A "boring, bland and soulless" plan to build flats on a Kenilworth town centre car park was rejected by councillors this week in the face of vehement community opposition.

Cobalt Estates (Kenilworth) Limited wants to build two town centre units with 43 one, two and three-bed apartments on Talisman Square.

As well as providing car parking, for which temporary planning permission was renewed by the landowner for another three years in March 2023, the area is also open space with Friends of Talisman Square, a group that has developed and maintained new planting there, among the 140-plus objectors.

The debate threw up a litany of concerns before councillors were eventually persuaded to crunch down their objections to two key areas – the design of the development and parking concerns.

They were advised against including biodiversity concerns as a reason for rejection because the impact was deemed minimal, while the loss of open space for the public was left out because of a current permission already being in place to deliver student housing there, meaning the landowner can take that away if they wish to. 

Cllr Richard Dickson noted sections of the Warwick District Council's local plan that calls on developments to be "imaginative" and "respect the surroundings".

He questioned planning officer Adam Walker on how those criteria had been met and said: "It seems to me that what we have in front of us is a five-storey building that, to put it frankly, is boring, bland and soulless."

Mr Walker replied: "As with any scheme, design is subjective.

"Officers have made an assessment against those relevant policies and as the report refers to, the use of materials, breaking up the elements of the building with recessed parts, is considered to be a good design approach to help deliver a building that is, as acknowledged, larger than surrounding properties."

Cllr Lowell Williams added safety concerns to the mix. 

"I am a resident of Kenilworth and walk through that square all the time," he said. 

"While Cllr Dickson put it quite bluntly, it is quite difficult to understand how this design protects or enhances the town centre.

"It creates an alleyway around what is a square. My background is in education and I am very knowledgeable about the behaviour of young people and how environments impact on behaviours. 

"That design worries me. It does not enhance, it causes, I think, some serious concerns.

"I also echo the point over the utter lack of imagination. There are designs possible which could retain many elements of the open spaces but we have a rectangular design taking up all of the frontages.

"It could have been pulled back, shaped differently, higher even, and still create some of the amenity value that we need." 

Cllr Dickson also said there would be fewer than half of the ideal number of parking spaces – 35 instead of 84 – to serve the development, with 14 of those not directly linked to the site itself.

Mr Walker said: "It is acknowledged that these parking spaces are less than ideal, although they are within the recommended 200 metre walking distance of the site. On that basis, it is not considered valid to discount them from the proposed parking provision.

"Yes, 84 is the starting point but the parking standards SPD (supplementary planning document) then sets out considerations which may allow for reduced levels of parking on a development.

"One of those is whether the site is a sustainable location and this is considered to be a highly sustainable location within one of the defined town centres.

"Officers have assessed the provision and considered that, on balance, that it is acceptable.

"This type of development within a town centre is likely to appeal to residents who are less reliant on cars. The council promotes the green credentials of developments so this would tie into those policies."

After an adjournment to sort through the reasons for refusal, Cllr Dickson, who made the proposal to say no, "reluctantly" agreed to go with two main reasons so not to risk putting forward objections that could be seen as unreasonable if the matter is appealed. 

"I hear the advice we are being given," he said.

"I also hear what my fellow members of the committee are saying and share those concerns but I do want the strongest reasons to be given. 

"Reluctantly, I would accept that we reject on the grounds of parking and design. I don't do that with any sense of pleasure, however."

All bar one councillor voted to reject the plans with Cllr John Sullivan abstaining.

The community group Friends of Talisman Square has also worked to generate support against the proposals and has also applied to have the land listed as an asset of community value.

Following Wednesday's decision, a group spokesperson said to Nub News: "We are delighted that Warwick District planning committee refused to grant planning permission for the Talisman Square development at tonight's planning meeting.

"We are thankful to the councillors for standing up for the residents of Kenilworth who had objected in such large numbers to the proposed five-storey development and the loss of the planting in the square and wider open space."