21-Storey home scheme rejected by committee
Coventry City Council’s Planning Committee rejects the development of a vacant site, despite being approved by several councillors.
The controversial plan to build nearly 700 homes, ranging from four to 21-storeys in height but only providing 77 parking spaces - was the talk of the evening for the Planning Committee. Nearly four hours was spent between the councillors debating whether this plan should be accepted or refused.
Proposed development plans. (Coventry City Council)
The insufficient number of parking spaces, in addition to its neighbouring of a primary school were the main topics discussed in depth. Paul Maddox, Vice Chairman of the Coventry Society said: “This is the future… The future for Coventry is to encourage people to use public transport and we are supporting it”.
Councillor David Welsh spoke in favour of the application, stating, “All of the work that we are doing in this part of the city is focused on improvement of air quality” and that over 6,000 families in Coventry are on the waiting list for accommodation.
Most councillors voted against the proposed plans.
Councillor Naeem Akhtar said that “there are a lot of red flags” relating to this matter and said that “MPs objecting [to the plan], the councillor objecting, the residents objecting.” He went on to say, “Since I have been on the committee since 2015, I have never seen that. Even the police object.” He followed by explaining that Covid was a great lesson for the need of a garden and a house, and that he is against the development of flats as they are ‘magnets for crime’.
Councillor Lindsley Harvard also voted against the plans. He said, “Too many red flags, and parking massively undersupplied. I also always think that families need gardens. Height: 21 storeys, seems to me that it is taking us back to the 1960s… I just cannot support this.”
St. Osburg’s Catholic Primary School. (Coventry Telegraph)
The headteacher of the neighbouring St. Osburg’s Catholic Primary School also attended the meeting. She said, “We object to the huge scale of the development… the City Council has been given a Government directive to reduce emissions not increase them.” She also pointed out other problems such as the visibility of children for people living in the higher storeys, which she viewed as “unacceptable”.
The plans have been rejected by the Planning Committee. Four councillors have voted against the plans, one in favour of the plan and one abstention.
Michael, a local resident said that he is “Very happy that the committee rejected these plans, as it’s absurd to have something sky-high near everything that’s barely 30metres in height.” When asked about the parking issues he said, “Personally, I never saw the parking situation as a problem as it’s common sense. The deeper you go into a city, the more probable it is that there will be a shortage of parking.”
The Planning Committee continues to assess plans of trying to balance the public’s need and development projects.