© 2006 Professional Monitoring Limited

 

 

     Green belt and the SE plan.

Following hot on the heels of the revised SE Plan now comes the anticipated first threat to our local Green Belt which has now emerged in the form of an application from Agents representing the offshore company who purchased the Legal and General Agricultural Green Belt Land.

Please see the attached application in respect of which our local Council is showing "its concern to give the local community a chance to respond" BUT only giving the KRA what is effectively 10 days to respond, the letter only having been delivered to the KRA on July 28th 2008.

This so called "Screening Opinion under EIA Regs 1999 (yet another Developers "Charter" (no doubt) proposes to develop 11 hectares (27.2 acres) of green belt land as a new self contained "Continuing Care Retirement Community" comprising some 260 units of different types plus staff accommodation and various facilities.

In the view of the KRA this is the tip of a much more ambitious plan to develop more of the 522 acre site that L & G sold to the offshore entity now sheltered behind nominees.

 

One could be forgiven for thinking that the choice of a retirement community as the first development on the Green Belt is a cynical tactic to engender a softer responses from the community so as to breach the Green Belt policy bearing in mind also it will not count as housing under the SE Plan.

 

 Those of you who live in this area recognise too well that without a new road access and other infrastructure development the proposed scheme will never be viable so the trade off will be to build a new access and other infrastructural improvements to justify the costs and will thus lay the infrastructure for more development on the same green belt area. We can foresee Burgh Heath and Kingswood being joined by an urban ribbon development along the A217 as a result.

 

 It will be a hard fight ahead bearing in mind that the Councils LDF document states (quoting from the executive summary) on Preferred Options

 

 Preferred policy approach 4

 Continue to protect and enhance the Borough's built and natural environment

including (inter alia)

 "Metropolitan Green Belt except if needed to be released to meet future housing allocations" (my italics)

 

 Urban Open Land except where a limited release would result in environmental of social improvements on for the area" (my italics)

 The exceptions are more than likely to become the rule and this approach will have implications for both the Green Belt and the Urban Open Land in Kingswood.  

 

Whatever happened to the promises to protect the Green Belt and

Urban Open Land that we have heard so much about?

 If you agree with my analysis of the situation I urge all who are likely to be affected to respond and pull out all the stops. We need to identify every possible "significant effect" regarding sustainability, environment, traffic etc as to why this proposed development is inappropriate if we are to ever hope to protect the green belt.