The scheme, which would be built on countryside in the Claverdon area, is among nine options to increase housebuilding.

The options also include building up to 10,000 more homes in Warwick district - on top of 10,800 already projected.

The West Midlands Regional Assembly had already proposed building around 82,000 homes in Warwickshire Coventry and Solihull over the next 20 years, as part of 365,000 across the region.

But new options have been proposed by planning consultants employed by the government after it demanded up to 80,000 more homes than the assembly's figures.

The proposals have horrified the Campaign to Protect Rural England, which believes there is no need to build on greenbelt land.

The group's West Midlands chairman Peter Langley said: "The Prime Minister said the greenbelt would be robustly protected. That is clearly not happening. We want him to be true to his word.

"There is no acceptable distribution of houses in the sorts of numbers the government wants them to build."

The CPRE has instead recommended 285,000 homes as a preferable alternative. This includes affordable housing, which Mr Langley says the pressure group fully supports.

He added: "We should build the houses we know we will need and work upwards later in the 20-year-period if we need to."

A final report by the consultants Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners is due to be published in October and the government's and the regional assembly's recommendations will be heard by an independent panel in April 2009.

Members of the public can comment on both cases until this time and Mr Langley urged residents to support the CPRE's position.

He added: "The more houses that are built, the less desirable the area will become."

The Courier was told the consultancy's employees did not talk directly to the press. The firm had not replied to an email at the time of going to press.

Warwickshire County Council chief planner Andy Cowan believes the government consultants' options are "raw" ideas and stressed they were yet to be tested against figures for the area.

Mr Cowan believes the "mini-town" option is unlikely to go ahead, and it is more likely most growth will be spread between existing urban areas.

He said: "The options are theoretical and they are raw. You wouldn't deal with your growth only in new settlements or existing towns. Over a period of time you would do both of those things.

"They are not realistic, they are only theoretical. They have not been evaluated to the point where they would become real."

* Is a mini-town a good solution to the housing problem?

WHAT DO YOU THINK?
We'd like to hear your views. Simply click
HERE