Conflicts of Interest

Friends of Dean Row has been concerned about the serious potential conflicts of interest involved in the Wilmslow Vision process for some time.  At the meeting at Dean Row Village Hall on 20 April, we outlined the work which Broadway Malyan (the "independent" consultancy selected to run the Wilmslow Vision process) has previously done with housing developers active in Wilmslow and Cheshire East.

At that meeting, Councillor Michael Jones, head of Cheshire East Council elect, promised in the clearest possible terms to thoroughly investigate any links between Broadway Malyan and developers owning Green Belt land in Wilmslow.  He said he would confirm what conflict checks were undertaken as part of the appointment process.  We provided him with the evidence below, and asked whether these potential conflicts were fully and properly disclosed to Cheshire East at the time of Broadway Malyan's appointment.  Unfortunately, almost four weeks on, we have had no answer to this question.  In fact, we have stopped receiving responses from the Council altogether, so until we get anything more constructive from them, please see the information below for yourselves and decide whether you believe there is a conflict of interest here or not.

Below we will provide links which demonstrate that Broadway Malyan ("BM") has previously acted for Taylor Wimpey (which owns land in both of sites Ba and Bb) and Jones Homes (which owns land in site Ba).

Broadway Malyan has acted for Taylor Wimpey

Taylor Wimpey owns significant areas of land in both of sites Ba and Bb, and is lobbying for their development.  Here is a link which clearly demonstrates that Taylor Wimpey has been a client of BM:

http://ldfconsult.basingstoke.gov.uk/portal/fpt/core_strategy/issue_and_options_response_form?page=2&pageSize=20&tab=list&sortMode=response_date

BM acted on behalf of Taylor Wimpey in relation to Basingstoke's Issues and Options paper.  This is far from an isolated case, as a quick Google search of Broadway Malyan Taylor Wimpey shows.  

Broadway Malyan has acted for Jones Homes

Jones Homes owns significant areas of land in site Bc.  Yet BM acted for Jones Homes (in conjunction with Muller Property Group) in pushing for a housing development near Nantwich, which caused uproar with local residents due to the way in which the local community felt ambushed by Broadway Malyan's "consultation".  See the links below.

http://nantwich-news.co.uk/wordpress/2012/01/30/muller-and-jones-homes-unveils-nantwich-south-community-plan/

http://nantwich-news.co.uk/wordpress/2012/02/07/muller-and-jones-face-angry-residents-over-nantwich-south-housing-plan/

http://www.protectstapeley.org.uk/Stapeley/Documents_files/Broadway%20Malyan%20on%20behalf%20of%20Muller%20Property,%20South%20of%20Nantwich%202010.pdf

The similarities between BM's Nantwich document and their Wilmslow Vision are very striking! One of the key differences though is that whilst the Nantwich document is overtly branded as being on behalf of a developer, the Wilmslow Vision document was stamped as being a Cheshire East document!

Broadway Malyan already have a published position against development of Cheshire East's Green Belt

On behalf of Muller Property Group, BM submitted a response to the Cheshire East Issues and Options Paper.  This is contained in the document  Broadway Malyan on behalf of Muller Property 17 12 2010.pdf which is found on Cheshire East's own website: http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/common/search/advanced_search.jsp?id=459630&sortMode=response_date&lookingFor=representations&tab=list

On page 12, BM clearly states that of the four Spatial Options considered in Cheshire East's draft Issues and Options Consultation paper (2010), they say that "Option 1 is the only strategy which would be able to deliver the level of growth which Cheshire East have signed up to and are seeking to achieve.  This option focuses on Crewe allowing it to become the main driver for growth... ".  As already set out by Friends of Dean Row, Option 1 would mean a maximum of 640 new houses for Wilmslow.  So why on earth did BM inform the people of Wilmslow that they needed to propose sites for 1,500 houses?

BM goes on to say: "The release of Green Belt Land should be the last resort and only be considered as a viable proposal where there are no other viable alternative options available. In this case the release of Green Belt land is unjustified given that there are other more sustainable alternatives... The release of Green Belt Land around the smaller towns and villages and key service centres in the north of the borough is likely to have an adverse impact on the established character of these more rural parts of the borough."

For once, we completely agree with Broadway Malyan! It just makes it even more difficult to understand why every site (except one) that was proposed for development in the Wilmslow Vision is Green Belt.

Conclusion

We should not be surprised that BM has acted for housing developers in the past, and we are not suggesting that anything illegal is taking place.  However, the following questions remain unanswered:

- Was best practice followed by Cheshire East when appointing Broadway Malyan?

- Were proper conflict checks undertaken?

- Were the relationships with Taylor Wimpey, Jones Homes, and others, properly disclosed as part of their appointment?

- As a condition of being appointed on the Wilmslow Vision, has Broadway Malyan contractually agreed not to work for any property developer in relation to any housing developments in Cheshire East over the period which the Local Plan will be in place (ie until 2030)?

Given that clear potential conflicts of interest appear to exist, is it clear who is really running the Wilmslow Vision process? Is it Cheshire East? Or is it Broadway Malyan? Read this account of the process from one member of the Advisory Stakeholder Group, and come to your own conclusions! www.wilmslow.co.uk/news/article/6315/wilmslow-vision-process-thoughts-of-a-stakeholder

The residents of Wilmslow demand answers to these questions from their Councillors.

Meeting at the Village Hall with the Council

The council has announced a meeting at Dean Row Village Hall, to be held at 5:15pm to 7:30pm this Wednesday, 16 May.


Councillors and planners will be present to answer questions about the Wilmslow Vision process.


Despite the unequivocal support shown by councillors at our meeting last month, there have been very few firm answers given to the questions we've asked.  Please use this opportunity to pose your questions to the people in power directly, and demand some straight answers.


See you there.

Minutes of the public meeting with Councillors, 20 April

NOTES MADE DURING THE MEETING on                                                                                                                                FRIDAY 20^th APRIL                                                                                                                                                                             DEAN ROW VILLAGE HALL

·         Several members of the public said that they had no warning of the Draft Wilmslow Vision Consultation (DWVC).

·         The maps in the brochure very unclear.

·         Who are the stakeholders? They weren’t representing me! How were they selected?

·         MICHAEL JONES, Leader of CEC –elect, said that ‘It was not good enough’!

·         Cllr PAUL WHITELEY, CEC Dean Row, explained how he had served Dean Row for many years and was a vigorous supporter of the retention of green belt. All landowners, he said, were entitled to apply for planning permission on their respective pieces of land. Currently this is happening throughout CE for the CE Local Plan.  In the past, he told the meeting, that he had defended the green belt in Dean Row and would continue to do so.

·         MICHAEL JONES said that the two plots of land (Ba & Bb) would not be in the plan He added that if he had known that this land was going to be put in the plan he would have had it removed!

·         Cllr JIM CROCKATT, Chairman of Wilmslow Town Council, reminded all that he had represented Dean Row for years and he was ‘not going to stop now’. He also vouched for all his councillor colleagues. He also voiced concern over the amount of time given to the residents to return their questionnaires. He thought that the Council had contacted all the residents to tell them about the DWVC. The audience clearly did not agree with this assumption and made their feelings felt. We were then told that the date for returning questionnaires has now been extended by one month to 31^st May.

·         The meeting’s Chairman said that it was a disgrace that we had not been told and also added that a key module of information was missing from the report even though this had been promised in earlier Council material – that of the important Sustainability Report.

·         PAUL WHITELEY covered the topic of the Safeguarded land. This is land for houses when needed. In the case of plot Bc in Dean Row he explained that this land had been considered in the previous plan and had been rejected and held its status. In his opinion plot Bc will remain as Safeguarded house supply land but would not be the first choice.

·         MANUEL GOLDING from Lindow Common/Fulshaw suggested that the ‘structure’ of Wilmslow is creaking. He is working with a small action group in his area.  He wants all the District action groups to work together to fight the DWVC as one organisation. This he felt would stop residents merely defending their own patches. There was much support shown to this plea.

·         ONE LADY called for a single meeting for the whole of Wilmslow in a larger hall. The meeting Chairman agreed that the Friends of Dean Row would be happy to work with a united Wilmslow faction.

·         Several members of the public criticised the Broadway Malyan report and questionnaire. Serious doubts were raised regarding the quality of the stakeholder group. To much applause one gentleman said that the people in the hall are a better representation of stakeholders than those selected by Broadway Malyan as the residents are the one who buy their homes, educate their children, shop and pay their rates in the town. Another resident criticised the construction of the questionnaire. This, he said, was a joke and any research deriving from it would be worthless. Many at the meeting called for its withdrawal.

·         Following a specific question about the green belt land Ha & Hb to the north of Handforth Road MICHAEL JONES informed the meeting that neither plots would be built on.

·         MICHAEL JONES was also asked how the figure of 1,500 new homes in the Plan had been arrived at. He told the meeting that it had come from an ‘academic’ within the Broadway Mulyan team.

·         A LADY said that she did not want the character of Dean Row to change and asked how she could object. By returning the questionnaire she was told.

·         BRIAN WINTERBURN thought that the Dean Row area had had enough development thrust upon them over recent years and that enough was enough. With Colshaw Farm, Summerfields, the By-Pass, and the perceived impact from the Woodford Aerodrome development to our corner of the town we should be left alone. He also considered that the Handforth is struggling already and couldn’t cope with further residents.

·         ONE GENTLEMAN asked if the process was a plebiscite. He was told by MICHAEL JONES that it was not – it was a consultancy!

·         When asked how one should respond to the questions regarding building on green belt MICHAEL JONES advised to say no to everything.

·         MICHAEL JONES remarked that he did not agree with the DWVC document’s figure of 1,500 new homes. He thought that there were enough brown field sites in Wilmslow to cover the house requirements throughout the period.

·         CHRISTY WILKIE from the Dean Row Chapel told the meeting that the Chapel was a grade two star listed building built without foundations. More traffic along Adlington Road could destroy the foundations and we could lose over 400 years of that heritage.

·         Questions were asked about the inadequate site map in the Broadway Malyan document. The Friends of Dean Row will attempt to put the link on their blog site showing the site plans and planners involved.  An appeal to include brown field sites was made by BRIAN WINTERBURN.

·         MICHAEL JONES was asked by what process was Broadway Mulyan appointed to their task and how much was the cost and was he aware that one of BM’s clients is Wimpey who own one of the sites Ba in Dean Row. Mr Jones said they paid £30,000 for the report and that if he finds out that BN do have Wimpey as a client will ask for the money back and BM will never work for the Council again. If he’d know that BM would not have got the business in the first place.

·         One Resident said that there was no future for a theatre or cinema in the town.

·         When asked when a decision might be made on the DWVC, MICHAEL JONES advised that it would be in the autumn (November). The sites will all then be discussed and an evaluation of all the brown sites will be evaluated in conjuction with the needs.

·         The Chairman of the meeting re-visited the missing and promised sustainability report in the document. MICHAEL JONES said he would look into it. Another Councillor suggested that it could be available in about a month’s time.

·         There was general agreement that strong local response is vital. The meeting Chairman was asked by a lady resident whether he was ready to lead a campaign to carry the torch forward as a combined force. Commenting that we all want no part of this document and must, absolutely, work together. 

·         When asked whether the Council would publish the details of their stakeholder consultations MICHAEL JONES said ‘Why not! I think we will publish it’!

·         A local business man offered to pay half the costs incurred by the ‘Friends of Dean Row’ on receipt of an invoice.

·         A vote of thanks was made to the Chairman of the meeting and he closed the meeting at 8.50 pm and the 200 attendees went home.

Car "stickers" - show your support and spread the word!

To help publicise the plight of Wilmslow's Green Belt, one of the Friends of Dean Row has kindly put together this "sticker" to put in your car!

You should be able to download a copy of the image by right clicking on it.  If not, please email us on savedeanrow@gmail.com and we will email a copy.

Over 100 signatures on the e-Petition!

Just five days since the petition went live, the number of signatures has already exceeded the threshold of 100 required in order for it to be automatically brought to the attention of the head of the Planning Department of Cheshire East!


Thank you so much for showing your support! :)


Now let's see how many more we can add in the seven weeks that the petition will remain open for...


http://moderngov.cheshireeast.gov.uk/ecminutes/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=17

Over 2,000 website hits!

2,314 to be precise! The support we're getting is massive.  Apologies if you've emailed us and we haven't had a chance to reply yet - we will get back to you all!

Sign the petition!

I'm delighted to say that Cheshire East has now approved our petition against development or any release of Green Belt in Dean Row! Please follow the link below to make your voice heard!

http://moderngov.cheshireeast.gov.uk/ecminutes/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=17

Please feel free to pass this link on to as many friends and neighbours as you like, and remember that everyone in a particular household can sign it, not just one person.

Signing this petition is not a substitute for submitting a questionnaire, so please do both if you can! The deadline for questionnaires is now 31st May 2012.

Thanks again for all your support.

Why are all Brownfield sites missing from the consultation?

It is a well recognised piece of planning policy that Brownfield sites should be considered before Greenfield sites wherever possible.  The Draft Wilmslow Vision Consultation document itself recognises this: "Within the existing built up area of the town, preference will be given to the use of vacant buildings and brownfield sites for housing."


The same document, prepared by Broadway Malyan, confidently proclaims that "There are very few brownfield sites within Wilmslow..."  The document identifies not a single Brownfield site for potential housing development.  Should we take it from this that there are no Brownfield sites in Wilmslow? Absolutely not!  Friends of Dean Row has reviewed Cheshire East's Handforth and Wilmslow Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 2011 and found that there are in fact 24 identified sites which are either Brownfield or mixed!  A list of these sites is shown below, and the vast majority aren't in Green Belt.  Even those that are in Green Belt, surely such Brownfield sites should be prioritised over the Greenfield sites in Green Belt, which account for virtually all of the sites in the draft Wilmslow Vision?


The total housing potential on these Brownfield sites is 1,164! Or to put it another way, roughly DOUBLE the number of new Wilmslow houses required under Cheshire East's favoured Spatial Option of 480 - 640 houses!


In addition to the 1,164 in Brownfield sites, there is a further site (ref 3149) with space for 281 houses which is Greenfield, but not Green Belt.


So why on earth have not a single one of these 1,445 sites not been considered for potential housing development in the draft Wilmslow Vision?


Friends of Dean Row believes that it's down to two reasons.  First is laziness.  Brownfield sites are generally smaller and more difficult to identify and develop than pointing to a nice big Greenfield site and sending in the bulldozers.  That is not an excuse not to do the work necessary to develop such sites, and indeed one of the key purposes of Green Belt to encourage / enforce the redevelopment of Brownfield sites.  Second is money.  Again, because Brownfield sites are smaller and more difficult to develop, they tend not to be speculatively snapped up by developers and then aggressively proposed to planners for development.


Another important point is that additional new Brownfield sites will become available during the period of the Local Plan, ie between now and 2030.  Local planners are able to take an estimate of such "windfalls" into account when assessing how to reach the target of new houses for Wilmslow.  Friends of Dean Row believes that such windfalls could represent a substantial proportion of the c.500 new houses targeted by Cheshire East's Issues and Options (2010) review, yet the Wilmslow Vision consultation includes no estimate of this.


Development of Brownfield sites before Greenfield is something that has many benefits, and which I think everyone agrees with.  Sadly the Wilmslow Vision document omits a consideration of them entirely.  We would encourage all residents to make this point clearly when submitting your questionnaires.






Source information: Brownfield sites identified in the Handforth and Wilmslow Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment:

No. Brownfield Green Belt Location (SHLAA site ref)

of 

houses

213 Brownfield Yes Stamford Lodge, Altrincham Rd (3452) (Considered for employment (site G), but housing may be more appropriate given lack of other options and the large amount of empty commercial space in Wilmslow)


164 Brownfield No North of Marks & Spencers, Handforth (3448)


108 Brownfield Yes Bollin Cross School, Styal (3451)


103 Mixed         Yes Stanneylands Rd (3296)


100 Mixed         Yes Ned Yates Garden Centre (3426)


96 Brownfield No Rear of Marks & Spencers (3470)


44 Brownfield No The parade, Alderley Edge (778)


40 Brownfield No Wilmslow Road, Handforth (3153)


36 Brownfield No Honford Court, Handforth (3384)


31 Brownfield No Egerton Rd (913)


28 Brownfield No Redesmere Day Centre, Handforth (3156)


25 Brownfield No Beddels Lane (487)


22 Mixed         Yes Pigginshaw, Altrincham Rd (3316)


21 Brownfield No Oaklands Dean school (3148)


18 Brownfield No Alderley Edge (495)


17 Brownfield No Villas Dean Row rd 17 (482)


15 Brownfield No Manchester Rd (3144)


14 Mixed         No Grove Ave (906)


14 Brownfield No Donkey Lane (3145)


13 Brownfield No Peacock Farm, Handforth (3146)


12 Mixed         Yes Sunny Bank Drive, Wilmlsow (3767)


10 Brownfield No BJ's Health Centre, Altrincham Rd, Wilmslow (660)


10 Brownfield No Holly Road (758)


10 Brownfield No Manchester Rd (945)

1,164 in total

Development map

Unfortunately, Broadway Malyan took the decision not to clearly identify the areas being consulted on for potential development in the draft Wilmslow Vision document.  We have therefore used the information in the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment in order to show the areas more clearly, as shown below. 

Seeing it like this really brings home the scale of the proposals and how the village of Dean Row would be utterly subsumed by the horrendous urban sprawl.

Key background to the Wilmslow Vision process

This is quite a long post, but it's definitely worth a read if you want to understand the full picture behind how Wilmslow fits into the wider plans for growth in Cheshire East, what the real requirements for growth in Wilmslow are (not the ones in the Wilmslow Vision document!), and therefore what our realistic options are based on Government Policy.


Please use this information when commenting in your questionnaires!




Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment

A number of potential development sites in and around Wilmslow are mapped out and assessed for suitability in Cheshire East's Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment ("SHLAA"), updated February 2012.  This shows the areas proposed in the Wilmslow Vision much more accurately.  It also contains important information about the planning constraints on each site, eg lack of sustainability, access, flood risk, etc, which should be contained in the missing Sustainability Report (which we understand is at least a month from being available).  You can find the Cheshire East SHLAA here

From this page you can download the "Handforth and Wilmslow Area Plan" which gives an overview of sites which Cheshire East have identified as having potential for housing.

For a map of each site, download the relevant documents:


Area Ba - Site 3277
Area Bb - Sites 3532, 3358, 3479Area Bc - Site 3150Area Ha - Site 3292Area Hb - Site 3529


I believe the other sites in the Wilmslow Vision will also be contained in here, although we are not as familiar with these areas so couldn't state exactly what reference numbers they have.




Core Strategy Issues and Options Paper (2010)

This document has been put together by Cheshire East's planning team, and considers the various options for accommodating growth across the county as a whole.  It considers two key questions:

(a) what level of growth should be targeted for Cheshire East (low, medium or high), and

(b) what should the spatial distribution of new houses be across Cheshire East?

Low = 23,000 new houses, Medium = 26,950, and High = 32,000.  The document favours a High growth strategy, although this was up for consultation and I don't think this has been decided upon / announced for sure.

Four spatial distribution options are considered, which were put out to public consultation and the document doesn't favour any particular option over the others.  They are:

Option 1: Growth in Crewe and Key Service Centres outside of Green Belt (this option results in 2% of the total new houses in Cheshire East being built in Wilmslow, ie 460, 539, or 640 new houses, depending on whether a low, medium or high growth strategy is selected for Cheshire East as a whole)

Option 2: Growth in Crewe and Macclesfield and Key Service Centres outside of the Green Belt (again, 2% for Wilmslow, so between 460 and 640 new houses)

Option 3: Growth in Crewe and Macclesfield and Accessible Towns (including destruction of Green Belt) (7% for Wilmslow - ie 1,610, 1,886, or 2,200 new houses depending on a low, medium, or high growth strategy)

Option 4: Rural Dispersion (like options 1 and 2, 2% for Wilmslow, so between 460 and 640 houses)

From this, it can be seen that even if a High growth strategy is adopted, there is only one Spatial Option that could result in Wilmslow needing more than 640 houses.  This is Spatial Option 3.  However, this option requires the widespread destruction of Green Belt across the county.  Given the very strong re-endorsement of the importance of Green Belt in the recent National Planning Policy Framework (see below), then we believe very strongly that Option 3 is not compatible with Planning Policy and therefore cannot be used.

In fact, it is not just Friends of Dean Row that believes that option 3 is not possible: Broadway Malyan (the planning consultancy which has drafted the Wilmslow Vision) has also stated that Option 1 is the only possible option for achieving high growth! In a document produced on behalf of Muller Property Group, Broadway Malyan states:

"Option 1 is the only strategy which would be able to deliver the level of growth which Cheshire East have signed up to and are seeking to achieve."

"The release of Green Belt Land should be the last resort and only be considered as a viable proposal where there are no other viable alternative options available. In this case the release of Green Belt land is unjustified given that there are other more sustainable alternatives.

“The release of Green Belt Land around the smaller towns and villages and key service centres in the north of the borough is likely to have an adverse impact on the established character of these more rural parts of the borough."

It is clear, therefore, that the 1,500 houses proposed by the Wilmslow Vision document is utter fantasy.

Over 1,000 hits!

Wow, we've now had nearly 1,200 hits to the website: thanks for all your interest! Today was a record day too: interest is clearly continuing to build.


Looking forward to the meeting with councillors tomorrow.

Use your questionnaire wisely!

In completing questionnaires, it's important to understand that the council planning bodies will be unsympathetic to residents' concerns about the likely negative impact on local house values or the spoiling of residents' views. Impassioned pleas to simply preserve the status quo are likely to fall on deaf ears unfortunately.  These sorts of issues are simply irrelevant to the planners' decision making process.

However, there are many other valid planning considerations which the council will take very seriously if they hear voiced by a large number of local residents. These might include:

· Major questions regarding the sustainability for development on all sites

· Lack of infrastructure to support a new conurbation (schools, health, utilities, shops, etc)

· Relatively long distance to the town centre, making walking and cycling less viable compared to other potential development sites

· Lack of public transport connections

· Loss of Dean Row as a separate hamlet with its own character, which risks being subsumed into an urban sprawl

· The planned development of a further 1,000 houses on the old Woodford airfield less than 2 miles away would mean chronic over-development of the area

· Increased traffic congestion, with the likelihood of new traffic lights and/or roundabout on Adlington Road, Brown’s Lane, Cross Lane, and/or Dean Row

· Visual impact on the surrounding area

· Destruction of areas of natural beauty and wildlife

· Loss of open spaces in the Wilmslow area, including the children’s playground and playing fields off Brown’s Lane

· Drainage and flood risk

· Over reliance on this area of Wilmslow for new housing: the area to the west of Dean Row

has already been subjected to considerable development over the last 10 years

· Existing protected status: urge the Council to retain Green Belt status for Ba, Bb, Ha, Hb

and reinstate Safeguarded designation for Bc

Finally, please note that answering "no" to development in all areas is a perfectly acceptable response! The structure of the questionnaire suggests that it is asking residents to give their preferences as to which of the areas should be used for development, but if you don't want development anywhere, then say so.  However, because the "presumption" used in planning decisions is in favour of sustainable growth, it is important that if you do vote "no" to any area, then you back this up with relevant reasons.

Happy submitting!

Over 500 hits!

In the seven days since this site was launched, we've had over 500 hits! Not only that, but interest is growing fast, and yesterday we had the highest daily number yet!


Many thanks for all the interest and support.

Meeting Notice!

Come and meet Cheshire East and Wilmslow Councillors 

to share your views and ask your questions about the Council's draft 'Wilmslow Vision'

DEAN ROW VILLAGE HALL

BROWN'S LANE, DEAN ROW, WILMSLOW

FRIDAY 2OTH APRIL

7PM

savedeanrow@gmail.com

Urgent! Have your say on Wilmslow's Green Belt policy!

In addition to the Wilmslow Vision consultation process, we have just discovered that Cheshire East is also running a separate parallel process seeking comments on the planning policies themselves.  These will ultimately shape the outcome of the Wilmslow Town Plan, so it's critical that these are correct.  These policies are contained within the draft Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal scoping report: click here for the relevant page of Cheshire East's website.  


Whilst this is a relatively technical planning document, it contains an important (and incorrect) set of guidance relating to the treatment of Green Belt that we would encourage you to comment on to Cheshire East (see p.60 of the document).  The problem is that this Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal doesn't take into account the very helpful new guidance and protections given to Green Belts in Central Government's "National Planning Policy Framework", published only a couple of weeks ago (see here for a copy, if you're interested, but the important bits are reproduced below).  


Friends of Dean Row believes that it is critical for the Government's recent additional protections to Green Belt to be properly reflected in the Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal scoping report, and we have submitted our comments (copied below) to Cheshire East via their website.


We would encourage all other local residents to also have their say on the Green Belt policy, by submitting comments via the website.  Registration is quick and easy, and you can use the same details as for submitting your Wilmslow Vision questionnaire online.  

Click here and you should see Table B.1 (an orange table). Scroll down the page until you get to the second table (Table B.2). The section that we are encouraging people to comment on is the Planning Policy Guidance 2 – Green Belt section in Table B.2. If you would like to comment, click the 'Add Comments' link (in blue text) at the top of table B.2 

Please note that the deadline for comments is tomorrow, Tuesday 10 April 2012, so you will need to be quick!

All the best,
Friends of Dean Row




Our submission:

The policy guidance listed in "Planning Policy Guidance 2 – Green Belt" does not adequately reflect the important new guidance and protections to Green Belt areas which are set out in the National Planning Policy Framework ("NPPF"), published in March 2012 by Central Government and announced to the House of Commons by the Rt Hon Greg Clark, the Minister of State, on 27 March 2012. It is a critical and legal necessity that this Policy Guidance is followed.

The purposes of Green Belt as set out in "Planning Policy Guidance 2 – Green Belt" are inconsistent with the NPPF, and should be amended to read as follows (as taken directly from paragraph 80, p19, of the NPPF):

"Green Belt serves five purposes:

● to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;

● to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;

● to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;

● to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and

● to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land."

The "Implications for the Local Plan" as stated in "Planning Policy Guidance 2 – Green Belt" are clearly inadequate and inappropriate, based upon the NPPF. The current wording states that "any releases must be based upon sustainable considerations". This is not the correct test for release of Green Belt. The NPPF makes it clear that the threshold for releasing Green Belt is much, much higher than an assessment of sustainability.  Section 9 of the NPPF states that:

"The Government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

The general extent of Green Belts across the country is already established.

When drawing up or reviewing Green Belt boundaries local planning authorities should take account of the need to promote sustainable patterns of development. They should consider the consequences for sustainable development of channelling development towards urban areas inside the Green Belt boundary, towards towns and villages inset within the Green Belt or towards locations beyond the outer Green Belt boundary.

As with previous Green Belt policy, inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. ‘Very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations."

The "Implications for the Local Plan" should therefore be amended within "Planning Policy Guidance 2 – Green Belt" to read as follows:

"The Local Plan should seek to maintain Green Belts.  Releases will not be made except in very special circumstances.  Substantial weight will be given to any harm to the Green Belt.  'Very special circumstances' will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt is clearly outweighed by other considerations.  The need to promote sustainable patterns of development need to be taken into account."

Who is the "Advisory Stakeholder Group"?

The plans in the draft Wilmslow Vision have been presented as being the output of the "Advisory Stakeholder Group".  Both the Council and Broadway Malyan, the private planning consultants used to help put the plans together, have sought to distance themselves from the proposals.  If we take that claim at face value for now, then the ASG has clearly wielded a huge amount of power in this process, including:


- setting the draft target number of new houses at 1,500 (rather than the minimum of 500 as requested by Cheshire East);
- setting the areas proposed for potential development; and
- setting the form of the questionnaire and consultation process.


Given that the non-elected ASG apparently wields such power to frame the whole debate, it seems only fair to understand:


- what is the composition of the ASG?
- who are the individuals who contributed to the process?
- what are those individuals' credentials for being selected?
- what was the process for ensuring that no conflicts of interest exist within the ASG, and can we see the output of this?
- how was the composition of the ASG selected by the Council in the first place?
- is all of the above in line with best practice?


Friends of Dean Row has deep concerns with regard to these questions.  For some reason, the Wilmslow Vision document choses not to explicitly set out the composition of the ASG, but Friends of Dean Row has been told verbally by a Cheshire East councillor that the members of the ASG are included in the list of Acknowledgements on page 35, ie:


- Glam Mams
- Fulshaw WI
- Wilmslow Cricket Club
- CETRA (please let us know if anyone is aware of this body, as we are unable to identify it)
- Wilmslow Business Group
- Friends of the Carrs
- Wilmslow Health Centre
- Wilmslow Trust

- Living Streets

- Cycle Wilmslow

- Wilmslow High School

- Transition Town Wilmslow

- Cheshire Constabulary

- Churches Together in Wilmslow

- Wilmslow Guild

- Evans Trust

- Cheshire Peaks and Plains Housing Trust

- The Schools Council

This list begs many, many questions (email us with yours ahead of the meeting with Councillors!).  But in particular: how is the ASG suitably qualified to calculate the target number of new houses for Wilmslow to 2030?  This is a highly complex and technical question.  There is no explanation in the Vision document as to how 1,500 was arrived at as the ASG's proposal.  It is hard to avoid the suspicion that it was picked pretty much out of thin air, on the virtue that it's a nice round number somewhere between the two ends of the range requested by Cheshire East (ie 500 to 2,200, although the justification for this range is equally opaque)!

These questions should have been addressed in the Wilmslow Vision.  Without answers, the whole consultation process lack validity.  They need answering, fast.

Any questions?!

To help bring a bit of structure to the meeting with Councillors, it would be great if you could email your questions through to us in advance.  Please send all your tough questions to savedeanrow@gmail.com


Many thanks!

Chairman of the Planning Committee confirms attendance at residents meeting

I'm delighted to say that Cllr Christopher Dodson, the Chairman of the Wilmslow Town Council Planning Committee, has also confirmed his attendance at the meeting of the Friends of Dean Row, at 7pm on Friday 20 April at Dean Row Village Hall.  


We are really pleased that the Councillors are showing such a positive attitude towards the Wilmslow Vision consultation process and hope that you can join us for the meeting.

Chairman of the Council intends to join meeting!

I'm delighted to say that the Chairman of Wilmslow Town Council, Cllr Jim Crockatt, intends to join the residents' meeting at Dean Row Village Hall at 7pm on Friday 20 April. We hope to welcome you all there too!

Stay in touch through Facebook!

We have set up an embryonic Facebook page for residents to stay in touch.

Please 'like' our page to receive automatic updates about our campaign.

www.facebook.com/FriendsofDeanRow

Welcome to Friends of Dean Row!

Welcome to the blog / website of the Friends of Dean Row, a residents' group established to represent the views of people living near Dean Row, in Wilmslow.  Unfortunately, Friends of Dean Row has had to be set up at a time when the future of the area has been put into doubt by the proposals in the draft Wilmslow Vision document. You can view the draft Wilmslow Vision document here: Draft Wilmslow Vision.

Our raison d'être

1 - To spread awareness of the plans.  For reasons not yet clear, Wilmslow Council has chosen not to post information (even a leaflet!) to homes in Wilmslow to let residents know of the plans.  This is despite there being clear precedents in other East Cheshire towns going through similar processes, where all residents have quite properly been informed about the ideas for their town, and their views sought.  Friends of Dean Row is therefore working hard to ensure that people know about these plans.

2 - To ensure that local residents' voices are heard.  We understand that several Wilmslow Town Councillors have serious concerns about the proposals, and are very keen to hear the views of local residents.  We intend to help facilitate this, by providing a forum for people to debate the issues and have their say.  Please feel free to leave your comments on this website!

3 - To protect all of areas Ba, Bb, Bc, Ha and Hb in Dean Row from development, to retain the Green Belt status of the area in its entirety, and reinstate Safeguarded status for area Bc.

The plans

The sheer scale of the potential development has shocked many people across Wilmslow.  The Wilmslow Vision appears not to recognise the value which residents place on Wilmslow's precious green spaces.  Nor do the proposals recognise the vital function of the Green Belt, which protects the town from incessant development, at risk from becoming a suburban sprawl, and thereby a dilution of what makes the town special. 

If you live in the Dean Row area, the potential development sites of B and H will be particularly close to your heart, and many residents here are concerned that any extra development in this area is not sustainable.  This is following significant expansion already over the last 15 years leading to over-used roads etc, which is only going to get significantly worse once the 1,000 houses on the Woodford Airfield site are built.

Who decided on 1,500 houses anyway?

The "Advisory Stakeholder Group" (the composition of which is not clear) appears to be the body which has proposed a target of 1,500 new houses.  We believe that the residents of Wilmslow should demand to see the calculation of how this number was arrived at.  It is striking that the minimum number of houses required in order to satisfy Cheshire East Council's wider growth target for the county is just 500 houses (as stated in the Wilmslow Vision).  So why is the Advisory Stakeholder Group advocating a number THREE TIMES this size, and do the residents of Wilmslow agree? Clearly, it is in the interests of businesses in Wilmslow to encourage more development (more customers!) and this raises serious questions about the composition of the Advisory Stakeholder Group and whether any potential conflicts of interest may exist within it.

What Next?

- Questionnaire

You can fill in the questionnaire online here or let us know if you would like a paper copy and we will photocopy one for you! In theory, they are also available at the Leisure Centre, but when we visited on Tuesday, they had already run out.  Please remember that anyone with an interest in the area can fill in a questionnaire and it is one per person, not just one per household.  We are assured that the number of questionnaires received back will have a direct impact on whether Areas B and H are opened to development, so please do fill out a form.

- Meeting with Councillors

Friends of Dean Row are arranging a meeting with Wilmslow town councillors, giving local residents the opportunity to find out more information and to voice their views. The meeting will be held at Dean Row Village Hall at 7pm on Friday 20th April. We look forward to meeting you there!

- Stay in touch

Please email us or subscribe to this blog if you wish to stay in touch with the campaign as it develops.  We also have a facebook page: just search for Friends of Dean Row and show your support!

Thanks!

We hope that with your support, we can retain the Green Belt / Safeguarded status of the area and prevent these damaging developments from proceeding.  Many thanks for your support.

Best regards,

Friends of Dean Row