Eco towns are the future, but at what price?
Sandra Camwell, vice-chairman of Keresley Parish Council, said: “We want the council to know the feelings of the people because the council is not listening.
“It’s just money, money, money to the council. We have fields of barley but the developers want fields of gold.”
In Stratford-on-Avon council, meanwhile, where proposals for an eco-town at Middle Quinton appear to have been abandoned, there is the threat of having to find space for an additional 3,000 homes on top of the 7,500 being proposed by the panel. A final decision will be taken when the results of a study to determine the sustainability of such a level of growth is known.
On the other side of the region, Worcestershire is struggling to deliver the 40,500 new homes recommended by the public inquiry.
Bromsgrove is earmarked for 4,000 dwellings, but that figure could be increased to 7,000 following a review into the potential for sustainable development.
Redditch must build at least 7,000 homes, and would like to put more than half of these across the border in Bromsgrove.
Similarly, Worcester City is expected to deliver 11,000 dwellings, but plans to build 3,500 of these to the west of the city boundary in Malvern Hills District.
Worcestershire County Council cabinet member for planning, Simon Geraghty, is stressing the difference between green belt land, which he says is unlikely to be built on, and green field land which is more likely to be released for housing.
Coun Geraghty said: “On one level, we are pleased the proposed housing levels are significantly lower than those originally being sought and that proposals such as extensions of the Birmingham conurbation into Worcestershire’s green belt, and the eco-town at Middle Quinton, have not been supported.
“However, it is extremely disappointing that the panel has made no recommendations on how the inevitable infrastructure funding issues facing Worcestershire can be addressed or how the strategy for the county can be taken forward in the absence of adequate levels of funding.”
The lengthy spatial strategy public inquiry was dominated by argument between house-builders and developers, who unsurprisingly think the West Midlands has sufficient sites to build at least 500,000 homes, and green campaigners who ideally would like to see fewer than 365,000.
The inquiry inspector admitted that any assessment of what the region could reasonably deliver was bound to be hypothetical. Areas recommended for significant development are: Hereford, Nuneaton & Bedworth, Rugby, Shrewsbury, Stafford, Telford, Warwick & Leamington and Worcester.
In its final report the inquiry panel concluded: “It is incontrovertible that development, wherever it occurs, has environmental impacts. It follows that for the Regional Spatial Strategy to be sustainable, it should not provide for more development or more damaging development than necessary.
“We do not consider that there is a danger of too many houses being built. To that extent we accept the West Midlands Regional Assembly case that too much provision, particularly away from the major urban areas, would adversely affect the strategy and the region.”
