Kenilworth housing plan approved despite 'deficient' alterations

The third and final detailed plan for a housing scheme at Thickthorn, Kenilworth, brings forward 267 homes and the linking of a spine road over the three parcels of land – the other two already have full planning permission with 509 homes set to be delivered across all three. The entire plot had outline permission for some time but a series of objections to part three came forward from residents in the surrounding homes and local councillors. A particular area of focus was the manner in which developer Charles Church – a brand of Persimmon Homes – had altered the location of a local centre, partly for commercial reasons, the knock-on effect being that homes are now being built closer to bungalows on Thickthorn Orchards than had initially been envisaged. Planning officers – Warwick District Council’s employed experts – deemed the changes acceptable despite residents arguing that two-storey properties less than 18 metres away from their homes would be too overbearing. Councillor Andrew Milton (Lib Dem, Kenilworth St John’s) said he had been following the plans for almost six years, acting as a go-between for residents and the developers. “It is extremely disappointing that there has been little, if any, consideration of the needs and concerns of residents throughout that process,” he said. “To be clear, residents are not opposed to the principle of development. They have contributed to the consultation that took place on the development brief and those I have spoken to are supportive of that blueprint.”

But he said developers had finished up with a scheme that did not adequately follow that plan and “is deficient in a number of respects”.

“Looking at the density of that area, the new homes are much closer to existing properties than any of those existing properties are to each other,” he continued.

“The indicative plan in the development brief suggested there would be no properties on the eastern side of Thickthorn Orchards, and Thickthorn Close, but the movement of the local centre brings more houses into play here.

“The key issue is that the new homes are close and risk overbearing the current characterful development as well as impacting residential amenity.

"It also risks creating massing by unreasonably increasing the density of that part of the site.

“It feels to me that we are missing an opportunity to create an exemplary development.

"We are letting down our officers who put so much work into the development brief and most of all, we are letting down the residents we serve.”

A number of planning committee members were concerned by the prospect of 3.2 metre bungalows being paired that closely with 8.4 metre houses, stating that separation distances between two-storey homes should be at least 22 metres.

Planning officer Dan Charles said that land levels for the new homes were due to be lower, meaning the overall height of the new builds would be lower in relation to the existing properties.

He also noted that some of the two-storey homes had been angled to prevent issues.

“It is something officers put a lot of consideration into,” he said.

“It is an unusual relationship, the properties in Thickthorn Orchards are very low, even by bungalow standards.

“We acknowledge they are low and it was a difficult assessment that we did but the final conclusion was that with all the mitigating circumstances, on balance we find that acceptable.”

Councillor Phil Kohler (Lib Dem, Leamington Lillington) picked up the baton with a series of questions, including: “So officers were content that the obvious harm it does to properties in Thickthorn Orchards is less than the benefit gained by moving around the site, bringing the community amenities together – is that the overall calculation that was done?”

Mr Charles said the assessments related to the bungalows and the centre were separate.

“Within any development such as this, there is always a balance to be struck,” he added, concluding that “each element of the site is considered to be acceptable in its current form”.

Other issues raised included the stage at which the spine road would be operational and the potential for traffic problems due to a single road access for the proposed new primary school.

The matter concluded after almost an hour and a half of discussion with Councillor Jan Matecki (Con, Budbrooke) one of seven to vote for the plans.

“I think there are a lot of positives with this – almost 47 per cent affordable housing, of which nearly 40 per cent is one-bed. This district really needs one-bed properties,” he said.

“We know no development can be done until a stage one road safety audit is passed, so those concerns are going to be addressed.

“I hear the concerns on the bungalows but I think they have been mitigated.”

Cllr Kohler, Councillor Lara Cron (Green, Kenilworth Park Hill), Councillor Richard Dickson (Lib Dem, Kenilworth St John’s) and Councillor Becky Davidson (Green, Radford Semele) cast the four votes against.

Notes – non-binding comments reflecting the wishes of councillors – were added to the conditions to open the spine road as soon as possible and to include hedgehog fencing and swift bricks to aid local wildlife.

A subsequent statement from Kenilworth Liberal Democrats read: “Despite powerful statements by local residents, well presented objections and lots of questions and issues raised in advance of this week's meeting, the committee still voted in favour of the proposals from Persimmon at Thickthorn.

“It had not been possible to make a group site visit but there was only one of the three Kenilworth councillors on the committee who had made their own site visit to see first-hand the scale of the site and the proximity of the existing homes.

“The challenge now for local councillors is to ensure planning conditions are met."