Delay looms for blueprint

A BLUEPRINT that will dictate where thousands of new homes are to be built in Basingstoke and Deane could be delayed by as much as a year following a damning High Court ruling.

Mr Justice Lindblom blew apart the borough council’s core strategy development blueprint in April after describing the Conservative-led administration’s exclusion of the 820-hectare Manydown land from the planning process as “unlawful and irrational”.

The judge’s ruling came after The Manydown Company, which sold the land to the borough and county council in 1996, took legal action over the Tory-led administration’s failure to consider the site for development.

The judge’s ruling means councillors must now look again at where new homes should go in the borough over the next 15 years.

On Thursday, the council’s planning and infrastructure committee will look at how to resurrect the core strategy, and the potential of including the Manydown land in it.

A report to the committee suggests that the revised core strategy will not now be submitted to a Government planning inspector until August or September 2013 – 12 months later than planned.

Andrew Hunter, planning policy and infrastructure manager, has warned members that old planning policies, including an annual house-building target of 945, are still in place. The Tory administration had hoped to bring this figure down to 594 a year.

As a result of the delay, the council cannot provide evidence that it has enough land available for five years’ worth of house-building – a Government requirement.

Mr Hunter said: “A robust five-year land supply position can no longer be demonstrated from 2011-12 onwards.”

Opponents fear that developers wishing to build on greenfield sites could find it easier to gain planning permission as a result.

Mr Hunter’s approach suggests looking again at the housing numbers required in September, and reviewing sites for inclusion in the core strategy in November or December.

The updated plan could then be put before the public in March and April next year. Once a final plan is agreed, it will then go before a Government inspector for approval.

Comments(8)

Opinions_opinions says...
2:26pm Tue 19 Jun 12

I find it hard to understand why it can take 15 months to sort this mess out. Get everyone in a room and sit them down for as many days as it takes to sort this out. It does not need an extra 15 months to add Manydown to the existing house building plans and prioritise. This is just bureaucracy gone mad. We need someone from the Council to explain to us, the taxpayers, why it needs 15 months to sort this out. What happens in each of those 450 days ?

Best_Name_Ever says...
4:38pm Tue 19 Jun 12

Hmmm, I agree. However, before making the decision that it is ' just bureaucracy gone mad' I would be interested to hear why it takes so long. It may be for reasons unavoidable, like consultation. We would not want to shorten that process now, would we?

The _right_stuff says...
4:40pm Tue 19 Jun 12

The original 'The _right_stuff' has only one space between the e and _ (underscore), has no capital R or S and no other spaces.


Blimey. Another year ?
They already have an LDF and as Opinions_opinions said just add Manydown, rationalise those developments already in the the LDF and NO MORE BUILDING ON POPLEY.

And my favourite dog walking place the Loddon Valley they can leave alone :)

I read the other day that the golf course may take 7 years before it's built on (1,050 houses) so is this development still allowed to be in the plan as it's currently 'unavailable' !?!

Theyouthmatters says...
12:09am Wed 20 Jun 12

This Manydown thing has been going on since 1996

now think for a minute... how many gadgets and more have been invented since then?

Let's think about this

Year 11's just leaving where only just being born when this all began...

Jonty11 says...
5:32pm Wed 20 Jun 12

Chances are that despite already going through one round of consultation, if the whole LDF has in effect been thrown out as a result of the judgement - I'm guessing they will have to go through all the consultation again!

And just a thought - if the whole thing is delayed and is no longer going to be from x to y years, but now from y to z years - does this mean they have to go right back to all the original calculations on population, housing need and number of traffic movements etc to rerun them for the new plan period?????

The _right_stuff says...
8:41pm Wed 20 Jun 12

The original 'The _right_stuff' has only one space between the e and _ (underscore), has no capital R or S and no other spaces.


Jonty11. I had a look at the documents for the P & I oscom web cast tomorrow and there is some bits that say the council have already spoken to the planning inspector...it will be interesting as the figure 594 will have to be discussed again and will be interesting to see if that figure has gone up having spoken to the inspector.
The other things is about the 5 year housing supply. The NPPF documents says ' Continue to identify five years worth of specific deliverable housing sites, but an additional 5% should also be included to ensure choice and competition, which should be increased to 20% in areas with a record of under-delivery' (doesn't say what under delivery is).

I'll be watching the webcast for the P and I oscom tommorow...should be interesting viewing.

Mayor_Joe_Quimby says...
8:47pm Wed 27 Jun 12

"should be interesting viewing."

I bet nobody borrows your DVD's.

The _right_stuff says...
11:20pm Wed 27 Jun 12

The original 'The _right_stuff' has only one space between the e and _ (underscore), has no capital R or S and no other spaces.

It was and no you can't KCACMV until you stop being a little child and play nice.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree