and everyone should object to them.
And if we don't, we could have yet more houses imposed, as
overspill from Coventry”, says Mark Sullivan, Technical
Secretary of the Warwickshire Branch of the Campaign to Protect
Rural England (CPRE).
“The
old Warwickshire Structure Plan, which limited total housing
numbers, has gone. The proposed West Midlands Spatial Strategy
proposes that 10,800 houses be built in Warwick District from
2006 to 2026. It also says that Coventry should have 33,500
more houses. As Coventry may not have room for so many, some
of them may be put into the Warwick District. If just 3,000
were allocated to Warwick the total would be nearly 14,000."
There is no need for this huge amount of new housing. The
numbers proposed by the Regional Assembly planners would add
18% to the houses and flats in the District. This is far more
than the needs of the local community. Yet the key priority
in the Core Strategy is “to meet the housing needs of
the whole community, including adequate affordable housing”.
The Regional Strategy housing numbers conflict with this by
providing far more than for local needs.
The District Council does not have to accept the imposition
of over 10,000 houses, let alone overspill from Coventry.
So the housing figure for the West Midlands is open to objection.
“Everyone
concerned about the future of Warwick District as a well-planned
mix of historic towns and protected countryside should object
to the regional housing figure of 365,000 and to the Warwick
District figure of 10,800” said Mr Sullivan.
Notes
for Editors
1.
The housing figure in the West Midlands RSS as currently published
is 365,000 dwellings (houses and flats) to be built between
2006 and 2026.
2.
CPRE (West Midlands region) after researching the data carefully
believes that the right figure is 285,000 over those 20 years:
78% of the regional planners’ number.
3.
If the CPRE regional figure is applied proportionately to
Warwick District, instead of 10,800 houses and flats 2006-2026,
the number to be permitted would be not more than 8,400.
4.
Warwick District Council’s Core Strategy Options Paper
says that in Warwick District 2,650 dwellings have been built
since 2006, are under way or have permission now. And it estimates
that 5,500 could be built, or converted from existing stock,
between now and 2026 without needing any greenfield land.
5.
Warwick District could thus accommodate 8,150 dwellings without
needing new greenfield sites. Applying the CPRE proposal for
the region to Warwick District would result in the loss to
new housing of little, perhaps no, greenfield land in the
District in the next 18 years.
6.
Objections to the West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy
housing numbers should be sent to the Regional Spatial Strategy
Panel Secretary, Government Office for the West Midlands,
5 St Philips Place, Colmore Row, Birmingham B3 2PW.
Telephone
calls:
Mark Sullivan (CPRE Warwickshire) 01926 330104 or 01926 494597
Peter
Langley: CPRE West Midlands Region) 02476 540211
A
NEW TOWN AT LONG MARSTON?
(Article
in the Warwickshire Life June 2008)
The
Government wants to build 240,000 houses a year in England
between now and 2016. Some of them will comprise new towns.
One of these towns might be built on 240 hectares at Long
Marston. The local residents, the local planning authority,
the local M.P. and the C.P.R.E. all hope that it will not.
New houses, many new houses, must be built somewhere. Young
married couples must be properly housed, people upon whom
local communities depend, teachers, doctors, carpenters, plumbers
and farm workers, must be able to afford to live in those
communities. So why is the Long Marston site ruled out?
You cannot build houses where they are not needed.
South Warwickshire has a high level of employment. Stratford-upon-Avon
and Evesham, primarily market towns, employ many people from
their rural catchment areas. The local planning authority,
Stratford-upon-Avon, knows how much affordable housing it
must add to each of its towns and villages. Six thousand houses
at Long Marston would meet no local demand.
The town would be sustainable, up to a point, with its own
shops, schools and leisure facilities, but though it would
also have business premises it would be far from being economically
self-sufficient.
Most of the new townspeople would commute considerable distances
to their work and the roads round the town would be clogged
with traffic. To solve this traffic problem these minor roads
would have to be upgraded, an enormous expense which would
inevitably be passed on to the ratepayers.
The development would harm the environment.
The Long Marston site is set in particularly attractive countryside,
close to the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
To the south east is the Heart of England long distance footpath.
To the north west is the Greenway, from Stratford-upon-Avon
to Long Marston, a cycle route that uses an old railway line.
It is overlooked by Meon Hill, the northernmost hill in the
Cotswold Scarp line, with the higher hills between Hidcote
and Ilmington to the south rising to over 800 feet.
The natural beauty of this area would be spoiled and when
the new town had covered the former Royal Engineers depot
it would almost certainly take in Long Marston Airfield to
the north.
This site is one of fifteen on a Government shortlist. In
November, these fifteen sites will be whittled down to ten.
Do you want Long Marston to be excised from this list?
Objections will be considered up to the end of this month.
So write – now – to the Secretary of State for
Communities and Local Government, Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears, at
Eland House, Bressenden Place, Longon, SW1E 5DU.
The Chief Executive of Warwickshire County Council, Jim Graham,
would be interested to see a copy of your letter. His address
is Shire Hall, Warwick, Warwickshire, CV34 4SA.
So would the Chief Executive of the Stratford-on-Avon District
Council, Paul Lankester. His address is Elizabeth House, Church
Street, Stratfordc-upon-Avon, Warwickshire, CV37 6HX.
INTRODUCING
OURSELVES
(Article
in the Warwickshire Life May 2008)
Between the two world wars of the last century, car ownership
grew at an alarming rate. Arterial roads shot out over all
over England and beside them sprang up garages, shops, Odeons
and factories, blurring the distinction between town and country.
In particular something had to be done about ribbon development
and something was done. In 1926 The Council for the Preservation
of Rural England was formed. This was our first campaign and
the upshot was The Restriction of Ribbon Development Act.
Then we asked that buildings of historic and architectural
interest should be listed as such. The Town and Country Planning
Act of 1944 turned hope into reality.
We urged the Government to establish National Parks. In 1949
established they were.
We proposed an “open belt” of protected countryside
round London. In 1955 Green Belts were created.
Ribbon Development, Listed Buildings, National Parks, Green
Belts. Had we never addressed these issues England today would
be, physically….much more of a mess than it is.
These four campaigns tower above the rest of the achievements
that comprise our eighty year history, but there have been,
and there are, many, many others.
For instance, we campaign to prevent advertisement hoardings
alongside roads, protect of our coastline, safeguard our hedgerows,
grow food locally, prevent light pollution, build houses on
brownfield land rather than greenfield and halt the reckless
expansion of airports.
None of these are losing battles, but with sixty-one million
people crammed into thirty-two million acres, they are, must
be, largely defensive ones. We have a great deal to lose,
in fact we lose twenty-one (is that all?) (square delete)
acres of countryside to concrete every year, and it will take
all our goodwill, experience and effort to conserve the natural
and man-made beauties of England for those who live here now
and those who come after us.
Warwickshire’s greatest conservational asset is its
share of the West Midlands Green Belt, which was established,
in 1975, to stop Coventry and Birmingham from running into
each other. In fact, it encircles both those cities and, as
you can see, extends south and east to Stratford-upon-Avon,
Warwick and Leamington Spa.
Some of this countryside is exceptionally beautiful, some
of it is just countryside, for its essential quality is not
beauty but openness. Here is greenery. Our ancestors took
it for granted and we value it as a priceless, because it
is a potentially diminishing, asset.
For it is always under threat.
As people may not build there they seek permission for agricultural
dwellings that are nothing of the sort, convert outbuildings
and create garages that are houses in disguise.
Sometimes the Government even slyly reneges from its official
position of support for the Green Belts. The recent Review
of Land-Use Planning by the economist Kate Barker wondered
if the boundaries of the Green Belts might be altered to allow
development to extend out of cities….
For the pressure on land is enormous, almost overwhelming.
LONG MARSTON ECO-TOWN – “WHOLLY
DAMAGING TO THE COUNTRYSIDE” SAYS C.P.R.E.
(PRESS RELEASE Thursday, 3rd April, 2008)
The Government’ selection of the former Royal Engineer
Depot at Long Marston for an ‘Eco-Town’ flies
in the face of the all the local factors that make the site
unsuitable for major development and have done for years,
says CPRE Warwickshire Branch.
CPRE believes that the site is given special favour because
the Treasury would make money from it. There is a ‘clawback’
on the profits that any developer of the land makes, the site
having been sold as surplus Ministry of Defence land only
a few years ago.
The Long Marston Royal Engineers Depot was established just
before World War II in a remote location in the western lee
of the Cotswold escarpment in order to prevent an air attack
by the Luftwaffe from the east. Its remoteness then makes
it remote now, far from major towns and main roads.
It abuts the north-western end of the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty and is overlooked by the northernmost hill
in the Cotswolds Scarp. The name ‘Middle Quinton’
is stolen from the quiet Cotwold villages of Upper and Lower
Quinton a mile to the east.
6,000 houses in the rural area where Warwickshire, Worcestershire
and Gloucestershire meet would be a wholly ‘unsustainable
type of development. It would create large scale out-commuting
to towns providing work, and cause residents to drive to as
far away as Birmingham, 30 miles north along mainly rural
roads through the Green Belt. The effect on tourism and country
roads seems to have been entirely ignored in short-listing
Long Marston.
o The effect on the attractiveness of the northernmost Cotswold
Hills would be highly damaging, and seems to have been entirely
overlooked by the Minister. Traffic generated by 6,000 houses
and businesses set up at Long Marston would flood country
lanes and damage historic villages in the Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty. Mickleton, Ilmington, Hidcote and Chipping
Camden are all nearby.
o Damage would spread, because the Long Marston site is accessed
off the winding B4632 tourist road that runs from Stratford-upon-Avon
to Cheltenham via Broadway and along the foot of the Cotswold
scarp through Winchcombe. This road was once the A46 but downgraded
to attract only leisure use.
o To the north, the narrow, weight-limited country bridges
over the River Avon at Bidford-on-Avon and Welford-on-Avon
would come under severe pressure from extra traffic as eco-town
residents would use cars to work in Redditch and Birmingham.
o The new town would be dependent on car use as, despite the
promoter's claims, there is no passenger rail service in prospect.
The site lies on a long freight siding.
‘Middle Quinton’ (Long Marston) is wholly unsuitable
for a major new town.
Contact: Mark Sullivan: 01926 330104 or 01926 494597
Nicholas Butler: 01608 684953
FIGHTING
TO SAVE OUR POST OFFICES
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 28th March 2008)
What
happens in a post office?
We meet our friends, discover that they and we are not feeling
so bad considering, agree that we dislike the weather, or
the weather that we have had, or the weather that is to come,
blame the Government for whatever is currently amiss and,
incidentally, buy a stamp or so and some groceries.
Nothing in particular happens in a post office and it is important
for our social health and happiness that there should be places
in every community where nothing in particular happens, because
that is what community life is all about and without it community
life ceases to exist.
So, needless to say, we are concerned about the post office
closures and very, very concerned about closures in villages
that have no other facility.
As we all know, the post offices are costing the Government,
which of course means us, £4 million pounds a week.
So it has established certain criteria by which the success
or otherwise of every post office must be measured and if
it fails this test the Government subsidy will be withdrawn.
These criteria are being administered by the Post Office Ltd.
Network Change Team at Watford. Two or three months hence
it will publish the list of potential victims in the West
Midlands.
A six week consultation period will ensue. During this time
you may send letters or e-mails to this body, or ring it up,
and tell it just why your post office should not close. However,
unless you can produce some fact that was overlooked in applying
the Government criteria your plea will be in vain.
That, however, need not be the end. When it was announced
that Essex would lose thirty-one post offices, the County
Council donated £1.5 million to seeing how many of them
it could save, by one means or another. It appears that at
about half of them will remain.
The Warwickshire County Council is also preparing for the
fray. One post office at least, in Warwick itself, will be
saved, for it will be relocated to Shire Hall. In small towns
and villages, post offices may be combined with existing shops
or relocated to schools and libraries.
What can you do? If you think your local post office is threatened,
raise the matter with your parish council immediately so that
it can devise a sensible plan for its future. You should also,
personally, take this sensible plan to County Hall and tell
your M.P. about it. The post office buck stops in several
places; it certainly stops with you.
KEEPING IT RURAL - Eco Town?
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 14th March 2008)
Three columns ago I introduced the subject
of eco-towns. I told you that before the month was out the
Government would produce a shortlist of locations. February
is over and that shortlist has not yet appeared, but it is,
we understand, imminent, indeed might be with us by the time
you read this.
The C.P.R.E. has devised tests to measure the suitability
of proposed sites. Let us apply them to the site proposed
for Warwickshire: Middle Quinton, near Long Marston and south
of Welford-on-Avon
We believe that eco-towns should be carbon neutral, conserve
natural resources, minimise air, noise and light pollution,
and achieve zero waste. Of course. Otherwise, they would not
be eco-towns.
They should have a strong sense of identity and have shops,
schools, and facilities for recreation, community and health.
Of course. Otherwise, they would be dormitories.
They must have high quality architecture. The style will be
largely dictated by the carbon neutrality and lack of pollution.
So it will be original, but not necessarily good. Aesthetics
is a difficult business, for it is largely subjective, but
if Middle Quinton is chosen we will look at the plans long
and carefully. High quality? We want excellent quality, superb
quality.
So much for the character and content of an eco-town.
Land should be efficiently used, with priority given to recycling
urban brownfield land. A good deal of this site is brownfield,
for it was previously owned by the Ministry of Defence.
Eco-towns should be well connected to their surroundings with
public transport to nearby settlements. Ah, here is a fault.
The site is ill connected to its surroundings. The surrounding
B roads and lanes would have to be upgraded, at prodigious
expense. With little local employment the inhabitants would
commute, many for long distances.
Eco-towns should be sympathetic to their settings and clearly
enhance the local landscapes.
And this is damning. The site, open countryside, is close
to the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is
overlooked by the northernmost hill in the Cotswold Scarp.
The new settlement would wreck the local landscape and destroy
good agricultural land into the bargain.
So the locals have risen in revolt and we have joined cause
with them. We have no quarrel with eco-towns in principle,
but Middle Quinton is the wrong place for one.
The Minister for Housing, the Rt. Hon. Caroline Flint, addressing
a recent 2008 Ecobuild Conference at Earls Court, indicated
that she would employ the C.P.R.E. tests in her choice of
suitable sites.
If she does, if she has, Middle Quinton is ruled out.
WHAT
BILL BRYSON HAS TO TELL YOU
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 29th February 2008)
“England’s
countryside is one of the country’s supreme achievements
– loved, visited and walked across and gazed upon, infinitely
varied, lovely to behold.”
As you, or I, or anyone, might well remark. However, when
the speaker comes from Iowa, as does Bill Bryson, our Anglophile
president, who loves us as he laughs at us, then we should
pay attention.
He is writing in a pamphlet called 2026 Vision, with which
he intends to stir up interest in the countryside.
So, just what is the C.P.R.E. vision for eighteen years hence?
We optimistically hope that in 2026 nine tenths of England
will be open and green, with very little lost to development.
So it will, if we ensure that the new housing is built on
brownfield sites and that these desired residences are in
fact desirable, places in which people will live by choice,
not necessity.
Most of the countryside will be farmed and most of the food
we eat grown here.
I can believe that. As a matter of economics we will import
less food in the years to come and a good deal more of it
will be produced a good deal nearer the people who eat it.
Many more of us will visit the countryside The wildflowers,
birds and insects that have dwindled over the past seventy
years will return. The countryside will be more wooded, a
little wilder and wetter.
It may be so. We are already creating more nature reserves,
woodland and wilderness areas, and more of us may be interested
in restoring lost flora and fauna. Wetter? If we fail to take
immediate and drastic action a good deal of England will not
be wetter; it will be drowned.
The countryside will play a leading role in reducing greenhouse
gas emissions.
The politicians will. They are already competing hard to be
first in this field, and laws, ever tighter, about cars that
use too much petrol and factories that make too much smoke,
are on their way.
However, the extent to which this modest vision becomes a
reality, for you, me, Bill Bryson, and everyone else, depends
on how many individuals press for it to happen and how hard
they press.
“Creating an enchanting landscape is a great achievement,”
our president tells us, “but keeping it will be the
real trick”
Amenity and conservation societies, local and national, abound
and among the glad throng there must be one, or more, for
you. Give us money, by all means, but far, far better find
out what we do and how we do it, and become an active part
of that doing.
KEEP
IT RURAL WITH BRIAN DOUTHWAITE
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 15th February 2008)
This
week the chairman of the Warwickshire Branch of the C.P.R.E.,
who farms at Kineton, writes of his hopes and fears for the
coming year.
The first thing we do in our family farming partnership when
deciding the budget for the year ahead is to look at what
happened in the year just ended. That gives a base to plan
for the future. We have a mixed farming enterprise of livestock
and arable crops, all produced to Soil Association organic
standards.
So, how did we do last year? All the factors within our own
control worked pretty well; the cows in the beef suckler herd
produced healthy calves on time and the ewes produced a reasonable
crop of lambs. The grass grew very well, a product of the
very wet year no doubt, so we have plenty of conserved grass
(silage) to feed the animals through the winter months. The
organic produce commanded a very useful price premium.
The factors which didn’t work well were, unfortunately,
considerable and outside our control. The extremely wet summer
weather depressed the cereal yield; the new disease Blue Tongue
affecting sheep and cattle arrived from Belgium. Foot and
mouth disease “escaped” from the Government’s
own laboratories. Both of these led to movement restrictions
across the whole country and severe disruption to normal trade.
So how do we plan ahead on the basis of the previous year?
We must expect a more normal year of weather, or can we? Global
warming in action! We are promised a vaccine for Blue Tongue.
Foot and Mouth will not “escape” again, or could
it come in contaminated produce from overseas?
We will continue to manage the farming enterprise as well
as possible. Both my sons have college and university training
and we have between the three of us about 100 years of practical
experience! Managing the farming enterprise includes the environmental
schemes which are part of our farming philosophy.
How will the business fare financially? On the input side
the cost of fuel has rocketed, as you all know only too well,
other costs are rising too. On the output side prices for
some of the commodities which we produce have risen sharply,
notably all the cereal crops, wheat, oats and beans. Beef
and lamb prices have remained low, although our organic premium
has helped considerably. It is fair to say that in recent
years prices have been very depressed, so a rise is both welcome
and necessary. Our mixed farming enterprise, which relies
very much on producing high quality grass/clover crops to
feed our livestock, has insulated us from the effects of high
cereal feed prices.
To sum up, we shall continue producing for our niche market
in a spirit of optimism. Farmers need to be optimists!
GREEN
TOWNS ARE TO BE BUILT SOON
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 1st February 2008)
We
knew last year that the West Midlands must build 365,000 more
houses over the next twenty years, and to get 2008 off to
a good start the Government increased the figure to 420,000.
And on top of that the West Midlands will receive yet another
5,000 to 20,000 houses within the next year or so. For the
Government has decided to give every region a brand new eco-town.
I have in front of me a document from The Department of Communities
and Local Government entitled Eco-towns Prospectus.
Like every government document, there is a foreword promising
change and improvement with a smiling minister above it. Unlike
most government documents, its intentions are not cunningly
hidden in a mound of convoluted bosh.
In plain words we are told that ten small new towns will be
buuilt. Each will have a distinct identity and be linked,
mainly by transport and employment, to neighbouring towns.
Each will have a secondary school, shops, business premises
and leisure facilities. Each will have 30% to 50% affordable
housing.
And they will be eco-towns. The houses will be cheap to run,
with solar panels and triple glazing well to the fore. Rain
water will be used, among other things, to flush lavatories.
Household waste, perhaps all of it, will be recycled on the
spot and some of it turned into power. The buildings will
produce no carbon emissions. Biomass boilers will heat schools
and commercial premises.
We are starting to tackle climate change – as we are
loudly and repeatedly reminded. We are also, quietly and discreetly,
abandoning a national economy that is based on everyone being
persuaded to buy more and more and more.
These facts will be reflected in the new towns. This will
be the architecture of thrift and it will shape the behaviour
and character of those who live and work there.
Local authorities have proposed three sites for the West Midlands:
Throckmorton in Worcestershire, Fradley in Staffordshire,
and, nearest to home, Middle Quinton near Long Marston, south
of Welford-on-Avon. If the last-named is chosen, 6,000 houses
will appear on land recently owned by the Ministry of Defence,
for each eco-town will be built on a site previously used
for some other purpose, another thrifty ploy.
Before this month is out the Government will announce a shortlist;
come mid summer it will tell us where the ten new eco-towns
will be built. Must they be ugly, utilitarian places? No,
not if the architects know their job. If Middle Quinton is
chosen we must demand that the new town, besides being strikingly
original, is an humane, welcoming place.
IT
IS TIME TO TAKE A STAND ON PLANNING
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 18th January 2008)
Two members of our National Office team visited the House
of Commons last week. They presented our comments on the Planning
Reform Bill, which is now before Parliament, to the Public
Bill Committee.
For the bill has now reached the committee stage and twenty-two
honourable members from all parties are receiving and digesting
the opinions on what is proposed from conservation bodies,
such as us, business, naturally, and indeed the Government
itself.
We began by telling the Committee that planning was a crucial,
well-established but yet undervalued part of the democratic
process.
So it is. It is also comparatively unnoticed. In order to
be seen to be governing, governments must alter things. If
they alter school curricula or hospital management they will
receive curiosity, and generally hostility, in full and equal
measure. However, if they alter planning regulations you will
rarely hear of it in the newspapers or watch people arguing
about it on television.
Are you interested in a Planning Reform Bill that wants to
create documents called National Policy Statements and a body
called an Infrastructure Planning Commission? Hardly. But
are you interested in the sixth terminal and third runway
that are proposed for Heathrow? Indeed, you are.
Then you should know that this Planning Reform Bill wants
to fast track terminals and runways, and power stations, and
major roads, and every other project that will wreck the ecology
and climate of this country. The Policy Statements will declare
that they must occur, and where, business will produce the
money, the Commission will consult the Policy Statements and
constructed they will be.
Oh, there will be public consultation, but not nearly as open
and thorough as it is at present. In particular, we may not
be allowed to cross-examine the promoters of large schemes
and when that right has been taken away the promoters will
take far less pains with their proposals. And so we told the
Committee.
If National Policy Statements complement existing planning
policy statements perhaps they should be created, but we draw
the line at the Infrastructure Planning Commission. It will
cost millions of pounds to set up and run, and make the lives
of conservationists much harder.
So we told the House of Commons that if the I.P.C. produced
unwelcome decisions it could expect to be challenged in the
courts and even face direct action. The C.P.R.E. might very
well take the I.P.C. to court, but would we lie down in the
front of the bulldozers that obliterate countryside for the
third runway at Heathrow?
Some conservationists surely will.
WILL
WE BE AT MERCY OF THE DEVELOPERS?
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 4th January 2008)
I
open the new year by reminding you - yet again - of a matter
of vital importance to us all.
Will the carefully crafted policies in the current district
and borough local plans appear in the local development frameworks
that are to replace them?
But they must! How could they possibly not? For if all our
local planners had to rely on were the generalities contained
in the Government’s planning policy statements the planning
system would be at the mercy of the developers.
Yet the well-nigh unthinkable might become a hideous reality.
For the Government has not yet told us in which of the documents
that comprise the local development frameworks local policies
will appear and the only reference to these policies in the
latest Government White Paper on Planning is patronising and
dismissive.
I wrote to the Department of Communities and Local Government,
to ask exactly what is proposed and after four months, which
included a second letter from me and two prods from my M .P.,
I received a vague, ambiguous, rambling, icily discouraging
letter that confirms my worst fears.
Space forbids quoting the letter verbatim, so we must settle
for the nub of the answers I received to my two questions:
1. “Will the present detailed policies that are contained
in the district and borough local plans be contained in the
local development frameworks or not?”
“If a local authority could justify the need for a Development
Plan Document specifically on Development Control policies,
the local authority could produce one. However, the production
and location of such policies within the LDF is at the discretion
of the local authority.”
2. “If they do, in which of the documents that comprise
the local development frameworks will they appear?”
“The location of such policies within the Local Development
Framework is at the discretion of local authorities. The management
and consideration of development through the application process
will be via policy contained in key documents at all levels.
Some local authorities may produce a specific DPD on development
control policies but the decision of whether to produce one
is not imposed on them by Central Government, but rather it
is a decision for each LPA to make based on their own set
of circumstances.”
I brought the Department’s letter to an executive committee
meeting of our Warwickshire branch and we decided to write
to the eight planning authorities in Warwickshire, asking
them exactly what they propose to do. I will let you know
how they reply.
THIS HAS BEEN A YEAR FOR VICTORY
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 21st December 2007)
How
will we remember 2007? Coventry Airport.
For seven long months the big guns thundered in the Leamington
Town Hall and for seven long months two extremely resilient
members of our planning team, Gill Smith and Mark Sullivan,
listened to the battery of argument and counter argument,
and indeed opened up with their own field piece, cross-examined
witnesses and told the inspector exactly why a passenger terminal
should not be allowed.
The inspector agreed with us and two government departments
concurred. So the number of passengers will not rise to two
million a year and those who live nearby will not be tortured
by noise.
The airport has appealed. Of course it has, and beyond the
High Court lies the House of Lords and the European Court.
And if all that fails the passenger terminal may well be reintroduced
and we shall have to fight the battle all over again.
One of the grounds for refusal was “the potential diminishing
of its role as complementary to Birmingham Airport.”
So is Birmingham now more likely to secure the longer runway
in its master plan? Or will the country’s growing concern
about the noise and pollution of areoplanes turn the tide?
Well, never mind all that just now, and never mind the Planning
Reform Bill that is passing through Parliament or the dreaded
local development frameworks. This has been a year of victory.
The dozen or so guerrillas who run our branch going keep in
touch by telephone and e-mail. From time to time committees
meet at our Warwick office, but we never see a great deal
of one another and this, alas, is one of the reasons why we
find it so hard to recruit and retain active members.
However, once a year we follow up an executive committee meeting
with a Christmassy two hours at a hostelry. This year we all
trouped down the road to The Roebuck Inn for chicken, jacket
potatoes, a raffle and an opportunity to talk about anything
other than conservation.
We also met, and thanked, other active members of our branch,
our unsung but invaluable team of hedgerow surveyors.
Quietly, slowly, determinedly, this band of volunteers is
mapping the 6,000 miles of Warwickshire hedgerow. When the
task is complete we will have an edge tool in our hands that
can be used to assess planning applications and be produced
at public inquiries. If Coventry or Birmingham Airports were
to expand how many miles of hedgerow should we lose and what
quality of hedgerow should we lose? When the survey is finished
we shall know.
I’LL NEVER TEMPT PROVIDENCE AGAIN!
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 7th December 2007)
“How
about a sixth terminal and runway at Heathrow…?”
Thus I blithely opened my last but one article, with an example
of a ridiculous, an impossible circumstance.
I vow never to tempt Providence again. For a sixth terminal
and a third runway are proposed for the ugliest place in Great
Britain.
As one man, the environmentalists have denounced the proposal,
(as you knew we would), for it will destroy acres of countryside,
multiply traffic on overburdened roads, pollute the heavens
above and the earth below. As one man, big business has championed
the proposal, (as we knew they would), for it will create
jobs, promote wealth and effectively prevent an otherwise
inevitable recession.
How can these two sets of irreconcilable factors be justly
weighed? They can’t, but a public inquiry will be held,
an inspector will write a report for the Secretary of State
and he will decide which shall prevail.
Or will it, and will he?
For last Tuesday week the dreaded Planning Reform Bill was
presented to Parliament.
This bill will introduce National Policy Documents and these
documents will tell us where major infrastructure projects,
such as highways, airports, railways, dams, reservoirs, generating
stations and waste treatment plants are needed. It will also
introduce an Infrastructure Planning Commission, which will
decide if a development is in accordance with the relevant
National Policy Document. If it is, it will be built.
What will happen to public inquiries? In fact, they are not
to be abolished entirely, as we feared they would be. However,
they will be limited to discussing the local impact of a development
and it appears pretty certain that there will be no more cross-examination.
We may no longer brief barristers to haul the developers over
the coals.
There is no doubt whatever that Heathrow’s sixth terminal
and third runway will impact horribly on the locality. So
we oppose it on these grounds.
In fact, we oppose the expansion of any airport in this country
at this moment. Airports cause noise and pour greenhouse gases
into the atmosphere. The Government is allegedly pressing
for a 60% reduction of carbon emissions by 2050. It cannot
possibly mean what it says if it allows Heathrow to expand.
We shall fight, but if this bill as it stands becomes law
what hope have we? And what hopes shall we have if the second
runway at Birmingham International and the terminal building
at Coventry Airport are resurrected? We won the battle of
Coventry Airport and a hard battle it was. If the Planning
Reform Bill is passed we must surely lose a second fight.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN BROWNFIELD SITES ARE GONE?
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 23rd November 2007)
A stone’s throw away from the Bank of England is Merchant
Taylor’s Hall. It has stood there since 1347 and though
the City has many skyscrapers that go socking up to heaven,
this livery hall and its fellows still provide oases of quiet
and comfort in the heart of London’s money-making.
In fact, this hall is not the original, a pity for the Middle
Ages could unite grandeur with grace and the Victorians, who
built the present one, united grandeur with ponderousness
and humourlessness.
No matter. It was pleasant, the other day, to step out of
busy Threadneedle Street into peace and to meet my fellow
C.P.R.E. members at our annual Volunteers’ Conference.
So, what did we delegates confer about?
Ninety of us, from all over the country, sat at tables in
the Great Hall and were presented with various topics. A speaker
would talk on an issue, such as Planning or Housing, and we
were given a short time in which to discuss the points raised
and decide which were most important. Then one delegate from
each table was allowed fifteen seconds to present the views
of his colleagues to the meeting.
It sounds a rather breathless way of doing things, but it
enabled the C.P.R.E. headquarters team to find out what matters
most to us. As regards Planning, we were pretty well agreed
that the Government should not be allowed to put economic
development before the environment. As regards Landscape we
were all for developing parks in towns and cities and preserving
green corridors.
Lady Caroline Cranbrook, who spoke about Food and Farming,
told us bluntly that the world had run out of its finite resources
and the era of cheap food was over. Since her family has farmed
in Suffolk for the past century she must know this only too
well.
Housing was another grim topic. The Government, we were reminded,
wants to build another three million homes. Put them on brownfield
sites by all means. But what happens when the brownfield has
all gone? And already the country is losing twenty-five square
miles a year to development.
The conference was naturally a social occasion. The refreshments,
wine, beer and a buffet, were first class and as we ate and
drank we talked our heads off. Altogether, despite the bleak
rural outlook, a well spent day, a happy day.
The years ahead will be critical for the countryside and we
know it, but we will continue to prod the politicians and
generally agitate to ensure we turn them to good account.
A
DANGEROUS PLANNING BILL
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 9th November 2007)
How
about a sixth runway and terminal at Heathrow…?
As one man, the environmentalists would denounce the proposal,
for it would destroy acres of countryside, multiply traffic
on overburdened roads, pollute the heavens above and the earth
below. As one man, big business would champion the proposal,
for it would create jobs, promote wealth and effectively prevent
an otherwise inevitable recession.
How could these two, totally different, points of view be
evaluated and a just decision made? How indeed, but a public
inquiry would be held and an inspector would listen to argument,
counter-argument, examination, cross-examination, re-examination
and concluding speeches. He would write a report and make
a recommendation. Then the Secretary of State would make the
decision. And how could he, the Secretary of State, properly
weigh environmental loss against economic gain?
These decisions are ultimately always arbitrary, but they
are made openly. Public matters are publicly aired and may
lead to other, responsible and effective decisions on matters
such as traffic control, light pollution and air fuel taxes.
Unhappily, this democratic way of doing things is likely to
be abolished.
For the Government wants to set up National Policy Documents,
which will tell us exactly where air terminals, and oil terminals,
power stations, wind farms, roads and all the other large
pieces of infrastructure are needed. There would be no more
“if” about that sixth terminal and runway at Heathrow,
only a “when,” and perhaps, just perhaps, a “how
large” and a “how long”.
What, no public consultation? On the contrary. The White Paper
on Planning, which proposes this change, shouts consultation,
bellows consultation, in paragraph after paragraph.
There would be consultation early and late. Everyone human
being and organisation with an axe to grind, no matter how
large or how small, would be invited to grind that axe before
an august new body called the Infrastructure Planning Commission,
which would decide the matter.
Unfortunately, since the Commission would decide the matter
in accordance with a National Policy Document, or in other
words would have already had its mind made up for it by the
Government, this rip tide of opinion would be little more
than waste paper.
And here it comes! “There will also be a bill to reform
the planning system….” Thus Her Majesty on Tuesday
morning to her Lords and Commons assembled and it is expected
that before the month is out the bill that will turn this
dangerous, this morally repugnant, this undemocratic proposal
into reality will be presented to Parliament.
DEMANDING GOOD DEVELOPMENT
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 26th October 2007)
Last
month the Warwick District Council adopted the new Warwick
Local District Plan. So let’s have a look at it. Or,
because space is limited, one small part of it. What about
Chapter 4: Development Policies?
Two introductory paragraphs tell us that new development should
respect the environment, be safe to use and fit for its intended
purpose.
Then, to business. The first Development Policy is called
Layout and Design and the text, printed in amarinth cerise,
runs thus:
“Development will only be permitted which positively
contributes to the character and quality of its environment
through good layout and design. Development proposals will
be expected to demonstrate that they:
(a) harmonise with, or enhance, the existing settlement in
terms of physical form, patterns of movement and land use;….”
And (a) is followed by (b), (c), (d) down to the letter (l),
a dozen ways in which developments must make things physically
better, not worse. Then we are told that if the application
makes a significant impact the applicant will have to back
it up with a Character Appraisal and Design Statement.
Nor is this the end. Eleven more paragraph of black type explain,
in words that you and I can understand, exactly what is proposed
and why.
Now, there is a policy for you. And an upbeat one at that.
Time was when district local plans forbade various forms of
bad or inadequate development. Now they demand positively
good ones. And provided the planning officers firmly insist
on the letter of that policy then surely the physical future
of the district is reasonably safe?
Safe until 2011, because that is the life of the present District
Local Plan, and perhaps safe for three years thereafter because
the District Council may ask for the lives of policies to
be extended, and even extended again.
Unfortunately, the District Local Plan is the last of its
kind. It is to be succeeded by a Local Development Framework,
which is not one document but several and we do not yet know
where, in this bundle, the carefully crafted policies upon
which we rely will be found, or even if they will be there
at all.
Mr Philip Clarke, the District Council’s Head of Planning
Policy, is sanguine. He tells me that properly drafted policies
will indeed appear in the Local Development Framework.
Will they, indeed? And if so, in which document? And what
power will they have? To set my mind at rest I asked the Minister
for Communities and Local Government, the Rt. Hon. Hazel,
Blears, for an explanation. My letter was dated 28th July.
I am still waiting for a reply.
BUILDING NEW HOMES: HOW MANY?
(Article
in the Leamington Courier on 12th October 2007)
At
the end of August I told you that the West Midlands Regional
Assembly would soon tell us how many more homes the region
ought to build itself by the year 2026. Ten days hence it
will do so.
In fact, it has already made up its mind. It originally wanted
a figure of 300,000, but the Government has been pressing
hard for 380,000 so it has finally opted for a conformist
362,600.
Who can know, or guess, how many human beings will have needed,
or will have received, new homes by 2026? Yet governments
must make public predictions and even a layman can guess that
in twenty years time the population will have risen and the
size of the average household will have shrunk.
Where will we be housed? The three districts of Nuneaton and
Bedworth, Rugby and Warwick are each to receive a target of
10,800 more houses and Warwickshire as a whole 41,000.
In fact, about 15% of housing is usually built on windfall
sites and in Warwickshire this figure is much higher. Unfortunately,
the Government will not allow windfall sites to be taken into
consideration, so these homes must be built either on brownfield,
which is previously developed land, or greenfield. The three
districts already have a very high housing provision; anything
more would be truly alarming.
Since Coventry is to have a building rate three and a half
times the current level, this building, if implemented, will
almost certainly spill out southwards into the Green Belt,
despite the Government’s publicly avowed intention to
preserve it. And if it does, why should Leamington not spill
out northwards towards Kenilworth? The new homes will command
new roads, schools, hospitals, shops, offices and factories.
So what will the county, what will Warwick District, look
like in twenty years time?
These figures will be formally announced on 22nd October,
mulled over by the Regional Assembly and forwarded to the
Secretary of State, the Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears, in December.
Twelve weeks of consultation will ensue, during which we shall
all be able to object. The C.P.R.E. will do so, vigorously,
because it believes that only 285,000 new homes are needed
in the West Midlands.
In September, 2008, there will be a public examination, very
likely in Birmingham, and again we shall be able to object.
The Government will then adopt these figures or, if we press
hard enough, slightly revised ones. And that will be that.
The prediction will be acted upon and more houses will appear.
Top
of Page
|
Contents
A
NEW CHAMPION FOR OUR COUNTRYSIDE
WARWICKSHIRE’S
CANALS
LOCAL
FOOD
CLEAR
UP THE CLUTTER….
CPRE
WELCOMES AN END TO THE
36-YEAR-OLD SERVICE AREA THREAT
COMMUNITY
SHOPS
COUNCIL
MUST FIGHT FOR BEDWORTH WOODLANDS AND GRIFF GAP AT REGIONAL
PLAN ENQUIRY
A
NIGHTMARE HOUSING SPRAWL SCENARIO FOR RUGBY BOROUGH
A
NIGHTMARE SCENARIO - HOUSING SPRAWL IN WARWICK DISTRICT
A
NIGHTMARE SCENARIO FOR HOUSING IN STRATFORD DISTRICT
A
NIGHTMARE OF HOUSING SPRAWL AROUND NUNEATON AND BEDWORTH
DRINK
UP OR THE PUB GETS IT!
SUPPORTING
LOCAL FOOD
CLEANING
UP WARWICKSHIRE
POST
OFFICE CLOSURES
TOO
MANY HOUSES!
A
NEW TOWN AT LONG MARSTON?
INTRODUCING
OURSELVES
LONG
MARSTON ECO-TOWN – “WHOLLY DAMAGING TO THE COUNTRYSIDE”
SAYS C.P.R.E.
FIGHTING
TO SAVE OUR POST OFFICES
KEEPING
IT RURAL
WHAT
BILL BRYSON HAS TO TELL YOU
KEEP
IT RURAL WITH BRIAN DOUTHWAITE
GREEN
TOWNS ARE TO BE BUILT SOON
IT
IS TIME TO TAKE A STAND ON PLANNING
WILL
WE BE AT MERCY OF THE DEVELOPERS?
THIS
HAS BEEN A YEAR FOR VICTORY
I’LL
NEVER TEMPT PROVIDENCE AGAIN!
WHAT
HAPPENS WHEN BROWNFIELD SITES ARE GONE?
A
DANGEROUS PLANNING BILL
DEMANDING
GOOD DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING
NEW HOMES: HOW MANY?
HOW
GREEN ARE POLITICAL PARTIES?
TRANQUILLITY
WILL BE GONE IN A HUNDRED YEARS
HOUSING
IN THE GREENBELT
LONG
LIVE ACT: 60 YEARS OLD
CHANGES
AFOOT IN LOCAL PLANNING
INTRODUCING
MR. BILL BRYSON
|