DEVELOPER FREE-FOR-ALL: YOU AIN’T SEEN NOTHING YET!
15 DEC 2015
Hook Norton, Oxfordshire, Cotswolds, 4.5 miles from PMs Chipping Norton home. population around 2,000.
Local plan – tick
Five year land supply – tick
Neighbourhood plan – tick
Local council gets a planning application for 54 houses over and above local plan and neighbourhood plan, next to a dairy. Council says NO – it’s not in our approved Local Plan, not in our approved Neighbourhood Plan and too close to the cows: smelly and insects.
End of development – right?
WRONG!
Developer goes to appeal – planning inspector finds in their favour. Sent to Secretary of State – he agrees.
“In the secretary of state’s view, development of the whole appeal site would not necessarily conflict with [the neighbourhood plan], providing construction were to proceed incrementally in the form of three or more separate phases, each of no more than 20 dwellings built at say five year intervals. In view of this, the secretary of state considers that the degree of conflict between the proposal and [the neighbourhood plan] is limited and he finds no evidence that any significant material harm would ensue if this”, the letter said.
Overall, the letter said that Clark considered that the benefits of the development “would clearly outweigh the harm in terms of the limited conflict with the [neighbourhood plan] and the slight adverse effect on future occupiers as a result of odours generated by the adjacent Redlands Dairy Farm. He therefore concludes that the material circumstances in this case indicate that the appeal should be allowed and outline planning permission granted.”
RESULT: forget your Local Plan, forget your Neighbourhood Plan, forget your 5 year land supply – if a developer wants to build 54 houses next to pong and insects, that’s fine.
So, NPPF, Local Plans, Neighbourhood Plans, five year land supply can ALL be over-ridden by a developer, planning inspector and the Secretary of State.
It is to be hoped that there will be a judicial review – otherwise we might as well all rip up all three documents and leave the developers to it – we will have no planning rights at all.
Developer free-for-all: you ain’t seen nothing yet! | East Devon Watch
It seems that the intentions of those putting together the Neighbourhood Plan were not quiet understood by the Secretary of State:
Clark dismisses odour concerns over 54-home
Oxfordshire scheme
The communities secretary has dismissed a council's concerns about odour from a nearby dairy farm and approved plans for 54 homes at a site near Banbury in Oxfordshire, despite finding that the council could demonstrate a five-year housing land supply.
Cherwell District Council had refused to grant outline planning permission to developer Gladman for up to 54 homes at the site at Sibford Road, Hook Norton.
According to a planning inspector’s report, among other issues, the council argued that "significant odour and insect nuisance that would arise would prevent the existing farm and the proposed residential development from happily co-existing".
But a decision letter issued this week said that the secretary of state Greg Clark agreed with the inspector’s conclusion that the scheme should be approved.
On the issue of odour, the letter said that Clark found it would be "likely that the future occupiers of the proposed residential development will be subjected to a slight adverse effect as a result of odours generated by the adjacent Redlands Dairy Farm, but there is an absence of empirical evidence which supports the council’s contention that the appeal site is subjected to a level of odours that would be unacceptable to residents".
The letter said that secretary of state took the view that the council could demonstrate a five-year housing land supply consistent with the relevant policies in the council’s recently adopted local plan "and he gives those policies full weight."
However, it added, "notwithstanding the secretary of state’s finding that there is at present at least five years’ housing land supply in Cherwell District, a significant benefit of the proposal is that it will contribute to boosting housing supply, including a 35 per cent proportion of affordable housing, in line with the [local plan]. The secretary of state considers that this factor weighs heavily in favour of the appeal."
The decision letter also said that Clark took the view that it "would be acceptable for Hook Norton to provide a relatively larger share of the 750 dwellings than other villages" listed in a policy in the local plan.
The letter added that Clark found that there was confusion over the wording in a local neighbourhood plan policy which had been adopted since the inquiry closed.
It said that the policy stated "that proposals for up to 20 dwellings may be permitted where this does not result in more than 20 dwellings being built in any location at any time."
The letter said that the examiner who examined the neighbourhood plan concluded that it is not entirely clear what is meant by "no more than 20 dwellings being built in any location at any time".
"Like the examiner, the secretary of state’s understanding is that this policy wording could be taken to mean that there may be locations where more than 20 dwellings would be acceptable over a period of time, but that no more than 20 dwellings should be built in any one discrete phase of development.
"In the secretary of state’s view, development of the whole appeal site would not necessarily conflict with [the neighbourhood plan], providing construction were to proceed incrementally in the form of three or more separate phases, each of no more than 20 dwellings built at say five year intervals. In view of this, the secretary of state considers that the degree of conflict between the proposal and [the neighbourhood plan] is limited and he finds no evidence that any significant material harm would ensue if this", the letter said.
Overall, the letter said that Clark considered that the benefits of the development "would clearly outweigh the harm in terms of the limited conflict with the [neighbourhood plan] and the slight adverse effect on future occupiers as a result of odours generated by the adjacent Redlands Dairy Farm. He therefore concludes that the material circumstances in this case indicate that the appeal should be allowed and outline planning permission granted."
Here is the petition:
Challenge the unfair decision to build 54 new houses in Hook Norton
Hook Norton Neighbourhood Plan
An application to build 54 new homes on the Sibford Road was made some time ago, and rejected by Cherwell. Gladman Homes appealed, and the appeal was called in by the Secretary of State due to the emerging Neighbourhood Plan.
The Neighbourhood Plan clearly states:
Policy HN – H1 of the Hook Norton Neighbourhood Plan states:
“To maintain a sustainable community, proposals for up to 20 dwellings may be permitted where this does not result in more than 20 dwellings being built in any location at any time, taking into account any extant permissions.”
In paragraph 16 of the Secretary of State’s decision notice he states that this policy is ambiguous, and therefore building 54 homes in one location at one time is only in ‘limited conflict’ with this policy and therefore this can be ignored.
To many of the villagers who voted overwhelmingly for this plan, this is one of the key policies in the plan. The concern is that this now sets a precedent, and any future developer can propose to develop sites with as many houses as they wish, in direct contravention of policy HN-H1, and know that the policy will be effectively over-ruled.
The Town and Country Planning Act section 288, makes provision for an application to the High Court for permission to challenge the validity of this decision. It is vitally important for the future of the Hook Norton that an application is made.
We urge Cherwell District Council to challenge this decision in the High Court.
Petition · Challenge the unfair decision to build 54 new houses in Hook Norton · Change.org
.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment