[19th February 2009 - Response received from Denis Spooner (Eco-towns Team DCLG) regarding letter to Margaret Beckett 5th November 2008]
Dear Mr. Roberts,
PROPOSED MARSTON VALE ECO-TOWN
I have been asked to investigate and reply to your letter of 5 November to Margaret Beckett which set out MMETAG’s objections to the eco-town proposed for Marston Vale by O & H Properties and which enclosed a petition against it signed by local residents.
I must first of all apologise for the delay in sending you a substantive reply to the issues you raise. You were sent a holding reply on 23 December but I am sorry that it has taken some time to issue a full response.
I will deal in turn with each of the issues you raise and take this opportunity to update you on recent developments in the eco-towns programme.
1- Why would Government go against its own policy on brownfield before Greenfield development?
We continue to emphasise the importance of making use of brownfield sites before consideration is given to building on greenfield sites. In 2007, 77% of new dwellings were built on brownfield sites but, as I am sure you will appreciate, not all such land is appropriate for new housing development and, in order to provide for all the new housing that the country will need over the next 20 years and beyond, it will be necessary to use some greenfield sites as well. However, by subjecting all shortlisted eco-towns and all other housing proposals to the statutory local planning system, we intend that such loss of greenfield sites will be minimised.
2- Presumably you agree that we have been served badly as local communities and hence accept you have failed to ensure meaningful consultation?
Communities and Local Government has made it clear to eco-town promoters that we place significant importance on the public consultation that they carry out in respect of their proposals. We have, therefore, logged and passed on to O and H Properties the comments that you made about their consultation with local people. You may be aware that all bidders for eco-towns are required to produce a detailed Statement of Community Involvement as part of their submissions to the eco-towns process.
3- Why has the DCLG attempted to sneak in and out of the local community without engaging it in meaningful consultation?
I am sorry that you think that we tried to ‘sneak into and out of the local community without engaging in meaningful consultation’. I can assure you that this was not the case.
The eco-town roadshows that were planned for Marston Vale were part of a national programme involving 15 individual roadshows across the country over a 4 week period during November of last year and took many weeks to put together. Although I had been able on 30 October to notify the Parish Councils about the Marston Vale roadshows and asked them to forward this information to their parishioners and to all other local people and organisations, we were subsequently prevented by a legal challenge from giving any further publicity to them until 4 November when, following an announcement by the Housing Minister, the second stage of formal consultation on the Eco-towns Programme began.
A roadshow already planned for 1 November for a proposed eco-town at Rossington in Yorkshire had to be postponed but we decided that we would go ahead with those already planned for Bordon – Whitehill in Hampshire on 6 November and for Marston Vale on 7 and 8 November. Postponing either of them would have caused substantial disruption to the national roadshow programme. We tried to give as much advance publicity as we could to the Marston Vale roadshows by issuing national and regional press notices; notifying by e-mail the County and District Councils and other stakeholders; and also by e-mailing all people who had previously contacted us about the eco-town programme.
We accept that the advance publicity for the Bordon – Whitehill and Marston Vale roadshows was not as extensive as we should have liked but, taking into account the national publicity given to eco-towns that week; the advance notice given to all Parish Councils; the content of the roadshows; that fact that Marston Vale was to have 3 roadshows – no other location had more than 2; and to avoid further disruption to the national roadshows programme, we decided to go ahead with them as planned.
As explained above, we did our best to publicise the Marston Vale roadshows in the time available and, as you may know, we were considering a request from Mid Bedfordshire District Council to undertake another roadshow in the area at a later date – I say more about this below. Following the Bordon – Whitehill and Marston Vale roadshows, we were able to ensure that all our originally intended advance publicity for all subsequent roadshows was carried out as planned.
I must emphasise, however, that the purpose of the roadshows was to alert local people to all the information about eco-towns that continues to be available to them either on-line or (on request) by post; to encourage them to have their say on the eco-towns programme and, in particular, to let us have their views on both the Eco-towns draft Planning Policy Statement and on the Sustainability Appraisal for Marston Vale; and to assist them to make their views known to us either on-line or by post.
The roadshows contained no detailed information about the proposed Marston Vale eco-town as that was a matter for the scheme promoters to discuss with local organisations and local people.
Nevertheless, the roadshows went beyond our usual consultation requirements in publicising what was on our website and local people still have until at least until the end of March to send us their comments – see my further advice below.
4- Do you not agree that this [i.e. that David Lock Associates both works with the developer on the Marston Vale eco-town proposal, and was the organisation that first promoted the concept of eco-towns] must be a conflict of interest?
Neither David Lock Associates nor Professor David Lock himself plays any role in advising Ministers on the selection or evaluation of the proposed eco-town locations.
5- Can you explain why a charity [Shelter] was used to promote Government policy and present information in a way that implies these eco-towns will be built?
Shelter considers that the work it is undertaking on eco-towns is entirely within its remit to help provide a context for the current debate on eco-towns; to encourage the public and stakeholders to engage in the current consultation; and consider eco-towns as a potential means of encouraging higher levels of housing delivery and improving the ecological sustainability of development. The leaflets produced by Shelter were funded by CLG as part of a programme to ensure that people potentially affected by eco-towns have information about housing need in their area and how to take part in the consultation – and not to present eco-towns as a ‘fait accompli’. These publications aim to fulfil a need for more information on exactly what the housing pressures are in the country; the extent to which these are currently being met; the current shortfall in housing provision; and just how serious a gap this could end up being by 2016.
6- Why would you contemplate plans to create false migration drawing yet more people into the over-crowded South East of England to place more pressure on unsustainable infra-strucutre?
A key criterion for assessing the value of eco-towns is their potential to alleviate housing pressure – i.e. where demand for housing outstrips supply and gives rise to high prices that prevents young families and first time buyers from entering the housing market. There has, therefore, been a predominance of eco-town proposals coming forward from land owners and developers in areas where these problems occur.
The most careful consideration is being given at a strategic level to the potential economic, social, and physical impact of the proposed eco-towns, particularly with regard to their infrastructure requirements – please see the Marston Vale sustainability appraisal chapter available at:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/marston)
In addition, further detailed studies will be required for those proposed eco-towns which are shortlisted and will then have to be considered through the statutory local planning system.
7- What timescale are you setting the DCLG to respond to these letters including those sent direct to Caroline Flint [or the Minister] herself?
The department operates a guideline of 15 working days following receipt of correspondence. We endeavour to issue holding replies where it is anticipated that responses will take longer than 15 days. Owing to the high volume of correspondence that the Eco-towns team receives it is not always possible to respond to all correspondence other than with an automated response but all comments received as part of the consultation period are logged.
8- Finally, we would like to know whether you personally support the concept of a rural landscape and three distinct village communities being removed to make way for a new town three times the combined size of our nearest two towns, Ampthill and Flitwick.
We support the essential need for more housing throughout the country, particularly for young families and first time buyers that is both sustainable and takes account of the local character that you mention.
It would be inappropriate for any Minister or any of their officials to comment on the environmental impact and planning implications of any of the eco-town proposals because, like all other housing proposals, all shortlisted eco-towns will have to be considered through the statutory local planning system. It will, therefore be for the Regional Assemblies – through their Regional Spatial Strategies – and Local Planning Authorities – through their Local Development Frameworks – to decide whether a shortlisted eco-town is suitable for their respective areas.
I would emphasise that if Regional Assemblies and Local Planning Authorities can identify sufficient new housing land for their needs without making use of a shortlisted eco-town, they have discretion to do so.
Please accept this response as confirmation that your comments – and those set out in your enclosed petition – have been logged into the current round of consultation.
I can also now update you on the following issues:
The withdrawal of the proposed Marston Vale eco-town
As you way already know, O & H Properties has now withdrawn its proposed eco-town at Marston Vale from the Government’s eco-town programme.
We understand that the company wishes to pursue its development proposals for the area by dealing directly with the East of England Regional Assembly which is undertaking a review of its Regional Spatial Strategy and with the relevant Local Planning Authorities which are preparing Local Development Frameworks.
We will, therefore, take no further action on the proposed Marston Vale eco-town and will not take a further Communities and Local Government eco-towns roadshow to the area – as we had been asked to do by Mid Bedfordshire District Council.
All written comments about our draft Planning Policy Statement for eco-towns and the eco-towns standards already supplied to us by organisations and people in the Marston Vale area will continue to be taken into account by Ministers in deciding which of the remaining proposed eco-towns should be short listed and then considered through the statutory local planning system.
We will continue to welcome any further written comments from people and organisations in the Marston Vale area about the draft Planning Policy Statement for eco-towns and the eco-standards – either on-line of by post.
Extended consultation period
Our public consultation on the eco-towns programme currently runs until 6 March 2009. However, in light of the recent High Court proceedings we expect to extend the consultation deadline further to reflect the undertaking given to allow an extra 6 weeks from the outcome of the legal proceedings. The Court’s full and final Judgment is expected on 25 February following which a further deadline for consultation responses will be announced.
Further information
By way of further background and information I would draw your attention to -
1. the latest suite of eco-towns related documents which was published on 4th November 2008 when a new round of consultation launched.
Visit: http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/housingsupply/ecotowns/
Any correspondence on eco-towns received before this date will be taken into account as part of this current consultation exercise.
2. The dedicated eco-towns microsite which has been established and which displays recent feedback analysis and gives you the chance to feed in views on the eco-towns programme in more general terms.
Visit: http://www.direct.gov.uk/ecotownshaveyoursay
3. Information and links to related online material can also be accessed via the DirectGov site.
Visit: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/campaigns/ecotowns/DG_171328
4. You may also register for the newly-established eco-towns newsletter which will provide regular updates on the Programme via email.
Visit: http://haveyoursay.communities.gov.uk/newsletters/default.aspx
I hope this response addresses your concerns and queries and that the additional information that I have provided is of assistance to you. Once again, I apologise for the delay in sending you a full reply to all the issues you raise.
Yours Sincerely
Denis Spooner
Eco-towns team
Communities and Local Government
