| Highclere Enabling Developemnt |
| The issue: |
Dear Sir George
I refer to Lord Carnarvon’s proposal for Enabling Development (ED) to cover the cost of repairing Highclere castle. The policy identifies 18 sites mainly in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty around Burghclere and Highclere. The Times suggests that some 50-100 homes would need to be built.
It is claimed that ED would offer the best defence against an aggressive property developer buying up the Carnarvon’s land packets cheaply because they have no planning consent and building a big enough holding for an eco-town on the outskirts of Burghclere.
I am un-persuaded. The defence depends on the hope that ED would constrain development to moderate density and that the individual properties would quickly pass into private ownership. It appears to ignore the possibility that if the ED policy is agreed the land will need to be sold to a developer to implement. Perversely, this might increase the risk of an eco-town proposal now based on the precedent of this relaxation to the AONB.
I am interested to learn your views about the threat of eco-towns pose in your constituency and how the current Highclere ED proposals affect them.
|
| Date Issue Raised: |
11 Nov 2008 |
| My response: |
Many thanks for the email and of course I understand your concern.
No ecotowns have been proposed for my constituency, although we do have a Major Development Area on the east side of Andover with some 3000 houses. I am not against ecotowns in principle, but believe they should go through the normal procedures.
On Highclere, I am sorry I couldn’t get to the meeting, but a number of constituents have been in touch. I understand it, the position is as follows.
1. The Council has not approved any development. There is a proposal for 'enabling development' but that doesn't go to the Council for approval(or otherwise) until next spring. The only decision currently on the agenda is to consult with residents and other interested parties.
2. No land has been identified for any particular development and no land will be so identified, even if the Council makes a positive decision
next year. The first decision will only be about the 'principle' of potential development. The Council is engaged on a consultation process through which full details of the process are being made available.
3. 'Enabling Development' only means that in future, if the Council does approve the principle, then the estate will have to bring forward planning applications in the usual way. Each planning application will be considered on its merits and will be subject to the usual consultation with parish council, residents etc, and either approved or refused in the usual way. The only difference is that without the 'enabling development' principle, it is likely that such an application wouldn't be considered at all, because in the main the applications would be expected to be outside any settlement policy boundary. There is no question of an open door to any and every development and other than the 'countryside' issue, all other policies as regards the appropriateness or otherwise of a development will apply.
4. To put this into perspective, enabling development is not something the council can simply refuse. There are only one or two such
cases a year across the whole of the South East and any council has to assess any application of this kind on its merits. If the case is a good
one and the council turns it down it would go to appeal and be won on appeal. The council is part way through the process of considering
whether it is a sound case.
I hope this is of some help. I will continue to take a close interest and I understand constituents' concern.
Best wishes, George Young
|
|
Sir George Young Bt MP: Constituency and Parliamentary Website 