1 / 41

Time Line of Events

Time Line of Events. Former RAF Coltishall Eco Town Bid. Summer 2005.

bijan
Télécharger la présentation

Time Line of Events

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Time Line of Events Former RAF Coltishall Eco Town Bid

  2. Summer 2005 • The Government announced through the Ministry of Defence that no successor military or Government use had been identified or proposed for the facility and therefore the base would be advertised for disposal through Defence Estates. • Scottow Farm Estates asks the MOD if the land that was originally compulsory purchased from them, when the RAF Station was built, be returned to them for agricultural use once more on the closure of RAF Coltishall. • The Government declines to sell the site back to Scottow Farm Estates.

  3. Early 2006 • North Norfolk District Council presents a paper ‘Disposal of RAF Coltishall’ to the RAF Coltishall Task Force, set up to ensure the site is marketed expediently, and sympathetically with respect to its location and in consultation with the local population. • The Task Force was concerned that the site should not be ‘moth balled’ and thus fall into a state of disrepair as had happened in former closed military bases. • Local communities and businesses had lost economically from the closure of the RAF base.

  4. Autumn 2006 • Defence Estates appointed agents Drivers Jones to market the site. • Drivers Jones included a position paper prepared by the local authorities in the information pack used for potential bidders.

  5. 1st November 2006 • The first of viewing dates arranged for prospective bidders takes place • Further viewing dates are arranged for 16th November, and 6th December. • Mr Richard Davies (Norfolk based developer) viewed the site and outlined his proposal for a new eco settlement on the site to Officers from NNDC and the County Council. • Both Councils advised that the proposal would raise significant issues in terms of the prevailing and anticipated planning policy framework for the area, strategic location and the capacity of the local highway network.

  6. 22nd November 2006 • An announcement is made that the Home Office are considering the site as a detention centre for asylum seekers. • There are local concerns about this proposal. Councils spend time and resources considering the implications for the local communities and submitting their views

  7. Early 2007 During the early part of 2007 local communities and the local authorities heard little, if anything, formally from the Home Office or Defence Estates regarding the future use and/or disposal of the site. In the late autumn the proposal for the site to be used as a category ‘C’ prison by the Ministry of Justice was made public

  8. Later in 2007 • Ownership of the site transferred from the Home Office to the Ministry of Justice • Plans for the new Prison were submitted • Subsequently, the new prison plans were passed by North Norfolk District Council using 30 acres of the total 650 acre site. • One of the planning conditions involves the Ministry of Justice providing 30 acres for the planting of a community woodland to compensate for protected trees felled to accommodate the prison. • The site is 660 acres, minus the prison and woodland site, leaves approximately 600 acres remaining for other uses.

  9. 23rd July 2007- Eco-town Prospectus published by DCLG • Eco-towns will be small new towns of at least 5-20,000 homes. Places with a separate and distinct identity but with good links to surrounding towns and cities in terms of jobs, transport and services • The development as a whole to achieve zero carbon and to be an exemplar in at least one area of environment technology; • A good range of facilities within the town including a secondary school, shopping, business space and leisure; • Between 30 and 50 per cent affordable housing with a good mix of tenures and size of homes in mixed communities; • A delivery organisation to manage the town and its development and provide support for people, businesses and community services • We will also continue with targeted funding for Growth Areas, New Growth Points and eco-towns including a £300m Community Infrastructure Fund over the next three years’.

  10. March 2008(DCLG scrutiny report compiled in March but report not published until 3rd June 2008) • Communities and Local Government carried out an initial scrutiny of the proposals in relation to the eco-towns criteria, and where proposals met these, looked across government and its agencies at the transport and environment issues and opportunities in locations put forward.  This publication provides a summary for each assessment. • The report provides details for the Coltishall site and responses from various other government departments and agencies such as Natural England, English Heritage, Defra etc and also views from local District and County Councils and Highways etc • Details follow:-

  11. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (2) The number of homes proposed at Coltishall site- 10,000 ( CETAG comment-Nobody locally was aware of this figure that the DCLG were using in this scrutiny report in March 2008-indeed ‘The Greener Future’ publication in April 2008 by DCLG on Eco Towns specifically states 5000 homes at Coltishall and local parish councils were unaware of a formal proposal for 10 000 homes until 9th June 2008 at CETAG’s inaugural meeting)

  12. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (3) • Question – posed for scrutiny report by DCLG • Does proposal include commitment /agreement by local authority partners to growth? • Answer (summarised answer from DCLG) • Possible support by North Norfolk Council (where the site is located). Not aware of support or objection by the Greater Norwich councils of Broadland / Norwich City / S Norfolk • (CETAG comment- Not aware of views of Broadland/Norwich City or Sth Norfolkand says possible support from Nth Norfolk but Nth Norfolk were unaware of the size being proposed by DCLG at this stage.)

  13. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (4) • Question posed by DCLG Scrutiny:- • Approach to environmental issue and impacts- environmental exemplar and opportunity ? Answers (summarised by DCLG) from Natural England, Environment Agency and DEFRA • Expensive new infrastructure needed and uncertainty over ability to issue discharge consents into R Bure because of water quality issues in the Broads . Relationship with Norwich water cycle strategy needs to be made. • However, given the levels of growth at Norwich, the cumulative impacts are potentially severe especially due to drainage into the river and its impact on the Broads • Extremely sensitive catchment. 30km directly upstream of Broads SAC, environment may not be able to accommodate level of building.

  14. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (5) • Question - Heritage views from English Heritage ? • Answer The fighter pen (WW2) and 1950s Blast Walls are currently being recommended for scheduling. The setting of these will need to be preserved which could in part be achieved by maintaining the line of the runway and taxiways. We would also hope to see a visual link retained whereby the blast walls can be seen from the line of the runway. The late 1930s layout has some design value and English Heritage is currently funding study

  15. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (6) • Question-Approach to Transport. Issues and impacts on network? • Answer (summarised by DCLG) from Department of Transport and Highways Agency • The Northern Distributor road has no funding and there are environmental issues surrounding the preferred route". A140 does not pass site, some link needed. Role of existing rail likely to be very limited - need to develop a strong and realistic public transport offer.

  16. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (7) Other comments listed in report are:- • Government Office East GO-E – eco-town scheme relies on NNDR going ahead which is by no means certain. However, NNDR well-promoted by Norfolk County Council and the Councils forming Greater Norwich. Strategic fit with growth of Norwich also needs consideration.

  17. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (7) Report Summation:- The summary section of the report categorised each bid individually, on the basis of the reports from the various agencies, into 4 categories labelled A-D Details of categories are:- A ) No significant issues at this stage B ) Significant issues but can probably be addressed through conditions, studies etc C) A location where growth is possible but major issues – assurance needed D) High level constraints – reasons why growth in this location is unsustainable. (Otherwise labelled ‘show stopper’)

  18. March 2008Initial DCLG scrutiny (8) Coltishall site achieved category • C on transport, • Potential D on environment • Rated C/D overall • Final assessment of Coltishall site? - ‘C’ - (A location where growth is possible but major issues – assurance needed). ( CETAG comment- Please note this information was not published until 3rd June 2008 and even then not as a publication in it’s own right but as additional information on the DCLG web site headed ‘further details’ under a section named ‘How Eco Town proposals were assessed’ . Local communities/councils were, in June, consulting on the basis of, initially, a figure of 2500 - 5000 given by R Davies the bidder at his presentation in April and then the figure of 5000 in the DCLG Eco Towns consultation published in April).

  19. April 2008’Living A Greener Future’ DCLG’s Eco Town Consultation published Coltishall site is listed at 5000 homes in this prospectus More specifics in this consultation to the Coltishall site include:- ‘ Proposed benefits An exemplar eco-settlement with a zero carbon footprint, 5,000 eco homes with different sizes types and tenures. Business and technology park accommodating 3,000 jobs. Over 100 hectares of wetlands and open space, renewable energy sources, integrated transport system and additional facilities including schools, shops, community facilities, crafts centre, and heritage museum. The eco-town proposal would make use of the former airfield site to provide a zero carbon new settlement adapted to Norfolk needs and design character, with extensive proposals on green infrastructure including creation of a new Broad, SUDs and local renewables’ 20

  20. April 2008‘Living A Greener Future’ (2) General criteria for all eco towns :- • New settlement - minimum 5000 homes • Zero carbon build • Good range of local facilities - schools, shops, leisure and employment • 30-50% affordable housing • A new approach to area management

  21. 3rd April 2008 15 Potential locations for ‘Eco’ Towns announced by Ms Flint, Housing Minister • Pennbury, Leicestershire: 12-15,000, • Manby and Strubby, Lincolnshire: 5,000 • Curborough, Staffordshire: 5,000 • Middle Quinton, Warwickshire: 6,000, • Bordon-Whitehill, Hampshire: 5-8,000 • Weston Otmoor, Oxfordshire: 10-15,000 • Ford, West Sussex: 5000 • Imerys China Clay Community, Cornwall around 5,000 • Rossington, South Yorkshire: Up to 15,000 • Coltishall, Norfolk: 5,000 on a former RAF airfield • Marston Vale and New Marston, • Bedfordshire: Up to 15,400 • Elsenham, Essex • Rushcliffe, Nottinghamshire • Leeds City Region, Yorkshire (a number of sites admitted)

  22. 3rd April 2008 • This consultation is the first of four key stages in the eco-towns process. • Stage One: Three month consultation on preliminary views on eco-town benefits and these shortlisted locations; • Stage Two: Further consultation this summer on a Sustainability Appraisal, which provides a more detailed assessment of these locations, and a draft Planning Policy Statement. • Stage Three: A decision on the final list of locations with the potential to be an eco-town and the publication of a final Planning Policy Statement, later this year. • Stage Four: Like any other proposed development, individual schemes in these locations will need to submit planning applications which will be decided on the merits of the proposal.

  23. 9th April 2008 • Twelve experts from the worlds of design, the environment, transport and sustainability have signed up to join the Eco-towns Challenge and play a key role in shaping eco towns. • The panel of leading figures will provide expert advice and support to developers whose proposed locations were announced in the shortlist of fifteen potential eco town sites. • They will also play an important role in challenging the developers to meet the highest standards possible for sustainability and design in their final proposals. • They will address issues such as using resources and the site's natural assets and opportunities efficiently, ensuring house designs are sensitive to local surroundings and create homes people will want to live in, creating a vibrant and healthy community for people of all ages to live in, and encouraging more journeys on foot, bicycle and public transport. • The Eco-town Challenge panel will publish recommendations to each bidder on how they could improve their vision for eco-towns development. • Housing Minister Caroline Flint said: ‘Up to ten eco-towns will be built by 2020

  24. 17th April 2008 • Local parish councillors requested a presentation from R. Davies on his ‘Eco Town bid’ • The Presentation given was of an Eco ‘Village’ of 2500 to 5000 homes on the former RAF Coltishall airbase • Parish councillors presented the information to their respective parish councils

  25. 9th June 2008 • Glyn Williams of Swanton Abbott Parish Council invited other local Parish Councils’ representatives to a meeting to discuss the Eco Town Bid • Representatives of NNDC, Broadland DC, and MP Norman Lamb also attend • NNDC informs the meeting that an Eco-town Panel meeting in London considered a Coltishall Eco Town bid of up to 10 000 homes • All parish representatives were concerned that little consultation has taken place between Government and local government and the people they represent.The deadline for submission of comments on the Eco Town consultation is 30th June 2008, leaving 21 days to report back to Parish Councils and local communities and feedback to DCLG. • Norman Lamb MP for North Norfolk states that he is unaware of any further consultation period after 30th June and has no further information that has been given to him as the relevant constituency MP.

  26. 9th June (2) • Local PC representatives decide to report back to their own PCs as quickly as possible and do their utmost to make their representations to government as individuals, as individual Parish Councils and as a group formed from this meeting. Coltishall Eco Town Action Group or CETAG is formed

  27. 23rd June -Ministerial Visit • Ms Flint, Housing Minister, visits RAF Coltishall for a presentation with Henry Cleary, lead official on Eco Towns within CLG • Ms Flint hears a presentation from the bidder with plans for 10,000 homes on and outside the original site. The lake has been reduced to accommodate the extra houses and infrastructure and also doubled up as a ‘means of treating the towns sewage’ using reed bed technology. • The additional 5000 homes are to be located at the southern end of the site down towards the Bure valley.

  28. 23rd June - Ministerial Visit (2) • NNDC presented their views and their reasons to oppose the bid and stressed that local councils had been preparing their own Local Development Frameworks for some years with careful planning with regard to the whole structure of Norfolk and that the ‘Eco’ Town did not fit into Local Plans. North Norfolk DC are actually above Government targets on new houses. • Norfolk County Council presented reasons as to why the bid should be opposed. The transport links, and other infrastructure required, the location unsuitable for commuting to and from employment and the lack of sufficient on site employment. The feasibility studies from NCC all deemed the project unsustainable • All present, other than the bidder and his team, reiterated the basic reasons for opposing the proposed development in this location.

  29. 23rd June - Ministerial Visit (3) • The Carbon Reduction Team UEA stated that although initially at the 2500 size they were willing to assess the bid as possibly having credibility, this scheme was no longer an ‘Eco’ Town but simply a new town. The bidders claims of attracting people world wide to a new Science Park (as part of their 3000 total on - site employment target) was ‘pure fantasy’ in this location • Ms Flint advised that there would be a further 3 months consultation period after 30th June whilst the Eco Town sustainability appraisals were taking place and bidders would, as part of their appraisals, have to prove that these consultation with the local communities had taken place. • The meeting was advised that the shortlist of up to 10 of the bids would follow these appraisals in early Autumn 2008.

  30. June 2008 Publication of notes and recommendations from the Eco-Town Challenge Panel on sites proposed for Eco Towns • Coltishall - extracts from the report and challenges to the developer team from the report • The comprehensive approach and presentation is impressive. • The proposal posed pertinent questions and is developing a strong vision; however, • The location presents major challenges • The area has low economic activity and a narrow employment base. The proposal is not yet persuasive enough around the issue of employment at Coltishall. • The transport strategy is the principle issue in rural Coltishall - Examine the viability of upgrading the Bure Valley railway to tram-train standard into Norwich. Develop the business model for the bus network and explore traffic management options. • Explain how a resident’s carbon footprint will be reduced by 80% in 2020. • Detail how the development will achieve zero carbon throughout the town, both for new and existing buildings.

  31. 30th June 2008 • Response to government on the Eco town consultation • North Norfolk District Council • Norfolk County Council • Broadland District Council • CETAG (a group representing 14 local parish Councils) • Individual local parish Councils • Many individuals • ALL OPPOSED THE ECO TOWN PROPOSALS FOR COLTISHALL ON THE BASIS OF WELL RESEARCHED AND CONFIRMED SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES.

  32. 30th June 2008 • CETAG ‘flies a flag’ at a protest of all ‘Eco town action groups’ across the country at 10 Downing St. along with other well known action groups such as B.A.R.D. and Oppose Hanley Grange. • CETAG representatives speak on behalf of parishes at NND full council meeting • NND full council vote unanimously against the ‘Eco’ Town bid.

  33. July 2008 • Living a greener future - progress report published. • No details of Coltishall scheme included. • Reference made to a review of alternative schemes in the Greater Norwich area • Challenge Panel publish notes of second meeting - Coltishall not included in the various assessments / comments.

  34. Other interested parties • English Heritage have scheduled part of the site confirming their interest in the fighter pen and the blast walls mentioned in their initial report to the DCLG • The Polish Government has an interest in the site since Polish squadrons fought alongside the British RAF in WW2 and flew out of Coltishall from 1943-1947 Indeed Coltishall Air Base was totally under Polish Control from August 1945 until February 1947 when the base was officially handed back to RAF control. However there are no graves in the grave yard for the ‘Polish period’ post 1943 and thus it is possible there may be Polish Airmen buried on site in unmarked graves • English `nature have confirmed there are wildlife-protected species known to be on site • The majority of the site is classified as ‘greenfield undeveloped’, with a minority brownfield where the buildings are already in existence, (this does NOT include the runway) a portion residential (Annington Homes and private individuals own the former RAF houses) and thus most of the site does not have a ‘footprint’ of previous building.

  35. 2nd August 2008 • Rackheath is announced as a possible alternative to the RAF Coltishall site with potential of up to 4000 homes • Broadland DC had been in negotiations with the Government as part of The Greater Norwich Partnership and suggested that funds government were offering for infrastructure might help build the Northern Distributor Road.

  36. 2nd August 2008 (2)Quotation from EDP on Rackheath bid • A Broadland District Councillor said “The north east sector is an area which has been identified as an area for planned and managed growth and Rackheath is a part of this.“We would want any houses planned to be as carbon neutral as possible for environmental reasons and also to keep fuel bills affordable for the generations of families we hope will live in them.“The most important next step now is to talk to local residents about how they would like to see their community grow and develop. We are looking forward and planning for the long term needs of our communities. Managed growth needs to be sustainable and well thought through with jobs and infrastructure to support any growth.”And addressing the importance of the Northern Distributor Road (NDR) alongside the Rackheath plan, South Norfolk Council leader John Fuller said: “If the government wants to see an eco-town, and Rackheath is considered suitable, then it must fund the infrastructure to provide it, and that includes the NDR.“That's the deal Norfolk people would expect us to agree and which they would support. They should not be short-changed on this”.

  37. August 2008 • CETAG questioned DCLG whether the inclusion of Rackheath as an Eco-Town bid meant that the Coltishall bid was dropped. • The reply was that both bids are very much alive and are being assessed for sustainability and hopefully results of the initial appraisal stage will be available in September.

  38. The present situation • The local area has had no consultation as promised by Ms Flint Housing Minister / DCLG • The ‘Eco’ town bidder is alleged to be considering legal action concerning granting of planning consent for the category C prison. • The Local Government Association are threatening legal action of the whole Government process pertaining to their Eco town Policy • The B.A.R.D campaign are questioning, in the High Court, the legality of the Governments imposition of new towns on a national basis regardless of local planning forecasts carefully worked out over years. • The announcement of the shortlist of Eco towns has been delayed until early 2009 • The Coltishall eco town bidder is threatening to pull out all together BUT under present circumstances this does not prevent another bidder seeking to develop the site • Some of the nationwide bids have been dropped by the land owners and or bidders e.g. Hanley Grange in Cambridgeshire, meaning that the shortlist of up to 10 is now from a shorter list of possibles meaning both Coltishall and Rackheath have a higher probability of being chosen. .

  39. Now and the future CETAG are working hard to represent the views of the local communities on any plans for the former RAF Coltishall. CETAG wants to be engaged in any present, or future plans for the site and try and ensure that it is not just left to decay as many former MOD sites have been, but used for a purpose acceptable and in sympathy with its location, surroundings and economy

  40. The latest Information received • “The situation at Coltishall is unusual because following the Minister's visit it became clear that the scheme for Coltishall was not being further developed by the promoter at the present time while an alternative scheme was put forward by the Greater Norwich Development Partnership. Both schemes are currently being evaluated as part of the CLG sponsored Sustainability Appraisal by Scott wilson and we hope to publish this later this month - that will trigger the formal start of the second period of 3 month consultation. Depending on the report of the Sustainability Appraisal it is likely that only one of the Norwich schemes would go forward. If that were to be Coltishall we would certainly put in hand the detailed local consultation which the Minister described and we would expect from the promoter also. If not we would not be taking forward an eco-town scheme for this location. Apologies that there has been this uncertainty but I would expect it to be resolved in the next 3 weeks”. Ref. Henry Cleary DCLG September 2008

  41. What next? • That is the history and the main reasons for CETAG’s opposition are clear and ‘well publicised’ See www.cetag.co.nr for full details • Questions now have to include what might happen in the future as well as resolving the eco town issue. • What do you think? • What would like to see happen at RAF Coltishall? • Do you agree that CETAG should be part of any future negotiations to ensure that the local communities have a say in their local community? • Have your say tonight! • Ask the panel for their views

More Related