Brookmans Park Newsletter Community Discussion Forum

General Discussion Boards => Environment => Topic started by: Editor on May 08, 2002, 10:08:49 am

Title: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 08, 2002, 10:08:49 am
15 October - WHC Cabinet Housing & Planning - Housing need for the borough (numbers), review of promoted sites for home in and around WGC & Hatfield taking account of the Green Belt & Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity Studies.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on May 08, 2002, 02:27:39 pm
Surely everyone was aware of Government policy when they voted last year. ???
I million extra imigrants ( See press today) They have got to go somewhere :'(
My old saying " when its gone its gone" :'(
regards,
jet
Not Party political as they are all the same. ;)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on May 08, 2002, 02:51:09 pm
A careful, objective, informed, full, even-handed, comprehensive, ...  review should not be a bad thing ?
 
The Green Belt was invented for London in the 'Thirties as one of a "bundle" of strategic planning policies in a very different world than now exists.  For example, it was then about the only planning restraint-policy, whereas now there is a whole-raft of sustainability, conservation, TPO, HPO, SSSI, Listed Buildings, AONB, Landscape significance, ... controls which in total affect almost the whole of the country.

Certainly I'm looking forward to seeing what happens next   -  not least the response to   "emotive" ?  "debate-stimulating" ?   by-lines as "Green Belt under threat ".  

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mary_Morgan on May 08, 2002, 04:22:04 pm
For interest, many years ago a surveyor with the old Potters Bar Urban District Council told me that Brookmans Park should never have been built and that this had been said in some report.   The suggestion was the development would eventually merge Potters Bar and Hatfield.  

Have a look at Peter Kingsford's A Modern History of Brookmans Park 1700-1950.  The quote in Chapter 5 click here (http://www.brookmans.com/history/kingsford/chfive.shtml) under the heading town and country planning is presumably the report that my old friend mentioned to me.  

Not a comment either way, just interesting.

Mary

Edited by Forum Admin to put the link in.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 08, 2002, 04:54:55 pm
Quote
Certainly I'm looking forward to seeing what happens next   -  not least the response to   "emotive" ?  "debate-stimulating" ?   by-lines as "Green Belt under threat ".

Just to clarify, the headline on the front page poses the question, "Is the green belt under threat?" and the thread's headline is, "Green belt threat?".  The all-important question mark is left off in the quote above making it a statement rather than a question. Of course a headline reading "Green Belt under threat" would clearly be drawing the debate to a premature conclusion and could correctly be termed 'emotive'.
If you read the BBC story, linked to in the original post in this thread, it also reports that the Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) has warned that any compromise will open the floodgates to mass development.  In the same report the Government says it has enlarged the greenbelt by 30,000 hectares since coming to power. So it is not a forgone conclusion and it is a subject worthy of debate, especially in an area like this. Hence the question in the post and front page, raised by both sides being put in the BBC story.
In answer to the quote above, and judging by the other contributions on this thread, it seems that "debate-stimulating" is about right.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on May 08, 2002, 05:23:07 pm
Slightly off thread.
Do not forget the Government took "family" stately homes from landed folk using inheritance tax laws.
The value of homes around here means that even "ordinary" folk who live in property valued "high" because of the area can no longer assume that their property will stay in their family ( even with best loopholes).
All I am pointing out that the thin edge of the wedge 70 years ago will possibly mean that we will all loose our property to the state in say 30 years?
You read it here first.
Do not forget that any property that includes a right of way (all houses around here) ie when they were fields someone walked over them, can be liable to sequestration of part/all of their garden by anybody who needs it for access!
Article Telegraph last month. It has and is happening to people.
I can hear someone saying " no it couldn't happen to me"
regards,
jet
P.S. I think we should all treat statements as general and not be too pedantic or no one will say anything?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on May 08, 2002, 06:37:55 pm
Dear Forum Administrator:  it wasn't your headline I was "quoting", but the gathering "rush" in other branches of the media ... !
Regards -   j
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 08, 2002, 06:44:11 pm
Hi John, and there was I spending all that effort defending the site when it wasn't under attack. Apologies for misunderstanding your post.   :-[
David Brewer
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on May 08, 2002, 11:53:54 pm
and hi to you too David !

Quite understand your natural urge to defend your "offspring"  -  as you know, I'm often to be "found at the barricades" on behalf of the defence of the Vet College (& hence another "post" from my office desk at this hour of the day)

Best wishes  -  John
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 10, 2002, 10:18:11 pm
Checkout www.greenbeltsociety.org.uk and search against RTPI.  The RTPI have wanted to 'modernise' Green Belt policies since at least Sept 2000.  Before his move from DETR, John Prescott stated that planners and developers must redevelop town centres first , then move out sequentially thereby making Green Belt the last option for development.

My personal opinion is that Government should bring back a policy from the 1960's of encouraging (with grants) businesses to move from the crowded South East to the run-down areas elsewhere in the country.  'Elsewhere' was, and still is, where there are lots of houses and people but local jobs are still disappearing.  Memory tells me that the Relocation Agency was too successful and so it was closed down!  Moving jobs to people makes even more sense in 2002 in my opinion.  
(confession time - in the late 1960's I moved to London from Manchester to get a job, and have no desire to move back. I have lived over half my life around London so it is now 'home' to me)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on May 24, 2002, 05:08:20 pm
Well it's interesting to see that no one has apparently any concerns about a review of the Green Belt given that amongst other things, more housing should help bring house prices down towards what we local workers can afford to pay  (rather than these city folks on fat salaries who don't really need to be here but are because of their aspirations for "country living")
Eric
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on May 24, 2002, 07:59:49 pm
Steady on Eric.   I know prices are high hereabouts but are you suggesting that if the Green Belt is to be taken seriously by people, they should accept some sort of residential "qualification"  -  like in the Lake District, or as recently suggested for parts of Wales ?
Regards -  John
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on May 24, 2002, 08:16:24 pm
Any one who thinks this is the "country" needs to consult an oculist ;D
Any one that thinks living here is not the result of hard steady work is missleading themselves.
All the people I know in my road started life with nothing.
True there are some city gents around here, but they do not get paid for being lazy or failing at there job.
There are also quite a few pensioners on the limit of their income, again worked for.
Both myself and my wife earn below the average wage, it does not stop us budgeting accordingly and saving so that we can now own a (relatively) expensive house.
What ruined this area is the people who moved here and have changed a once rural area to suburbia, thus spoiling it for all.
Three jags has his eyes on our wealth and in time inheritance tax will give the government the lot.
regards,
jet
He is assisted by people being divisive and knocking each other rather than sticking together to oppose the plans.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mary_Morgan on May 25, 2002, 02:46:14 am
Eric, whoever you are, what are local workers?  BP was built as a dormitory village, it should not have been, but it was, and some of us like it.  Unless any of us have ancestors who worked at Brokemans or Moffats, we are all incomers.   The only real local workers at the moment are the school teachers,  the shop assistants, and people who work from home.   The first two categories would not have been there if there had not been an influx of people from elsewhere.  My parents chose to live in BP something over 50 years ago.  I cannot deny anyone who has moved there since the right to live there, and nor can anyone else.   It, perhaps, might have been called "country" then, but not today.  What is "country" - is there a working farm in BP?
Yes, eroding the green belt does worry me, but the green belt is not the cause of the high house prices.   It is the convenience to London that is, WAGN (who we all love to hate), the A1 and the M25
M
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on May 27, 2002, 05:10:06 pm
Well I'm pleased to see I've triggered SOME debate on this serious issue.  
Mary, I think that local workers are those who live and work in a local radius, and are not London-commuters or those who drive significant distances to work.   A large number of key workers ARE being priced-out because of the simple economic rule "restricted supply + continuing demand = higher prices"  (be it around Brookmans Park or fashionable parts of London).   Teachers, shop workers, police, fire, etc NEED to live locally.
You say that people can't be denied the right to live there, but therefore by definition that it is right to denies others.   You think there are no farms in the area ?  Well I bet that'll depress those remnants that are still here altho struggling to survive against those who want to treat them as a free extension to the gardens and lifestyles.
Sorry everyone but isn't the case that if we want to support the "green belt" then we need to support the whole package, and not just those bits that suit us individually (while ignoring the rest) ?   Also those early aims have been subsumed in to all the other "green" development restraint policies, but we & our children have to live on with all of the costs of this intervention.  Creeping suburbanisation in all forms, a form of ghetto-isation (sorry can't think of another word ...) ?, longer-range commuting with more petrol fumes, pollution, waste, ...
I wish I knew what the answer was, but maybe we have to move as others did, from "preservation" to "conservation" ?



Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on May 27, 2002, 06:23:47 pm
Wish as a quallified engineer that I could earn as much as a key worker, ie policeman, fireman, teacher and recieve the guarranteed pension rights. I am only the poor s*d that builds the places they work in and makes the equipment they use.
As I have only been here 17 years, should I s*d off back to my mum and dads three room flat in North London and leave it all to the farmers who all thought that they would be sticking their snouts in the EEC trough and ended up being rewarded by being beggared.
Myself and my wife have worked for 60 years between us, paid our taxes in full and got about 1% back, so I reckon we have paid in enough to deserve our third acre of suburbanised countryside.
Do people really think rural people have preserved our countryside. I think not, farmers are more than happy with the "brown" site conversion of agricultural buildings into industrial units. They can't stick their nose in the trough fast enough.
Don't blame the townies for everything that goes wrong.
Oh by the way, not a dig at Eric, just a comment stating what I see around me.
regards,
Jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mary_Morgan on May 27, 2002, 09:16:39 pm
This one could turn into a slanging match if one is not careful, mea culpa.

I don't know the answers either.   I think it would be a shame for Potters Bar, Little Heath, Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Hatfield to merge into one, and would like to keep the precious few fields there are between them, but people do need places to live.  

No-one should blame townies for everything, but equally townies shouldn't blame country people for everything either.

My point on working farms, is that there is not actually one in the village, they surround it.  Moffats Farm was a working farm when I was child.  

Come to think of it, Jet you go back to your parents flat, and I will go back to my grandparents farm in deeper Hertfordshire or my other grandparents pub in a tiny village in Co Cork.      Not a lot of point,  best we stay put and get on with each other :) :)

Mary
(Country girl by nature if not location :D)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on May 28, 2002, 12:49:20 am
Not sure I understand all these posts, but I don't think it has got anything do with where we all came from. I am  a newbie to the area. I fell in love with this area as a child, and slowly moved near to it......and at last got here and am very proud to be here. Its not actually about money, or how much we earn. For me, it was where I wanted to bring my children up. Nice open space, green fields, wild life etc. It was wonderful the other day when we all watched from our lounge window as a pheasant happly strutted around our Garden.  I want to keep these fields and the beautiful area......and I don't much fancy being bundled into all the other areas which seem to have problems of there own.

I agree we need more housing, but then I have to ask, why is it on every available plot there is, they are building more and more warden homes for the elderly, and no new affordable flats for the young? Why because there is a lot of money in retirement flats........
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on May 28, 2002, 01:20:42 am
Dear Anna,
So thats where my resident pheasant went! I thought my cat got it :)
Dear Mary,
I am a townie from N. London, but I bet I practise and know a bit more about country pursuits and widlife than a lot of so called country folk.
Being a townie is perhaps why I am more appreciative of the wildlife and do not practise the inherent cruelty lauded by some country folk I come across.
Foxes, bats,toads,frogs,newts, woodpeckers etc all live in my garden in reasonable harmony ( when they can avoid the cat who thinks she owns the place) I would imagine a lot of the people who live here do not even know what lives in their gardens. They are too busy trying to cut down trees and lay paving slabs etc.
I would gues that wildlife around here has dropped by half in the last decade alone, birds by 90% excluding magpies!
The only sure way to get to live around here is by plain hard work and sacrifice of certain pleasures perhaps.
Every one priveliged to live here should be gratefull and not try to turn it into London.
well I've had a rant, unusual for me?
regards,
jet
By the way Mary, Latin now, you will be quoting Arabic next, inshallah (peace be upon him) ilhamduallah, not spelt correct but pronounced as read, you know what I mean. jet is imshi'ing off
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on May 29, 2002, 12:54:36 pm
Might I try to offer a slight steer back towards the most pressing part of the strand that started off ?  (ie  the need to look carefully at all the issues of the green belt).

Mary:  the Vet College runs a working farm that keeps  land "open" between Potters Bar, Little Heath and Brookmans Park  -  despite the appallingly low prices for milk, the expensive local vandalism, etc etc -  and which some neighbours enjoy looking over by pulling out hedging ...

Anna:  I'm afraid it IS substantially about money, like so many things.   I think at least recognising that less-than-palatible fact would be a step in the right direction ?   In many parts of the UK where there are restraint policies, "incomers" are generally recognised as pushing prices up beyond "locals" reach ... etc etc   -  and some would add that inflated property prices are being subsidised by those other people who have to carry the correlated costs (eg  by travelling from beyond the green belt, by maintaining the rural aspect, clearing up the rubbish, replacing thestolen hedging plants, ...

Eric:   hhhmmm!   You seem remarkably prescient in talking about "ghettos".  I see Ewan Cameron, chairman of the Countryside Agency has just today published a report which touches on this very point  (see the various national broadsheets, such as Page 7, D Telegraph)

SOME careful flexibility has to be found somehow ?

john
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on May 29, 2002, 02:55:07 pm
Yes some people do have more money than sense when it comes to city types buying rural properties.
However the rural types who sell them the properties don't seem to mind taking as much cash as possible and running do they?
Pure greed all around, who profits, anyone in the property "game" mortgage lendrs etc. etc.
The RVC site is handy to maintain a bit of green, but watch this space dissapear over time!
regards,
jet
Market forces prevail
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: justin on May 30, 2002, 11:57:30 am
What an interesting debate! I've lived hear for around 7 years and moved hear simply to be in an enviroment where my children would be safer. In 1926 my fathers parents moved from St Johns Wood to Whetsone "to be in the country" for the same reasons. Whetstone is now London N20. Small enclaves of semi rural residential development should be protected from over development in the form of acres of new "toy town" houses that are so prolific now days. With regard to the supply and demand for immigrants etc there is a large covered space in docklands which we all paid for that I'm sure could have been utalised.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on June 05, 2002, 08:38:57 pm
How delightful to read in "Jubilee Memories", peoples' fond recollections of moving to Brookmans Park fifty years ago.
But weren't these often involving new houses being built in the Green Belt ?
Hhhmm
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mary_Morgan on June 06, 2002, 10:43:05 pm
The quick answer to that is no.   Neither the house that I moved into nor the one that Ann did were new when we moved in.

The damaged that was done to the Green Belt was done more than 50 years ago (see the link on my post of 8 May).  Most of the building in the last 50 years has been infilling.

Some people have a problem with that, I don't.

I am going to cut off now.  The last two nights I have typed a considered reply on this post, and the internet connection has gone down and I have lost it.   I may try again tomorrow when it is quiet.

Toodle pip for now folks.

Mary
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on June 18, 2002, 06:54:21 pm
Just a thought regarding the green belt.
If the building work at the RVC was a factory or even a hospital, people would go crazy.
But because its for cuddly and not so cuddly animals then its okay?
Strange enit,
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on June 20, 2002, 12:51:58 pm
or maybe most people realise that if you are working with animals, those animals (just for starters) rather naturally need things called fields, fodder, ... that tend not to be found in urbanised areas
Regards  -  john
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 28, 2002, 04:21:28 pm
Hertfordshire says it is looking at ways to increase the county’s stock of affordable housing by 49 thousand homes by 2016 while, at the same time, protecting the countryside. The authority sets out three options.
The authority says there will be presentations throughout the county.  To arrange one contact Jon Tiley on 01992 556297. And you can get hold of a summary document by calling 01438 737320. more details (http://www.brookmans.com/news/june02/housing.shtml)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 28, 2002, 09:13:14 pm
This confirms the comments made by Chris Conway, Welwyn Hatfield Chief Planning Officer at the NM District Green Belt Society committee meeting on 24 June.  See www.greenbeltsociety.org.uk for minutes of that meeting.  He recommended a community-wide response, rather than individual responses, to give the  views of the whole community of North Mymms.  I will be following the discussion on this Forum and would be pleased to receive your comments to greenbelt.nm@tesco.net.  
Bob Horrocks, Hon Secretary, NM District Green Belt Soc.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 28, 2002, 09:28:56 pm
Some things seem to have been around forever, but the Green Belt is a fairly recent legal entity created in part to stop towns etc from merging into one another.  When you travel along the A1000 from Barnet you can clearly see where London stops and the countryside begins.  Check out the new theme on this forum of where to put 49,200 in this county.  There is a huge and complex problem of where to put new businesses and housing in the county.  Naturally we have a NIMBY attitude of wanting to preserve the very things that attracted us to live here - all well discussed in this section.
Please be assured that your local Green Belt Society, and the Parish Council, are vigilant and fighting to preserve what we have got.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on June 30, 2002, 04:38:41 am
Da Da,
jet is back for one post this week only.
This is so important so I must post, can we all not unite against building on our green belt land.
In the 17 years that I have been privelleged to live here I guess BP has increased in mass by at least 20%. Trees unlawfully dissapear by at least the same amount. For Calder and Brookmans avenues ( avenue means tree lined road) trees just get cut down, totally illegal, no one cares, just go stump spotting ,10 minutes with chain saw = 50 years wiped out, poor birds its their home!  Shall we say Calder & Brookmans DESERT. Why do people do it?
What harm does a poor old tree do?
By the way we now have fox cubs in our garden, they are nocturnal so cat in at night = no problem.
Saw  a huge owl in moffats last week, it was well over 2FT tall 5ft wingspan, I would swear it was an eagle owl, escaped? What an experience! height judged against chimney brick courses.  How many people have seen one?Thats my lot for this week, make most of it because there is little else of interest, pretentious moi ?
best wishes to all,
jet
P.S. as allways.! John, fields and fodder has little to do with RVC extension. RVC is a business like any other.
bob this is Hertfordshire ( the best county in Gods land QE1 knew this, London it aint!)
I think NOMORA  should ally with GBS and tell Prescott & Co where to stick their houses, 140 on this site why don,t they all speak up! Thats all folks!!

Addendum following Owl Identification. It had the body of the Tawny Owl, but prominent ears. Much bigger than long eared owl. The nearest I have seen is an Eagle Owl at a display, it really could be an escapee?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 30, 2002, 10:56:59 am
Quote
Saw  a huge owl in moffats last week, it was well over 2FT tall 5ft wingspan, I would swear it was an eagle owl, escaped? What an experience! height judged against chimney brick courses.

Jet, could it have been a female Tawny Owl, which I understand from the World Owl Trust (http://www.owls.org/Information/british_owls.htm), and also Owl Pages (http://www.owlpages.com/species/strix/aluco/Default.htm), could have a wing-span of almost 4ft?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 01, 2002, 10:57:46 am
Your logic is a bit off. Firstly 49,000 Hones is not 49,000 families. One of the reasons – the population isn’t rising that fast - the homes are supposed to be needed is that people are living on their own longer i.e. the majority probably won’t be family homes, secondly many of these “new” families are already here, living in shared homes or homes too small for their needs.

That said the points are well made, the existing infrastructure is always left to support the majority of the expanded need.  But we need not worry here, for a house to be “affordable” in BP, it would have to be about the size of a rabbit hutch
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alfred the Great on July 02, 2002, 12:11:21 am
Nice to hear from you again jet. I've lost count of the number of trees, both forest and ornamental that have been pruned at ground level over the last 20 or so years. I can remember clearly when Mymms Drive and Georges Wood Road were avenues, but it seems that everybody is hell bent on tree removal as soon as they move in to the area. Is it because the leaves/needles are too much to sweep up?

You can predict the process:

1. For Sale board goes up
2. Sold sticker goes on
3. New people move in
4. Skip arrives outside, builders start work
5. Old kitchen and bedroom units go into skip
6. Front garden is cleared away (including trees and shrubs) and a big new driveway installed for parking the new toys on. I've seen good york stone paving in skips because the new owners preferred concrete blocks!
7. New residents drive aforementioned new toys around as if they are at Brands Hatch
8. For Sale board goes up a few years later


Aye, things have certainly changed (and don't get me onto my favourite subject of car/bicycle relations).

ATG
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 02, 2002, 05:36:47 pm
Perhaps you should put gates up all around Brookmans Park and vet everyone that comes in and check they come up to your standard? Put a clause in that no-one is allowed to improve their property, or buy big cars.

Life is about change, things can't stay the same for ever. And what is so wrong with improving your surroundings?  Are you suggesting we keep the same kitchens for years? I don't see what this has to do with the greenbelt.  I must say as a newcomer to the village, you make people feel most unwelcome.  I happen to feel this is a very pretty area, and its wonderful to see people taking so much care of their properties and frontage.

And I'm afraid sometimes tree's do have to come down! I love the trees in my garden, but sadly two had to come down because it was rotten.  Another one at the front fell down in the high winds, which was very sad, but part of looking after your area is looking after the trees and plants, if they are rotten they have to go.

As I said, I don't see what changing your house has to do with Greenbelt and the issue being discussed in this thread.  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 02, 2002, 07:09:59 pm
Dear Anna,
I will try to explain what Alf is saying, albeit perhaps in my normal clumsy way.
When I was privelleged to move here 17 years ago, the majority of building work was for maintainance ie house painting etc. If people wanted to improve they moved to a bigger house. Perhaps within the area like the writer. Now it is like living in a building site, there is not one day that someone is not building something in my road.
There was absolute politeness, children did not scream ever. Bad driving was very rare.
In short it was a pretty little village with cute lights that switched off at night and complete peace.
Front lawns that once absorbed rain water are now being blocked over creating floods.
Living trees are being ripped up for building work, they are not replaced.
Detached houses are now starting to form terraces by being extended in all directions.
People are destroying the very reason the place was so attractive.
An extended house ( I've got one as well) looks just like that extended.
A drive was a thing to take a car for every member of the familly, now it is a vast thing that turns the area any other colour but green.
In short the rural village is being turned into a suburban jungle which is exactly what people moved here to get away from.
All these things were constrained by the original deeds to all our properties. These deeds as I have just found out now take the form of Land Registry with all the old codicils which prevented "micky mouse" development having been omited.
In our road the verge was common ie 6 ft of grass to be left open, now people build right up to the road side thus turning a spacious outlook into a cramped muddle.
It is not progress to ruin things, it is retrograde.
I have no objection to tastefull extensions which enhance the property. Well as we sow so shall we reap.
There is a natural fence around BP it is called money. Unfortunately money does not equall sense.
That explains ALFs rant.
People moving here now cannot begin to understand how beautifull this village used to be. It is now an eyesore.
Well this is my weeks ration, so don't be offended if I don't reply to any comments on my post. Its a statement not a thread.
regards,
jet
addendum: In the good old days it was possible to walk around BP without the fear of being run over by high speed orange quadrupeds tearing along the road :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Astra on July 02, 2002, 08:49:04 pm
I think its about time I put my two penniworth into this topic.

When I moved to Brookmans Park over 15years ago it was a nice quiet little sleepy hollow.  I could not believe my luck.  People in the shops called me 'madam' and said thank you when I shopped there.  Parking was not a problem except on village day.  Now, try parking its a nightmare.  People smile at you in the shops but the sincerity is missing.  Obviously a sign of the times.

I was so pleased to get my house in BP only to be told by someone in the village a couple of weeks later that I was living on the 'cheap side' of BP.  I though all BP was expensive - how could there be a cheap side.

I used to drive a small van.  Personal choice.  I was told I was lowering the tone of the village and could I park it out of sight of the neighbours opposite as they did not want to see it out of their window.  Snobs or what.  I was persecuted over the fence to the side of my property.  My neighbours seemed to think that I should fix this as a matter of urgency.  It did not matter to them that I had no kitchen at all at the time, that my cooker and washing machine were in the garden covered with plastic sheeting, that I was living on cold food (it was November) and doing my washing up in the bath.  Oh no - fix the fence or we will report you to the council.  Nice people or what.  These were the neighbours who were quite happy to use the verge on the other side of the fence as a dogs toilet.  Imagine the smell on a nice summers day.  I have to admit I stood up to them.  I was brought up in a fairly rough area and had never in all my life been treated so unkindly and unfairly by anyone.  I put up new gates.  The concrete on the posts was not even dry before the council were down.  Someone had reported me.  They even tried to get up a petition to get me to take them down.  They even resorted to graffiti.  The local policeman at the time (Brian) told me that he was ashamed of the way that I had been treated by people he had known for years.  My gates were even discussed at a WI meeting ! ! !

I was also told by a neighbour why I would never 'fit in' in BP.  I have no children so am not involved in the local school, I play neither golf nor tennis so am not involved there, I do not frequent the local church and do not belong to the WI.  And just to add insult to injury, I drove a van and worked full time.  As far as they were concerned, not Brookmans Parks ideal resident.

Well, I still live in BP to spite them.  I have (like JET) moved within the village.  The neighbours where I am now are on the whole just like me.

The people who live on the 'cheap side' of BP will always be small minded petty little curtain twitchers who have never quite made it in BP and will probably never make it up the hill to the 'big houses'.

As a final word, I did enjoy living in my last house.  Once they realised that they could not push me around they backed off.  Once they stopped judging me on the car I drove and found out exactly what I did for a living they left me alone.   I am a better ally than enemy.

I only hope that where I am now does not deteriorate as fast - I don't think the residents will let it - I hope they don't.

Astra
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 02, 2002, 09:36:38 pm
How sad all of this is. I never wanted to live in Hadley Wood because I didn't like the way everyone backstabbed each other and had to better than everyone else. They were so snobby, so I moved to BP, thinking I was moving to a lovely area, with nice people. Of course there are a few who pave over their lovely frontage, and pull down a few trees. But on the whole this is a very pretty area, a place I am proud to live in and feel lucky to have got here after wanting it for so long.........however, now I am here, I realise that perhaps it's no different to Hadley Wood, they don't like people extending houses because they live in fear that someone elses house might be better than theres.

To be honest I don't see what this had to do with Greenbelt.
Astra, your old neighbours sound horrible, there is no "cheap" side of BP, all the houses are expensive, and alot better than many of the surrounding areas. Its a great shame to move into an area and feel unwelcome. Something I am beginning to feel from this forum, (not my neighbours who are lovely).  Its seems I am judged on what car I drive, and how many cars I have and what size drive I want.

Sorry guys, I feel actually quite depressed today after reading these posts. Everyone I've "met" in Brookmans Park have been very nice, although not over the top friendly. Yet from reading the posts in this thread, I feel I have no right to be here. That I'm one of the "new" people, so don't belong.

Yes I need to extend on my house, its not big enough for my family, and believe me, we looked for ages to find a house that would be, I'd rather not go through the extension process! Yes I will extend my drive, so people don't have to park outside and ruin the look of the road.  I can't speak for all roads, but I take a walk up my road and its full of beauty.  I know I am lucky to be surrounded by such lovely surroundings, and I will fight to save the Greenbelt, from more development.

Anyone who has a house here, must have worked damn hard to be here.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 03, 2002, 12:45:57 am
I live in the cheaper side of BP – as Ann says there is no cheap side – and have found BP to be an excellent place to live. We’ve only been here six years, but we hope we never move. I can only conclude that JET and Alfred the Great have lived here so long that they have forgotten just how nice it is. True, Astra’s old neighbours sound a nightmare and, while I’ve not met any as bad as that I’ve met a few snobs. But on the whole the people here are excellent and there is a community spirit that is lacking in many places. I don’t mind the people in the shops not calling me sir. I actually like the fact most of them call me John.

People extend because the can afford bigger houses but want to stay here. There are areas which look just as nice, but people want to stay in the community and if you doubt there is a community spirit why are you on this forum? Why is the Village day so well attended? Why did people stand up for BPH when I attacked it?

But on the whole I’d like them to go back to turning off the street lights at 10pm. Sounds quaint and I’d like to see the stars more often

P.S.

Astra, we’re not all “small minded petty little curtain twitchers” over in the “slum.” When I moved in someone described this area as the “Hillman Imp side Brookmans Park.”  At the time I though it was an amusing remark, and I still do.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 03, 2002, 01:12:25 am
Dear John,
My point was that it used to be better when I moved in, it could be compared to the type of village one sees in 1940s-50s films. As you have only been here 6 years it would be difficult for you to grasp the change. No offense mean't and I am not trying to say you have no imagination, just no experience of how it was. It was delightfull when the lights went out, it helped one get a good nights sleep. BP is still better than the rest of the outside world, its just that it could be even better rather than the mediocre example of other places which we judge it by.
I would not describe anywhere in this village as anywhere near a slum.
By the way, you all, just read the 10 year planning plan. Do not be surprised when some of the fields around Gobions turn into an estate. Potterils was a farm? Leach fields could easilly be Leach estate. Relaxed planing on extensions is a double edged sword. The little guy thinks he is on to a winner, the developer knows he is!
regards,
jet
PS if my posts were read as they were written, with best intent rather than assuming the worst then it would be realised that I only want the best for this area and the people that live here.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mooniemad on July 03, 2002, 01:20:04 am
 I just would like to say this. I don't own the house I live in as I'm too young. Yes I guess you could say I live on the poorer side of Brookmans Park and yes we have extended and yes we do have more than one car. To be honest I don't care what people think because they don't know whatelse we have or whatelse we have done in our life. I believe that somethings our family has, others will never be able to have or do. We may live on the poor side as you say, but how do people know we don't have family secrets or wealth elsewhere in this world. I don't think it matters what people think.
The other thing I would like to say is. As our village becomes more urbanised, the urban areas also modernise and develop in their looks.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mary_Morgan on July 03, 2002, 01:30:50 am
Oh dear, we have lost the plot.

Greenbelt threat?  I do not believe some of what I have been reading.

Let the Green Belt Society carry on doing the very good job they have been doing for years.    Join up, they always welcome new members.   Also CPRE The Hertfordshire Society monitor green belt county wide.

But please, this is becoming very boring, and is purely people trying to impress their values or lack of values (and I admit values are personal) and personal opinions on other people.

Neighbours from hell, grumps and snobs and Hillman Imps (much as I like them - though did prefer the Sunbeam version- went to Biarritz in one in 1970 ;)) have very little to do with the green belt.

Night folks.

Mary

Had my dirhams worth.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mary_Morgan on July 03, 2002, 01:37:51 am
Mooniemad,   You posted while I was typing.  

Good on you.  

Mary
(someone who enjoyed BP never having lived on the so called "richer side" - think about it - us "poor" ones live (in my case lived) nearer the station, the shops and the pub - what more could you want)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Astra on July 03, 2002, 02:10:12 am
I really feel that I should explain myself.  I feel this is a green belt issue.

I originally come from a victorian terraced house in North London.  I moved out to the Enfield area and bought an end of terrace house.  Semi-detached sort of.  It was small but all I could afford.  I used to drive along the roads nearby looking at the 3 bedroom semi detached houses with envy wishing that I could have bought and lived in one of them  Every house had an attached garage to the side and they were all clean and tidy and sort of warm if you get my drift.

Over the ten years I was there I noticed more and more people extending to the back of their properties and also rebuilding their garages with extra rooms above.  All you see now are a row of terraced looking houses that are nothing like they were meant to be.  Also, take a close look at a house that was extended 10+ years ago.  You will notice that the house has aged at a different rate to the extension and most extensions stick out like a sore thumb and an afterthought.  We are destroying our own environment.  We are the culprits.  

We buy houses that are not what we really want and then spend a fortune changing them.  

We dont like tarmac on the drive - block pave it.  It is a proven fact that the increase in block paving in Hertfordshire is making it more difficult for rain water to drain away and is causing higher flood levels.  Plastic under block paving is not porous.  The rain does not soak into the ground and runs off to old antiquated drains that cannot cope.  Net result - floods.

We want an extra bathroom - extend - push the old sewers to the limit and them complain if the waste does not go away quick enough.

We then extend in every conceiveable direction until the houses are almost touching at the sides and then what do you have - a terrace ! ! !

Try walking down the Gardens or Westlands or Oaklands and imagine what the road looked like before everybody extended their houses.  What do you think looks best - before or after????  I know what I think about it.  I can remember what it was like and I lived over that side of Brookmans Park during the transformation.  When will this mad craze for building stop.  When will the council have the guts to say no.  Do the building lines count for nothing.

We all want to look out of our windows and see a bit of the countryside.  Surely the people looking in your direction are entitled to the same.  

If the house you are in is not what you want - find one that is.  I did.  Once you close your doors this area does not differ much from Hadley Wood or other similar areas.

Also, if this area was so nice why are there so many people breaking their necks to get away from it.  I have never in over 15 years seen so many houses for sale.  And here we go again.  More people buying houses that are not really what they want just so that they can put 'Brookmans Park' as their address, extending and altering them yet again and then moving on so the cycle can start all over again.  We are our own worst enemies.

Astra
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on July 03, 2002, 12:16:29 pm
Well painful tho it may be for some, we're beginning to get down to some real points it seems.
Astra and JET seem to have it broadly right  -  a lot of people are spoiling the area they've moved in to, possibly by muddling new suburban features with what should be genuine rural features ?
Anna is intriguing:   1) "don't see what changing your house has to do with the green belt"  -  changing the style of garden areas and extending/ improving means you'll expect a pro-rata increase in price when you sell, moving the proportion of housing stock ever upwards and away from basic need (and other people must pay in various ways)  2) you want to preserve the Green Belt but say "life is about change, things can't stay for ever"  3)  "I agree we need more housing ..."  but if this suddenly took place next door what might be the reaction ? NIMBY or acceptance ?
Social issues ARE very much part of the overall Green Belt subject whether we like to admit or deny it.  John has touched only on some of the reasons ?
Bob wants shops to give him what he wants, rather than recognising they can only give the best they can when 90%+ of us want cheaper superstore prices whether we admit it or not ?  and to preserve 'tho leaving the implications to everyone else ?
Mary interestingly has no problem with infilling it seems  Really?
Poor old Brookmans Park Hotel must wonder from time to time whether it'd be easier just to pull down the shutters than try to earn a living wage?
I think we ARE faced with some carefully controlled small scale, well-designed developments of "cottage"-type housing that are prevented by law from being traded-up, or commuting with pollution etc etc etc will just go on and on ...?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MC on July 03, 2002, 03:30:11 pm
This thread may be becoming slightly tangential to the greenbelt argument in some ways but it is a very interesting thread all the same.

Only 2 comments for now.

Firstly the specific reference to rich and poor sides of BP I find unhelpful. In terms of the Greenbelt and in terms of housing work it is irrelevant. I was a little surprised by the apparent snob values at work in some of the posts and stories told. I have never experienced this here before........

.......however, I would probably argue that we are all a bit "snobby" around here anyway but that's another story.

Re building work and changing the character of streets then I would agree to an extent although most of the work around here seems to be fairly tastefully done.

It would certainly appear to be an imperative to extend for some people because it is virtually impossible to move within the area for those who need more space. but that's probably another story too - one that concerns propery bubbles and when they will burst.

I remember talking to an estate agent here recently and he commented that people who extend in order to sell and realise the profit are really kidding themselves. They buy for say 300K and feel good when they sell for 400K - however the reality is the extension cost 60K and the original house would have gone up 40K anyway therefore no profit but 4 months of brick dust etc for their trouble.

His advice is to buy the size house you want in the first place. While I agree with the opening argument it's tough to agree with the advice especially for those already in properties who genuinely want more space.  It's just too expensive to move. Which explains all the building work !!

And as to property bubbles who saw Panorama? There are some arguments that house prices are going to crash but on the other hand it's a supply and demand issue. It is projected there will soon be more households than houses. Prices aren't going to go down in that scenario so the present situation will continue but with the addition that more houses will be built per Govt plans.

Basically guys the UK is just over-crowded !!

MC












Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 03, 2002, 04:24:26 pm
Just to add a little to MC's post. If you really do want to have a go at someone about all the extensions, then start with the govenment. They have made it too expensive to move with such high stamp duty. For a house costing £500,000, you are looking at about £20,000 in tax.........thats goes a long way towards an extension!  So at the moment, it is cheaper to stay put and extend rather than move. And Eric, lets not forget the "workers" as you say are getting a lot of work right now from all the building work.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mooniemad on July 03, 2002, 05:21:06 pm
 I was telling my parents about this topic and they told me of a little incident which they experienced when moving in. They were also told to get out the village as they didn't belong here. They were told the area didn't need people like them letting it down. They were told that they had no involvement in the village life.
Well they were wrong, since one of my long lost relatives owned one of the first shops in the village. I believe it was known as Moon Stores or something like that.
On this page you moan about the gradual increase in extensions, but then how do you know this arguement wasn't brung about when this village was built. Along time ago this area wouldn't have been built up as much as it is today. Therefore the changes have been significant. That would mean there is no right or wrong. The village therefore possibly shouldn't have been built, but it was. If you all had your way we would all be living in the past with no developments or structures. I would also like to ask those who have problems with the extensions if they also have problems with peoples gardens, because I have seen people bring new species of plants into their gardens. They have added various features. These changes to the gardens surely have ruined the original village characteristics.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 03, 2002, 05:35:43 pm
Mooniemad, I just wanted to congratulate you on your post. For someone so young you have a very wise head on your shoulders and put many of us to shame.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 03, 2002, 07:33:44 pm
Dear Mooniemad,
I am going to be devils advocate as per usual and for the benifit of the uninformed it means I am opening up a debate with an opinion that may not be my own, but which shows it from a different aspect.
Is there any chance, (not that it matters) that your family did not fit in for any reason, did your lifestyle affect a neighbours esablished existance.
For instance when I lived in Hillman Imp Land ( There is still one there if you look) I had bonfires. The man next door had them to, and we caused no nuisance to each other, by having them at night.
When I moved up the hill shall we say, the first thing my wife got from our neighbours was . " we do this we don't do that ( no bonfires) etc" With arrogance we said that we did what we liked. Well we learn't that we were in fact offensive to inflict our smoke on people and stopped. It got easier and cleaner just to take it down the dump. So we actually learnt by being considerate.
It may be worth considering that some older people have fires because they are not physically able to dispose of their rubish in any other way, it may be worth people offering to help with the disposal, If you are taking your own down the dump does it hurt to take someone elses as well?
Any way most problems are missunderstandings, they happen every day on this forum, a word missing/added or incorrect punctuation.
All I know is that its summer ( believe it or not) and I have four construction sites in earshot, when I moved here for peace.
Before someone says this is off thread, it is about the gren belt ,we are in it. If we cannot control ourselves then we cannot expect others to consider us.
Perhaps we need a pot pouri or general winge thread, now that would soon fill the computer :)
regards,
jet
PS it used to be when people moved in to a new area they quietly blended in to get the lie of the land. Now its seems to be I'm here s*d the lot of you a bit Prescotty ;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Astra on July 03, 2002, 07:59:05 pm
Firstly let me clarify one point.  Iseem to have offended some people with my comment about the cheaper side of Brookmans Park.  Read my post ! ! !  I was TOLD that I lived on the cheaper side.  I personally do not think that there is a cheaper side to Brookmans Park but there are a lot of snobby people who live in Brookmans Avenue, Georges Wood Road etc who seem to think that they are better than for example the residents in The Gardens, Oaklands and that area.  I think that these are sad sorry people who should get a life.

Astra
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 03, 2002, 07:59:40 pm
There is no need for bonfires. The council now take your garden waste away, all you have to do is buy green bags.
Or if you really care about the enviroment you can start a compost heap.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 03, 2002, 08:07:05 pm
This is just a suggestion but perhaps its best not to name roads Astra. There are both good and bad in all roads. Lets not make it personal.

I have to say, I met someone recently at a party in Barnet, we got talking and he said he lived in Brookmans Park, when I said I did as well, he replied to me........." Well I live in the cheap bit" I just laughed and said there isn't a cheap bit. I don't think any property can be discribed as cheap anymore!

It doesn't matter how much anyones house cost, the fact is, its problably one of the biggest investments we ever make and we should all look after that and the surrounding area.  Lets not get personal by pointing fingers at people who have had extensions, or taken a tree down. I'm sure everyone had valid reasons for these things.....its not for us to judge. But we can try to stop further development. What makes Brookmans Park so nice, is that each Road is different and has its own charm.  The houses are pretty and well kept........I would hate to see a whole estate built with all brand new identical housing with postage stamp gardens..........surely this is what we should be fighting against?


Lets all stop pointing fingers at each other, and trying to blame others. Lets fight to save what we have, and stop the village becomming a town and a concrete jungle.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Astra on July 03, 2002, 08:22:01 pm
Anna

I will name roads as that is the crux of the point.

We will all end up with postage stamp gardens if we keep extending our houses beyond building lines.  They were put there to stop us creating a needless concrete jungle.

Also, when I lived on the other side of Brookmans Park I was approached by a developer who wanted to buy the end of my garden and 3 of my neigh bours were also approached.  The two furthest from me said yes, the neighbour next to me said he would go with the majority and I said no.  The reason I said no - the house they were planning to build would hev been at the end of my garden and the garden of the neighbour next door.  The garden on the new property would have been at the end of the other two houses.  Also, without my agreement they did not have access so I said no.  I think I was right and we are talking ten years ago.  If we all did that can you imagine what BP would look like.  It would be a mess.  We must preserve our green and pleasant land otherwise the next generation will have nothing.

Also, can I ask Anna one question.  Please do not take this as a personal insult.  Are you defending the builders and developers because perhaps you personnaly have had an extension built, a block drive laid and maybe knocked down a few trees along the way.

Astra
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mooniemad on July 03, 2002, 10:40:48 pm
 To be honest Jet you may be right. At the time I was too young to remember.
The incident happened only after a week from when we had moved in. My family were told to get out the village. The people who told them to get out, lived round the corner. So, I doubt we were a problem to them. To be honest we had just a fair a course as they did to live here as my Grandpa owned the first shop in the village. Well now I can say I've cemented myself in the village history books and so if I decide to move away and then come back here in the future, I won't be expecting any fuss from my neighbours.
So Jet, this incident may have been brung upon by my family, but then there is a thing called being democratic. This allows people to talk and then come up with an idea which will satisfy both parties, but in this case my family didn't really get given a choice or a reason for their newly formed enemies. I don't believe some of the comments recieved by new comers in the village, that I've heard in this thread, really are acceptable behaviour. Surely if you have a problem then both parties can be man enough to come together and solve the problem.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 03, 2002, 11:22:41 pm
The point Mooniemad about how the village has changed was so on the nail that I want to reiterate it. This village is a living entity. You may try to preserve its character, but it will continue to evolve and change. You may not like all of the changes, but longing for the BP of 1985 is as pointless as longing for the BP of 1885 – or indeed your lost youth.

I’m not arguing for unchecked development, but if we confuse the building of houses on greenbelt land with extending properties we will not just lose the plot. The dangers JET sees of losing the green spaces are very real, and in my opinion unrequired - the UK is not as over crowded as some vested interests like to make out. To object to every development will weaken the arguments against the real problems.

I do think it is a little unfair to blame this government for the cost of moving. While I’d be happy to lay the blame for many things at their door, there are now only two breaks on the housing bubble – stamp duty and interest rates. All bubbles burst and when this one goes it will hurt a lot of people. Even higher stamp duty now may save us the pain of higher interest rates and repossessions latter.

Just to stir things up, there is a cheaper side to BP. And I feel I can say that because I live in it. However, it doesn’t matter because:
1) I couldn’t afford to buy my house if it was on the market today
2) I like my house and it is a lot better than I ever expected to live in
3) I have the best neighbours on the planet
4) I like the whole of BP  
Basically you can live in Hadleywood and hate it or Tottenham and love it. Its not the cost of the house that matters.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 03, 2002, 11:44:48 pm
Astra, I ask you please not to make this a personal debate. No, I would never consider block paving. Yes we have had to remove a tree that was rotten, and I even kept some of the good logs to enhance the natural look of my garden and spent money planting what will be another beautiful tree in many years to come.  Yes we are going to have an extension, because I have a large family and its impossable to find a house big enough. We have spent a lot of time planning our extension to make sure we do not use extra land! We also turned down an offer by developers soon after we moved. (and a very nice sum the offer was too.) I fell in love with this house, there is no way I would ruin it.

I have also been a member of the greenbelt society for 7 years.  

I really don't see why this has become so personal, when we are talking about larger issues. I hope at least Astra you will no understand that I am in fact on the same side as you and Jet, and do not want to change the look of the village. NO I was not here 20 years ago, but I fell in love with what it is NOW! And I would fight to keep its beauty.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alfred the Great on July 04, 2002, 12:10:56 am
Hey, a thought just entered my head (scary, eh?) - if everybody is desperate to move out of BP having sold their place for (say) between 500k-750k, where are they moving to?

Is there really anywhere else nicer than BP (even with the skips.........)? ;)

ATG
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 04, 2002, 01:28:32 am
Dear Alf.
There is no where comparable in the South East. I have looked. Which is why I moved within the village, I would have been happy in the cheap end for life if it had not been for rotten neighbours.
Houses here are in fact undervalued in my opinion.
My plans are hopefully Southern Ireland. Basically what I have here for quarter the price. No rates!!!!. All the field sports you could want for free and seas with fish in them still. A thriving EU sponsered economy, which we are paying for, Plus little chance of sunburn for my bald head .
Hope this helps.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MC on July 04, 2002, 02:26:37 am
I see we are all strenuously agreeing with one another again.

Or at least close enough that it makes no difference.

Shall we move on?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 04, 2002, 03:04:20 am
Definitly not its only just starting to be fun.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on July 04, 2002, 03:42:14 pm
Dear Jet
I was intrigued to notice your PS "John, fields and fodder has little to do with RVC extension. RVC is a business like any other".  
I'm afraid you're ... well, somewhat less-than-correct.  
Without the fields etc RVC would not be here:  our cattle, sheep, horses, pigs, goats, etc need grazing, exercise/amenity space, the cultivation of feed, straw for bedding, ... and all the rest of it.
RVC was granted a quota of development years and years ago:  all the buildings do not total up to exceed that.
As a charity, we can't afford to build when we want, what we don't need ... so things have taken a lot longer than expected.
If we WERE a "business" our activities would be centred around winning the best profit for a set of shareholders.  If you really know us, you'll know that that basic-test is simply not applicable in our case.
Best to try to clarify these things less misunderstandings creep in ?
Kind regards  -  John

 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 04, 2002, 04:30:28 pm
Dear John,
Many thanks for your kindly worded information.
Charity is big business nowadays.
It matters not a jot what the development is , Business,
residential or whatever it is still a building in green belt land.
Myself and my pets are indebted in more ways than one by the advancement in Veterinary science which RVC has a part in so do not missunderstand my post.
If it is brown, with 4 legs and neighs it is a horse.
If it is made from building materials it is a building.
If its orange it could be a LLama.
Vets are like farmers you never see one on a bike, oh dear I bet I am now going to be told there is a cycling vet.
Fields also make good sports pitches ;)
With the relaxation on developments in the village, RVC is of little concern. At the moment?
regards,
jet
By the way do you buy locally or get your fodder etc at best price from other areas, you can answer privatley if you wish or of course choose to keep your affairs private, I just wondered?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on July 04, 2002, 06:13:42 pm
Dear Jet
Thanks for yours
SOME charities are big business, but not us
If you don't have any building on greenbelt land, then no farming, very little electricity, water, gas, ...   But at least using agricultural land for agricultural-related activity is a jolly sight better than speculative housing, engineering works or whatever
Brown, 4 legs and neighs could be a pony of course ...! (overlooking the old chestnut about 2 brown cows in a field ... "aren't you worried about BSE ?" Nah, I'm a horse ..." )
You bet I'll tell you there are vets on bikes !  (how COULD I do otherwise ?!)  -  AND knocked off 'em by speeding cars ...
We buy a LOT locally, but depending like everyone else on availability (eg  "store"/ off-field), prices, quality, ...    Hence our hopes to have acquired the 20 acres in Hawkshead Road  -   which'd have kept it in conventional use
Kind regards  -  j
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 04, 2002, 07:12:34 pm
Dear John,
Thanks for your reply and I confirm that my original post was "clumsilly" ( deliberately misspelt) worded and refered to structures in green spaces.
Like Tony B. you judge big business as multi billion, to little me your RVC is big business. It occupies a lot of land ( by neccesity) and is bigger than the average business in this country ( over 90% of business's are one or two man bands) ( no not musical) why do I feel the need to explain everything lately?
I am so ignorant I thought a horse, Equus caballus was a pony also part of the genus Equidae but basically one of less than 13/14 hands high? or £25 where I was brung up.
I would have wellcomed you gaining more land and am sorry that you lost out, it would have had better use by RVC than it may have in the future.
Do you by any chance drive VET 1 ?  as I have seen it around.
By the way because you are involved in RVC I do not assume that you are a Vet, by any means.
Thanks for your honesty in revealing your sourcing, I did doubt that there was enough agriculture around here to support your requirements after all this is no longer "the country" around here is it? :'(
regards,
jet
By the way I did feel that my PS appeared to be rude so I had edited my post the next day.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 05, 2002, 04:21:40 pm
Quote
It matters not a jot what the development is , Business,
residential or whatever it is still a building in green belt land.


If you ban all building in this area businesses will move out as the structures become too small for them or as they fail to meet the basic functions required. This will turn the village into a dormitory of London very quickly. Likewise as people expect new facilities in their homes – I lived in a house with an outside toilet until I was five – they will move out if they can’t adapt their property to match.

If you want to kill BP then you couldn’t do it faster than banning all building in the area.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 05, 2002, 05:21:34 pm
very well said John.  :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 05, 2002, 09:23:30 pm
odds blood,
All I said was stop the total free for all that has developed and go back to the older regulations and codicils ( which were binding and agreed to when a house was purchased) which allowed for reasonable development in line with the surroundings.
Exampe do not turn detached houses with space all round which look nice into terraces with a small gap between them that don't.
Example do not turn a two bedroom house suitable for a small familly into a five bedroom house with say 6 people as it doubles the population density in that area , thus totally altering the concept of the original development.
Will every one be happy  when the area has been turned into one big bodge up?
As simple as that no more. A personal opinion.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 05, 2002, 09:34:19 pm
So if you have a house and love it and don't want to move.........you're not allowed any more kids? Hmm an interesing one.  Fact is Jet, families are getting bigger, and there is very little housing for larger familes. Anyone who is trying to move right now, will agree to find a 5 or 6 bed house is very difficult......so we have to extend.

I do agree that some thought has to be put into extensions not to change the pretty look of the village, or take away to much of the lovely green surroundings......I guess it comes down to compromise.  Which is fair enough, but we still have to try and stop "new" developements popping up on our greenbelt.
Which is what the argument is here.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 05, 2002, 09:47:10 pm
Quote
but we still have to try and stop "new" developements popping up on our greenbelt.

I think the thing is to judge each case on its merits
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 05, 2002, 10:05:15 pm
Dear John,
Precisely, however all residential extensions are being passed.
I will let you in on the scam.
What you do is you put in some over the top designs which are sometimes refused, then your representative  appeals and reduces them to what you really wanted in the first place. It looks like you are being told what to do by the planners, who like all committe types are little hitlers and they are passed.
Council collects fees, representative gets extra fees for doing three times the work
Does this ring any bells with anyone.
Council is happy with us ruining our own area as in case you didn't notice BP is not exactly the councils ideal place.
Now by over extending we make the property price go up thus preventing newer people having a chance and moving or even remaining in the area.
We think we are then elite but all we have done is financed the council and the building society who will move in for the kill when we are all over extended. It happened 10 years ago with a much better ecconomy than we have got now.
Hope that explains it in a more realistic way and demonstrates that I am not just knocking people who appear to want to better themselves but really want the village to be as attractive as possible to us all.
I am afraid more people, cars, skips etc etc do not make the place attractive.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mooniemad on July 05, 2002, 10:32:44 pm
 Like I said this arguement is too late for some. If you want the village to be pleasant and peaceful then the BBC mast will need to be pulled down and all the roads will need to go as they are all urbanised.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 06, 2002, 02:10:30 am
Dear Mooniemad,
If you look at the history of B.P. you will find that the Mast and transmitter is the reason B.P. was shall we say developed. It was to house the workers and with the proximity of the Station allowed B.P. to become a commuter Village.
I am appalled that some individuals consider that the pavement and verge is a place to store their building materials, the damage is never put right as it isn't theirs is it.
Word of advise the monatary value and length of construction of some extensions etc brings the works within the requirements of the Construction Management  regulations concerning management and health & safety etc. These works are no different from commercial building sites and I have noticed some site display a lack of adherance to H & S directives. Be advised that even if your builders have P.L. insurance that the property owner is liable for their safety on site and may be pursued in event of accident. Ignorance is no defense, make sure your insurance is up to it.
Not a lot of people know that.

Joke for RVC
Horse ( 16 H.H.) walks into bar and orders a beer.
" Why the long face" says the barman.   Groan.

My neighbour had a real problem the other day, his gardener sprayed weedkiller on his lawn.
Although he was a bit angry he later saw the "fungicide"
Double groan.
Can anyone post a worse joke!
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mooniemad on July 06, 2002, 02:55:48 pm
 Jet. I know that but then it does ruin the characteristics of the village.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: literatedrewman on July 06, 2002, 03:21:23 pm
Hello everyone, my names literatedrewman and, with a friend, i've been exploring this site.  Firstly I'm startled at the strength of feeling and levels of angst present in Brookmans Park-surely that should be a teenage preoccupation?(I'm 18). I've chosen to reply on this post, as it is the one most recently updated.
  Firstly, I have no problem with extensions, this coming from someone whose neighbours have all had them.  Often they are constructed sympathetically, whilst providing employment to architects, electricians, builders, plumbers and the like.  If the council were particularly opposed to a planning application I'm confident they would only too soon reject it.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: literatedrewman on July 06, 2002, 03:24:30 pm
I'm curious to know exactly when RVC became big business-surely it has far wider benefits than the large mulitnationals and conglomerates.  I wouldn't exactly call it an emblem of capitalist supremacy
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MC on July 06, 2002, 04:49:28 pm
Just wanted to make 3 brief comments :

1) is Mr Brewer a Hillman Imp fan?
1a) suggest John Fraser gets a new icon for his role as ImpMan...............no, no, ImpMan don't turn to the poor side..........the farce is strong in this one .....etc etc

2) all this argument is exactly why I suggested we should all move on some short time back. Do I really think Jet wants to ban all extensions - no. Do I really think Anna would allow any extension of any sort  - no. Do we all actually agree that each case has to be judged on its own merits - yes. So why continue to argue the point?

3) I actually think Jet makes some very good points but like I say I am sure neither he nor I would extend any such argument so it banned all housing work. Each to be judged on it's merits. I would like to highlight also that this is exactly what is happening - I know of a neighbour who was not allowed to extend in exactly the "terrace-creation way" (your words not mine... :D) that Jet has mentioned. This despite the fact that other houses in the road have done just this. I also know some other folks who were not allowed to do something they wanted to do with their porch or garage (I forget exactly what it was)

So you see controls are operating

MC
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 06, 2002, 10:36:57 pm
Jet, with the exception of a possible handful of cases, you can not possibly know what the person originally putting in the plans really wanted. You see each compromise as a final victory for the developer’s/builder’s/homeowner’s underhand tactics over a ineffectual and naïve council. I think someone from the Green Belt Society should comment on how many developments they stop completely. Whenever I visit their site they appear to have some victories.

Mark, I think you are seeing agreement where it doesn’t exist. Possibly I’m being unfair here, but JET and Astra’s postings appear to object to all building. Or at least object to all by default.

This debate is the most important one in this forum and I feel it is going along the right lines, even if a consensuses is some way off. JET’s vision of the local green space being built over is probably going to become reality over the next fifty years. The only chance that it can be stopped is by a grassroots opposition movement. That movement will fail if the more vocal members alienate local people by objecting to minor housing extensions.

P.S. I should declare an interest at this point. I have a planning application in process for building a conservatory.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 06, 2002, 11:15:27 pm
Just to clarify, I couldn't really care what people do, they have to live with it.
I just object when it spoils my surroundings.
My expose on the way to get  most things passed is factual, I have a contact who is involved in this and I don't think it fair to comment further, I have also been involved in various applications professionaly.
I was only saying how things can be achieved if they initially apear to be refused, bit of public information.
If guidelines were set by statute then it would not need a panel to give personal approval. It would simply be "this is okay, this is not." and would apply from original development plans, setting a reasonable precededent for the future.
Its called control, and with out it, its simply out of control, out of control being a not very could position to be in.
Must be a big or wierd conservatory to need planing permission, John, sure you need it?
Just passing comments, nice to hear other ideas and opinions, not telling people what to do by any means.
regards,
jet

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 07, 2002, 04:00:10 am
Sorry John just to clarify again, I meant do you need permission not do you need the conservatory.
If it faces South it will be too hot :)
Regarding strife I had this original thought, I think its original anyway so treat it as copywright:-
War, it is  pity that it is based on might,
not on what is wrong or right.
Think about it friends.
On the basis that only 5% of the membership contributes, why don't we all cut out the missconstrued words and just discuss it over a pint or three at the BPH we may all find that we are on the same side and cut Captain Paranoia out.
Have a lovelly Sunday, youall,
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 07, 2002, 11:24:54 pm
On the planning permission – which I assumed you meant anyway – yes I do need it.  I’m not a solicitor, but I believe you need permission for anything after you go beyond 15% of the original property, and mine has already been extended well beyond this. I’d need permission to put in a porch now. Before anyone asks, these extensions were done before we bought the house.

Regarding strife – This is either by Lewis Carroll, Mark Twain or a book I read that had them as characters. “A row is like a thunderstorm. It’s frightening while it lasts, but it clears the air.”

If guidelines were set by statute laid down when the house was built they would be inflexible over time. As I said, I spent some of my childhood in a house with an outside toilet, my mother grew up in a farmhouse with no running water and no toilet. A state my grandparents still lived in the late 60s. I can also remember in the 70s the government gave automatic grants to allow houses to build inside bathrooms. A badly worded statute from the 1920s may have forced houses to have remained with substandard facilities. Who knows what we may need in the future or find unacceptable?

The idea of statues would backfire over time. Developers would ensure literally anything would be ok for all futures developments. Then we would have no control. The current system is far from perfect, but it could be much worse.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mary_Morgan on July 08, 2002, 02:29:04 am
I have slowly settled into the reason why I found some of the post on this subject unsettling.   I did not "aspire" to live in BP, I just did.  I moved into the village when I was a year old.   Why did my parents "aspire" to live there - I don't know - but after the war when my father came home he  found a job in Potters Bar and it probably seemed  like a good idea.   He had never lived anywhere except Hertfordshire and North Africa, and I  do not know where else - quite possibly nowhere more exciting than Salisbury Plain and Catterick.   My mother was Irish, came to London in the 30s and was a nurse in London before and for the duration of the war.  

These two people instilled into me a tolerance of everything and anything, and a true value of how much I should value my "priviliged" life in BP. and how much we should welcome "newcomers" to the village (there was a fair bit of building going on in the 50s).  

I think, by never having "aspired" to live there, I find less to complain about other people who come to live in the village.

I do hope that BP does not join up with the towns and villages that surround it because I like to see the greenfields between them.

Somebody in an earlier post mentioned possible building on Leach's fields - sure it may happen, that is what Hubert Leach hoped when he bought them 50 odd years ago, but apart from the "newer" houses on the right as you go up Moffats his hopes have not been fulfilled.  If the Leach family still own them, one has go to admire their staying power!

Mary

PS But one can never say that BP was a cute little Hertfordshire village - it wasn't - it was built as a dormitory to London (Brookmans Park Estate's advertising was based on the fact that it had a station with good connections to London), and that is what it still is (suburbia with fields round it)  but it was a jolly nice place to live, and I hope it still is.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 08, 2002, 06:18:26 am
Quote
Brookmans Park Estate's advertising was based on the fact that it had a station with good connections to London

I have been digging in the site's archives and came across the original Brookmans Park Estate's brochure from 1926 advertising Brookmans Park as a place to move to.  Some might enjoy reading about how they tried to attract people to the area almost 80 years ago. There are also some old photographs and maps of the area. click here (http://www.brookmans.com/history/estate/estate.shtml)  (Apologies for not all the south-east map being there -  we are trying to recover the complete image)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 08, 2002, 02:06:57 pm
What an interesting read. And from reading it through it seems they expected building work through the years........the area is still developing........as its still quite new compared to many towns.

Also wanted to say I loved Mary's post, and agreed entirely. I moved here because I thought the area was pretty, and had local schools. I also thought it would be a friendly and welcoming area. I have found my local neighbours all to be very nice and friendly, and we have a very good relationship.  Sadly I don't find everyone else to be quite so welcoming, and there is a definete feeling of being a "newbie" to the village. Also from a lot of comments on here, its easy to see why. Some of the longer term residence don't like change........so must hate new people moving in. However, sometimes it is for the better. There was a house up the road from me, that had become very run down, overgrown trees blocking the front,  and the house itself was in desperate need of paint and some TLC. The new people have moved in, and I've enjoyed seeing the house transform.

Brookmans Park, is a beautiful area, we are lucky to live here, it has changed through the years, and will continue to do so, but I do believe it will always keep its appeal

Everyone who has come to visit me since I moved have commented on how beautiful it is round here, and where as, when I first announced I was moving here, they all thought I was mad to move so far out......now they understand.........and amazinly enough, 4 people I know are all desperate to move here now.

If they are to build new houses, I just hope they are in keeping with the area, rather than an estate of new properties like they have done in Shenley. Old shenley is so lovely, full of charm, and they you get to Porters Park, and its just awful.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 08, 2002, 03:28:09 pm
Dear Anna,
precisely!
Unless new houses are built on the edges (horror) It is not going to be easy to fit new ones in. ???
It has been done and I will relate an example here.
A Bungalow was sold circ 500K, it housed a family of four with 3 cars comfortably. It was knocked down and two houses were built and sold for 645K each. The potential occupancy on the same plot size is now twelve people and 8 plus cars. The green open plan front is now mainly blocks and the appearance is now estate type rather than rural. :o
All this into the same sewer and surface water drains. :'(
Now shall we all do it, trouser the profit and go mess up another village? Or shall we try and stop this type of development and keep the place special.
Example 2, Hillman imp end. ;)
Houses with gaps between allowing views over fields and trees have now been extended to fill in the gaps. The view is now a form of terrace. Is this progress, also seems that each tin god car needs its own little temple to reside in. :(
This is the type of thing which detracts from the charm of the area. Just as Anna says it is like in Shenley.
Hope I have now presented my fears for the future in a more comprehendable way than I did earlier.
It is also lovelly to see new people breath life into a tired property, but don't forget some older people may not be up to doing it financially or physically and I don't see why they should suffer because they want to finish their days in an area the love, hope people understand what I mean here. ???
regards,
jet
PS M.M. it looked cute to me when I moved in  :P
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on July 08, 2002, 04:32:23 pm
Dear Jet

I started off about a "neighing pony" not for the finer points of equidae, but as a link with other themes on this site  -  then found that my cranial hard-drive had lost recall of the lines I was going to cite:
Overall my mind had first turned to those "society" themes of "tomato" - "tomayto", "I own a horse (BMW) ... no you don't it's a pony (Hillman Imp) " ... but then had to give you a BSE joke in lieu of getting to recall the following bon mots  -  which might have some relevance  to some of this site's correspondence ?

>  " It's awf'lly bad luck on Diana
Her ponies have swallowed their bits
She fished down their throats with a spanner
And frightened them all into fits

>  "Phone for the fishknifes Norman
As Cook is a little unnerved
You kiddies have crumpled the serviettes
And I must have things daintily served

Are the requisites all in the toilet?
The frills round the cutlets can wait
Till the girl has replenished the cruets
And switched on the logs in the grate

It's ever so close in the lounge dear
But the vestibule's comfy for tea
And Howard is out riding on horseback
So do come and take some with me

Now here is a fork for your pastries
And do use the couch for your feet
I know what I wanted to ask you -
Is trifle sufficient for sweet ?


>  "the slow heavy drive home by motor-car
a heavy Rover Landaulette
Through Welwyn, Hatfield, Potters Bar
Tweed and cigar smoke, gloom and wet

And now I see these fields once more ?
Clothed thank the Lord in summer green
Pale corn waves rippling to a shore
The shadowy cliffs of elm between
Colour-washed cottages reed-thatched
And weather-boarded water mills
Flint churches, brick & plaster patched
On mildly undistinguished hils -

They are still there ?  But now the shire
Suffers devastating change
Its gentle landscape strung with wire
Old places looking ill and strange
One can't be sure where London ends
New towns have filled the fields of root
Where father and friends
Drove in to to shoot

Tall concrete standards line the lane
Brick boxes glitter in the sun
Far more would these have caused him pain
Than my mishandling of a gun


>  "Encase your legs in nylons
Bestride your hills with pylons
O age without a soul
Away with gentle willows …
… let's say goodbye to hedges
and roads with grassy edges
and winding country lanes …
… destroy the ancient village signs
but strew the roads with tin signs …
… for every raw obscenity
must have its small "amenity"
its patch of shaven green
and hoardings look a wonder
in banks of florobunda
with floodlights in between

Leave no old village standing …
Let no provincial High Street
Look as it used to
But let the chain stores place here
Their miles of blank glass fascia …

When all our roads are lighted
By concrete monsters sited
Like gallows overhead
Bathed in the yellow vomit
Each monster belches from it
We'll know that we are dead

>   "God save me from the Porkers …
His land rover come hooting …
Then dinner with a neighbour it does not matter which
Conservative or Labour
So long as he is rich

A faux-bonhomme and dull as well
All purse not pedigree …
We must admit that though he's hell
His womenfolk are worse …
Loud talk of meets and marriages
And tax evasions' heard …

The strange example that they set … "


Regards  -  john

It'd be a shame if we lost track of the fact that a lot of the separate strands on this site, are actually different aspects of one broadly-common theme ... ?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 08, 2002, 06:00:21 pm
Dear John,
If I am not precise I am missread.
If I am precise I am a know all.
Cannot win.
I had to think about the bse joke. ???
Nice poem?
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 09, 2002, 08:56:16 pm
Here's an idea, which I doubt will ever be implimented, that would help stop people extending

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/dynamic/news/top_story.html?in_review_id=635593&in_review_text_id=606313
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on July 10, 2002, 12:21:38 pm
and who managed to see the Leader Page article in the Evening Standard of yesterday (9 July) ?   Quite a few interesting points regarding the green belt and the interlocked issues which we cannot simply ignore
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Astra on July 10, 2002, 06:29:21 pm
I have just returned and read the website.  I think you are all losing the plot.

If you like your 3 bedroom house and don't want to move - extend it to a 4, 5 or 6 bedroom house and when there are no more 3 bedroom houses left, then what.  Smaller families will not be able to move into this area - not that they would want to as by then it would be a great big terrace of hotch botch houses with absolutely no character at all.  Can no one see this but me.  It is bad enough that BP is one big building site for the whole of the summer.  No wonder we never win the best kept village prize any more.  

I even know someone who moved to the other end of the road I live in to get a bigger house.  Mind you that was when the building lines were being strenuously enforced.  Not so now.  Quite frankly you can do what you like and s** the rest of us.

Hope you are all stuck here to reap the so called benefits of your short sightedness ! ! ! !

Astra

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 10, 2002, 07:02:31 pm
Dear Astra,
A little harsh and perhaps slightly unkind.  ???
You appear to be plaguerising my posts where I said the same if I recall >:(
regards,
jet
You wanna chill out like I :P
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 10, 2002, 09:00:47 pm
So whats the alternative. People move into a three bed house......they are not allowed to extend on, so move out, into a bigger house. Or like that article says, you get taxed for each year you stay in a property.  What's the end result?? You never get to know your neighbours......you lose all community spirit. As you know when you move in, you won't be staying long, you don't take the same care of your property. So the whole area goes to rack and ruin.  

Fact is, we are one of the few countries where we do BUY our properties, people abroad tend to rent a lot more so do move more and don't extend. However, rent in this country is far to high, so this is not possible. Renting is actually more expensive than paying an average monthly mortgage.

Astra, I feel your words are harsh. Of course I agree that skips and builders vans are not attractive, but I still think this is a beautiful area and we should count ourselves lucky.

Your comment about winning village of the year..........well, sorry, that has little to do with the skips.......I often walk around the village shops and think how sad it is they have not made a feature of it..........there could be pretty flowers, nice little statues, some more benches. Nice pavements.  Not to mention the empty shops........

Believe it or not, there are still very strict guidelines on building. I think the council work very hard to keep the beauty of the village. As I have said before. Stop finger pointing and fight the bigger issue. Do you want the SPARE land used for new development. Then no doubt as the village gets bigger, we will need our own supermarket and macdonalds!  

Also by the way. Astra.........if you can find me a 6 bed house in the area, for anything I can afford, I would jump at the chance of moving rather than building.  Who would want to go through all the mess and upheavel of building???
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 11, 2002, 01:35:17 pm
I don't think it's true that BP will eventually become full of large, extended 6 bedroom houses that no one can afford.

The simple principle of supply and demand will apply, house prices in this part of the country have nothing at all to do with real, tangible building costs, but simply the demand for them.

Households come in many different sizes, Anna mentions she has four children so needs substantially more room than just a couple without children. So different sizes of houses will always be needed to suit different circumstances. If people can't afford to buy a house that suits them then they'll change their existing house - if there is a glut of large houses on the market, the price will fall and people will find it cheaper to move - that's simple economics at work.

Some of the posts seem to imply that building extensions, improvements etc can only be a negative thing. My house in Peplins way was built in 1953 and has undergone substantial work over the last few years to bring it up to modern standards and be able to house my family comfortably. If you walk along Peplins Way I would be suprised if you could spot one house that hasn't been altered or extended in some way. That's progress. I don't want to live in a 1953 standard house any more than I want to drive a Ford Prefect or a Hillman Minx (not sure if these cars were current in 1953 but you get my point). (I think the Minx was a predecessor to the Imp - I assume Peplins is considered Hillman Imp land)

One thing I've noticed is that most of the houses in BP having been built some time ago have the potential for improvements. Most new housing developments don't have any scope for change because they are built on tiny plots and every cubic foot of space is used to its full potential. Therefore all the houses look the same and the area has no character, BP on the other hand has a wide variety of houses even in the same road. I think that's better, in my opinion of course  :)

Another post commented on planning regulations, maybe they have been relaxed, but they are still quite strict - surely a good thing.

Anyway, that's my thoughts on the subject.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 11, 2002, 05:11:59 pm
I am still at a loss as to why people from suburban areas look at BP say thats a nice place because its a village etc and then immediately change the rural property they purchased into the area that they came from.
This is now another summer of building noise in my road, it has been non stop as far as I can remember, I moved to the country for the quiet and its quieter in town. I expected Moos, Baas and squawking birds, but not angle grinders, cement mixers and tuneless whistling from builders.
I repeat the population goes up, the schools, roads and sewers etc cannot cope and the infrastructure suffers.
Just think if 100 trees are cut down in 10 years thats 3,000 birds gone, no owl habitat etc. I should imagine 100 trees go every year around here per year, they are great at drinking water from our saturated ground.
When its all concrete and foreign shrubs from the garden centre then I suppose everyone will be happy.
Conservation is not just the rain forest and other countries its right here in our own back gardens.
Still individuals can only do their own bit.
I don't go into London and plant trees, please don't come here and cut them down.
Whew all in one breath,
regards,
jet
P.S. Dear Anna, by the way what has the council worked hard at to preserve the beauty of the village, I must be missing something as it seems to have deteriorated, empty shops, poor sidewalks, damaged verges, ott extensions?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 18, 2002, 11:22:39 pm
So John Prescott has announced plans that could lead to the building of 200,000 new homes in the south-east over the next five to 10 years, including thousands of subsidised properties for key workers such as nurses and teachers. BBC News Online (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_2135000/2135057.stm).  If you go to that page you can also vote on whether new homes should be built on greenbelt land.  Last time I looked it was 20.20% for and 79.80% against.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 18, 2002, 11:48:09 pm
BBC News Online has a vote on this page (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_2135000/2135057.stm) asking whether new homes should be built on greenbelt land in the south-east.  This site has its own poll.  The BBC also has a 'Talking Point' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point/newsid_2131000/2131200.stm)on the issue where you can have your say in a national/international forum.  Oh, if you do post on the BBC Talking Point say you are from Brooky Park - it might give it more clout.  ;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 19, 2002, 12:05:26 am
Well there it is the official start of Prescotts slums of the future just like before the war. :'(
Houses with overloaded roads and trains to serve them :'(
The Eastern area, flood plain, discharging more cr*p into the newly cleaned Thames Estuary, now we know why he has been having elocution lessons in Estuary English.
Milton Keynes an already jammed M1.
Why not face the truth, too much immigration has stretched the infrastructure.
As for Millenium areas anything with that monika is doomed, doomed I tell e doomed :'(
A rant to equall J.F. ;)
It does effect us, its more traffic down the A1 and even more people drinking our water before we get it.
phew burst a vessel,
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: anna on July 19, 2002, 12:00:54 pm
Sad fact is, I don't think Voting will do any good. They make up their own laws. Perhaps if they knocked down the Dome, they could fit a few houses there!!  Before re-building, they need to look at some of the awful council areas that already exsist, knock them down and build decent housing.

Plus instead of letting companies build loads and loads of retirement flats, this land could be used for affordable housing. ALthough I understand a need for retirement blocks, they are popping up everywhere right now.......very expensive to buy as well!  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 19, 2002, 12:04:07 pm
Is it more people or more houses? i.e. giving a family a new house does not create more effluence, and it might not create more traffic
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Govvy on July 20, 2002, 04:54:11 pm
The government will be wanting to build archo's next.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 16, 2002, 12:33:53 pm
Hertfordshire has set up a forum (which is a lot like ours) for people to discuss how the county should grow over the next 20 years. It might be worth some of the regular contributors on this issue, who have so far been writing in the Brookmans Park Forum, having a look. more details (http://www.brookmans.com/news/august02/housing2.shtml)  Alternatively, click here (http://enquire.hertscc.gov.uk/CFforum2000/index.cfm)for the new HertsDirect planning forum.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Zorro on August 16, 2002, 02:19:34 pm
Buenos dias mes amigos,
I was travelling between my casa in Los Angeles to spend the summer season at the Royal Court in Seville having sorted out the al calde and Sargeant Garcia when Tornado threw a shoe and I literally stumbled on your village website.There is good grazing and it would seem that from looking at your threads there is much need of a little friendly help hereI urge you all to help yourselves by preserving your village from those who would harm it and to register your feelings to the council who are here to serve.I will look in from time to time as needed but until then,
Before I go does anyone know the address of a good farrier, must be used to secret passages and caves.
Up Tornado and Away
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on August 20, 2002, 09:35:01 pm
The Green Belt has served us well for over 50 years by keeping London and other cities within a strait jacket.  Mr Prescott made a mistake when he allowed the expansion of Stevenage.  He is back in charge of planning so let us hope he learned his lesson when he got such a backlash over Stevenage.  There are lots of organisations who will be opposing any move to build on the Green Belt - your local one is North Mymms District Green Belt Soc.  

I would like to thank the many people who support our efforts to protect the Green Belt in this area.  You can keep up to date on our activities, and that of an umbrella organisation caled the London green Belt Council on www.greenbeltsociety.org.uk.

Bob Horrocks, Hon Secretary
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mooniemad on September 23, 2002, 09:33:15 pm
 Well on this website we are always talking about the past and present, but I wonder what changes will occur in the far future? Any ideas of what you think it may look like in the future? For instance, what do you think the future will bring? What new technology will be used in the village? How will it have been affected by things that are happening in todays world?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: aqueous transmission on September 24, 2002, 02:36:41 am
well, i think that in the future, brookmans park will swell to the size of a small country, and have a population of several hundred million...and will be the future launch site of intaglactic space cruisers departing for Alpha Centuari, and all by the year 2023...

...no, well, physically, the village hasn't changed much since i've been here. Sure, shops have come and gone, as have faces...and houses have been modified and repainted, but generally, the village and surroundings have remained very similar to when i first moved here, and before that i'm sure.

interesting thought tho.

aqueous :-p
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aidan Winwood on September 24, 2002, 04:30:23 pm
I think, in 30 years or so, every house will have been knocked to the ground and totally rebuilt so that they all have at least two en-suite bathrooms per bedroom... :)

Also all garden areas will have been totally bricked up to allow parking for up to 18 cars per house...

...and smaller and smaller houses will get bigger and bigger gates until everyone has their own Folly's Arch...

;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on September 24, 2002, 05:04:17 pm
Dear Aque,
I was gonna say that :)
Dear Aiden,
Hillarious, I thought some were :) :) :) :)
For once I am stumped for summin to say!
An internment camp on RVC land :o
regards,
jet
Does anyone remember Passport to Pimlico, now theres an idea, now what should the qualifications be to live here, and is there life after BP
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MC on September 25, 2002, 03:10:28 am
Tres Jollies my European comrades.

What do we really think if we look into the future? BP is essentially a dormitory town containing residents who work elsewhere, primarily London.

As we all get faster comms at home what will happen?

How will the public infrastructure react/adapt?

Will the Green Belt shrink?

Will BP become a north London suburb and if so what of the living conditions, crime rate etc

Will the village ever stop arguing the toss about trivia?

Etc

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Swan on September 25, 2002, 11:33:15 am
After an 84 year old Tony Blair finally claims his rightful throne and becomes undisputed Emperor of all Europe, he will instigate his infamous "Paving for power" scheme, this will involve every loyal British euro-citizen, laying at least one slab a day so that we can finally be rid of this acursed countryside (available in pink or yellow from B&Q, at a reasonable 300 euros a sqm)

Shortly after this, Brussels will declare the "Paving Tax" which Emperor Blair will struggle against.... but

It will be at this point that (prompted by a campaign on this very message board) the people will rise up against their concrete relate oppressors and the Peoples Republic Of Brookmans Park will be born to lead the way into the future

So keep the faith brothers, as we await that glorious day

;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Sparkie on September 25, 2002, 03:47:25 pm
Is ‘Star Trek in our future?

THE UNIVERSE IS big, really big!

But don’t take my word for it. Consider a few of these numbers. I warn you, if you actually try to get your mind around them, they’ll turn your brain to tapioca.

There are 250 billion stars in the Milky Way. The Milky Way, for you non-astronomers (like me), is the galaxy we live in. Experts who know about these things have told me that if I were to ship off from one edge of it traveling 700 million miles an hour (the speed of light), it would take me 144,000 years to get to the other side! That’s a lot of years. But even more astounding than the enormity of the Milky Way itself is the fact that it represents only a tiny fraction of the universe — a droplet in an ocean of Milky Ways. There are an estimated 100 billion galaxies out there beyond our tiny planet. If you were to count the number of stars in the cosmos — first you would be long dead before you could count even a fraction of them — but if you could, you would come up with a number that has more than twenty zeros behind it.

And there’s more...

The swiftest object we humans have created (except for people who drive 4x4’s around the village) is a spacecraft called Pioneer 10, launched from earth way back in 1972. About twelve years ago it departed the solar system, zipping along at twenty-five miles a second, a pretty stout speed. (I’m lucky if I can go twenty-five miles an hour on the M25). Having left our relatively crowded solar system behind, Pioneer 10 now finds itself sailing through a vast vacancy, as solitary as a clam. Even traveling at 90,000 miles an hour, it is moving 7,500 times slower than the speed of light!

The nearest star to Earth, other than our own sun, is Proxima Centauri, combusting 4.3 light-years away. It will take Pioneer 10 32,000 years to get there. And this is the closest star! It will take 15 billion years for it to reach the next galaxy. That’s a billion with a “B.” To place that number in perspective, keep this in mind: 15 billion years is the current estimated age of the universe. Everything that has ever happened, from the big bang to your last meal, from the extinction of the dinosaurs to the rise of alien civilizations in star systems we don’t even know about — everything has happened in those 15 billion years. And remember there are a hundred billion galaxies roughly the size of our own out they’re, circling, colliding, transmogrifying.
     
Okay. Fine, you say. I get the picture. The universe is big and things in space are far apart. This is probably why we call it “space”.

The simple fact is: -

If we do find life somewhere out there, I will guarantee that they will buy the house next to me, have bonfires every night, play loud music, have two barking dogs which leave their mess in Gobions Wood, 60 ft Conifers, drive around the village at the speed of light, their children will get the school bus at the junction of Mymms and Moffats, be pro-European and love the Euro, enjoy  fireworks in the middle of the night, love line dancing, and have hordes of noisy children playing in their garden to the early hours.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on September 25, 2002, 07:57:51 pm
So your last paragraph suggests that the future is allready here ???
I am a bit hurt that you left out moaning old g*ts :o or will they be extinct :D
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: aqueous transmission on September 26, 2002, 12:30:23 am
seems to me like the future is bright...

...and quite probably orange

aqueous :-p
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 20, 2003, 09:52:56 am
The district council has been urged not to take more than 64 acres from the green belt in a move that could lead to 700 new homes being built locally. A meeting of 185 local residents, organised by the North Mymms District Green Belt Society (NMDGBS), warned that such a move could lead to local villages merging and the character of the area changing forever.  Click here for more details (http://www.brookmans.com/news/may03/greenbelt.shtml)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on May 29, 2003, 12:45:25 pm
Dear Ed(itor)

For the avoidance of doubt re your report today about threats to the Green Belt and showing a picture which looks suspiciously like part of our farm land at Boltons Park Farm, I should stress that RVC has not ... is NOT seeking to take that land out of the Green Belt for attempted development or any other purposes

Given the regularity with which RVC seems to be rather unfairly maligned, please could you make this clear ?     Or use a different picture ?

regards   -  john (rvc) ???

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 29, 2003, 12:51:32 pm
Certainly John, I will find another image. It was only there to illustrate the countryside in the area taken from a stock of scenes of local fields.
David Brewer
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on May 29, 2003, 02:53:18 pm
Thanks very much indeed, David

best wishes -  john  (rvc)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Reginald on June 03, 2003, 05:34:45 pm
Interesting program on BBC1 last night at 7.30 telling story of St Albans company selling plots "with potential planning permission" in green fields near Potters Bar. Looked like area around Hawkshead.

Our own council planning officer, Chris Conway, stated that permission would not be granted in the frorseeable future (ie next 10 yeasr or so at least) ::)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Birch on June 05, 2003, 02:18:34 pm
Then why has the local Greenbelt Society distributed leaflets in Welham Green saying that owners of certain plots of land want to apply for Greenbelt status to be taken off so that hundreds of houses can be built in and around WG?

Birch
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 05, 2004, 07:49:23 pm
Quote
Please be assured that your local Green Belt Society, and the Parish Council, are vigilant and fighting to preserve what we have got.


Bob,

Perhaps you could interpret this for us please? It's the Hertfordshire County Council's Development Strategy, Green Belt and Housing.

I checked it out regarding the 20-acre field application, although this post isn't particularly related to that, but more generally about how, and where, the county is going to fit in the homes it needs to find as part of its housing strategy.

Click here to read the current structure plan (http://www.hertsdirect.org/hcc/environment/planning/forwdplan/hertstructureplan/currentstructureplan/contents/greenbelt)

In it it says...

Quote
The Development Strategy balances the need for new housing and other development against the need to protect Hertfordshire’s urban environment and the countryside. The main policy of planned town regeneration aims to concentrate new development - particularly housing - within existing urban areas. This approach also aims to make best use of existing facilities, reduce the need to travel and to protect the Green Belt and countryside beyond from urban sprawl and other damaging development.


It goes on to say that 5,600 extra dwellings are needed in Welwyn Hatfield by 2011. It also says the emphasis is on affordable housing 'within' settlements.

Where is the existing settlement land within Welwyn Hatfield that can be turned over to develop the extra affordable homes we need in the next seven years?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mooniemad on January 05, 2004, 07:51:29 pm
I think but am not sure. There is possible plans to develop on the old De Haviland site.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alfred the Great on January 05, 2004, 10:40:05 pm
They're already developing the De Havilland/British Aerospace site - big new campus for the Poly (sorry, university) with insufficient car parking spaces, and loads of new houses (went to one on business this afternoon).

But, to be sure, there's plenty more land there waiting to be built upon.

Sorry to be contrary, but I once heard that even if we doubled the area of built up land, this would only reduce the area of "countryside" by 10%. So are we getting ourselves worked up for nothing?

ATG
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 06, 2004, 02:51:39 pm
Sorry about the length of this but you did ask for an interpretation.  The whole planning process is being revised by the government so the Herts Structure Plan update is on hold, and Welwyn Hatfield’s current update of its District Plan may be the last one in the country under current procedures.

Who would be a planner!  Government tells each region to build xxx new houses by 2011 and planners have the unfortunate task of putting them somewhere, but where?  Land in this county is very expensive so there is a major problem in building housing that the average Joe can afford to rent or buy.  The average Joe in this case is the shop assistant, hospital maintenance worker, school caretaker, and all other essential but not highly paid jobs.  They are unlikely to afford to travel great distances to get to work, so they need to live near their work.

From a sustainable and economical view it is sensible to enlarge existing towns etc to reduce travel, and make better use of existing facilities.  However it would result in the ‘London Borough of Stevenage’ by 2011 or soon after.  We like village life, and do not want to live in a town or city. That is why in 2003 the NM Green Belt Soc campaigned strongly in opposing landowners proposals to put housing on three areas of Green Belt land adjoining Welham Green.  Is it a losing battle?  Who knows but many local people feel it is a battle worth fighting.

In purely housing terms it makes sense to build 700 houses on 65 acres at Welham Green where there is an established community with shops, schools, doctors, churches, recreation facilities, rail and bus services, an industrial estate for local employment, etc.  But can these facilities, and the roads, sewers etc cope with a 50% increase in that village?

Hertfordshire is very attractive because the Green Belt has stopped London and existing towns from expanding into the countryside.  ATG is right in saying that ‘only’ 10% of the countryside would be used for housing, but that national figure includes the Lake District, Dartmoor, Salisbury Plain, etc.  What % of Herts countryside would disappear forever under concrete?  Start thinking ‘London Borough of Stevenage’ for a better perspective than the national 10% concept.

The 2002 draft update of Welwyn Hatfield District Plan –appendix 7 – shows a requirement for 2592 houses between 1.4.2001 and 31.3.2011.  To meet this figure a potential supply has been identified of 2,816 houses.  This includes 1,160 at Hatfield Aerodrome (excluding existing approvals) plus another 1,406 and 250 ‘windfall sites’.  The 1,406 includes 263 on Sir John Newsom school site WGC, 218 at Chequersfield WGC, 128 at SKB site, Ridgeway WGC, and 88 at Hilltop, High View, Hatfield.  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: catbirder on January 23, 2004, 01:57:23 am
Sorry if this has been discussed before, but if the proposals to take land at Welham Green out of the Green Belt are rejected, is there a possibility of the developers appealing?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 24, 2004, 01:45:48 pm
In summer 2003 there was the Public Inquiry stage of the review of the District Plan.  The Inspector will report this Spring and make his recommendations.  WH Council decide which recommendations to accept, and then produce a final draft District Plan which will go out for final consulation, most likely in the summer.  Developers can object at that stage.  

Then the final version of the District Plan is produced and agreed by the Council.  And that is it until the next review.

Planning applications CAN be made which do not conform to the new District Plan, but very special circumstances have to be given as to why the application should be approved.  

Hope that explains it OK
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: catbirder on January 27, 2004, 02:01:26 am
Thank you very much, Bobcat.   Could I please ask:

1.   If the Inspector recommends the 700 houses at Welham Green, and the Council decide not to accept his recommendation, can the developers appeal?  

2.  If the Inspector doesn't recommend these houses, and the Council doesn't include them in the final plan, can the developers appeal?

3.  If the answer to either of these is yes, have you any idea of the time scale before the final plan is published?

4.  Should I address these questions to you via your email?


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 04, 2004, 02:40:31 pm
Thanks for the questions.
WH Council (WHC) does not have to accept the recommendations of the Planning Inspector.  (This may change soon ).  The final draft revised District Plan will go out for public consulation most likely this summer.  Last minute changes can arise from that, and then the final version goes for Council approval before the end 2004.

Developers etc can put in planning applications which are not in accordance with the District Plan, but stand a good chance of being refused permission.  They can then appeal, which will be decided by a Planning Inspector, who may refer to John Prescott for the final decision.  Changes to the Green Belt boundary have to be approved by John Prescott's office.  Keith Hill, Minister for Housing and Planning has recently said the government wishes to continue protecting Green Belt land, or words to that effect.

You can e-mail me direct anytime, but I suspect that the many readers of this thread would be interested in the discussion.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 05, 2004, 09:40:18 am
Bob,

What do you make of reports that the governement might phase out green belts and replace them with national parks? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,1137560,00.html) A report in the Guardian said ...
Quote
In one of the most radical initiatives, No 10 is looking at addressing the chronic housing shortage by scrapping postwar green-belt building controls in return for setting up national parks.

Ministers believe the population trends are so clear that the green belts will have to be relaxed. They are already so eroded and of questionable environmental significance that it may be better to offer a larger, more coherent, set of protected parks.

Here is some strong reaction to that, (http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,3604,1141058,00.html) again from the Guardian online.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on February 05, 2004, 12:54:43 pm
How history DOES repeat itself ... !?    as it was in the 'Thirties and early 'Forties when (as a result of ribbon development and urban sprawl in to the countryside ... that has now become regarded as "accepted" Brookmans Park, Little Heath, ... and MANY other parts of the South East) the Government started on such a policy  by buying up and creating such parks  (eg   Thorndon & Weald near Brentwood, Lullingstone, ...)
O tempora !  o mores !
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Johnny Redd on February 08, 2004, 10:36:56 pm
I humbly apologise if this is old ground however:-

I (speed) read in the MoS this week that the residential development intended in the M11 corridor has now grown to 500,000+ new houses in a corridor from the A1 across to as far as Suffolk and Norfolk.

Now that Mr Johnny Prescott, is a pet project!!!!

Is this purely media hype and can anyone add any meat to this particular bone.

regards.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 09, 2004, 05:01:42 pm
An ongoing saga unfortunately.
Saturday's Telegraph reported on page 6 that the CPRE (Campaign to Protect Rural England) says John P plans 500,000 between the Wash and the Thames by 2021.  Most growth would be the M11 corridor covering north London, Stansted and Cambridge.

In total the plan is for 900,000 more homes by 2031

Herts figure will increase from 50,000 to 72,000. 60% built on brownfield sites and the rest on green field and Green Belt.  Makes you think!  Where are they all going to go?  Who would be a planner.  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on February 09, 2004, 06:08:04 pm
Its all to do with the incoming tide of more E. Europeans coming here from May onwards.
The money to rebuild our roads etc. is being missapropriated to finance the false unsustanable infrastructure to house them.
This government wishes to destroy S. England.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 11, 2004, 10:15:12 am
Quote
Herts figure will increase from 50,000 to 72,000. 60% built on brownfield sites and the rest on green field and Green Belt.  Makes you think!  Where are they all going to go?  Who would be a planner.

More on this is published on the HertsDirect site (http://www.hertsdirect.org/environment/underthreat?view=Frontpage) this morning. It says...
Quote
Hertfordshire under threat
Hertfordshire could end up with 72,000 extra houses by 2021 – the equivalent of two towns the size of St Albans. The county is among the worst hit in plans to build 496,000 extra houses in the East of England over the next 17 years.

Click here for the full article (http://www.hertsdirect.org/environment/underthreat?view=Frontpage)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on March 18, 2004, 12:04:17 pm
Just to point to a thought-provoking piece in one of today's broadsheets by Boris Johnson ...

" I suppose hypocrisy is a vice endemic to the human race. But in this country there is nothing that excites our natural talent for humbug more than the question of planning.

The Englishman will lament passing of the nice old shops that gave life to so many town centres. He will rail at the philistine politicians who gave planning permission for the out-of-town superstores that have done so much to rip the heart out of those adjacent towns.

But given the choice, on a Saturday morning, of waiting for some smocked codger to reach him down a tin of beans from some dusty wooden shelf, or whizzing round Tesco, or Waitrose, or some other gleaming temple of gammon, and piling his trolley with twice the goods in half the time and at half the cost, the good old English hypocrite goes straight for the supermarket.

The freeborn Englishman will curse every time his coccyx is shaken by a speed bump. Why, oh why, he will demand, are the local authorities permitted to put these monstrous impediments in the Queen's highway?  But wait... If it turns out he has the chance to cause one of these infernal hummocks to be erected in his own street, so protecting his children from idiots who drive too fast, and perhaps (whisper it) increasing the value of his own property, what does the freeborn English hypocrite do?  He goes for the bump every time.

And when we come to the building of houses other than our own, we attain, as a nation, our most dizzying pitch of intellectual dishonesty. With one breath we grieve for the shortage of "affordable housing". We bewail the lack of nurses, or young police officers, or bus drivers, or even bartenders, who find it so difficult to afford accommodation in London and the South-East.

But as soon as we are told that there is a solution at hand, and that "affordable houses" are to be plonked in the vicinity of our own, we become quite incoherent with anger; not just because of the loss of amenity, the uprooting of those ancient elms, or the threat to the mating habits of the great crested grebes which - or so we assert until we are blue in the face - depend entirely on that open field next door if they are to achieve the slightest romantic feelings toward one another.
No, we object also because we fear that the new arrivals could have an adverse effect on the value of our property.

Remember dear departed chain-smoking Thatcherite Nicholas Ridley, who succeeded in relaxing some green belt protections, and who caustically called his opponents Nimbies?    And do you remember what happened when some poor serf wanted to build a bungalow near Castle Ridley? Riddles went through the roof, which was quite a feat considering the size of his schloss. Not in my backyard, he squealed, and how we all laughed.

But it is that central muddle, in all our hearts, which is paralysing the British housing market ...





Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on March 18, 2004, 10:14:05 pm
Quote
Just to point to a thought-provoking piece in one of today's broadsheets by Boris Johnson ...


Nice one :-)

I can laugh at that in part because I'm not English. On the other hand it isn't necessarily the case that the English are being particularly hypocritical, because there *are* things like administered planning rules, and there *are* things like governments who can come up with nostrums like "we have a policy of building 100,000 homes a year".

The only real alternatives are to do away with all of that, and to let the market decide everything (in which case Mr Johnson's Englishman would want the government back to counter the short-term economic wreckage caused by not being able to get bus drivers and binmen), or to do away with market-driven property prices (in which case those who have bought in during the overinflated last couple of years will squeal.

Under those circumstances, and where it is "the government's" problem, it is an entirely natural human reaction to want both to have ones cake and eat it. It isn't particularly hypocritical, and it isn't uniquely English.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Earlybird on March 19, 2004, 11:01:12 am
I haven't visited this web-site for some time and am always surprised at how excellent it really is. On this Greenbelt subject I find the debate extraordinary, we are to build houses in one of the most expensive areas of the country to accommodate lower paid workers (I do not mean lower worth workers) and to allow for E.European worker influx who will fill a shortage of workers in lower paid jobs. Neither group will be able to afford to live here and I would imagine the majority of new houses will be snapped up by "buy to let" owners. I am also a little perplexed as to the long term planning as I read every day (so it seems) that we are too expensive and India and China are the place companies prefer to site. I wonder how long it will take before there is a net exodus from over-regulated and expensive UK by a highly mobile workforce who do not want to be saddled by home ownership ties. Related to this subject is it practical for Schools to build accommodation for staff who are perhaps in the early years of their careers, in the grounds to offer at a subsidised rent. Alternatively we could pay "vocational" workers enough money to allow them to compete with their fellow inhabitants right from the start. It is strange that we value Paramdeics less than Bankers !
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 20, 2004, 08:47:42 pm
Eric did a lot of typing when he quoted Boris Johnson, but unfortunately did not quote the whole article.  Boris then questioned the motives of the report's author - Kate Barker.    He concluded she wanted to reduce house prices in Britain because, in the words of the Treasury, 'the housing market is a high risk factor to the achievement of settled and sustainable convergence with the rest of Europe'.

Therefore, get rid of the bouyant housing market and we might join the euro.  He asks ' shall we lose the green belt for the sake of the euro?'.

I became an active member of the local green belt society because I firmly believe that this country is over-populated, and have seen statistics that show Britian at the higher end of the 'people per square mile' league table already.  OK you can prove anything with statistics, and you only believe those that support your own point of view.

The SE is a magnet drawing in even more of the population.  No wonder the landmass is sinking in the SE - no connection really but worth throwing in!  The reasons for green belts are even more valid today than they were 50 years ago when green belts were created.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 21, 2004, 01:28:58 pm
Lets get something straight. This country is not going to be host to lots of quallified foreign workers. As well as desirable contributors to society we will have an ammount of the shirkers of Europe who having exhausted their own systems come here to take what they can get while contributing nothing.
Europes revenge on our country is to turn it into the EUs dustbin, open your eyes, look around, visit our towns and cities.
Look at Hatfield Poly, (sorry Herts uni) it is full of far Eastern students, sponsered by their families and countries to receive a cheap education while our own youngsters hang around street corners.
Lets not forget the health chappie up North who had to resign because he told the truth about the fact that imported nurses etc from the Phillipines in particular were killing more patients than they were saving.
One thing that is taboo in our society is to tell the truth.
Let the plebs drink themselves silly 24/7 seems to be the Governments policy. Remember Rome and its downfall. Non stop entertainment to placate the masses while the enemy was at the gates.
Mind you I could be totally wrong.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on March 24, 2004, 11:22:27 am
No, not a lot of typing Bob, just cut and paste.  And clearly my Cunning Plan succeeded in getting at least one person to look for the whole article and the many real issues
Yes it's great to keep green areas nearby but many people can't admit to themselves the range of costs attached to those benefits and how they disadvantage  some people more than others.    The London Green Belt has just created a situation where poorer people now have to commute long distances from beyond the Green Belt so the GB has just increased commuting, pollution, ghetto-isation, ... and not helped agriculture either (wasn't that one of the original objectives).
But the bit I'm finding most interest in following is the ensuing theory/debate which is running along the lines of   "green belt - less housing - more competition - move in - do up property - prices up - social profile becomes more monied middle class - as savings devalue, people regard housing as best investment -  to keep that investment profitable, make sure supply doesn't increase - therefore say "support the green belt" as that's more socially acceptable than admitting personal motives are economic/greed/    -     "

There now !  I've passed it on to stoke the fires and if THAT doesn't invoke some sort of storm, then ------- ?  
But as to a sensible resolution of peoples' conflicting "agendas" ---- ?   green wedges rather than belts ?

[oh and by the way if Bob you "firmly believe that this country is over-populated" what exactly are you suggesting as the solution there ?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on March 24, 2004, 01:59:17 pm
Less green belt means less trees etc. and therefore more polution. The human race cannot survive without trees etc. which is why our green belts must be protected at all cost. As to too many people  the obvious answer is to encourage people to have less children not to have more as the government is suggesting so they can look after the older generation!!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 24, 2004, 06:22:58 pm
Green Belts have existed for over 50 years so the problem of commuting etc are not new, neither is the drift to the South Esat - I moved from Manchester in 1969.

Emigrate - that is one answer.  Stop immigration is another.  If you can believe the newspapers the Home Office has lost control of immigration.  Apparently they do not have a clue, as witness the Morecambe Bay cocklers.

Also have you noticed that John Prescott has been side-lined.  It is now the Treasury (Gordon Brown) who  approved the Kate Barker  report calling for even more housing (still burying bad news since it was announced on Budget Day), and now approved large stores out of town, rather than in town centres as J Prescott was wanting.  Frightening.  What about 'green' policies of promoting town centres etc, rather than the out of town development which require cars and buses for staff and customers to get there.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 24, 2004, 06:34:04 pm
Botheration.  I forgot to answer Eric's point about extending houses etc.  The cost and problems of moving to an existing bigger house are prime reasons for extending your current abode.  Again, you can finger Gordon Brown for increasing stamp duty on buying a house, and for not increasing the threshhold at which stamp duty kicks in.

By memory,  I read a few days ago that the number of house purchases attracting stamp duty has increased from 35% in 1997 to about 75%.  Where can you buy a house or flat for less than about £65,000 above which you pay stamp duty?  

As for green wedges.  Double talk for doing away with fields etc wherever you want to build houses.  Someone else will keep a few fields, but lets build houses here.  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 25, 2004, 02:50:04 pm
Hi Bob,

When I read your quote from an earlier post below...

Quote
I became an active member of the local green belt society because I firmly believe that this country is over-populated, and have seen statistics that show Britain at the higher end of the 'people per square mile' league table already.  


... and then this in a later post...

Quote
Emigrate - that is one answer.  Stop immigration is another.  If you can believe the newspapers the Home Office has lost control of immigration.  Apparently they do not have a clue, as witness the Morecambe Bay cocklers.


I wondered how that ties in with the North Mymms District Green Belt Society's aims as outlined on your site's about us page. (http://website.lineone.net/~greenbelt/About%20us.htm#Top)

They are listed as ...
All the above seem to me to be planning issues, not immigration or population explosion issues. Are you saying that green belt societies now take a position on immigration and population growth issues too?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 25, 2004, 09:18:28 pm
Sorry Dave but I rose to Eric's bait.  Well done Eric!

The Green Belt Soc is very worried about the ever increasing housing requirements by this government.  The figures just keep getting bigger each time an announcement is made.  Where are they going to be built?  The Green Belt is under even more threat than every before.  I know we keep saying that, but it is true.

The views about Gordon Brown usurping John Prescott, immigration, emigration etc are just my own thoughts, for which I do not apologise.  I know you try to keep politics out of this website, but housing is a very political subject.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 25, 2004, 11:18:46 pm
Quote
If you can believe the newspapers ...


I think you should write that as:


[size=12]IF[/size] you can believe the newspapers
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on March 26, 2004, 01:36:17 am
Oh I think you *can* believe the newspapers. That is just not the same, though, as taking what they print at face value. Newspaper proprietors are all aware of the power that they wield as political entities - it is part of their marketing. OK, so for some it is a lesser part of the marketing mix than tits and bums. For others the "political" arena is less the City of Westminster than of London. But they're all plainly political organisations - and you can believe the *political aim* of an article, campaign or stance, if not always the top-layer of meaning of their words. Newspaper editors and proprietors are every bit as much professional politicians as the bunch in Parliament.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 26, 2004, 02:03:23 am
Thank God for the media, without them we would be in the dark.
We have to make our own minds up as to what is informed or uninformed.
Facts are that this government is commited to the EU and Federalisation. We are destined to become states within an united state. However unlike the US of A we will not have a democraticaly agreed constitution, It will be a totalitarianist, federal creed which will serve only those who wish to weild power.
Now this government has contracted to accept an influx of migrants who under EU law will have to be accomadated.
The accomadation is your hard paid for homes and countryside.
Of course the politicians are okay, nice homes in nice areas. But now that the urban and green field sites are spoken for the next target is the green belt.
Strange thing is that this government consists mainly of those who come from the North of the UK, their lands are okay. They do however have designs on the properties of the rich SE. The way to take those properties is to make them so expensive to live in that the indigenous ppulation actually ethnically cleanses itself.
You have been warned.
Don't waste your votes on altruisic parties hosted by drunks who advocate under age porn, or 24/7 drinking.
You know it makes sense.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 26, 2004, 07:42:23 am
Quote
I know you try to keep politics out of this website, but housing is a very political subject.


Hi Bob, don't get me wrong, political debate is welcome on this site, in fact many threads are heavily political. What we don't want is political campaigning by politicians on the site. At several points local politicians have been invited discuss local issues and concerns on the site, but none did.

As for the stance of green belt campaigners I was just curious. I had always thought the focus was on the objectives set out in your site. However your references to immigration made me wonder whether this was changing. I was just curious because it seemed a new development to me.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 26, 2004, 07:52:40 am
Quote
Now this government has contracted to accept an influx of wasters who under EU law will have to be accomadated.


jet, what do you mean by an 'influx of wasters'?  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on March 26, 2004, 11:17:15 am
Sticking with "the green belt" bit for now ---

Margaret:    I admire your honesty  -  "the green belt must be protected at all costs"   -   in declaring you don't care about the decline in public services etc because nurses, teachers and others can't afford to live and work in the South East  while those with vested interests stay behind the green belt drawbridge they''ve drawn up around themselves so they can just sit and watch property appreciate in value at the expense of others


Bob:

commuting isn't new but the characteristics of it are, and they have been largely generated by unthinking total adherence to green belts

the issue's not so much with "green" as "belts" and thus your point (wedges = "double-talk for doing away with fields wherever you want to") is sadly so wrong:   there ARE places close to transport nodes etc where some slack should be considered by careful PLANNING.    Isn't there a role (even a moral duty ?) for a preservation society to be pro-active rather than purely reactionary ?

brownfield development can help but there's a danger it's a red herring  (after all the dug-out polluted ground from a town-gas site in the Greenwich Peninsular for new housing just doesn't disappear out in to outer space does it ?!

promoting town centres as a "green" solution will not work adequately until "you" the customer make it work.  
Test questions for readers or perhaps an honest poll, Editor ?:    where do YOU go for your weekly/ main food shopping trip ?  (and on principle you don't buy airfreighted goods)    for YOUR DIY materials ?    for YOUR garden products ?     (and you rarely have overseas holidays because you support the prevention of air pollution by aviation fuel etc ?

As to flats  (ie   small units for young households starting up or for older people down-sizing)  is it being claimed that there's absolutely no where in Brookmans Park that's suitable / acceptable for say a maximum three-storey mansard brick and tile scheme in well-landscaped grounds and with discreet parking ?

on with the motley !



Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 26, 2004, 12:28:55 pm
Wasters are economic immigrants, those that come here for what they can get and have no intention of contributing anything.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 26, 2004, 02:06:16 pm
There will be those who will bring skills and wealth creation to these shores as well as offering cultural diversity.

:)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 26, 2004, 02:22:55 pm
They will also overload our infrastructure to the cost of the indigenous population.
I think we have had enough unwanted cosmopolitan cultural diversity to last a life time.
Heres a planning issue that may be of interest. A huge mosque with minaretes that will tower above all other buildings in Oxford is going ahead.
The skyline of Oxford will look like Constantinople, is that appropriate?
I would also consider it more apt that if people have skills etc that they use those skills in their own countries to rebuild their own infrastructures first.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 26, 2004, 02:36:26 pm
If it is needed to enable muslims living in Oxford a place to worship then it is entirely appropriate.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 26, 2004, 03:48:39 pm
I would tend to disagree if it detracts from the general architecture in the area.
As an aside it will almost certainly contravene the latest building regulations relating to energy efficiency. I cannot see it having triple glazed windows?
It will pass on ethnic religious grounds so as not to offend the minority group and their human rights.
Any more flaming and I will start a poll on " A mosque for BP"
regards,
jet
In the words of our beloved prime minister " I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer, next"
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 26, 2004, 06:40:29 pm
As  not all immigrants are Muslim and not all Muslims are immigrants and not all “wasters” are Muslim and not all Muslims are “wasters” and not all “wasters” are immigrants and  not all immigrants are “wasters” your attempt to link the three is utter rubbish.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 26, 2004, 07:02:30 pm
How were  these things linked ? seperate issues which in some way or other all affect the purpose of this thread.
Wish people would read what is written rather than make their own summations.
Fine if people want the country to loose its traditional ways, thats up to them. But it would be nice if they could accept these things in their own back yard rather than others.
Overcrowding is fine as long as its somewhere else seems to be the way. As long as its not in their own comfortable plots.
Mark my words, increased rates and taxes to pay for these changes will result in people loosing their properties, compulsory financially motivated downsizing and migration will pave the way for the influx courtesy of the EU superstate.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 26, 2004, 08:20:05 pm
Quote
How were  these things linked ?


They were linked by you in a series of posts by you today - including your last one. On the other hand, possibly you were just incoherent.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 26, 2004, 08:53:52 pm
The intent was to post seperate things that have a common effect in keeping with the thread about threats to the green belt and encompassing the relevence of planing applications.
At no time was there any implication that Muslims are wasters, or that all imigrants are Muslims.
Thats what I mean about reading the posts as they are mean't and not reading imagination between the lines.
The facts are that the government has relaxed planing laws to encourage high density housing to accomadate an influx of various people from Europe. These places will be the slums of the furure and I see a similarity between the high rise buildings of the 60s which caused social degredation to our inner cities.
This area is a definite target for expansion due to its rail and road link.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on March 27, 2004, 12:57:44 am
Quote
The intent was to post seperate things that have a common effect in keeping with the thread about threats to the green belt and encompassing the relevence of planing applications.


There are a number of problems with this. The most egregious is that it is far too easy to turn a bunch of symptomatic problems into just another excuse for xenophobia. This is exacerbated by the second problem of conflating things like the very large number of deficiencies in the workings of the EU, the deficiencies of the current government, and the social pressures attendant on the economic imbalance between the various parts of the UK. It is too easy with such conflation to identify a common thread and to lose sight of the fact that each of these things are also independent - and certainly can only be amenable to alleviation independently.

The deficiencies in the EU arise principally because that organisation is no longer just a way for France to bolster its international standing. The idea has evolved in a variety of ill-fitting directions and yet the "common institutions" still seem to believe in one-size-fits-all grand schemes.

The deficiencies in the current government arise principally because of the legacy of requirements-to-control that existed in the Labour party as it pulled itself out of its mess of the 1980s, coupled with a marketing-led approach to the electorate that insults voters intelligence, and very poorly representative national electoral and constitutional systems.

The economic imbalance has arisen at least partly because of things like the green belts that allow for relatively pleasant areas in which the affluent can live - coupled with an "economic aid" approach to development in the "provinces" that encouraged mainly fragile economic activity such as manufacturing that is too easily moved to lower-cost places offshore. Those, plus generally poor national transport infrastructures and the failure of technology to deliver remote working environments of the same power as people physically being together keeps the south-eastern economic "cluster" attractive.

Personally, I think immigration is a good thing. In my team I have a chap who came to the UK in the early 1970s as an asylum-seeker from then-communist Yugoslavia, a half-Jamaican, an Indian, myself (Scots/Irish) and I'm about to put out a offer to a Chinese chap (with, admittedly, a broad Glaswegian accent). They're all first-rate and wouldn't be available to do the good stuff they do were it not for immigration.

Personally, I think the EU is a good idea in principle but it is deeply and untenably flawed in the long term as it is constituted today (and that this constitution they're banging on about will only make matters worse). It is too undemocratic, too centrist, and too politician-centred having lost any sight it ever had of the people who live in it and end up paying for it all.

Personally, I think the current government isn't evil as such, but is an indicative case of all that is wrong with the British constitution. Their spin-doctors insist on putting "unelected" in front of "House of Lords" every time they mention it, yet at the same time the government refuses to countenance an elected alternative - for no good reason with respect to the people who live in the UK and pay for that government, but merely to protect the priviledges of the Commons.

Personally, I think the green belts were a good idea at one point, but that either they are going to break or something sensible *will* have to be done (or at least encouraged) to address regional economic imbalances.

Each of these can be described separately, and can be addressed separately. They have to be, or you just end up with a fruitless moan and an excuse for the likes of the BNP to promote themselves to the feeble-minded and intellectually lazy.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 27, 2004, 01:51:44 am
Although I do not consider myself wise enough to understand the above post. I really do consider it to be post of the year ( so far)
regards,
jet
PS any chance of an Irish/English man in your team ;) ;)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 27, 2004, 01:50:33 pm
Wow, that certainly got the discussion going!

My own opinion is that the government should do more to make the rest of the country (outside the SE) attractive for business.  This should, hopefully, take jobs to where people live now rather than people moving to the overcrowded SE.

I did see a snippet recently of some government jobs being moved away from London, but it did not indicate where.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 27, 2004, 06:38:28 pm
Trinity, apart from "I think the green belts were a good idea at one point, but that either they are going to break or something sensible *will* have to be done" you pretty much hit the nail on the head.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 27, 2004, 08:15:29 pm
The threat to the greenbelt is due to the EUs policy of so called free and easy movement.
This has caused an influx to this country of largely ecconomic migrants.
It was always possible to move country before as long as one was approved by the intended new country.
The people of this country have never been asked to approve this policy or indeed become members of the EU.
The only vote was for a trading agreement, nothing more.
The fact that the full agenda was never tendered is another matter.
We are soon going to see Spain full of English and England full of Everyone else apart from English, what a bizzare and unnatural situation.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on March 28, 2004, 10:20:05 pm
Quote
Trinity, apart from "I think the green belts were a good idea at one point, but that either they are going to break or something sensible *will* have to be done" you pretty much hit the nail on the head.


It occurred to me, as I wrote it, that that was likely to be the most contentious point. Nevertheless I do reckon that yes, green belt was a good idea. It may still be, but it is going to "break" unless something sensible is done. I do not know how or when, nor do I know what that "something" might be.

So yes, you have a point - wha are your objections to that comment ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on March 29, 2004, 11:50:13 am
Bob

There used to be an interesting read on regional policy by a chap called Barry Cullingworth:  he looked at attempts in the last eighty years to transfer pressures away from the South East through a whole galmut of Depressed Areas Aid, Regional Development Areas, Overspill/ New Towns, etc etc.

The conclusion was that it is virtually impossible to make any impact on"natural economics", and that countless billions of pounds have been poured in with very little effect.

I suppose the parallel would be looking at Ordnance Survey plans "then and now".  I certainly find it telling to compare the pre-war 1" OS plan for the Green Belt area with a more LandRanger edition.   There's been a LOT of development taking place despite the Green Belt (and that's not looking at how small modestly priced bungalows have bloated in to large expensively priced commuter "pads" ...)

bw  -  j

(have I missed it, or has Eric's basic premise gone unchallenged and therefore is tacitly accepted as correct ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on March 29, 2004, 04:59:14 pm
Eric. Perhaps you or someone can explain to me how building on the Green belt makes affordable housing. If the council are building these houses they will go to the people already on their list, which presumeably are people already in this area that need rehousing, or refugees, no good for people up north or nurses etc. If it is not the council, why are they likely to be any more affordable than any other property around here. All it would do is make the area overpopulated. Is there some stipulation in this enforced building that states that these houses are going to be cheaper. Because if you think that you are living in a fools world.  Who are all these people with a vested interest, is it perhaps people like myself who want to live in a village and would like the human race to survive, which it will not if we continue to denude this planet of it's 'green and pleasant land' or in this small country, it's 'green belt'.
As to Jets remarks about 'wasters'. I would have thought the word itself was self explanatory. All countries have their 'wasters' and if other countries have more than their 'quota' of refugees you can bet your life that it will be the 'wasters' sent here, not the people who genuinly want to make a better life for themselves by hard work etc. or people who have a skill to offer. A 'waster' has no specific colour or religious sect, all communities all over the world have them, they just want everything for nothing and in this country that is what they get, which is why underpaid nurses etc. cannot afford to live in the south east. Nothing to do with the green belt.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 29, 2004, 05:49:17 pm
Quote
Nothing to do with the green belt.

You are right Margaret, these issues have nothing to do with the green belt, which is why I queried references to immigration and so-called 'wasters' made in the earlier posts.

The danger is that we side-track a real debate with concerns raised during an 'Alf Garnett moment'.

;)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on March 29, 2004, 07:46:10 pm
Hi Bob

Another point I've only just remembered is one you should be able to help debate.    
His point was that      if the the almost universal prevalence for town & country planning policies  (AONB, Landscape Conservation Value, sustainability, Agricultural Priority Area, etc etc)  in this country now is to stop sprawl etc, then what does a green belt policy now do in the way of specific added-value ?   Because seventy years ago a green belt policy akin to the physical determinists of ideal settlements such as WGC, Letchworth and HGS  (and if I recall to stop the rask of sporadic development now called BP ...), was the ONLY restrictive policy.  But that has changed 180 degrees:   thus a blanket application policy needs to be refined to deal more coherently with specifics ...

(wish I could find the original ...)

bw  -  j

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 29, 2004, 09:12:14 pm
The threat to the green belt is entirely due to the governments policy on immigration.
The population was static/decreasing, now it is being artificially increased.
Nothing to do with Alf Garnet, pure fact.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 29, 2004, 10:45:06 pm
“The truth is seldom pure and never simple.”

True the population has started to rise again after a long period of decline and this is the result of immigration. That is not the whole story. The pressure on the green belt is predominantly in the South and especially in the South East. This has been caused by a migration of British people toward the South East and movement of the more affluent city dwellers toward the suburbs and country.

On the subject of immigration, it is worth remembering the demographic time bomb, where there will be two few workers to support an aging population. The only way around this is breed like rabbits – which will move the pressure onto our hospitals and schools – or allow immigration.

There are a large number of “economic” migrants, but I have no issue with this. Despite what has been written other countries do not “send” us members of their population – or at least if they do, in quantities too small to matter. Economic migrants move to new areas of their own free will in order to make a better life for themselves. Although I do not like generalisations, they are frequently more motivated and more willing to work hard than the people who remain in the same area all their lives. Refugees flee persecution and/or extreme situations like war. We should always offer support both out of civilised behaviour and Christian duty.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 30, 2004, 12:30:43 am
Quote
Refugees flee persecution and/or extreme situations like war. We should always offer support both out of civilised behaviour and Christian duty.


Good post, fully agree, well said John.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 30, 2004, 01:57:34 am
How altruistic but unrealistic, I have always tried to act in a Christian manner commandment wise.
Althought the Christian way does seem to be to go forth and interfere with the customs and ways of others.
It would however be nice if those that came here had the respect not to change the traditional ways of this country for their own ends.
As for the aging population needing youngsters to carry them in later life. The aging population were planing to be self supporting until this government ripped off their pension funds and reduced their returns on investment to allow their false policy of low interest rates so as to quallify for membership of the Eu and adoption of the Euro.
Able bodied people are well able to look after themselves if left to do so without being taxed to the hilt to fund the Eu delusions of granduer aspired to by all European politicians on the continueing gravy train.
We have a mad cap policy of destroying Industry and encouraging the service industry.
I will explain simple commercial ecconomics.
Manufacturing, take £100 of raw materials and by engenuity/effort turn it into something worth £1K thus creating £900 of wages, taxes etc which all make the ecconomy turn.
Service industry, take £100 of foreign imports or home provided services, then mark them up a maximum of 10% creating a virtual loss.
This is why everyone is working hard and generating very little in real terms.
Yes an over simplification but the trend is correct.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on March 30, 2004, 02:20:21 am
Quote

True the population has started to rise again after a long period of decline and this is the result of immigration.


Birth rates are between somewhat and well below replacement in most if not all of western Europe. They're just about replacement in the US (source: The Economist - article in the last two weeks). Where do the "population rise due to immigration" figures come from, and to where do they apply ?

Anyway, I agree that we should support refugees - but I don't think that "christian duty" has anything to do with it. This is partly because I'm not religious, but mainly because it is in our own interests so to do. And not just economically. It is a mark of civilisation, and shows the rants of the likes of bin Laden for the lies they are.

I can't help but interpret anti-immigration noise as resistance to change, rather than resistance to economic detriment.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 30, 2004, 03:30:15 am
All nations should do their fair share in assisting refugees, but they don't and thats reality.
Refugees should perhaps be encouraged to return to their homelands if they are safe to go to.
We now have fewer places that are unsafe. For instance having liberated Iraq is there any reason for any displaced refugees to remain in England? Not exactly clamouring to go back are they.
All very well for people in BP to be altruistic and benevelent, but try living in the areas where some of the less desirable immigrants are housed and see how you like having your surroundings blighted by some lawless so called immigrants who smash their homes up and then demand better.
Anyone want to see it for real and I will take them to my parents road so they can see for themselves how these people repay their benefactors.
The biggest joke is crooked developers us who "do up" houses and rent them out to the councils to house so called asylum seekers at extortionate rates.
Its fine to be well intentioned but it is not working, this country in fact aids criminal gangs who extort money from poor people who wish to come here having been told tales of free this and free that.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on March 30, 2004, 11:26:20 am
Nicely put Jet. Refugees need homes the same as the rest of us, but like the rest of us they need to work hard, but too many are coming here because they know this country will look after them without them doing anything, once again I repeat we are not talking about the real refugees we are talking about the 'wasters' & criminals and until they are refused entry (as many countries do) there will be no money left to help the people who really deserve to be helped. Quoting numbers and government figures is a waste of time, if you doubt that this is true just go to some of the places that have so many problems and see it for yourself. I watched my home town go rapidly down hill, not because of the number of imigrants but because of the number of wasters & criminals, all of whom were housed by the council at our expense. My parents eventually moved out, having lived there for over 50 years, as they no longer felt safe in the area.  As to the need to 'breed like rabbits' that's what got us into this overpopulation problem in the first place. The theory of this astounds me. We have more children to look after us, then they have more children to look after them and then they have mor children...................................It has to stop somewhere as does the destruction of our 'green belts'. So why not now!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on March 30, 2004, 11:48:11 am
Dear Margaret:   you'll find it helpful to do some reading around the subject as to specifics, rather than just  generalisations ?  
For example:
1)  on the basic economic laws of supply, demand, prices, - - -
2)  about the legislative etc arrangements for bringing forward affordable housing  -  which is now necessary because of market-tinkering by the institution of unjoined-up blanket policies that hold back public sector pay, create economic ghetto-isation and all the rest of it  (you saw the BBC 2 "if" programme about housing etc polarisation ?)

A trifle optimistic that the green belt is going to single-handedly save the planet (tho it might be preserving some people's cozy little worlds for themselves) ?  Reading the various message themes on this site it might help, if it weren't filling up with more expensive housing with each person of driving age wanting their own car to commute to work/ pub/ shops and garden centres to import their instant gardens from Holland and  while their dishwashers and swimming pools burn off scarce energy/ pollute the air - - - - -    
Ecoyardstick studies shows that it's often green belt-type communities who are disproportionally devouring global resources


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on March 30, 2004, 02:02:58 pm
Optimistic maybe, but forever hopeful. No matter how much reading I do (and I do read) the green belts may be small in comparision to the rest of the world but you have to start somewhere. As I said in my previous post too much is made of so called surveys etc. get out there in the real world and see for yourself. Of course the better off people use too much of the worlds natural resources but depleteing it further by destroying what is left of the the land is not exactly constructive. Do you seriously think that the people who do not live in the south east wouldn't behave in the same way given the chance. I take it that you live in the north and don't drive a big car etc. etc.. Mind you having travelled up North it seems an extremely beautiful place to me. Like the rest of the world though it has it's bad patches as does London and Hertfordshire. I live in Hertfordshire, it is a beautiful place and I wil do my best to preserve it as much as I do my best to preserve the rest of the world and I have yet to see how builiding lots of houses in a 'Rich' area is going to provide cheaper housing. As to remarks like pulling up the drawbridge in my cozy world, too right. Surley encouraging firms to transfer to the north would be far more constructive, then cheap house could be built in the north or is it only building on the green belt in the south that is okay? Of course not it is bad news everywhere.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on March 30, 2004, 09:57:54 pm
Quote
No matter how much reading I do (and I do read) the green belts may be small in comparision to the rest of the world but you have to start somewhere.


Start doing what ?  I suppose I owe an explanation for my previous implication that green belts are not necessarily a good thing any longer.

Why ?  In creating the green belts, the governments of the day sought to arrest a problem of the day - urban sprawl. It would be fair to say that in that aim they have succeeded since, whilst development might not have been stopped, it has been restricted greatly.

But a side-effect of this has been that it has provided a place to which affluent people from the London area could flee, to get away from being in the urban area. People who choose to live here in BP don't need the attractions explained either to the youngish professional couple, or the more, erm, "established". This has entrenched and to an extent protected the green belt.

So far so good, but the consequence of this side-effect is to put another barrier in the way of companies moving out of the south-east. Yes, you can get really nice places to live in the west, or north (and maybe even in parts of the midlands, though the proximity of Birminghole would worry me). But providing the impetus to move is hard when the MDs of the firms you want to go to those places, are all comfortable here.

Quote

I have yet to see how builiding lots of houses in a 'Rich' area is going to provide cheaper housing. As to remarks like pulling up the drawbridge in my cozy world, too right. Surley encouraging firms to transfer to the north would be far more constructive, then cheap house could be built in the north or is it only building on the green belt in the south that is okay? .


See above. If you build houses in the south east, you make it less desirable and you'll address the economic imbalance problems in the UK (even while not solving them quickly). They tried "encouraging" firms before, and have spent large amounts of money that ought to have remained in taxpayers' pockets. It didn't work. Building on the green belt would be sad. But it would also result, eventually, in cheaper housing.

Now, I suppse, is when we get to find out if the local history society managed to preserve BP's ancestral stocks and pillory :-)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 31, 2004, 12:24:37 am
I wish people would stop using “migrants” and “refugees” interchangeably. They are very different groups of people with very different needs. The majority of refugees wish to return to their country of origin and frequently do when it the situation changes and it becomes possible. The majority of immigrants wish for a better life and are willing to work hard to achieve it – which makes them a lot like the majority of British people. As in all things, a number in both groups are happy to wreak the lives of many.

Like most people here, I am part of the Baby Boom generation. The Boom started after the war and lasted to the late Sixties. We all grew up and have been busy getting on with our lives. This was OK because it meant there were lots of us paying taxes and generating company profits to pay pensions and heath care for the War Generation. Trouble is, the oldest members of this generation are now retiring and in about twenty to thirty years the last of us will be looking to retire. And when we do, the ratio of workers to pensioners will drop very quickly to levels where it will not be possible to maintain the services we will need. If you think it’s bad now, its going to get a lot worse. (To any teenagers reading this: “Sorry, but we didn’t ask to be born.”)

The population’s been falling, we’re living longer. The demagogical time bomb is ticking. If you want to defuse it you have to expand the working pool.  To ignore it is just storing up trouble, because it will go off by 2030. It takes twenty years to produce a child and put it into the work force. The “indigenous” population aren’t doing their bit.  Two choices remain:

1 – We start topping ourselves when we are too old to work
2 – We grow up and start welcoming immigrants.

P.S.

I know this has been linked to Greenbelt, but does anyone else feel we should move this to a separate thread?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 31, 2004, 04:09:22 am
I would refer my honourable friend to my earlier statement.
The taxpayers of this country have had their pension and NI contributions pillaged by the exchequer. Their interest on saved capital has been destroyed by this governments insistance on artificially sub ecconomic interest rates to enable compliance with the requirements for adoption of the Euro and EU policy.
Low interest rates mean soaring house prices and poor return on investment capital.
In other words its all a stitch up for the political ends of the socialist ruling classes.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on March 31, 2004, 02:06:06 pm
Trinity, Have I got this right, the south east is so nice to live in we have to make it less so by building lots of houses on the green belt  to encourage all the affluent to move up north. Surely if we do that and the affluent move up north then the population of the north wouldn't want to live down here anymore, but stay up north, so we will have destroyed the green belt for nothing. Has anybody actually asked the people who live up north. I know quite a few people who moved up there to find (and found) jobs and quite a few who moved simply because they like it and the quality of life is better there. I do agree with you that lots of people moved here to get away from urban sprawl and building on the green belt is just going to make that more and more difficult. As to the baby boom, it was a mistake, we can see that now, but is that any reason to continue to make the same mistake. John, you apologise to todays teenagers for something that was not in your control or perhaps you are apologising because you are advocating them making the same mistake.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on March 31, 2004, 02:09:43 pm
Immigration is part of the population explosion which is why we need more housing, which is why the green belt is under threat, which in turn is why it is under this thread.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on March 31, 2004, 02:12:07 pm
Trinity, You asked start doing what? Protect the green belt, that's what.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 31, 2004, 02:43:37 pm
The baby boom? If I recall the average family was still 2.4 children, just enough to sustain stable survival of the population.
Lets not forget the reduction in population caused by two massive wars.
Families were larger in the earlier part of the 20th century, but survival rates were poor.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 31, 2004, 04:16:28 pm
Quote
The taxpayers of this country have had their pension and NI contributions pillaged by the exchequer.


True – but not really relevant. Brown made a bad situation worse but it was bad enough anyway. It also should be remembered that at the same time he cut corporation tax, so the measure was closer to revenue neutral than you might think.

The problem with pensions is that state pensions have never been “saved.” Each working generation pays the pensions for the current pensioners and expected the next working generation to pay theirs.

Personal Pensions are saved mostly in equity and bonds. The value of shares and bonds are based upon their expected growth and dividend or coupon. This value represents the wealth created and expected to be created by the companies issuing the shares and bonds. Without workers to help companies to create wealth for the company, the dividends and coupons won’t happen.

If you put you pension in cash, you expect it to generate interest. But the interest is the money is generated by loans. Without companies investing to improve their ability to generate wealth, there is no need for loans, money becomes cheap and interest drops.

Whichever way you look at it, the working generation has to keep creating wealth and paying taxes or there are no pensions. Once upon a time people didn’t live so long and there were more workers per pensioner. In a few years we will have a major problem.

Quote
As to the baby boom, it was a mistake, we can see that now, but is that any reason to continue to make the same mistake.

The problem is the number of workers to pensioners. Ignoring this will not make it go away.

Quote
John, you apologise to todays teenagers for something that was not in your control or perhaps you are apologising because you are advocating them making the same mistake.
It was a joke, but I suspect you realised that. I am not advocating the same mistake or any mistake. Indeed I am advocating measures to stop a future crisis. The workers are certainly needed and will be needed more and more with every passing year. Without immigration the population will shrink, with immigration we can maintain it at a sustainable level.

It was a joke
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on March 31, 2004, 04:46:48 pm
Quote
Immigration is part of the population explosion which is why we need more housing, which is why the green belt is under threat, which in turn is why it is under this thread.


I think that far from there being a population explosion, the population is falling. So I have to agree with John Fraser, we need more workers to join 'the system' to generate wealth.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on March 31, 2004, 06:21:36 pm
a few points for Margaret:

if one really wants to save the world, you don't start with green belts.   You start for example by not having a car (let alone the 3 cars per BP household or 4x4s), by using public transport, by not commuting to work/shop, by not buying air-freighted exotic fruit and vegs, by turning your central heating down to 15C (or off) - - - -

(It'd be interesting to know EXACTLY how people are PERSONALLY helping to save the planet ?    and not just during Lent

if I read you right (and I'm sure I do) you've said that people who use too much of our scarce resources shouldn't be stopped, but those who haven't got any shouldn't be allowed to start.  
As such a principle applies to the nurse who can't afford to buy a flat near QEII as to those starving from cash-crop economies in Africa that makes me very sad and worried for the future of wo/mankind - - - -

I think you're resorting  ' in desparation to misquotation '.  I don't think I've ever said anything about "building lots of houses".   Most people now recognise we need to build some that are specifically linked to the essential needs of the community  -   the teachers of the children grumbled about elsewhere, the nurses you'll suddenly expect to be available if you have a car crash, the policewoman to interview you after your house is burgled and trashed

if it's as simple as you claim to move firms elsewhere, how come there's never been long-term success  (apart from say those gone to be thw sweatshops in the Far East that make the fashion trainers one sees in the BP area, moving between BMW and hairdresser/deli/ - - - - ?

Anyway that is nothing to do with the fact that people who don't NEED to live in many rural areas, move in and make sure others who do NEED to, can't     And that's in many parts of the Herts Green Belt,  second-homes in AONBs in Cornwall and the West Country  - - - -

Who doesn't  feel more admiration for people who openly admit their motives rather than those who obfuscate them with claims of high/ general principle ?

I think the pedulumn is swinging towards those Real Thinkers who recognise that the belt needs to be carefully let out a notch.   Cos no one is suggesting suddenly doing away with an entire  belt in one sweep:   the sudden exposure, the unsightliness, the cold winds of change sweeping around vital assets, etc would be mind-boggling  

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 31, 2004, 06:26:47 pm
Just to return to the original point of this thread for a moment -
The countryside is not one huge green belt. Green belts were created round large towns and cities to stop them sprawling even more.  Think of the American situation where the only reason you know you have travelled into the next town is a sign at the roadside said so.

Centuries ago there were two separate cities called London and Westminster, but now they are merely the centre of a huge conurbation called Greater London.  Green belts were created to stop London, in particular, from gobbling up more of the surrounding towns.    
By memory, Cardiff is now proposing its own green belt.  Why one wonders?  Maybe to stop Cardiff expanding to engulf nearby towns and villages?  

Green belts have existed for over fifty years.  Just because they are not 'new' or 'modern' does not mean they have outlived their usefulness.  That is why I work  to preserve our local green belt.  

There were over 100 people again at the North Mymms District Green Belt Soc AGM this month.  Many societies would be very pleased to get this turnout, year after year.  Why do so many people turn up?  I can only think that they feel the same as me and the other officers and committee members.  They want to show their support for a worthwhile cause.  Or tell me otherwise, please.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on March 31, 2004, 06:36:02 pm
The cut in corporation tax was of no benifit to anyone it is spin.
NI has been used to collect revenue to fund other things than the Health service and pensions that it was intended to fund. It has steadily been used as a stealth tax.
If the population has dropped, why do we need new homes on green belt land?
So much spin, so many red herrings.
People know best what to do with their money and land, not governments.
Green areas provide builder freiendly easy sites to develop.
Its all about greed and money.
regards,
jet
As for cars, I am so sorry to have to need one to visit clients, and have been paying dearly for my right to earn a living for decades.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on April 01, 2004, 02:09:46 am
Quote
Have I got this right, the south east is so nice to live in we have to make it less so by building lots of houses on the green belt  to encourage all the affluent to move up north.


Pretty much, yes. Otherwise there will be continued upward pressure on prices until they become unsustainable and collapse. At which point a buying opportunity will arise, and mortgage lenders and estate agents will find another generation of mugs to drive up the price again. Until eventually, the "green belt" being a political rather than an economic construct, it is destroyed by politicians just as it was created.

This of course, won't happen. Because no politician is going to accept responsibility for destroying the green belt (irrespective of how much they actually are responsible for such destruction).

But it is already going on. Wait for a train down on the station platform on a cold morning after a clear night. There is a *tremendous* amount of noise - mainly tyre-on-road noise - from the A1 and M25. The sorts of wages shop assistants earn means that the people in the shops on the green can't (increasingly) live round here. So they come in by car and the result is that visitors can't park. Landfill taxes are such that scum dump waste from housework over all this pretty countryside we have. We have hundreds of low-flying aircraft overhead every day. We get people being offered school places in St Albans and Hadley Wood which only makes the "school run" problem worse.

It happens like this because excessive concentrations of people causes mess, noise and general unpleasantness. It is made worse because there is a very limited number of ways in which the problem can be addressed under the green belt rules.

What I suggested was essentially providing a catalyst to spreading out some of the south-east concentration by making it attractive for people from the area to go to places west and north - and by doing so via means other than a domestic equivalent of third-world aid that just makes a geographical alternative look suspicious.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on April 01, 2004, 11:48:13 am
Who doesn't  feel more admiration for people who openly admit their motives rather than those who obfuscate them with claims of high/ general principle ?

Eric.
Please explain above.
No you didn't read me right, a common problem on this site. EVERYBODY should be doing their best to save the worlds scarce resources so there is enough for EVERYBODY  to live comfortably. And why shouldn't we start with the green belt, no matter how small all resources should be protected. If everybody did their best to save just one thing that would be an improvement. Also I didn't say YOU want lots of houses built, it is the government etc. who want to build lots of houses on the green belt and YOU said you think it is the only way forward.
I never said it would be simple to move firms elsewhere and once again you are not reading what has actually been written.
As to the NEED to live in rural areas are you suggesting that everybody who doesn't actually work in rural areas leave. Which presumably means all retired people who have probably worked hard all their lives so they can live out their retirement in nice rural areas, or perhaps the unemployed, who have a bad enough time as it is and are now expected to live WHERE?. Or is it just the affluent who should leave then there would be no money coming in to the rural areas.
Thank goodnes I work in Brookmans Park otherwise I might have to leave. But my daughter will have to go, she works in London (only job she could find in the area she trained for 4 years). Not sure how she will survive can't afford to live in London.
What happened to the freedom to live where we want, isn't that why we welcome refugees etc. because we believe they should have the freedom to live where they like.
John & Sasquartch.
If the population is falling as you say, why do we need to build more houses, on the green belt or anywhere else.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 01, 2004, 12:03:20 pm
Quote
Who doesn't  feel more admiration for people who openly admit their motives rather than those who obfuscate them with claims of high/ general principle ?


Hi Margaret,

I am not sure what you mean by this, who it is aimed at, or what post it relates to, but I think we need to respect all points of view, regardless of whether we agree with them or not, as long as they do not step outside the site’s editorial guidelines (http://www.brookmans.com/guidelines.shtml).

The only things I feel we should steer clear of, and where suggestions for edits will be made by the editorial team running this site, is where there have been generalisations that can appear offensive towards certain members of the community.

Often people won’t mean to offend, but sometimes the words could. In all cases, when this has been pointed out, forum members have been extremely generous in their willingness to edit certain words and phrases that could cause offence. In all cases the edits have not detracted from the power of the post.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on April 01, 2004, 02:18:20 pm
Quote

John & Sasquartch.
If the population is falling as you say, why do we need to build more houses, on the green belt or anywhere else.



Because the number of people per household is falling.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: john on April 01, 2004, 02:35:59 pm
"Because the number of people per household is falling"  and the number of smaller households is increasing:   and they often find they cannot find suitably sized smaller properties because people too often take a smaller property and then bolt-on extensions, loft conversions, etc which over-sizes and over-prices the property for future use.

I think the point was made some time ago that there is a case to be made for not allowing houses in the green belt to be "inflated up" in this way and thus preserve a balanced housing stock, and the green belt/ wedges from undue continuing building ... ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on April 01, 2004, 09:17:59 pm
I thought that flats and maisonettes provided the answer for starter homes or single person homes?
The population was static over the last 50 years, but lots of new homes and flats were built.
There are many unoccupied properties.
regards,
jet
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on April 06, 2004, 04:55:07 pm
Dear Margaret.      You say "What happened to the freedom to live where we want " ?   You're surely not suggesting a conflict here between this "natural freedom" and the artificial proto-socialist green belt dogma enshrined by the Attlee Government in 1947 ?   Or is it a case of
"I shall live wherever I please ---
"You are trying to spoil my outlook ---
"they mustn't be allowed to come here ---   ?

Dear Bob:    wasn;t the GBS born out of the old Residents/ Ratepayers associations ?  so naturally there'd be an interest for the 'shareholders' to turn up.  Not so easy for those being kept outside /away from The Promised Land

Hasn't this becoming a dangerous dance around haves versus have nots, gated settlements, ghettoes, apartheid, U and non-U, 'we're orwight jack so s-d the rest of it --- ?   Why not just own up to there being self-ish personal agendas ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on April 06, 2004, 07:33:32 pm
Once again Eric, you are not reading what is actually written in the posts. I believe everybody should have the chance to live where they would like and I fail to see why destroying where I live would help the less fortunate than me in any way whatsoever.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on April 06, 2004, 07:47:20 pm
Editor
Rergarding your post pf the 4/1, I didn't write the comment you refered to, Eric did, I didn't understand it and asked him to explain it. Another case of posts not being read properly?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: eric on April 06, 2004, 07:56:44 pm
Since this is getting "us" nowhere useful (which is presumably and precisely what some want to achieve ---), it's time for some maturer reflection over Easter ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on April 06, 2004, 07:59:24 pm
Eric
Refering to your post of the 31/3, why not start with the green belt? As I have said before, anything we do to save the worlds natural resources must be a good thing, no matter how small. I presume you wanted everybody to take a note of your post, not just me as stated. But if it was meant just for me, I have four adults living in our house all of whom work and three of them need a car for work. I only buy exotic fruit and vegetables occaisionally to suplement my diet as I have various food allergies as does other members of my family and we have always believed in putting more clothes on rather than having the heating on too much.
If you think discussing these problems is getting 'us' nowhere, I'm surprised you bother to write.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on April 06, 2004, 10:09:36 pm
Congratulations Eric - truly a magnificent post. Everyone who disagrees with you has a hidden agenda to attain selfish and immature goals, while you and your allies are the only ones trying to create a better system for all. Sadly, you ignore the very real issues of urban sprawl and the dangers of having a suburbia stretching from Palmers Green to Cambridge and beyond.

The green belt benefits everyone. Even those who don’t live in it are able to enjoy visiting it. Most of my holidays as a child involved going out to the country for a day trip. Without the green belt, this pleasure would have been denied to me and others. I still fail to see that building on the green belt is the best answer to the housing shortage.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on April 06, 2004, 10:48:41 pm
Facts are that this puppet government under the direction of the  Mandarins of Brussels fully intends to cover the South Eastern state of the province of England in concrete.
This area is going to be one huge camp of politically re educated ethnic English, just like one big Zoo for the amusement of our traditional enemies.
Moderate as ever, ;)
regards,
jet
Alas poor Blunket we knew him well :o
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 06, 2004, 10:51:08 pm
Quote
Editor
Rergarding your post pf the 4/1, I didn't write the comment you refered to, Eric did, I didn't understand it and asked him to explain it. Another case of posts not being read properly?


Hi Margaret,

Apologies for thinking they were your words, but the lack of quotation marks or any form of attribution led to the confusion.

If you want to quote people it is best to use the quote facility provided by the forum.  That facility has the added benefit of not only making it clear who wrote the words, but also linking back to the original quote.

Cheers

David

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 07, 2004, 07:02:09 pm
Eric is correct - the Green Belt Soc was created out of the NM Residents Assoc in 1976.  However we get our support from all age groups, not just those who were in the NMRA.  

This week's WH TImes (Potters Bar edition) shows all ages marching to stop Mr Cripps getting permission to use Green Belt south of the M25, on the A1000, for being used for a refuse sorting depot.

People join an organisation because they wish to support what it stands for, be it the Isobel Hospice, Gobions Woodland Trust, WI, or whatever.  About 1100 local residents continue to support the GBS.  Nothing wrong wth that, surely?  If you do not shout and holler, the things you emjoy i.e the Green Belt in my case, will disappear and you will wish you had done something at the time.  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 17, 2004, 10:49:19 pm
Plans to take three local areas of land out of the green belt to meet housing targets have been rejected. Now only two small areas will be affected. Bob Horrocks has just submitted a report for the site. (http://www.brookmans.com/news/may04/greenbelt9.shtml)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Margaret on May 18, 2004, 10:13:11 am
 :D :D :DWell done Green Belt Society, my thanks go to you for all your hard work. Long may you contiunue. :D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alfred the Great on June 27, 2004, 01:11:26 am
I see another perfectly good house has been demolished in a local road (name withheld to prevent censure, but there ain't many to choose from really...) so that another enormous monstrosity totally out of scale with the neighbourhood can be built. I have noticed this happening in my many travels through Cuffley and Hadley Wood, so we are not unique, but it's a bit disheartening when yoiu've spent so much money over the years making 'improvements'.

Having done the sums a few times myself it does actually stack up, but still it somehow seems wrong.

The good side of it is that I won't have to do anymore work on Great Towers as it's all going in the skip anyway. Mrs Great is not impressed......

ATG
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 27, 2004, 03:05:07 pm
One of the side effects of the increase in stamp duty payable when buying a house is that it makes people look at rebuilding on their existing land.  Also when you live in a nice place, why move just because your housing 'need' or priorities change?

People have lost fortunes in shares, pension funds, and other so-called safe places for your money, and property prices (not the same as 'values'!) still go up.  So is it any wonder people are investing in property.

The property bubble cannot keep on growing as it has these last few years, but what will happen, and when,  is anyone's guess.  

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aidan Winwood on June 28, 2004, 03:22:33 am
I haven't been past Mum's house since she moved, but finger crossed it's not her's that's gone - I have many happy menories of that house!

Aidan
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 22, 2005, 01:16:24 pm
About 100 residents braved the cold and snow on Monday evening 21 Feb to attend a meeting held by the North Mymms District Green Belt Soc. The meeting informed residents of the implications of the draft East of England Plan which will be the blueprint for development in the region until 2021.  The region covers the six counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Herts, Beds and Cambs.

I can let you have a summary of the points made and a response letter to send to the East of England Regional Assembly (EERA).  Please use the message facility on this Forum to give me your name and address and I will send you a copy.  EERA will only accept responses to 16 March, so my deadline for sending them to you is 10 March.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 10, 2005, 10:27:24 am
All are welcome to attend the North Mymms District Green Belt Society's Annual General Meeting on Monday 21 March 8pm at United Reformed Church, Brookmans Park. The meeting will be followed by an illustrated history of London's growth and need for Green Belts.  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 15, 2005, 10:44:24 am
Just to update you on progress.

North Mymms District Green Belt Soc collected comments from almost 400 residents and sent them in a package to the East of England Regional assembly.  People who commented should have now received an acknowledgement.

the next stage is an Inquiry in Public which will open on 14 September at the Maltings, Ely. 

As a consequence of our demonmstration of obtaining local opinion this Society has been invited to participate in the discussions on two of the topics.  One is about  Stansted/M11 - district level apportionment of regional growth to Braintree, Uttlesford, Harlow, Epping Forste, Broxbourne, and East Herts (excluding Stevenage expansion). 

The other topic is the western part of the London Arc in Herts - district level apportionment of regional growth to Dacorum, Hertsmere, St Albans, three Rivers, Watford and Welwyn Hatfield.

Expansion in these areas i.e. lots more houses and traffic, is bound to have a knock-on effect here in Brookmans Park.  This Society has now been contacted by the Harpenden Green Belt Soc and the Stop Harlow North group, and CPRE-Herts Soc - the latter two are also invited to participate.  We aim to co-ordinate our comments at the meeting to produce a unified voice opposing the growth of 478,000 houses in the 6 counties in the East of England.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Max on July 21, 2005, 12:25:09 am
Excuse me Bob, but doesn't it strike you that there is a real need for more housing in the South East? I am personally acquainted with several young people (my nephew is one of them) who despite having jobs and qualifications (in my nephew's case, a 2.1 from Oxford!) are nowhere near being able to afford even the most basic kind of home in order to start a family. Goodness knows I do not wish to see more building than is strictly necessary, but if you are opposing the building of new homes, what, if anything, are you proposing as an alternative? What are young people supposed to do, especially those who do not have highly paid jobs?

 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 21, 2005, 05:28:22 pm
I have posted a follow-up on the 20-acre field thread.

But just to repeat the salient point, there are too many 'executive' houses being built and not enough 'affordable' ones.  Maybe the answer is to amend planning policies so that only 'affordable' houses will get planning permission until such time as the housing shortage is greatly reduced.  It will never disappear.

And no more extensions above a certain percentage of the original house, because making a house larger will increase the market value of the enlarged house.  Parts of Brookmans Park is almost like terrace housing due to the enlarged houses filling the width of the plot.  The minute gap between the resulting houses is laughable.

And no rebuilding houses any larger than the existing one.

Come on, Mr Prescott, come up with some workable ideas instead of just moving Green Belt boundaries as he, or his staff, proposes for the Milton Keynes and South Midlands draft Plan.  This idea is to enable towns to grow but still state that there is no reduction in the overall amount of Green Belt land.  The boundaries are supposed to be permanent according to green Belt policies issued by the Government.  But maybe the policies are about to change?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 23, 2005, 10:49:52 am
The North Mymms District Green Belt Society (NMDGBS) has leafleted some homes in the parish in an effort to increase its 1,200 subscribed members. The leaflet sets out the NMDGBS's achievements over the past year. Click here for more (http://www.brookmans.com/news/july05/greenbelt.shtml). This site's forum has always had a healthy discussion about the green belt and the need for more homes. Please feel free to add your views.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 25, 2006, 10:40:39 am
The North Mymms Green Belt Soc is now distributing 3,500 annual Newsletter to all addresses in the parish.  Unfortunatley several stalwarts cannot help this year for various reasons. 

I am looking for 3 or 4 people to help.  It will only take an hour, two at the outside - about 100 per round. One existing 2-hour round of 200 in Welham Green could be split into two  There are some streets in Brookmans Park and in Welham Green where I am looking for help.  The Newsletters are ready to go now, and need to be delivered by 13 March.

You can phone me (R N Horrocks in the phone book) or click on my name at the side of this entry to obtain my profile.  Near the bottom is a link for you to send me a message.

Many thanks
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 25, 2006, 11:13:48 am
Bob, is the newsletter published on your North Mymms District Green Belt Society site (http://website.lineone.net/~greenbelt/) ? I clicked on the link on the front page of this site, but couldn't find the latest newsletter. It's probably me being dumb. However, if you want to add a link to the newsletter from this thread each time you update it, please do.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 25, 2006, 03:51:05 pm
It is not on the website but I will add it, less the subscription renewal form since it contains a person's address.

Thanks for the idea, which is obvious once it has been stated!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 25, 2006, 03:53:33 pm
Okay Bob, then you can add the link to this page whenever it is updated. We could also have a box on the front page that always clicks through to the latest newsletter, a bit like the one for the Parish Magazine.

Dave
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 26, 2006, 11:00:38 am
Being only an annual publication it is not worth a special link, but thanks for the offer.

I have now added the newsletter to www.GreenBeltSociety.org.uk under the 'Latest News' section.   There is a link to the home page of the website at the foot of all my postings
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 26, 2006, 11:05:34 am
Very neat Bob, looks good. People can click here (http://website.lineone.net/~greenbelt/NEWS2006.htm) for a direct link to the page.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: SNAPSEE on February 27, 2006, 08:47:01 pm
We are considering buying a house in Brookmans Park. Can anybody advise on how difficult it is to obtail planning permission. I have noticed that there are a few houses with walls and gates where planning permission has not been granted (according to searches I have made) but the council appears to have done nothing about them.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alfred the Great on February 27, 2006, 09:59:42 pm
What were you thinking of doing which would need planning permission? It appears that practically any size extension will be permitted (subject to proximity to boundaries, etc), demolition and rebuild at twice the size goes through on the nod, and replacing two houses with flats would be welcomed as saving the green belt.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 28, 2006, 10:26:00 am
Hi Snapsee

You can contact me via the Forum - Click on my name to get my profile and at the foot of that page is a link for you to send me a message.  I check it on most days.

Tell me which road or address you are thinking of buying, and what you might wish to do to it,  and I might be able to give you some broad ideas about the planning position.  Since you are new to the area, my credentials are that I have been checking planning applications in the North Mymms parish for 11 years, and am currently chairman of the planning committee at North Mymms Parish Council.  This does not make me an expert, or infallable, but I have no axe to grind.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Lectricary on March 14, 2006, 06:22:55 pm
In reply to Snapsee, I can inform that the illegal front walls in Mymms Drive do not come under the local planning authorities but rather under the Highways Authority of Herts. C.C., even though it is an unadopted road. Apparently the local enforcement officer has refered the illegal walls to them on several occasions and everybody can see the result.

I have also been informed that if a wall is over 6 years old it can stay. So if you want to build a wall with gates, go ahead Herts C.C. don't seem to care if you have planning permission or not.

Lectricary


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 15, 2006, 10:38:43 am
Sorry to disagree but it is most definitely a planning matter.  If the wall or fence at the front of the property is higher than 1.4m or 4 foot 6 inches (by memory - you would need to check the council planning officer on this) it needs planning permission.

A planning application to erect a 1.5m wall and gates, with 1.8m pillars at 14 Mymms Drive was refused and the appeal dismissed on 31 January 2006.  By memory the planning inspector dismissed it because it would be out of character with the neighbouring area.

Another planning application for walls and gates at 60 Mymms Drive was also refused on appeal, and the result was a low wall has been built.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Lectricary on March 15, 2006, 01:51:12 pm
The walls in Mymms Drive do require planning permission, but if the resident goes ahead and builds the wall the local planning officer has no power of enforcement. Apparantly the enforcement comes under Herts. C. C. highways division as they are reespnsible for Mymms Drive and the verges.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Lectricary on March 15, 2006, 03:10:47 pm
Further to my post of today, I have spoken to Herts.C.C. highways dept. They state that as Mymms Drive is a privately maintained road the enforcement falls under the local council. The local council also advise me that if the wall has been up for 4 years (not 6) it can stand. Confused?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 15, 2006, 04:43:06 pm
If something needs planning permission and is built without it, the council can take enforcement action.  Usually they ask for a planning application to be submitted.  This may or may not be approved.  If refused, action will be taken to get it pulled down.

It is immaterial whether or not the road has been adopted.  Ask anyone who lives in Mymms Drive, Georges Wood Road or Brookmans Avenue.

You are right that there is a 4-year limit after which enforcement action cannot usually be taken

If someone builds a wall and does not get planning permission they might have some problems if they try to sell the house within those 4 years. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Lectricary on March 15, 2006, 06:06:04 pm
The problem is not the rules but who enforces the rules. Herts. C.C. say its the local council, the local council states its the County Council.

Any rule is a total waste of time if there is no enforcement.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 17, 2006, 07:16:17 am
The BBC is reporting that more agricultural and green belt land should be reforested with some areas turned over to housing. BBC News Online says a study by the Adam Smith Institute proposes the change saying that much of the UK's agricultural land, including land currently labelled as green belt, is not especially green.

According to the report's author Mischa Balen, modern farming techniques turned land into "monocultural wastelands" that did not provide proper habitats for animals.

The BBC quotes Mr Balen as saying...

"If some of these were converted to sympathetic development consisting of 90% woodland, including small lakes and rivers, and 5% each for housing and supporting infrastructure, each farm whose use was changed in this way would yield almost 200,000 square metres (2.15 million sq ft) of new woodland, together with 140 average sized new homes."

The BBC says that Mr Balen proposes that 3% of all farmland be converted using this system, which would create 950,000 new houses and 130,000 hectares of woodland, which equated to about an 11% increase in the woodland cover of England and Wales.

Click here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4915022.stm) for the BBC News Online report or click here  (http://www.adamsmith.org/index.php/main/individual/land/)for the page on the Adam Smith Institute with a link to the .pdf report.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 22, 2006, 01:23:39 pm
Dave.  Thanks for drawing attention to the Adam Smith Institute’s new report called Land economy. I have read it and felt like weeping (an exaggeration but you get the drift).The report has been condemned by the CPRE (Campaign to Protect Rural England) and the RTPI (Royal Town Planning Institute). 

The report proposes abolition of the planning process and Green Belts. It recommends the use of restrictive covenants and legal actions taken under nuisance laws.  However it fails to realise that Green Belts have prevented London and other large cities from swallowing up the surrounding towns and villages like Brookmans Park.

As Dave says, the report suggests that 3% of farmland should be converted over a 10-year period to provide about 130,000 hectares (320,000 acres) of woodland and almost 1 million homes. It says ‘None of these new homes would be overlooked by existing houses.  Rather they would be nestled in among new woodland’.  My question is this – how does this dream stack up against the reports complaints about the current price of homes and the long commuter journeys particularly by those working in London?  There is a lot more like not knowing the difference between metres squared and square metres when it says ‘England’s rooms average 15.8 metres squared’.  But that is minor compared with the wholly unreal nature of this report.

Adam Smith must be revolving in his grave.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on July 31, 2006, 09:01:02 am
Not sure if this appears elsewhere but there are 10000 new homes planned for our area and only to October to object in any way. The plan is on www.go-east.gov.uk/goeast/planning/regional_planning/

People can object directly to Ruth Kelly but Grant Shapps is running a campaign with the WH Times. This is supposed to be apolitical/cross party. His site is www.shapps.com

The obvious concerns to me are that about half this development will go on Green Belt land and if they are running down the QEII now and the new hospital on the Aerospace site is in doubt, how will our local NHS cope with say 15000 more people? Indeed how will our police give us more resources for our area if they have more people to police?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 12, 2006, 01:01:56 pm
A Newsletter is being circulated by the NM Green Belt Soc, going to every home in the parish.  We want to show Welwyn Hatfield Council the strength of local concern about the possible imposition of 10,000 in the Borough, with about half having to go on Green Belt land.

Please sign the letter enclosed with the Newsletter and return it by the end of Sept if possible.  There are collection boxes in Brookmans Park News shop and Welham green Post Office, Dellsome Lane.  Or you can mail it to me, at the address shown on the draft letter.

The Society is also holding a public meeting on Monday 2 Oct at the NM Youth and Community Centre, Station Rd, next to the catholic church.  We will give you more info on the implications of the East of England Plan.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 16, 2006, 12:05:32 pm
A post script to the above it.

Bill Storey will be a speaker at the public meeting.  He is very well known as a Councillor for Welham Green on the Parish Council, County Council, and formerly on the District Council. He has great knowledge of the subject and will be able to put our local concerns into the wider context.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 16, 2006, 12:12:56 pm
Bob,

Where do we get the forms from if they are not delivered to our house?

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: JMT on September 17, 2006, 03:44:43 pm
We've had three delivered through our door - all on different days - and presumably by three different people.  Seems a bit of overkill to us.   We have sent them back though.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 17, 2006, 04:37:21 pm
I can't understand why all the fuss about the extra 4,200 homes proposed for Welwyn Hatfield. The East of England plan has 89 references to affordable housing and several times the need to sustain local economies is mentioned.

Quote

A priority is for the provision of affordable housing to meet identified needs, particularly in rural areas ... to sustain local economies.


The area is bound to change. And it needs to change to accommodate a growing population.

Don't forget the sales pitch sent out when the bulk of Brookmans Park was just a glint in some developer's eye.

Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/history/estate/estate.shtml) to read the developer's dream.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 23, 2006, 05:48:15 pm
The problem is that the council reckons it can find space for the original 5,800 hpomes without building on the Green Belt, but not the extra 4,200.  Green Belt land will disappear.  Once it has gone it has gone forever.  It is not just the homes but everything else that goes with them. 

You cannot build homes in isolation.  They need roads, water, gas and electricity, etc, and where are the jobs going to materialise to employ all these people?  The Shredded Wheat factory is closing down to name just one current employer.  Will we be simply a commuter area for London jobs?  The QE2 is being slowly closed down so we will have to go to Stevenage for hospital treatment.  The proposed Hatfield hospital looks increasingly like a pipe dream according to this week's WH Times.

When Brookmans Park was built there was no Green Belt. 

Agreed about affordable housing but experience says that developers prefer to build expensive houses with large profit margins.  Mr Friday Grove (sorry - name and address supplied) even wrote in the WH TImes that a series of country houses could be the saviour of the Green Belt, each one taking up several acres of countryside!

Sorry if anyone got more than one copy of the Green Belt Soc Newsletter, or did not get one at all.  The 25 or so volunteer deliverers were given specific roads where they were to deliver and every home in North Mymms parish should have received one copy.  Some houses have locked gates and others have no letter boxes which makes life difficult for the deliverers.   I will let Dave have a copy.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grant Shapps MP on September 23, 2006, 10:35:30 pm
Very interesting discussion.

I just want to clarify that the cross party, cross community website on this subject  -- mentioned in the initial posts above -- is not at http://www.shapps.com which is my own personal site, but at http://www.NoWayTo10k.com which is a site that I've built but as you'll see with nearly cross party and complete cross community consensus.

Regards,
Grant Shapps MP
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 01, 2006, 09:43:23 pm
Would any forum user attending the meeting tomorrow night like to send a 200-word report on the event?

Also, a digital picture would be appreciated.

You can mail me through the site's feedback form.

Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/contact.php).

Thanks

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Laurel on October 03, 2006, 01:19:17 pm
Hi,

From the point of view of someone trying to get on the property ladder and move out of home at 25 (I would have done before, but it was out of the question), these houses rarely are affordable. I certainly couldn't afford somewhere in Welwyn Hatfield where I work, and am looking at Stevenage. I know from friends that I am far from being the only one in this situation either.

The houses seem to go to more buy-to-let companies quite often or wealthy people already on the ladder, rather than first time buyers. It just seems there's no incentive to work hard for a living to do it in your own right because the prices are always just out of reach. I, like many, have lived in the county all my life, and work here, but have struggled to find anywhere affordable. And all the competition, including from wealthy commuters, only pushes prices up further.

I just think we could be in danger of becoming another London suburb, meanwhile the north of the country is becoming increasingly unlived-in and derelict. What about regeneration there? It just doesn't seem to make sense to develop here, especially what with water shortage problems and the problems with the new Hatfield Hospital/QE2/Lister.

Also, I just wonder who building more houses round here will benefit - may be not the people the government hope for.

Taking all this into account, sacrificing the green belt makes even less sense for development with those odds against it before it even starts.

Then, as a reporter for the Welwyn Hatfield Times, may be I am biased to the No Way To 10k campaign.

Food for thought anyway...

Laurel

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 04, 2006, 06:30:50 pm
I have updated the NM Green Belt Soc website with some of the points that I made at the public meeting on Monday 2 October.  Click on the link below and follow the 'click here' for East of England Plan.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 03, 2006, 12:45:57 pm
At 12.30 on Friday 10 November the North Mymms District Green Belt Society will be formally presenting the 657 responses to its Newsletter to Welwyn Hatfiield Council.  It will be at the main entrance to the council offices, Campus East, Welwyn Garden City (on the lefthand side of Waitrose supermarket).  All are welcome to be present.

The delegation is expected to include our chairman, Claire Taylor, immediate past President Bob Wilson, our new President Gary Mabbutt, and our MP Grant Shapps who is running the 'www.NoWayTo10K.com' campaign . 

Bob Wilson stood down after being our President for 24 years when he sold his house in September but he is still living locally for a while.  Local resident Gary Mabbutt has agreed to be our President, and this will his first occasion when he will be seen in that role.  Both Bob and Gary were defenders for their football teams and their countries so it is not surprising that they continue to defend, in this case it is the Green Belt.

Many thanks to everyone who responded to our Newsletter thereby supporting Welwyn Hatfield Council in its opposition to the extra 4,200 dwellings proposed by planning inspectors.  This is in addition to the 5,800 dwellings in the original draft East of England Plan for the period 2001-2021.  According to the council, these extra 4,000+ dwellings will have to be built on Green Belt land because there is nowhere else.

Many replies commented on the existing water shortage, lack of funds for infrastructure, and the running down of the QE2 hospital.  One comment in particular summed up for me the general views of local residents.  In a young but very neat handwriting, someone  wrote 'I am six years old.  I live in Welham Green because I can ride my bike in green fields'.   

These 657 replies from just one small area compares very very favourably when you think that the CPRE campaign for the whole East of England region has had 2,500 responses so far.  North Mymms residents have stood up and been counted!  Thank you.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 03, 2006, 03:24:45 pm
Bob

Thanks for the great work you're doing on behalf of us all.

Many of us don't have the time or maybe the inclination to get involved to the extent you have, but I'm sure I'm right in saying we appreciate your efforts on behalf of the whole community.

Brookmans Park and the surrounding area is a great place to live and don't want to see huge tracts of greenbelt land disappear forever.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 09, 2006, 11:28:41 am
An interesting planning application recently made is for the Red Lion pub on the A1000 at Hatfield.  It involves the demolition of the 2-storey side extension - the Cranborne Rooms - and rear outbuildings, and erect a 3-storey block of 20 2-bed flats and a terrace of 4 3-bed houses.  The carpark would be revised.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 13, 2006, 12:03:44 pm
Rather than sidetrack the current QE2 discussion, I will add a related comment here.

Planning Inspectors held a Public Inquiry in 2005/6 on the draft East of England Plan.  They then updated the housing figures to reflect central government's more recent forecasts showing the 'need' for even more dwellings.  Welwyn Hatfield had a good track record of attracting jobs to the area, which is why the inspectors increased the original 5,800 dwellings in this borough by 72% to 10,000.

Had they done some research they would have found that it was the closure of Hatfield Airfield and the substitution of new business park which had created a one-off increase in jobs in the area.  Where will the jobs come from in the next 15 years of the East of England Plan period to 2021?

The final decision on the number of homes is expected about July 2007.  The current petitioning by the NM Green Belt Soc and our MP is to show Ruth Kelly now that her department needs to think again over where to put the extra housing.  Hopefully the 'proposed changes to the EEP' consultation paper due next month will reflect the current petitioning.  Will it be a happy Christmas  present to we local residents or not?  We shall see.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Max on November 13, 2006, 10:26:11 pm
From the point of view of someone trying to get on the property ladder and move out of home at 25 (I would have done before, but it was out of the question), these houses rarely are affordable. I certainly couldn't afford somewhere in Welwyn Hatfield where I work, and am looking at Stevenage. I know from friends that I am far from being the only one in this situation either.

The houses seem to go to more buy-to-let companies quite often or wealthy people already on the ladder, rather than first time buyers. It just seems there's no incentive to work hard for a living to do it in your own right because the prices are always just out of reach. I, like many, have lived in the county all my life, and work here, but have struggled to find anywhere affordable. And all the competition, including from wealthy commuters, only pushes prices up further.

Surely it is within the power of some authority somewhere to stipulate what kind of houses are to be built, and what percentage of them should be suitable for first time buyers? What about social housing? Do councils not build houses any more? As I see it, there is a hell of a need for more affordable housing for young people in the area. To cite the example of my own nephew, he still lives with his dad at the age of 30, despite getting a 2.1 from Oxford, and has no prospects of being able to afford a home in the areas despite earning a quite respectable salary! He could, I suppose, move to Middlesborough, but most people want to stay near their family and frineds. Indeed, most people want their children to stay fairly near them, so I would have thought that anyone with kids would be favourable to the building of more homes in the area.

Obviously, there are genuine concerns about proposals such as this, but the fact remains that local young people cannot afford homes, and something needs to be done about it.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 14, 2006, 11:16:41 am
The fact is, the housing market is governed by simple supply and demand and, in the SE at least, house prices have little relation to actual construction costs.

Affordable is a term often used, however if people genuinely couldn't afford to buy properties then their price would soon fall. Every year people inevitably die, their properties are sold, and new people come into the housing market. If the prices of houses are high it is because people CAN afford to buy them, otherwise the prices would drop.

I sympathise with the 30-year old who still lives at home - to a point. If he has a 2.1 from Oxford I think it would be reasonable to say he is able to earn a reasonable salary. It is also reasonable to say he should have been able to save some money in the 8 or 9 years since leaving college. Looking at Andrew Ward's website he has a one bed flat in Welham Green for £108,000. Let's say this 30 year old earns at least £25k, then a 4x salary mortgage and a deposit of £8k would mean he can quite easily afford to live in the area. And of course there will be cheaper properties further away. And if you are co-habiting then the finances can only get easier.

I know what people will say - I don't want to live in a flat / I don't want this / I have no deposit etc etc - however this is all due to the credit mentality that many people have. Homes are expensive and if you buy one and then can't afford a new car or plasma TV or new leather sofas or whatever, then don't buy them. It's a simple as that. Buy a home you can afford then upgrade in a few years. Very few people buy an average 3 bed home as their first property and then stay there all their lives.

I bought my first flat in 1988 in London Colney. A year or so interest rates peaked at 15.4% I had sold my car to help raise a deposit and had no cash to buy luxuries. Going out and other 'luxuries' were difficult at times But I still managed to live OK and with hard work and saving I now have a nice house in Brookmans Park. Anyone can do it, but they have to make a comittment and make a few sacrifices.

I don't think the answer is
Quote
Do councils not build houses any more?
- I think all the evidence is that many council estates are only nice places to live when a significant number of properties are sold off to the tenants, ie becomes privately owned.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on November 14, 2006, 11:39:08 am

I'd be quite interested to know what percentage of the country's housing stock is held as second homes or Buy-to-Let.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on November 14, 2006, 11:54:44 am
Not Hertfordshire, but according to The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060629/text/60629w1309.htm) there are 41,588 second homes in the South East, which is 1.2% of the stock. Which is a little above the national average.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 14, 2006, 11:59:26 am
Councils are not allowed by law to build council housing.  This dates back to Maggie and her introduction of the Right To Buy in the early 1980s.  A vote winner but it greatly reduced the amount of housing available for renting.  

Until recently councils could re-invest net proceeds from the Right To Buy sales of council housing back into housing provided by housing associations in certain circumstances.  But now even that money goes to Gordon Brown.  Another stealth tax.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mungroo on November 14, 2006, 12:00:18 pm
don't forget that you also need to raise (not insignificant) cash for stamp duty as well as a deposit
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 14, 2006, 12:05:48 pm
In the hypothetical example I quoted, there would be no stamp duty to pay.

This applies only to properties over £125,000. Obviously this is still a low figure but many first time purchasers buying modest properties will escape this.

According to the latest government stats, 70% of properties are owner occupied, as John Fraser has already said some 1.2% are second homes with the remainder rented.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: barnabus on November 25, 2006, 11:22:25 am
In my professional life I work in Social Housing and receive a weekly magazine called ‘Inside Housing’

I was interested to read the headline this week:

‘Shadow Ministers suggestion to put new homes on agricultural land marks big shift

Gove: Let’s build on farmland.'


The full article can be read at:

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/article.aspx?articleid=1448381

or the magazine at

www.insidehousing.co.uk

So before we think the other lot would save our greenbelt we ought to think very hard! No disrespect to mr Shapps.

Barnabus


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Max on December 10, 2006, 07:01:11 pm
I sympathise with the 30-year old who still lives at home - to a point. If he has a 2.1 from Oxford I think it would be reasonable to say he is able to earn a reasonable salary. It is also reasonable to say he should have been able to save some money in the 8 or 9 years since leaving college. Looking at Andrew Ward's website he has a one bed flat in Welham Green for £108,000. Let's say this 30 year old earns at least £25k, then a 4x salary mortgage and a deposit of £8k would mean he can quite easily afford to live in the area. And of course there will be cheaper properties further away. And if you are co-habiting then the finances can only get easier.

Well, you leave university and look for a job, but that does not mean that you are going to find one at once, nor that it paid as much when starting out as it does later. Take into account having to pay off all the debts that students incur since the abolition of a decent grant, plus the fact that even if you live "at home" you have expenses, and it becomes a lot less easy than the quoted post suggests. And my point was not so much to make people feel sorry for my nephew, as to consider the position of young people without a 2.1 from Oxford, who are surely the majority.

Councils are not allowed by law to build council housing.  This dates back to Maggie and her introduction of the Right To Buy in the early 1980s.  A vote winner but it greatly reduced the amount of housing available for renting.

Sounds like a law that needs to be changed.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 11, 2006, 09:45:53 am
Max, sorry to tell you the rules were changed in order to allow even more to buy their social rented home.  Social = council or housing association home.

As I said earlier, the rules were recently changed so that central government got even more ofthe sales proceeds instead of the housing authority.  Another of Gordon Brown's stealth taxes.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 20, 2006, 05:32:19 pm
On 19 Dec 2006 the government issued for consultation its 'Proposed Changes to the original draft East of England Plan'.  Comments are required by 7th March 2007.

Click on www.eera.gov.uk and then 'Assembly tells government to 'reach for its cheque book' to support East of England Plan'.  There is a link on that page to the full 260-page document.  Not what you might call a nice Christmas present!  I would prefer something a bit better for holiday reading.   :'(  As you can tell by the way the Regional Assembly has worded its headline, it is most unhappy. It says the region currently has the lowest level of public spending per head of population. 

The bad news is that it proposes to stick with the increase from 5,800 to 10,000 in Welwyn Hatfield.  The Council has already gone on record as saying that the extra 4,000+ homes will have to go on Green Belt land because the other 5,800 homes will soak up all other available sites.

The consultation paper also says the extra homes are a minimum to be exceeded if more sites can be found in urban areas or densities further increased (jargon for shoving even more homes into a given area of land).  It supports a second runway at Stansted Airport.

Over 650 local residents have already expressed their opposition to the extra 4,200 homes when they responded to the September 2006 Newsletter issued by North Mymms District Green Belt Soc.  For which, many thanks.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Max on December 22, 2006, 08:04:25 pm
Over 650 local residents have already expressed their opposition to the extra 4,200 homes when they responded to the September 2006 Newsletter issued by North Mymms District Green Belt Soc.  For which, many thanks.

650 out of a total of how many, just as a matter of interest?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on December 22, 2006, 11:32:33 pm
A better comparison would be 650 have expressed their opposition compared to how many who have expressed their support?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 28, 2006, 12:51:41 pm
All 3,600 households should have received the Green Belt Soc Newsletter with an attached response letter.  A return of 650 letters was about 18%.  Not even one response supported the extra housing.

Reading further into the 260 pages of the 'Proposed Changes' the government wants certain councils, including Welwyn Hatfield, to adjust their green belt boundaries and allow for another 10 years of housing and other developments i.e. up to 2031.   The council must assume the same rate of development as now, which is roughly 500 a year.  If approved in the final East of England Plan, this means WHBC will have to adjust the green belt boundaries for 9,000 homes plus all the associated infrastructure.

If you want to look on the bright side, it does mean that there can be no reason to make any further boundary changes for the next 25 years, by which time I expect to be long gone.  On that cheerful note I wish you a happy New Year.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on December 28, 2006, 05:56:29 pm
I think 100% against from all respondents is clear enough even for this govt to understand-remember Tony telling us after his majority got slashed at the last election that it was time for them to listen to the people! This is why people will have to take the trouble to look at the wretched plan and get a response in by March.

Not surprised the EERA is disgruntled. In this odd procedure they get to do the initial research and drafting only to have the plan taken out of their hands, corrupted and finalised and published by govt.

Even though it is so obvious that we cannot cope with ANY increased housing without investment in infrastructure, we do need to tell govt that.

Even though the whole point of a green belt is NOT to build on it, we have to tell the govt that too!

These are not things that the EERA, our MP and the Green Belt Soc can do alone.

What might also help is sorting out the net immigration issue.

Afraid if we want it to be a happy New Year we are all going to have to do something about it!

Here's to the next 25 happy new years Bob!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on December 28, 2006, 09:02:50 pm
What might also help is sorting out the net immigration issue.

Peter,

I presume you are talking about legal immigration. If you are, and if that is causing a housing need, then surely that housing need has to be met, regardless of whether it is to provide homes for people who are recent arrivals in this county or those who happen to have been here for a generation or more.

We clearly need more homes than we have and the sooner we get used to that fact the better.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alfred the Great on December 28, 2006, 09:53:07 pm
"We clearly need more homes than we have and the sooner we get used to that fact the better."

So why object to the "eco house" then? Or knocking down houses to build flats?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on December 28, 2006, 10:08:43 pm

So why object to the "eco house" then? Or knocking down houses to build flats?


I don't object to flats if there is a need. As for the eco house, my view is that if that piece of green belt has to be built on it would be better if there were more affordable homes there than one big one.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 29, 2006, 11:36:37 am
Dave said "I don't object to flats if there is a need."  I assume he really means more homes rather than a specific type of housing.  The recent objections to flats in Brookmans Park were that they have set precedents for a large change in the character of the village, akin to the A1000 between Barnet and Totteridge.

This Christmas, by chance I met a Russian who used to live near Moscow and she said that most people there live in flats.  She married an Englishman three years ago and now lives near Newark (about 100 miles from here up the A1) in a 4-bedroom detached house backing onto fields.  It is not difficult to guess that she prefers her house to a flat.  My guess is that until you are unable or unwilling to maintain a garden, most people would prefer a house to a flat. 

The draft East of England Plan and the Proposed Changes by the government reckon that there will be a huge 400,000+ increase in the number of jobs in the East of England, plus the 'London effect'.  This is the justification for 500,000+ more homes in the East of England.  I have not yet fully read all the Proposed Changes document but I get the feeling that this vast increase in jobs is guesswork. 

The government has done so many U-turns (Hatfield Hospital funding to name but one) and issued forecasts and statistics which have proved to be wildly wrong that I for one do not trust any official figures or predictions any more.  Therefore we should fight to keep what we have until proven wrong.           
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on December 29, 2006, 02:47:27 pm
Dave said "I don't object to flats if there is a need."  I assume he really means more homes rather than a specific type of housing. 

Hi Bob,

No, I meant flats because I was responding to another post that mentioned flats.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on December 30, 2006, 02:07:43 pm
There are several issues here: Naturally if the population is growing we need more homes. However, the government has some control over the issue of net immigration (not to mention the question of illegal immigration) or at least it has to power to have some control. This relates to the whole EU issue and whether we want what we are currently getting from it. it also has some influence over other factors such as smaller family units due to split marriages, second homes, inflated house prices etc. We may decide we need net immigration to deal with an increasingly aged population but still it needs to be planned and controlled so we increase the right age and skill level to make it worthwhile.

Secondly if we decide other policies mean we have to accept more housing, clearly it has to be planned. The EERA original plan was a long time in the making and very thorough. It provided for over 5000 new homes in our area and was largely accepted and planned. It was closely argued and supported by evidence of relevant adequate infrastructure or suitable plans to provide same.

The amended plan is basically the same plan with the number of homes almost doubled. From being a workable plan it is an unworkable order, from being the result of lengthy and positive consultation it becomes an arbitary figure plucked from the air for political reasons, from being an exercise in democracy it becomes an exercise in government dictat, from being a positive step forward it becomes a negative intrusion on this area without any regard for the existing inhabitants, the new inhabitants or future generations who might have thought the Green Belt was a progressive idea. And then they reduce our hospital cover!! Who is going to want to move into the new homes when the investment in infrastructure the EERA wants to see is not about to happen?

Apart from anything else it is momumentaly stupid like ... well nearly as daft as starting the Ashes with your best spin bowler carrying the drinks...as if such a thing could happen. Bad government leads to bad decision making.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 18, 2007, 10:20:22 am
Have you received a CD from the GO-East (Government Office for the East of England)?

Anyone who wrote to the East of England Regional Assembly 2 years ago about the draft East of England Plan will most likely have received this CD setting out the proposed changes to the Plan.  I have been asked what people should do now.

The answer is that the NM Green Belt Soc will be issuing a Newsletter early in February to every home in North Mymms.  Attached will be a suggested letter to GO-East.  Add your name and address and any more comments you wish to make. 

Then send it to the Green Belt Soc via my home address or collection boxes which we expect to have in Brookmans Park and Welham Green as in the past.  Details will be in the Newsletter.  Deadline will be 28 Feb so we can deliver them in bulk to GO-East.  A bulk delivery of hundreds of letters is very impressive.

We received 658 letters to our Newsletter in September which went to 10 Downing Street.  Can you top that figure this time? 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Max on January 23, 2007, 12:20:37 pm
All 3,600 households should have received the Green Belt Soc Newsletter with an attached response letter.  A return of 650 letters was about 18%.  Not even one response supported the extra housing.

Now, to me, when a proposal such as the one under discussion is made, the only people who respond to a letter such as the above will be those who object, as those who do not can just sit back and let things take their course. My interpretation of the above is that if 18% of the 3600 households in question opposed the proposal, it can be infered that some 82% either supported the proposal or had no opinion one way or another.

Obviously, realistic objections based on the ability of the local infrastucture to be extended to cover such an increase in housing have to be seriously considered, but I feel that it is hard to interpret the above figures in such a way as to indicate that they are a sign of strong popular opposition to the proposal.

I also feel the nature of the households responding would be an interesting thing to know. How many of them had young or teenaged children, for example, as opposed to childless couples, or couples whose children had grown up and left home? My feeling is that people whose children still live with them and who have hopes for them to one day to find affordable housing nearby are less likely to oppose such measures than those whose offspring are already home-owning adults.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 23, 2007, 12:38:23 pm

My feeling is that people whose children still live with them and who have hopes for them to one day to find affordable housing nearby are less likely to oppose such measures than those whose offspring are already home-owning adults.


I agree.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on January 23, 2007, 05:26:59 pm
Quote
All 3,600 households should have received the Green Belt Soc Newsletter with an attached response letter.  A return of 650 letters was about 18%.  Not even one response supported the extra housing.

I would have thought that, contrary to Max's view, that this represents significant opposition to the plans.

It is well known that the great majority of people don't bother to register their views on these sort of things, local elections often have a turnout of 30-40%. So I would say that 18% is a significant show of opposition.

I am against the huge numbers of new homes proposed mainly because I don't want to see the character of SE England, which is already densely populated compared with other parts of the country, change significantly, and once land is built on it can never be reversed.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 24, 2007, 11:03:28 am
What opposition? Not one person has written or voiced their support for the extra housing.  For 658 people to actually do something to record their opinion is pretty good going.  It was not as if we stood outside shops collecting names on a petition form.   Elections are not comparable, in my opinion.

From the whole six counties in the East of England region, over 21,000 responded to the initial consultation on the draft Plan in 2005.  Over 400 were from North Mymms residents.  The staff at the Regional Assembly were sufficiently impressed that they gave contact details of NM Green Belt Soc to other parties as an example of how to get local reaction.  In 2006 the North Mymms number increased from 400+ to 658, presumably as more people realised what was on the cards.

The Government's Proposed Changes to the initial draft East of England Plan are now requiring Welwyn Hatfield to 'review' the Green Belt boundaries to allow 9,000 homes to be built on what is currently Green Belt.  Hertfordshire is already the most densely populated county in the whole country according to the County Council. i.e more people per square mile.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on January 24, 2007, 11:18:19 am
Bob

Just to be clear, I am agreeing with you.

I am talking about opposition to the proposals to build more homes, not opposition to the work and aims of the GBS - which I wholeheartedly support.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: barnabus on January 24, 2007, 11:25:38 am
I think people who decide not to vote in such referendums must understand that their view can  not be taken into account by either side.

Turnouts for these things are notoriosly low and it is in my view it is  invideous to try and second guess what people are saying one way or the other by not voting. The fact no one voted in favour says a great deal. 

I think 658 votes from such a small contituency is very good - thank you Bob and the GBS for making it possible

Baranbus
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Max on January 25, 2007, 09:25:18 am
No, I don't agree Barnabus. When you have a proposal that will be implimented unless vigorously opposed, then not opposing it equates in effect to supporting it. Consider, if no one at all expressed a view one way or another on the issue, would the proposed houses be built or not? Obviously they would be. Thus, the only reason anyone supporting such a proposal would have to make public expression of their support would be if opposition to the measure was increasing to a level such as to threaten its implimentation.

At the risk of repeating myself, out of a total of 3600 households (and we are, by the way, given no data as to the number of people this represents) 18% oppose the proposal and 82% do not (and yes, we can infer that they do not oppose the proposal because they did not oppose it when given the chance to do so). Were I responsible for the implimentation of such a proposal, I would not consider this to be a worrying level of opposition.

Much as I enjoy the countryside, and much as I have benefited from living a large part of my life in the middle of the Green Belt, it has to be remembered that the Green Belt was created in another era, and one very different from the present. It may be, given the extraordinary difficulties that young families face in finding affordable housing, that some changes do have to be made. If the necessary new homes can be built without encroaching upon green field sites, so much the better, but if this turns out not to be the case, I would say that homes have to be the first consideration, if the required infrastructure can be provided.

There is to me a certain irony that opposition to such a proposal might come from Brookmans Park, given that had the Green Belt been created after WW1, Brookmans Park would not exist.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on January 25, 2007, 12:18:15 pm

I don't think that anyone has actually said that they are against affordable housing have they? I'm sure we all acknowledge that there is a need for affordable housing for key workers and young people starting out and this was allowed for in the original target of 5800 houses to be built in the area, which was considered to be more than adequate.

The "No Way to 10K" campaign is against the additional 4200 houses that have been summarily imposed on the area after the original target of 5800 was acknowledged and approved by all the authorities.

Unfortunately, the catchy title of "No Way to 10K" makes it sound as if campaigners are against all the housing, rather than just the (currently unjustified) extra, which is not correct.





Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on January 25, 2007, 08:13:54 pm
Whenever people protest someone will point out the number of people not on the protest and infer - or just claim - that they must in some way support the idea. When 2 million people marched against the invasion of Iraq - the largest protest this country has ever seen - the Sun said that 58 million hadn't marched and must support the war. It only takes a moments thought to see that this is nonsense. There were many reasons why people did not march and there were many reasons why the majority did not reply. Undoubtedly for some it was apathy, but for others there were good and bad reasons not to write back. Some were too busy and let the letter slip their mind ( I hold my hand up to that one ), some letters may have been lost, some people may not have felt they had enough facts to give a view, some may not have understood the problem.

Of course the poll was taken among a group of people who would have a vested interest in keep the cost of housing in the area high so its worth is questionable. Shouldn't the views of the people who would like to be able to move here also be taken into account?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on January 26, 2007, 11:37:42 am
Quote
Of course the poll was taken among a group of people who would have a vested interest in keep the cost of housing in the area high so its worth is questionable. Shouldn't the views of the people who would like to be able to move here also be taken into account?

Not sure it's just about house prices, surely the fundamental reason the green belt exists is to keep the area predominantly, err, green. As I've said before it's about the character of the area. If prices are high it's because it's a nice place to live. I can't believe many people want to make it a _less_ nice place to live.

Also can't see what use it would be inviting people to comment if they don't live here or even might want to live here. I certainly wouldn't expect to be asked my views on any developments in, say, Windsor or Hampstead, both very expensive areas.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on January 26, 2007, 04:41:03 pm
I didn't say it was 'just' about house prices. Even if it were, there is nothing wrong with wanting your house to keep it's value. Like most people, most of my money is in the bricks and mortar I live in and I have no desire to be poorer. And just because someone has a vested interest doesn't mean that their views should be dismissed. But the decision to build more homes will have an effect on a lot of people, many of who will have their opinion canvassed. My point is that the objections are a valid and important indication of local feeling, but there is more than just local feeling to take into account.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Max on January 27, 2007, 09:01:08 am
That's a sensible post John.

I was not suggesting, by the way, that not responding to the letter in question means that you support the proposal. Simply that you did not oppose it, which is not exactly the same thing.

And although I appreciate the point you were making, I don't think it is entirely valid to compare writing a brief letter and posting it with attending a demonstration. The latter requires a far more time, effort and discomfort, not to mention things such as travel (often large distances) and risk (it is not unknown for people to be hurt at such events). A lot of people might also have been put off demonstrating by the knowledge that the decisions had already been taken and all the demonstrations in the world were not going to make any difference. In the case of the proposed housing, it seems perfectly possible that if local opposition is strong enough, the project could be shelved or ammended, so there would be no obvious reason for anyone who did oppose it not to register his/her opposition.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 30, 2007, 03:16:13 pm
To be held on Monday 26 March 2007, in the United Reformed Church, Bluebridge Road, Brookmans Park starting at 8pm.  Hear about and discuss the Society's activities during the last year, also your chance to join the committee.  Followed by an illustrated talk on the work of the Herts & Middx Wildlife Trust.  Then tea, coffee and snacks.  Open to the public - membership (£1 each) not essential but welcome of course! ;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 04, 2007, 12:25:04 pm
Local residents are invited to a public meeting called to discuss plans to build 10,000 new homes in the borough. The meeting, on Wednesday 14 February, has been organised by Welwyn Hatfield Council (WHC), in conjunction with Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE).  The aim is to give local residents the opportunity to learn more about the East of England Plan and find out how they can comment on the recommendations.

Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/news/february07/housebuilding5.shtml) for more details.

Note: This item has been linked to the site's calendar.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on February 04, 2007, 06:12:42 pm
The whole character of the area will undoubtebly change. Whatever is said, the country needs more housing and the facts are that the extra population is and will be in the South East. Unfortunately I don't want to sound negative, but whatever we do or say, I fear the decisions have already been made. Incidentally, any new building of this nature will have to include an element of 'social housing', so whatever one's view point this may be good or bad for the future character and demographic make up of Brookmans Park, it will make a difference. The value of houses in BP will be affected. I still hope that individual's contribution to the debate will make a difference, and I hope people will continue to express their opinions as I hope it's not too late. Of course 'social housing' does not necessarily mean that the area will be adversely affected, some may see it as a positive change. Only time and individuals' perspective will tell on that one! I guess I know however, what the views of those who already live here will be. My main concerns are the infrastructure is just not able to cope and its that which will adversley affect house values the most. It struggles at present and whilst building non social housing generates income, building/improving roads, drainage, hospitals, schools etc. doesn't.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 04, 2007, 06:15:35 pm
We'll also need more pubs. The queue to get served will be a nightmare.

 :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 05, 2007, 11:25:10 am
The latest NM Green Belt Soc newsletter is now being distributed to all homes in North Mymms parish i.e. Brookmans Park, Welham Green, Bell Bar and parts of Little Heath and Bullens Green.   As usual it is on green paper.  Attached to it is a suggested letter to the Government objecting to various issues affecting Welwyn Hatfield, and therefore every one of us here in North Mymms.

The letter has been worded with help from the Council to ensure that it contains the main issues.

All you need do is add your name and address, plus any comments of your own and return it by 28th Feb.  Either mail it to me (address on the newsletter) or put it in the collection box in Brookmans Park News or the one in Dellsome Lane Post Office. 

The Society will then send the letters in bulk to the Government before their deadline.  The receipt of a parcel containing hundreds of letters from just one area will be very impressive to Government. It was last time.

I still have a couple of delivery rounds without a deliverer, if anyone can spare an hour, two at the most.  You can contact me via the 'email' or the 'Personal Message' symbols at the side of this posting.

Many thanks to the two shopkeepers for their continued support of this Society over the East of England Plan during the last two years.  This is the final stage, and the most important since it is the last chance to influence the definitive Plan.

The Newsletter has been added to the Society's website (linked below) in the 'Latest News' section.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: francis on February 07, 2007, 02:20:07 pm
at the end of the (proverbial) day, people have been making lifestyle choices to bale out of London to live in the countryside  -  justifying it to themselves in their own particular case, but being rather reluctant to accept it for others.    Hence BP being branded in the 'forties as a rural slum, which should've been largely bulldozed under the then Regional Plan and proposed Green Belt
Once over the drawbridge they're anxious to keep that drawbridge up  -   and with the consequent limited housing supply helping appreciate their domicile ahead of inflation, suspect pensions and the rest.   
Sadly on many occasions it's more comforting to attribute this to "concern for the environment" rather than admit any vested pecuniary interest .
With agriculture no longer being the substantive need to reinforce the need for "rural"/ foodstuffs land near the metropolis, more land's up to grow residences or other convenience buildings.  A great shame.   But better some carefully controlled releases than the Russian roulette of planning proposals & appeals on dodgily concocted reasons (just look back at past proposals, some of which are probably dormant rather than dead)

Oh dear !  I KNEW I shouldn't have let myself get too worked up !!!!!!   the fingers tend to take on a life of their own ...
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on February 07, 2007, 07:14:17 pm
In the end you can only count the number of people who do vote, protest, answer a questionnaire. Who knows what the unexpressed opinions are? Time, priorities and sheer apathy are big players I suspect.

On the substantive point, igore the title to the campaign which is snappy but a bit misleading. The point is we as a community have accepted a planned increase in housing. What we are objecting to is the unplanned, unargued, unviable and pretty unprincipled dumping of nearly 5000 extra such houses.

The whole point of the Green Belt is to ensure different communities are NOT all linked into one urban sprawl, to maintain the lungs of the country and some sanity for the soul. The way it works is that governments and planners have to work within the constraints of the Green Belt, not just abandon the notion when it suits them.

There may be a need for more housing  but there is much the govt can do rather than just double the figures in the South East without so much as a by your leave. They dont have a policy on legal or illegal immigration, what about using stamp duty breaks to greater effect to rejuvenate areas that need it rather than ruining areas that dont, what about using the EERA (if you really want an unelected regional assembly) and relying on their suggestions rather than ignoring their figures and imposing your own, what about addressing family breakdown so there are fewer single people living alone and so on. In contrast with Hertfordshire, Norfolk which is far bigger in area is underpopulated and severly lacking in infrastructure. Why not give it some proper roads, support the ailing tourist industry, rejuvenate the once thriving port of Gt Yarmouth etc etc and watch planned growth draw people from all over the country to work?

These are just a few ideas that came to me over my tea and not a focus group in sight!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on February 09, 2007, 09:06:53 pm
As it's clear that a lot of people feel very strongly about this topic, what about petitioning the Prime Minister not to build on the green belt around Welwyn Hatfield area?

To do this, there is a new online petition area hanging off the Number10 Downing Street Site which, although still in beta testing, would make it easy for people to express their opinion.  Check it out at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/).

If there is a consensus on people thinking it would help, I would be happy to create the petition.  We'd obviously need some good ideas to make people aware that the petition existed.

Mark
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on February 20, 2007, 05:42:24 pm

That is a very interesting idea Mark.

Has anyone from the local Green Belt Society seen your post?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 20, 2007, 06:24:02 pm
As reported earlier on this topic, 658 letters of protest were delivered to 10 Downing Street last November.

The NM District Green Belt Soc has just delivered its latest Newslettter to all homes in North Mymms enclosing a letter of protest to the Government about proposals to build 9,000+ homes on Green Belt in Welwyn Hatfield.  So far over 550 responses have been received, with a deadline of 28th Feb.  On the Newsletter it says you can send your response to my home or put it in a collection box in BP News shop or Dellsome Lane Post Office.

If your Newsletter got put in the bin then you can go to the Green Belt Soc website - link below - and on the Latest News page is a link to the Newsletter.  It includes the protest letter.  Copy it onto a sheet of paper, add your name and address and any other comments of your own, and deliver it as already stated.

Why not do a copy for each member of your family to complete?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on February 22, 2007, 09:00:52 pm
According to this week's Welwyn Hatfield Times, a compulsory review of the Green Belt "could see Welwyn Hatfield buckle under an extra 15000 homes according to a council planning boss". (Chris Conway, chief planning officer of Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council). So, this is 5000 on top of the 10000 the Government was already demanding. Excellent idea on someone's part. Tell us it's now 15000 houses, so when only 10000 get built, it will be seen as a victory! Keep the petitions coming in, maybe we'll all get a nice little 3 page email from our Mr Blair like all those who protested about road pricing. It's going to happen anyway..... 

Tell me I'm getting cynical... :icon_jokercolor:
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 23, 2007, 10:53:44 am
The extra minimum of 5,000 homes came about because of the Government's Proposed Changes to the East of England Plan.

If the wording stays the same, the Green Belt boundaries will have to be 'reviewed' ('spin-speak' for taking land out of the Green Belt) to allow building up to 2031.  That is 10 years after the EEP coverage from 2001 to 2021.  The EEP currently requires 10,000 homes in that 20 years, so you add another 5,000 homes in the next 10 years, making 15,000 in total by 2031. 

Welwyn Hatfield reckons the original 5,800 homes could be built without major incursions into the Green Belt.   15,000 minus 5,800 equals 9,200 homes on Green Belt land.  That means about 400 hectares (1,000 acres) of Green Belt land will be lost.

I have now received over 680 of the protest letters which were circulated with the NM District Green Belt Soc Newsletter.   Contact me via the symbols at the side of this posting if you wish to add your name.  I can just add your name and address to my reserve stock of letters.  In fact a separate letter could be sent by each person in your family.  2 parents plus 2 children equals 4 letters of protest.  Letters from Rover or Tiddles are not allowed!  A few letters have been signed by people who live elsewhere in Hertfordshire since they will be affected as well.

Closing date is 28 Feb so they can be sent in a parcel to the Government Office by its 9th March deadline.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: francis on February 23, 2007, 02:45:27 pm
I've been catching up on my papers and magazines just now and see that the vet college has recently flogged off another chunk of its proiperty in London as prices are on the up around the Kings Cross new Eurostar station.   So now they have got the millions in their pocket perhaps the traffic mess in Hawkshead Lane can get sorted out at last ?    More development in the Green Belt ? but get on to it Welwyn Council before those £££££ disappear
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 01, 2007, 12:00:48 pm
822 replies   ;D

Yesterday was the last date for receipt of replies to the Green Belt Soc Newsletter.  I have now emptied the two collection boxes and the total number of letters is 822.  These will now be boxed up and sent to the Government Office-East on Friday.

About 3,900 Newsletters were circulated so there was a 21% response.  This compares with 658 received from the September 2006 Newsletter when the Planning Inspectors issued their report recommending the increase from 5,800 to 10,000 new homes in Welwyn Hatfield. 

Many thanks to everyone.  And many thanks to Brookmans Park News and Dellsome Lane Post Office for allowing collection boxes to be put in those shops.  Nearly half the replies were put in those boxes.

Letters were received from virtually every road in North Mymms parish.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on March 01, 2007, 03:21:29 pm
Good that there was a response. Hopefully, it will have an effect together with the other campaigns being run on this theme. Hopefully the 79% who didn't respond have already objected via other methods elsewhere or are perfectly happy with this proposal. My guess is those in the latter category will be the first to moan and complain should these proposals go ahead and the anticipated conjestion, lack of resources, schools, hospitals etc come to fruition. For their sake and for all those who have objected, let's hope the campaign makes a difference. At least nobody should complain that "they didn't know about it!" Well done Bob and all the NMGBS team.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mungroo on March 12, 2007, 07:54:21 am
anyone seen this ?
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/conservation/story/0,,2031755,00.html (http://environment.guardian.co.uk/conservation/story/0,,2031755,00.html)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 12, 2007, 09:43:50 am


That is truly shocking!!        :(
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 07, 2007, 06:40:34 pm
Local green belt campaigners have played host to a group of planning experts from South Korea who came to North Mymms looking for tips on how to protect the countryside.

The group made the 5,500 mile (9,000 km) trip after stumbling on the North Mymms District Green Belt Society (NMDGBS) website while looking for help in how to best manage green belt land around the capital Seoul.

Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/news/may07/greenbeltsk.shtml) for more details.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: ADM on May 08, 2007, 09:32:20 am
Blimey.  How's about a bit of green belt consultancy in Korea, Bob?

Sounds like they need you.  ;)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 08, 2007, 11:27:36 am
Thanks for the suggestion but I am not keen on flying, in fact I don't   ::)  A holiday in Australia 30 years ago put me off flying for life.  And the hassle at airports!  Cath and I enjoy our holidays in the UK.

The Koreans were intrigued that we do not have lots of tower blocks of flats, which seems to be their most common form of housing.  They were particularly interested in Angerland Common football and park and ride.  Park and Ride was something new to them.  Their main concerns appeared to be creation of parks and other leisure facilities and affordable housing.

In preparing for their visit, it struck me how hard it was to find examples of what development has been allowed in our local green belt.  It just shows how effective the policies are.  Of course we have the threats in the East of England Plan but so far the policies have kept this a very pleasant place to live.  Long may it remain that way.

From here they are going to Paris to see what they do with their green belt around the French capital city. Good job they were not there when the riots took place after the presidential election.  Can you imagine similar riots when our next Prime Minister is announced?

Typical that the one morning in ages when we had rain was when they were here.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: dag on June 19, 2007, 01:05:39 pm
Designation of green belt areas was pretty trendy some 50 years ago in Melbourne. It's imperative that we continue to hold elected groups responsible for achieving the ideals of that forward-thinking group.  The visit of the S-Korean party was a fantastic indication that positive processes are in place.         cheers dag.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 10, 2007, 12:37:08 pm
In the latest shadow Cabinet reshuffle, our local MP Grant Shapps has been appointed Shadow Housing Minister.  His opposite number is Yvette Cooper. 

She attends the government's Cabinet meetings, and Grant will similarly attend the shadow Cabinet meetings.  Normally it is only the Secretaries of State who represent their Department/Ministry in the Cabinet.  In the case of the Dept of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) that is Hazel Blears who has recently replaced Ruth Kelly.  Housing is a section of the DCLG and, by giving the Housing Minister a seat as well shows the high profile that housing has in Gordon Brownn's agenda.

Grant is well qualified for this position thanks to his 'NoWayTo10K' campaign against the draft East of England Plan's latest proposals for a minimum of 10,000 new homes in Welwyn Hatfield in the period 2001-2021, and another 5,000+ in the folowing 10 years to 2031.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trade on July 10, 2007, 07:45:43 pm
Good news, well done Grant
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on July 11, 2007, 07:13:04 am
Grant is a tireless campaigner, so it will be interesting to see him batting against a minister, especially the one responsible for home information packs.

I'd better stop this post here!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 11, 2007, 03:03:19 pm
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has just outlined his housing and planning bills.  He said: "Putting affordable housing within the reach not just of the few but the many is vital both to meeting individual aspirations and a better future for our country."
Up to 100,000 homes could be built on around 550 surplus sites owned by arms of central government such as the Ministry of Defence and the NHS, Mr Brown said.  In total, three million new homes would be built by 2020 - up 250,000 from the previous plan, he said.

The annual target would be raised from 200,000 to 240,000 new homes in England from 2016. There would also be a regime on "covered bonds" to help mortgage lenders finance 20 to 25-year fixed-rate mortgages.
On Tuesday, Communities Minister Hazel Blears said house building took "priority" over environmental concerns and said she could not give "categoric assurances" about redrawing the green belt.
The Conservatives said this had "raised the prospect of the government systematically concreting over" it. But Mr Brown told MPs disused "brownfield" sites would be used for the expanded building programme.

I may be being simplistic, but if only 100,000 of the 3 million new houses could be built on surplus government sites, where will the other 2.9 million go? 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 11, 2007, 03:49:34 pm
Isn't the answer in the sentence above your question?


Mr Brown told MPs disused "brownfield" sites would be used for the expanded building programme.


David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on July 12, 2007, 07:13:02 am
If there was to be building on green belt land, I heard some government spokesman say, that would be a decision for local government.

Well, we now have the Opposition housing spokesman as our MP. Doubtless he'll seize on any erosion of the green belt in his constituency.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 12, 2007, 10:25:27 am
The buck passing will be very interesting to see.

According to today's newspaper report Central Government will leave it to local councils to decide where to put the 3 million homes by 2020.  Welwyn Hatfield claims to have non-Green-Belt sites for about 6,000 homes so any figure above that will have to go on what is curently Green Belt.   

The final version of the East of England Plan has been delayed until the autumn at least because further research is necassary to comply with some EU regulation.  At the moment the Blair Government proposed 15,000+ homes in Welwyn Hatfield by 2031 (yes - 2031!).  Will that figure be increased because of Mr Brown's announced national increase to 3 million by 2020?

To answer Dave's point with a question - are there are enough brown field sites to build 3 million houses?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 12, 2007, 10:28:23 am

To answer Dave's point with a question - are there are enough brown field sites to build 3 million houses?


Hi Bob,

No idea. I was just quoting the source in your post.

Dave

 :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on October 09, 2007, 08:41:44 pm
This is in the latest batch on the Welhat website.  We are puzzled as the postcode comes up at the back of Peplins Way, but the address is Station Road, the other side of the railway.  It involves demolition of buildings and erection of two detached buildings.  Would it be the Livery Yard?  Can't get the plans to download on Adobe.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob on October 09, 2007, 09:00:45 pm
Stables in between the scout hut and the doctors surgery between the road and the railway
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 10, 2007, 10:35:39 am
A previous application ref S6/2007/0770 was refused in July for the demolition of most, maybe all, of the buildings at the livery stables (where it says  NO LIVERIES on the gates!) and erect two detached houses.  You can read the grounds for refusal on www.welhat.gov.uk in the planning section of that website.

The current application is for outline approval.  The plans for this latest application are under ref 2007/1441.

Unfortunately the supporting design and access statement is not on the website and the copy which goes to the parish council is caught up in the postal strike.  I still to compare the new plans with the refused plans and cannot say whether or not all the grounds for refusal have been dealt with.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Dem on January 07, 2008, 03:24:13 pm
Hi All!

First post, so apologies if this is in the wrong section!

We will be moving to the Brookmans Park area as soon as possible from North London (finally had enough!) and are in the process of purchasing a house in Hawkshead Lane.  Currently at the 'searches' stage and have unearthed a few things which are worrying.  On the assumption that these will affect other people in the area, I just wondered what the general thoughts were...........

1) Two landfill sites at the rear of the property (one was a Chalk Pit).  Does anybody know what impact these have?  Any nasty substances buried there?!?!  Are they still in use?!?!?!

2) Apparently, the ground has a "High Risk of Instability - e.g. subsidence".  Just checked, and the first insurance quote is £1,000 which is about double what we are currently paying (the helpful insurance company that quoted couldn't tell us why it was so high though!!!  We asked if it was because of crime in the area or the possibility of subsidence; their reply was simply "maybe"......).  Anybody else have problems with insurance or particular clauses included?

3) Not sure what the field behind the property is used for, but wondered if there is any problem with chemicals from spraying?

At the end of the day, we really want to go ahead with the purchase, but if any of the above items are too prohibitive, we'd be crazy to go ahead.

Thanks for any advice / other information on the location / property!

Dem.  :)


Editor's note: Edited to remove house name and address.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on January 07, 2008, 04:54:43 pm
I do remember as a small child going with my Dad to dump my old pedal car there - this was probably in the early 70's so the rubbish is all probably well over 30 years old and as compacted and decomposed as its going to get.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Dem on January 07, 2008, 05:12:11 pm
Thanks for the info, so no need to worry about the land fills still being used?

Editor's note: Edited to remove identifying information.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: zorb on January 07, 2008, 05:34:30 pm
If the postcode is EN6 the insurance companies don't like it because the whole of the area lies on soil they don't like. Can't remember what.
I had the same issue when i bought a house in Little Heath right on Hawkshead.  They said the area was liable to subside. Complete load of rubbish.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Dem on January 07, 2008, 06:58:27 pm
If the postcode is EN6 the insurance companies don't like it because the whole of the area lies on soil they don't like. Can't remember what.
I had the same issue when i bought a house in Little Heath right on Hawkshead.  They said the area was liable to subside. Complete load of rubbish.

Hi!

Thanks for that.  It's actually AL9, so would be interested to know exactly how far reaching this risk of subsidence is!

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: zorb on January 07, 2008, 08:11:14 pm
I actually meant AL9. The other was my present code.
As I said it covers the whole AL9 area. It really is nothing to
worry about. It's insurance companies being insurance companies.

I have no info on the gravel pit though.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: stevea on January 08, 2008, 03:04:54 am
I think I can help with the two landfill sites. Both were at the same place - the old chalk quarry. I used to play there when I was a boy. When the chalk quarry was closed down, they left an old mechanical digger there. It was so old it used to work on cables and chains! It must have been just before hydraulic systems came out. We used to play on the digger for hours.  The quarry was re-opened as a domestic light rubbish tip only - lawn clippings etc - and then it was changed to a hardfill site - dirty concrete, clay etc and it was filled to the brim. It was closed down years ago and was not near to any houses.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Dem on January 08, 2008, 12:12:44 pm
I think I can help with the two landfill sites. Both were at the same place - the old chalk quarry. I used to play there when I was a boy. When the chalk quarry was closed down, they left an old mechanical digger there. It was so old it used to work on cables and chains! It must have been just before hydraulic systems came out. We used to play on the digger for hours.  The quarry was re-opened as a domestic light rubbish tip only - lawn clippings etc - and then it was changed to a hardfill site - dirty concrete, clay etc and it was filled to the brim. It was closed down years ago and was not near to any houses.

Hi!  Thanks very much for that information - good to hear that this won't be a problem by the sounds of it!

Cheers,

Dem.
 :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mallow on January 08, 2008, 01:27:44 pm
Hi Dem,

If you go ahead with Cataline Field we will be very close neighbours.  Just opposite!  We also owned another house in Hawkshead Lane for a while but didn't find the insurance too bad, however we had previously lived in another AL9 location so maybe we were used to high prices.

The field behind Catalina is crop rotated each year , rape, wheat etc.  The farmer is usually very responsible and has in the past warned my husband when he will be fertilising so we can walk the dog elsewhere for a few weeks.   

Old maps show mine workings in the acre field next door, known as Cherry Dell. Maybe Stevea could tell me if this is where the chalk mine was?  I have always wondered what was there and have been told that this is why planning permission can never be granted on this pocket of land.

Good luck.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Dem on January 08, 2008, 02:41:41 pm
Hi Dem,

If you go ahead with Cataline Field we will be very close neighbours.  Just opposite!  We also owned another house in Hawkshead Lane for a while but didn't find the insurance too bad, however we had previously lived in another AL9 location so maybe we were used to high prices.

The field behind Catalina is crop rotated each year , rape, wheat etc.  The farmer is usually very responsible and has in the past warned my husband when he will be fertilising so we can walk the dog elsewhere for a few weeks.   

Old maps show mine workings in the acre field next door, known as Cherry Dell. Maybe Stevea could tell me if this is where the chalk mine was?  I have always wondered what was there and have been told that this is why planning permission can never be granted on this pocket of land.

Good luck.

Hi!

Thanks for that information, and you'll have to pop over for a drink if all goes well!  :D

I'm guessing then, that you've had no issues with insurers, even if the prices were a little higher?  The quote we had only asked that we also confirm that the house isn't currently suffering subsidence (which a survey will pick up anyway), so that's no problem to us.

Thanks again!

Dem.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 12, 2008, 06:53:03 pm
Just in from Welwyn Hatfield Council...

12 May 2008 

Secretary of State says 10,000 new homes for Welwyn Hatfield by 2021 


The East of England Plan has been launched by the Secretary of State today designating Welwyn Hatfield as a growth area that will have to accommodate a minimum of 10,000 new homes in the borough before 2021, with potentially even more growth beyond that date.

Welwyn Hatfield Borough Councillor Mandy Perkins, Executive Member for Planning says: “It is unbelievable that the Government has confirmed this level of growth for Welwyn Hatfield, completely ignoring the detrimental impact this amount of development will have on the quality of life of the local community, and without any idea as to whether, or how, the necessary infrastructure can be provided to service this number of dwellings.  I am extremely disappointed by the announcement.  The Secretary of State has pushed ahead with this high level of housing in spite of the strong case put forward by the Council.

“What we need to do now is fully digest the plan, reflect on it and then consider our next course of action.”

End/PR/08/52

Notes to Editor’s: The East of England plan can be viewed and downloaded from the Government Office for the East of England’s website – www.goeast.gov.uk   (http://www.goeast.gov.uk) 


 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on May 12, 2008, 07:07:10 pm
Unfortunately this is no longer a "plan" just a random figure plucked out of thin air with supporting infrastructure with even less substance.  The result, unless things change, will be to make us all a suburb of London right out to St Albans without enough water or sewage to keep us all going. Let's hope someone makes a proper plan with real money and attention to supporting infrastructure, Green Belt issues, keeping gaps between towns and other basics which I suspect we all find blindingly obvious but which have been overlooked by the powers that be.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 25, 2008, 12:10:58 am
Herts says plans to build more than 65 thousand homes in the county are bound to have a detrimental impact on the quality of life. Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/news/may08/new_homes_in_hertfordshire.shtml) for more details.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on May 26, 2008, 10:11:29 am
Infrastructure costs money, the housing makes money, (assuming the credit crunch doesn't continue indefinately). Despite pleas and petitions, the housing will be built without the infrastructure and when everything grinds to a halt, sewers overflow, water runs dry, schools are stuffed full, the QEII is closed, the incumbent council will then say they don't have the money to do anything about it and blame a previous administration for their failure! That's the way it is, get used to it! We have no real say. Sorry Grant, Mike and all, you try your best but this 'problem' is too big for you to make any difference. Money talks, not people.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 27, 2008, 12:29:55 pm
The following is a summary of an article in last Friday's Planning magazine, issued by the RTPI (Royal Town Planning Institute), tailored to Welwyn Hatfield's situation, and my own thoughts added at the end.

The Government may wish to see 10,000 new homes built in Welwyn Hatfield but the latest signals in the housing market pose some serious dilemmas for planning authorities about land supply, affordable home targets and revenue streams for infrastructure provision. 

The credit crunch has sent panic waves through the house building industry. If builders cannot build homes that will sell, they will not build the accompanying affordable homes either. Infrastructure provision is based on the assumption that planning gain will pay for it.  Planners have dutifully found five years' supply of building land only to discover that few wish to build on it.

Alarm bells started to ring when Persimmon Homes - one of the largest house builders - amazed the industry by announcing that it has postponed the commencement of scheduled new sites until the mortgage market improves.  Other house builders have made similar announcements, and are reducing their workforces.  It is not a situation in which builders will think about contributing to community infrastructure from their profits.

Although there are suggestions of Government money being used to enable housing associations to buy up unsold homes, the problem is that they do not meet Government standards.

Ferdie is correct - money talks.  And money (or lack of it to be more accurate) is saying that housing targets will not be met for at least a few years.  Even when conditions improve, that slippage will not be recovered.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on June 26, 2008, 09:47:47 pm
Here we go again...

Information through my door today about 14 new flats being built on the land between Green Close and Station Road (where all that lovely attractive fencing is currently being put up!)

Application on Welwyn Hatfield site at

https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/detail.asp?AltRef=S6/2008/0918/MA

Please note, this is separate from the proposed development on Green Close already discussed on the site. No plans as yet online, so not that easy to judge what impact it is going to have, but planning application mentions 3 storey blocks...

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: southbury on June 27, 2008, 07:01:58 am
Fozzie Bear looked into building new flats in the Village at the moment but decided he was enough of a Muppett
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 27, 2008, 08:58:02 am
Fozzie Bear looked into building new flats in the Village at the moment but decided he was enough of a Muppett

 :)

Fozzie Bear was probably also put off by seeing all the mature trees chopped down.

 :-\
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: southbury on June 27, 2008, 09:37:00 am
I don't want to say I told you so .. but my comments from September on another development

9   Local Issues / General Issues / Re: Peplins development  on: September 27, 2007, 07:11:32 am 

Whatever Estate Agents and  Industry Surveys say at present we are about to get a real correction in the UK Housing market .. any developer worth his salt will realise this . Mortgage lenders in Q1 2008 will have to pass on higher borrowing costs or see their margins greatly reduced and Credit conditions in the retail / mortgage sectors are going to get squeezed .. hopefully pulling down houses and replacing them with flats in the village is going to look far less appealing over the next couple of years.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on June 27, 2008, 09:48:06 am
It's interesting that this application has gone in, presumably the original 24 proposed flats on the other side of Green Close will be far less attractive to build if these 14 flats get built.

Also, as this new proposal has only required the land to be purchased, rather than 12 existing properties for demolition there is going to be much more potential profit.

Would these two proposals be mutually exclusive ? ie would two developments become overdevelopment ? Perhaps Bob can advise ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: southbury on June 27, 2008, 09:51:26 am
"potential profit " .. now where are 'Kirsty and Phil ' ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 27, 2008, 10:34:02 am
It's interesting that this application has gone in, presumably the original 24 proposed flats on the other side of Green Close will be far less attractive to build if these 14 flats get built.

Also, as this new proposal has only required the land to be purchased, rather than 12 existing properties for demolition there is going to be much more potential profit.

Would these two proposals be mutually exclusive ? ie would two developments become overdevelopment ? Perhaps Bob can advise ?

Interesting!
In a way it is similar to the flats on either side of Georges Wood Road.  Although each application should be considered in isolation in theory, in practice the council must consider them together.  Otherwise there could be problems if they approve one and reject the other.  The good points are that these 38 flats are not on Green Belt land and they are at the village centre so they should help the viability of the shops.  'Windfall' developments properties like these help reduce the pressures on the Green Belt.

Another thought is that the plans for the 24 flats include 48 car spaces underground, which is in excess of the 1.5 per dwelling maximum.  So maybe these two developers are working together and the excess 12 car spaces could be used for these 14 flats.  Not having seen the plans yet, it is just a passing thought of mine.

Until I see both sets of plans and supporting documents together I would prefer not to make any other comment at this stage.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 27, 2008, 10:59:59 am

The good points are that these 38 flats are not on Green Belt land and they are at the village centre so they should help the viability of the shops. 


It's interesting that, although the flats "are not on the green belt", those closest to the station will replace what was a green space in the village.

Is there a group that helps to protect green space within a built up area?

If not, I can see the trees and grass that makes up the triangles of green space on Bradmore Green being identified as a prime building plot for flats in the not too distant future.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on June 27, 2008, 12:12:33 pm
If not, I can see the trees and grass that makes up the triangles of green space on Bradmore Green being identified as a prime building plot for flats in the not too distant future.

David


The land that is being built on was owned by Network Rail, who were probably only too glad to get rid of it. The triangles I believe are owned by the Parish Council who I hope would be a lot less enthusiastic about selling out to developers!

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 27, 2008, 05:09:58 pm
The triangles I believe are owned by the Parish Council who I hope would be a lot less enthusiastic about selling out to developers!

James
James is correct. The two triangles forming the green are owned by the parish council and I cannot see in what circumstances the council would sell that land.  The parish council has been acquiring various pieces of land over the last 30 years such as Gobions Open Space and the recreation grounds at Hawkshead Road, Little Heath.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on June 27, 2008, 08:08:36 pm
Although if we did sell the green (to a car park company) we could remove the parking problems, cut the precept and make John Fraser happy all in one go!


Was the triangle really a "green" area or just overgrown shrubs and thistles by the railway no one looked after?

Wont the planners insist on some greenery in the two flats developments?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on June 28, 2008, 06:54:33 pm
I'm sure I am not the only one wondering how 14 dwellings will be squeezed into that sloping bit of land and include car parking and landscaping. I'm sure the future residents will be happy right next to the bridge with a bus stop right outside their bedroom window!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on June 29, 2008, 11:58:11 am

Was the triangle really a "green" area or just overgrown shrubs and thistles by the railway no one looked after?

It may not have been pretty but it was a valuable piece of scrub for wildlife.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on June 29, 2008, 12:49:04 pm
Fair enough. i realise not all worthwhile green land is like a lawn.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 05, 2008, 10:20:47 am
The design company that has drawn up the plans for the proposed development on former Network Rail land between Green Close and Station Road has offered this site the planning application documents supporting the project to publish online. Click here for more details (http://www.brookmans.com/news/july08/green_close_station_road_development.shtml).
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on July 05, 2008, 02:17:39 pm

 Flats near station.

 Due a broadband breakdown this is my first posting for 3 weeks so I hope you all have not been suffering from withdrawal  symptoms.

Right, back to business, what I think we are all missing, is this is another piece of land that will be concreted over and completly killing off the eco infrarstructure that was there.  Rainwater will now drain off into the sewers unstead of soaking into the ground aquifers. Wildlife cannot live in concret so it will kill off the insects, worms, wild flowers and all the other bugs that birds and wildlife depend upon to live. In fact the food chain on that piece of ground will be gone forever.                                   

This, along with all of the other millions of acres of land being developed, and already built on, is spelling disaster for our wildlife. This does not take into account the energy used into providing the materials to build these new dwellings, or the fresh demands on utilitys. What is worse, is that if Mr Brown has his way, this is just the begining, you have been warned.

I could go on doing my David Attenborough bit, but suffice to say that I hope the above has got you all thinking.

Remember, extinction, is for ever.

Grumpy as ever, Roy
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on July 05, 2008, 03:05:23 pm
The design company that has drawn up the plans for the proposed development on former Network Rail land between Green Close and Station Road has offered this site the planning application documents supporting the project to publish online. Click here for more details (http://www.brookmans.com/news/july08/green_close_station_road_development.shtml).

The aerial photograph under section 2.3 of the design and access plan (part 1) looks remarkably similar to the one that Paul Large uploaded to this website a few years ago... presumably the developers got his permission before they used it for their own commercial use!  :icon_scratch:
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 05, 2008, 03:49:38 pm
At the risk of being painfull, perhaps 4 families living in flats rather than one family living on a huge BP property may in fact save green spaces?
Its not as if with the paved drives, mown lawns, weedkiller and fertilizer poisened earth that the gardens of large houses provide any sort of refuge for wildlife.
Only one answer and that is less people. I think certain world leaders are working on that one.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mr Green on July 05, 2008, 10:18:42 pm
Remember, extinction, is for ever.

Don’t fret Roy - FOREVER isn’t what it was?

Lost species will be synthetically reintroduced (Jurassic Park anyone). You yourself may well yet be cloned.

Enter - Grumpy Young Roy.

Welcome back.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on July 06, 2008, 10:46:30 pm
I agree with you, Jet, that the only long term answer is less people.  But the situation in this country would be greatly helped if one was only allowed to own one residence for one's own use.  Any further properties purchased must be let.  I realise that we live in an affluent area, but it does seem to be very common to own a further property to take holidays in.  Two members of my family do, with a third considering the purchase.  And to rebut any allegations, I am not envious as we could have done the same thing ourselves.

This might reduce the concreting over of the UK at least.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 07, 2008, 11:11:13 am
The application for 24 flats to replace the 12 maisonettes on Green Close has just been withdrawn.  This just leaves the new application for 14 flats on the land between Station Road and Green Close roadway.

The developer is crafty letting this website reproduce the plans etc.  But in my opinion he is not endearing himself to local people by enclosing the site with the hoardings now instead of waiting to see if planning permission is granted, and work is about to start.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 07, 2008, 11:45:54 am
Bob

Does this mean that the developer will be submitting new plans ?

Under what circumstances would you withdraw an application ? Can you only have one planning application in at any one time ? Presumably you would only withdraw if you wanted to resubmit something else ?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on July 07, 2008, 12:55:08 pm
 Re: Flats near Station.

 Jet you are absolutly right, the problem is to many people. The trouble is, those of us that have been professing this common sense approach since the 60's have been, and still are, being labled facists, racists etc.

Might I suggest that before this country is one big housing estate you all look at
WWW.MIGRATIONWATCHUK.ORG. chaired by Sir Anthony Green. This latest email sates, we have an immigrant arriving every minute, a new passpot issued every three minutes and a house needed every six minutes. And thats just the known ones.

With the above information perhaps we should all be ringing Easy Jet, or witness BP becoming part of Hatfield becoming part of Welwyn Garden City becoming part of Stevenage, Hey Ho Birmingham, here we come.

The above is not about politics, but about common sense, and I trust it is taken in that manner.

Grumpy Old Roy

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 07, 2008, 01:32:25 pm
Roy, the one thing that Britain is good at exporting is the English, 120K of em have moved to Ireland alone!
Still as the population is only 4M and there is room for at least ten times that we have no wories.
Even the hard working Poles are leaving now at a rate of 20K per year as the construction work dries up
Still the good old EU is meeting to discuss migration/immigration this week I believe.
The dust has settled I think its time  I now made a quick post about our Lisbon treaty rejection on the EU thread.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 07, 2008, 08:36:10 pm
Although if we did sell the green (to a car park company) we could remove the parking problems, cut the precept and make John Fraser happy all in one go!
Reading your other posts, it appears the precept is simply used to cut the grass. Or at least that's it as far as a Brookmans Park resident is concerned. Not much of a return on £60. So I doubt it would make me happy. I'd expect the windfall would be used to finance some half baked idea - such as more plastic bobbies.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 08, 2008, 10:54:34 am
Bob

Does this mean that the developer will be submitting new plans ?

Under what circumstances would you withdraw an application ? Can you only have one planning application in at any one time ? Presumably you would only withdraw if you wanted to resubmit something else ?



An application can be withdrawn for any of a number of reasons.  They may have been told that approval was unlikely so that they can go back to the drawing board.  They may have been told that the combined 38 flats at Green Close was too many so one or both would be rejected.  They may have thought the downturn in the economy and housing market would mean outlaying too much money now to build the flats with no certainty of making a profit when they are all sold.  Or a combination of any or all of these.

These two applications were by different people and for different sites.  One on one side of Green Close and the other for the other side.  One person can submit two planning applications for the same property or site at the same time with different proposals to try and get one approved.  I have seen it happen a few times.  It speeds up the process.  Otherwise you would have to put in one application, wait for the decision, and then put in a modified application if the first was rejected.

As for John Fraser's query about what you get for the council tax paid to the Parish Council, check out http://www.northmymmspc.org.uk/ and see the 'facilities' page.  Then have a look at the minutes of the meetings for the last three years.  This summer over £20,000 is to be spent on new play equipment at the Gobions Open Space play area - something John has suggested needs doing.  Nearly £10,000 is being spent on further improvements to the drainage of that Open Space.

All your parish councillors live in North Mymms.  They do not close their ears between the four-yearly elections.  And John - fancy bringing up the PCSO issue again    ???   The Parish Council consulted every household about that two or three years ago, and went with the majority of replies which were against that proposal from Hert Police.  Parish Councillors were 'unhappy' with the idea but sought confirmation from residents.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 08, 2008, 11:26:18 am
I think you will find that it was Peter who brought up the PCSOs:
The numbers are small however and in absolute terms if we had doubled it each council tax payer would have had to find about £60pa more. Think what we could do with such a burst of local finance!! It would cover several CPSOs for a start!

I was simply replying to what I felt was a snide remark.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: jet on July 09, 2008, 12:51:47 am
As somone once said " its only £60" fine if you have £61 but a bit of a no no if you have £59.
I am fed up to the back teeth with people who think they Know how to spend peoples cash better than they can. IE New ****** Labour.
As for plastic bobbies. I was appalled to find dozens of plastic Polish CPOs working in N London, photographing and recording the antics of various ethnic groups. Jobs for the boys or what. Shades of the 1930s.
If the rates were spent on services for the people who paid them then that would be fine. Instead they are used for most other things.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 09, 2008, 10:54:50 am
Fair enough, John.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 11, 2008, 06:04:39 pm
I saw an article in the Daily Telegraph this morning entitled Householders can convert lofts and extend homes without planning permission (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2779293/Householders-can-convert-lofts-and-extend-homes-without-planning-permission.html).

However there was a line in the article saying that home owners may need permission to pave over their gardens in order to make car parking spaces.  The article reads...

Quote

From next month, extensions of up to two storeys will be permitted as long as they extend no more than 10ft from the back of an existing property — enough for a small kitchen or spare bedroom.

Loft conversions will also be allowed without planning consent, as long as they extend no more than 20cm (about 8in) from the eaves of a property. They must also be no more than 50 cubic metres in size — roughly the equivalent of a room 18ft by 12ft. In conservation areas, loft conversions will still be restricted but ­single-storey rear extensions will be permitted.

The rules will remove as many as 80,000 house­holders a year from the planning system. About a quarter of all home development projects that currently require planning permission will be able to go ahead without formal authorisation from councils.

Ministers said the relaxation of the rules would make it easier for those who were struggling to move house because of the credit crisis to extend their homes instead.

However, there will be new restrictions on home owners who want to pave their front gardens. In order to cut down on the volume of water flowing off driveways into drains, home owners will need planning permission if they want to lay more than five square metres of asphalt or other impermeable materials.


So, fewer concrete front gardens but more dodgy lean-tos?

One for Bob H, our resident planning expert?

 :)

David

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on September 11, 2008, 06:15:15 pm
Did the article say how anyone is to know whether a new extension extends more than 10ft from the back of the property? Or whether a new loft room is within 50 cubic metres?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on September 11, 2008, 08:24:12 pm
Although planning regulations are being relaxed, extensions and loft conversions are still subject to building control, so presumably any excess size will still be picked up.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 11, 2008, 08:51:08 pm
Did the article say how anyone is to know whether a new extension extends more than 10ft from the back of the property? Or whether a new loft room is within 50 cubic metres?

Hi Mermaid, check it out. I put a link in my post, but it was perhaps hidden in the title. Householders can convert lofts and extend homes without planning permission (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2779293/Householders-can-convert-lofts-and-extend-homes-without-planning-permission.html).

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 12, 2008, 12:34:03 pm
Dave asked for my comments.   >:D  Oh joy!

Off the cuff, I would say that this just makes the planning regulations even more complicated.  The usual effect of the endemic tinkering instead of governing - my own opinion of course.  It seems uncannily like the simplification of the tax bands by doing away with the 10p band.

Maximum 10 feet!!!!  Hardly worth the effort unless you are simply enlarging the existing rooms. The inside measurements of the room will be reduced by the thickness of the wall. 

And why feet?  I thought all measurements had to be metric, like the other ones in the newspaper article  The EU will be livid.  What about the Metric Martyrs who got fined for not displaying the metric equivalent of their prices?

Without seeing the detail, it is not clear how or if this overrides the existing policy of permitted development rights which enable you to add up to 10% (15% maybe? - I forget which) onto the volume of the original dwelling without having to apply for permission.  What if you have already had a rear extension?  Will this be another 10 feet beyond that?

Why have they put a volume limit on loft conversions?  It makes no sense.  The calculation is complicated because a loft conversion is obviously not a regular box shape such as a standard normal room, and dormer windows will simply add to the complexity of the calculation.

And why 5 square metres of paving, except if it is permeable?  This takes no account of the length of your driveway.  There is a major concern about flooding caused by the run-off of rainwater made worse by paving over front gardens, but is this the answer?  Why not simply say that all new drive surfaces must allow the rain to soak through into the ground?

Who would be a planner or in the building industry having to wade through this further complication?  It reminds me of the added complexity of the tax regulations which have caused the annual edition of Tolleys (?) Tax reference book to more than double in the last 11 years despite using smaller print or some other device to cut down on the number of pages.  It has grown from one to two volumes.  Tinkering, tinkering, tinkering.  All it does is create more work for the civil servants - now there is a misnomer if ever I saw one.  Servants indeed, and not very civil either   ::)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 12, 2008, 01:00:27 pm
This application has been refused by Welwyn Hatfield Council on 9th September.  The reference number is 2008/0918 on www.welhat.gov.uk. 

The main reason for refusal is:

The proposed building would appear as a cramped form of development on this restricted site to an extent which would represent overdevelopment, as it would significantly reduce and harm the existing spacious character of the street scene and surrounding area. Furthermore, it would represent an unduly dominating and prominent feature within the street scene of Green Close and Station Road, thereby failing to respect or reflect the established character of this part of Brookmans Park. In addition, the architecture of the proposed building comprises of a ‘hotchpot’ of roofs, varied ridgelines, window design and fenestration details, which would appear incongruous to the detriment of the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area.

There are other reasons as well.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on September 12, 2008, 01:38:01 pm
Does that mean the ugly boarding can come down? Shouldn't they have had some kind of permission to put that up in the first place?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 12, 2008, 02:15:32 pm
And what about the loss of all those trees? Will those behind the failed planning application have to plant new trees to compensate?  Or can a developer just wade in, board up, dig up and then sell up?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on September 12, 2008, 02:50:56 pm
If the landowner (ie the developer) wants to chop down trees on his land then he can (assuming not subject to any preservation orders of course).

Although the residents of Green Close had enjoyment value from the copse opposite it wasn't actually their land so they cannot really object about the trees.

The hoarding a slightly different issue, I'm unsure if any permission is actually required. Presumably it is classed a 'fence', I would have thought as long as the 'fence' is no more than a certain height  it does not need any planning consent.

I agree though that the plans have been turned down for good reason, it seems very overdeveloped for such a small plot.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: ADM on September 12, 2008, 03:56:02 pm
I don't think for a moment that it's going to end here.

Next planning application for said site in 3..2...1....
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 12, 2008, 05:16:55 pm
Any fence or wall etc on a site frontage needs planning permission if it is more than 2m high so this needs permission.  I believe that a council officer had been to see it, and assume the council will be, or has been, in contact with the site owner about it.

Anyone who has bought development land must have a huge headache.  The large developers like Redrow have reported reductions in their land banks.  The price paid for this land was huge, according to my source, so the interest on any associated loan will be clocking up.  Does one hang onto the land and hope for a fairly quick end to the recession, cut ones losses and sell the land now, spend more money on an appeal, spend money on a revised application, or what?  I am only glad it is not my problem.

The local sites with planning permission at 2 Georges Wood Road and Claregate, Little Heath, have simply had their existing property demolished.  That stops the owner having to pay council tax on the empty property.  I met the owner of 2 GWR when he and I spoke at a Welwyn Hatfield planning meeting earlier this year in regard to a revised design application.  He told me that he intended to start work this summer with a completion next spring when he expected the housing market to have turned round.  Looks like he has had a change of heart, for which I do not blame him.

Incidentaly, the flat development opposite the church has, at least last time I looked, a sign saying 'only 3 remaining'.  It fails to mention that there are only 4 in the block!  A good bit of marketing - the truth but not the complete picture.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 13, 2008, 06:16:19 am
Too cramped, overdeveloped, harmful to the character of the area, unduly dominating and failing to reflect the established character of Brookmans Park --- just some of reason given by council planners for rejecting plans for 14 flats in Green Close which were described in the official report as a 'hotchpotch'. Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/news/september08/green_close_station_road_development_plans_rejected.shtml) for more details.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on September 14, 2008, 03:26:35 pm
Does that mean the ugly boarding can come down?

Now with added graffiti.... where's Banksky when you need him?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: southbury on September 15, 2008, 08:34:32 am
great news ... bring on the next property developer that bought into " Kirsty and Phil's" rhetoric ..
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 13, 2008, 04:20:34 pm
Further to my previous posting, this item appeared on the Welwyn Hatfield Council website last Friday:

Residents who want to make improvements to their house should check before they start any work.

Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council’s advice comes after the Government reduced requirements for planning permission on certain external building works to houses on 1 October 2008.  The Government says it wants to cut red tape, but local planning officers believe that most home extensions will still need to go through a formal approval process before works can start.

Planning officers estimate that only 10% of current applicants may be able to carry out work without planning permission.  Executive Member for Planning, Cllr Mandy Perkins, said:

“Householders should not just go ahead and undertake building work thinking they are taking advantage of the new planning rules.  They may end up having to take down or carry out costly changes because it should have had permission. The best solution is to seek advice. This reflects the fact that the Government’s changes are not as straightforward as they appear.”

The Government’s changes seek to extend the list of improvements that do not need planning permission from the council.  Not only will homeowners need advice because the new rules are so complicated, but they will still need consent under the Building Regulations for all works, whether or not planning permission is required.

Residents can do their own initial assessment using the Government’s online planning interactive tool at: www.planningportal.gov.uk/.  Alternatively, residents can contact the council on 01707 357 000 or they could use the council website, www.welhat.gov.uk/planning.

Having read that, it seems that the 2,000 planning applications received by the council may reduce by about 200.  Not a lot, but as the advert says, every litle helps.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 31, 2008, 12:55:05 pm
As a follow-up to the refusal of planning pernmission, last week Welwyn Hatfield Council approved an enforcement order requiring the removal of the boarding.

However the applicant has now appealed against the refusal of planning permission.  This means that the enforcement order is now suspended until the appeal has been decided.  The appeal will be heard at an informal hearing most likely at the Welwyn Hatfield Council offices usually within the next 6 months.

This means that we will have to put up with these hoardings for several months, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 31, 2008, 01:04:43 pm
This means that we will have to put up with these hoardings for several months, unfortunately.

I wonder whether the council would consider asking Banksy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy) to brighten up the boarding with some of his amazing art work, such as the painting below?

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aidan Winwood on November 04, 2008, 01:12:28 pm
an excellent idea Dave!  From working in and around Angel and Islington I can attest to how great they are!

A
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: peppermint on November 09, 2008, 12:00:26 am
Does anyone know the rules regarding development of the land owned by Three Valleys Water in Warrengate Road.

We believed this to come under the rules regarding the Green Belt but it would appear that a huge tank with pipes extended some 15 metres up has been erected in the extreme south west corner of the pumping station which is extremely unsightly in an area which enjoyed rural views.

Should local residents not have been advised of its erection together with its use.    The local residents are totally unaware of the current use of the site and what, if any, dangers to our environment there might be should an accident or leak occur on the site.

Over recent years the over development of this site has been immense.   The night sky for the surrounding houses has now been lit up by bright orange sodium lights.

A huge telephone mask was erected in the north east corner of the site some years ago and it would appear that these sites are exempt from the planning laws regarding development of the Green Belt.

What next?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 09, 2008, 10:14:30 am
So are you suggesting that we don't have water treatment works ?

They have to be somewhere - seems like a case of nimbyism to me I'm afraid.

No-one consulted me when a mobile phone mast was erected a hundred or so yards away from my house - but we have to accept developments like this if we want a mobile phone service, clean water, effective sewerage etc

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 10, 2008, 11:21:27 am
Peppermint is correct in saying this water pumping station is in the Green Belt and is therefore subject to Green Belt planning restrictions.  It is a 'brown field' site which existed before Green Belt policies were introduced.

Checking back on my records and the Welwyn Hatfield Council website database, there have been 4 planning approvals since 1995.  In 1996 an additional water treatment control building was approved, and then additional water treatment plant in 2000.  In 2001 a 30m high telecoms mast was approved and then addtional  antennae on the mast in 2003.

If more tanks, lights etc have been erected then she should report that fact to the council's planning officer (phone 01707 357000 and ask to speak to the duty planning officer).  Or phone 3 Valleys and ask them if they have planning permission for these items.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on November 23, 2008, 11:42:22 am

 I am getting increasingly cross (very polite word for me) over the unsightly fencing on Green Place. I am amazed at the arrogance of the developers and our apparent inability to make them remove this eyesore. Please, is there anyone out there who has the knowledge. legal or otherwise to make these developers understand they cannot just ride slipshop over the wishes of local residents.   
 
I must pass this eyesore three or four times a week and I get angrier and angrier each time I pass it.  Come on good residents of BP, lets make enough fuss so they remove this extemely ugly piece of woodwork (taking it down and erecting it around their offices at Potters Bar would focus ther minds)

Any suggestions, I look forward to your usual witty and consructive comments.

As Usual, everyone's favourite (well almost)

Grumpy Old Roy
 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 23, 2008, 01:00:27 pm
I think Bob Horrocks posted somewhere that the hoarding is in breach of planning regs, however because the developer is appealing aginst the refusal of planning permission for the development, the hoarding can stay until the appeal outcome is decided - up to six months apparently.

So looks like it is here to stay for a while yet - yes, I agree it is an eyesore as well as being completely unnecessary, quite what it is trying to protect I don't know.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on November 23, 2008, 01:09:19 pm
I've merged the two topics together.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alex on November 23, 2008, 01:11:42 pm
Does anyone have a view re the hording at the end of Georges Wood Road- junction with Great North Road. All building of these "approved" flats has stopped- so assume that climate is not right. The hording is somewhat basic and a slight eyesore?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 23, 2008, 02:25:17 pm
The hording is somewhat basic and a slight eyesore?

I think slight is about it.

Other than seeing it when coming down Kentish Lane it isn't really obtrusive in the same way that the Green Close hoarding is.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on November 23, 2008, 03:37:30 pm
I received a letter through the post yesterday advising that planning permission was being sort for 'Erection of 2.5 Metre High Hoarding at Green Close, Brookmans Park, Hatfield'. I guess the developer is applying to keep it there. Planning reference is S6/2008/2193/FP.

More details online here:


https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/detail.asp?AltRef=S6/2008/2193/FP&ApplicationNumber=S6%2F2008%2F2193%2FFP&AddressPrefix=&submit1=Go

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 24, 2008, 09:36:19 am
Perhaps if enough people object about it then permission will not be granted.

Could Bob advise on what grounds eg view, safety, loss of amenity or whatever could the proposal be objected to ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bunny on November 24, 2008, 11:04:05 am
Dear all all you need to object is send a email to planning@welhat.gov.uk, i have objected on safety grounds  due to turning out of green close is now dangerous due to restricted vision.  Also people who think they can just erect ugly hoardings when they know they need permission should be taught a lesson.  I live opposite said fence and have to live with the eyesore.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 24, 2008, 11:16:51 am
Could Bob advise on what grounds eg view, safety, loss of amenity or whatever could the proposal be objected to ?

Someone I know drove down Green Close and could not turn his car round so it had to be reversed out.  Fortunately he had a passenger who got out of the car to check for traffic.  In answer to the above request, I can do no better than quote from the report to the Planning Control Committee last month where the officers were recommending enforcement action.  The report puts into official jargon what Bunny has just sad.  It reads:

The hoarding is extremely prominent in the street scene and appears out of place in its location. The development is therefore contrary to Planning Policy Statement 1, Policy D1 and D2 of the Welwyn Hatfield District Plan 2005, and the criteria outlined in accompanying Supplementary Design Guidance.

The hoarding aggravates the already substandard visibility at the junction by forming a solid barrier thereby increasing the danger and inconvenience to people using and highway users in general. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 24, 2008, 11:31:48 am
I have objected online on the WH Council website

https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/detail.asp?AltRef=S6/2008/2193/FP&ApplicationNumber=S6%2F2008%2F2193%2FFP&AddressPrefix=&submit1=Go

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on November 24, 2008, 04:39:43 pm
We have objected too, thanks to James and Sasquartch for providing the link.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on November 24, 2008, 05:31:20 pm

 I will now object officially, thanks to the infomation, But am I correct in thinking the devolopers are McCarthy & Stone, can anyone enlighten me please? If so, I will write to the directors and attemt to get some action. Better still, why don't we all write individually and object or get some kind of petition going ? They cannot be allowed to ride roughshod over the wishes of local residents, and with such impunity.
 
Once I have the address of the developers, I will write and send it by recored delivery just to let them know that Grumpy Old Roy is on the their case. So there.

Grumpy Old Roy
 

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on November 24, 2008, 05:55:59 pm
 
Re my last posting, I have now officialy objected on line, furthermore  I understand that the architecs are the ones in Green Close. If so this where I shall take my objection.

Grumpy Old Roy
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 24, 2008, 05:56:30 pm
I have just objected, too. What arrogance. By the way, if you do object, consider posting a link to this forum discussion so those who read the feedback can see the comments from those who may not have registered their concerns. Here is what I just posted.

Quote

You may wish to sample the strength of feeling about this on the local website's forum.

Here is the url for the discussion.

http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php?topic=1813.30

David

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sharks on November 24, 2008, 09:03:38 pm
I have objected too.

One thought for all of you who are thinking that they don't need to object because so many others have, the planners take into account not only the nature of the objection but also the strength and number of objections.  In other words every comment counts.

If you don't object, the fencing may be there for years to come, maybe until confidence returns in the housing market.  Who knows, that may even be 5 to 10 years away.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 25, 2008, 11:55:57 am

 am I correct in thinking the devolopers are McCarthy & Stone,
Grumpy Old Roy

These will not be retirement flats, which is what McC & S specialise in.  The applicant is MJG Investment Property of Hazelmere, Bucks.  I cannot find a registered company of that name but maybe someone has better search skills than I have.

If every existing residents of Green Close does not object, I shall be most surprised. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 25, 2008, 12:20:52 pm

If every existing residents of Green Close does not object, I shall be most surprised. 


I wonder if every resident in Green Close (and Station Close for that matter) know about this forum and the links that are posted here for them to use in order to post. It would be good to have all residents using the forum.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bunny on November 25, 2008, 02:35:17 pm
Full address of MJG Investment is Common Wood House, 118 penn Road, Hazelmere, Bucks, HP15 7NB, you can get this from the welhat web site
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alex on November 25, 2008, 10:11:55 pm
 :mblah05:

Have also objected today!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bunny on November 26, 2008, 10:06:36 am
Dont know if all our comments have spurred someone into action, but parts of the hoarding are being taken down at the offending corner of green close, as we speak.  I wonder what will happen next?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 26, 2008, 11:27:13 am
Dont know if all our comments have spurred someone into action, but parts of the hoarding are being taken down at the offending corner of green close, as we speak.  I wonder what will happen next?

Thanks Bunny, will nip down and take a few snaps and post them here.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 26, 2008, 11:45:46 am
Unfortunately, they are just changing the position of some of the end panels to reduce the visual obstruction for motorists coming out of the close. The panels should be back in place soon. I guess the objections need to keep coming. Here is  the link again (https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/comment.asp?AltRef=S6/2008/2193/FP&ApplicationNumber=S6%2F2008%2F2193%2FFP&AddressPrefix=&submit1=Go) for objecting (or, in the interest of balance and impartiality, commenting in support of the boarding.)

(http://www.brookmans.com/news/november08/100_0829.jpg)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bunny on November 26, 2008, 04:47:44 pm
How do they think by moving a 10 foot high fence by 2 foot is going to improve the visibility for drivers coming out of Green Close.

Would appear our objections are doing some good, so all who want to see the back of this eyesore please complain.  I spoke to one resident of Green Close and was informed all residents are writing in or have written into to council to complain.  Power to the people!!!!

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 26, 2008, 05:00:47 pm
Hi Bunny,

If you are talking to residents, do tell them they can use this forum to express their concerns, too.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on November 26, 2008, 06:20:28 pm

 I really thought we had won when I saw the workmen on Green Close, a false dawn   unfortunately. What about if we get the WHT involved ??I am happy to try.  Any other thoughts ?  Failing that, what about a pound of semtex and a short fuse?

 
Grumpy Old Roy
 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on November 26, 2008, 08:51:35 pm
Me too. Roy.  Was having warm thoughts about the developers.  But then they were rebuilding it.

Any idea about what was going on?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 26, 2008, 09:38:53 pm
Any idea about what was going on?

It's explained four post earlier (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php?topic=1813.msg15998#msg15998).
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on November 30, 2008, 11:59:03 am
 
 HI Green Close Fence Objectors
 
I have received a reply from a Miss R Neil of WH planning re to my objections to the above. Interestingly, she mentions that due to the volume of correspondence it will not be possible to reply individualy., something must behappening.
I shall continue to write and email, especialy on the following,
Who gave permission to cut down the trees, if refused, will the developers replace them?
Will they make the banking safe ?
However, most impotantly, is it legal to erect fencing, this intrusive before planning is granted. 
 
May I further suggest that you contine to write, phone email WHC on this matter, please note ref, S6/2008/2193/FP.

We can win this.

Thanks

Grumpy Old Roy
 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on November 30, 2008, 12:15:05 pm
Who gave permission to cut down the trees, if refused, will the developers replace them?

If the developers own the land, is there anything to stop them cutting down the trees? I honestly don't know the answer, but imagine someone will...
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 30, 2008, 02:00:01 pm
Unless the trees had preservation orders on them the landowners are free to remove any trees.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 01, 2008, 10:47:04 am

 I have received a reply from a Miss R Neil of WH planning re to my objections to the above. Interestingly, she mentions that due to the volume of correspondence it will not be possible to reply individualy., something must behappening.
I shall continue to write and email, especialy on the following,
Who gave permission to cut down the trees, if refused, will the developers replace them?
Will they make the banking safe ?
However, most importantly, is it legal to erect fencing, this intrusive before planning is granted. 
 

Sorry Roy, but that was simply a standard reply from the council. 

The normal course of events is to get planning permission for a development and then put up a hoarding, as seen at 2 Georges Wood Road and Claregate on the A1000 at Little Heath.  In this case, the developer put up the hoardings before getting planning permission - which was refused and has now gone to appeal.  Therefore these hoardings are unauthorised development and enforcement action for their removal was approved by the council last month.  Obviously the developer does not want the expense of removing the hoarding which is why a planning application has just been made to retain it.

As already suggested, the trees were not protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) so they could be cut down, just as you could cut down or prune the trees on your land, unless they are covered by a TPO.  Just like you, there is no need for the owner of the land to replace the trees etc if he does not get planning permission.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mallow on December 09, 2008, 12:39:21 pm
I spoke to the planning department today, who told me that the pumping station does not necessarily need planning permission to erect a tank.  I find this hard to believe.  I am sure if I erected a 25' high x 15' wide ( I am guessing, it is probably bigger) green holding tank in my front garden the planning permission police would have something to say about it. 

I have asked them to investigate.  They say they will get back to me.

 ::)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on December 09, 2008, 04:27:07 pm
Surely the planning regulations are different for industrial sites ?

I would have thought that development on an industrial site, which I'm assuming the pumping station is classed as, would be different to residential areas.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 10, 2008, 10:43:47 am
As far as I know, anything classed as a development needs planning permission unless it comes within General Permitted Development Rights i.e. the recent relaxation of policy that allows you to add a small extension or put in dormer windows.

the Vet College has had to apply for dog kennels and new barns, extensions, air conditioning plant etc.  At the Welham Green industrial estate there have been numerous applications for revisions to windows, doors and even internal changes of use.

There may be special rules for pumping stations but it is such a one-off type of industrial use that I cannot imagine they would have special exemption.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 02, 2009, 10:41:30 am
The retrospective planning application for the erection of the hoarding has been refused.  Click here  (http://www.brookmans.com/news/january09/green_close_station_road_hoarding_plans_rejected.shtml)for more.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on January 02, 2009, 06:12:51 pm
Aw... shame...  :icon_jokercolor:

Thank you to everyone who took the time to write in!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 16, 2009, 12:10:51 pm
The appeal against refusal of the 14 flats is to be heard at a Public Inquiry on 25 February 2009 commencing at 10am at the Campus West Centre, Welwyn Garden City.  It is scheduled for two days.  Campus West is the theatre/cinema/library building with Roller City on the ground floor, opposite John Lewis.  There is a car park next to it.   

A Public Inquiry is the most expensive type of appeal involving barristers representing the appellant and the council.  The appellant must think it worth this additional cost, so I expect he will be asking for costs against the council.

The decision is usually made within a month of the Inquiry.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 17, 2009, 08:54:39 am
Imagine walking down Bradmore Lane and coming across a new housing estate with hundreds of new homes.  Unlikely? Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/news/january09/new_homes_consultation_goes_ahead.shtml) for more.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: peppermint on January 19, 2009, 10:35:32 pm
The paving over and associated drainage of land west of Brookmans Park station (RVC land), if built on, will have  devastating consequences to the properties on Warrengate Road.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 20, 2009, 11:51:26 am
The effect on house prices is not something concerning planners.

Welwyn Hatfield's consultation paper is due to be issued in late February or early March.  I have my own ideas on arguments for and against each possible development area, but would be delighted if people could let me have their ideas before then.  It will help to focus minds on the planning reasons against each option.

As an example, the area west of Brookmans Park wouuld be handy for shops and trains, but there would have to be a major upgrade of the local roads.  Currently it is quite hairy turning right out of Bradmore Lane into Station Road.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aidan Winwood on January 20, 2009, 01:08:43 pm
Any idea when the fence has to come down?

A
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 20, 2009, 01:27:30 pm

As an example, the area west of Brookmans Park wouuld be handy for shops and trains, but there would have to be a major upgrade of the local roads.  Currently it is quite hairy turning right out of Bradmore Lane into Station Road.


A minor problem, the Bradmore Lane flyover and Station Road underpass will sort that out.

 :icon_jokercolor:

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: AnneK on January 20, 2009, 05:24:17 pm
To accommodate 400 homes in the nearish term, and potentially 4,000 homes in the long term, Brookmans Park would need a lot more than an upgrade of local roads (though they're going to need plenty of investment after the construction lorries have chewed them up and, later, to cope with the extra traffic).

Would there not also need to be a major upgrade of Brookmans Park's train station and an expansion of First Capital Connect's service? At present the station is inaccessible to the disabled, the elderly and parents with young children. Those of us who can get to the trains are treated to a special, standing-room-only service at peak times. How about the bus service? A single, hourly Uno bus isn't going to be enough.

Then there are our primary and secondary schools, Potterells Medical Centre and the QEII Hospital, fresh after its downgrading. Will we be expected to absorb the extra students and patients, and all drive to Stevenage on congested roads in medical emergencies? (The Lister, at least, won't have to worry about overcrowding if most of us expire on the way there.) I'm sure the residents of Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield aren't thrilled at the prospect of major development, but at least they're better equipped to deal with it than we are in Brookmans Park, Welham Green and the other villages in the vicinity.

And one other thought. How would Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council acquire the Royal Veterinary College's land for development (if, in fact, that's where the new homes would go)? Surely the College needs the land and would like to stay put, particularly after it invested so much in its new buildings. How much public money would have to go towards buying the land off the RVC and setting up the College elsewhere?

Those of us in Brookmans Park may as well resign ourselves to a degree of development. Governments and developers the world over seem intent on concreting over anything that doesn't move. But this particular plan sounds really crazy to me.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: AnneK on January 20, 2009, 07:19:11 pm
ps - At least the station's car park has plenty of space for everyone.  :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on January 20, 2009, 11:06:18 pm
ps - At least the station's car park has plenty of space for everyone.  :)

Perhaps they could build some houses there too!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 21, 2009, 10:50:59 am
Any idea when the fence has to come down?
A

The hoardings can stay until after the decision on the appeal.  See my last posting which said the appeal Public Inquiry will be on 25th Feb with the decision report normally due about a month later.  If permission is granted for the flats then the hoardings will remain - as 2 Georges Wood Rd and Claregate on the A1000.  If refused the inspector will most likely give 1,2, or 3 months to remove them, depending on how generous he/she feels.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 21, 2009, 11:10:44 am
Then there are our primary and secondary schools, Potterells Medical Centre and the QEII Hospital, fresh after its downgrading.
And one other thought. How would Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council acquire the Royal Veterinary College's land for development

All good points Anne.   However our NHS PCT is pushing for one of these new polyclinics at the QE2.  The RVC would sell off some land to a developer making a huge profit on the increased value caused by the change from agricultural use to residential use. Even more if they get outline planning permission for, say. 400 dwellings.  I use the word 'dwellings' to cover houses and flats since the latter form of housing has now had a number of approvals in the village. 

Just to stir things up, perhaps they could use some of that profit to buy Friday Grove which they wanted to buy when it originally came on the market but they were gazumped.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mallow on January 23, 2009, 01:12:33 pm
Why bother with RVC land when there is a handy 20 acre field at the top of the road. ;D

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Abbot on January 25, 2009, 01:18:36 pm
Now would be a good time for them to check which fields are not under water.
There is no point in building houses where we do not want them and then them being uninsurable.
 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 27, 2009, 12:41:28 pm
The hoardings can stay until after the decision on the appeal.  See my last posting which said the appeal Public Inquiry will be on 25th Feb with the decision report normally due about a month later. 

They must be fairly confident of winning the appeal next month, they are painting the hoardings as I write. Or are they trying to make it less of an eyesore so that they win?

(http://www.brookmans.com/news/january09/100_1013.JPG)

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on January 28, 2009, 12:25:10 pm
The Planning Inspector conducting the Public Inquiry will visit the site.  He/she usually visits the location informally before the Inquiry in order to familiarise him/herself with the area.  The formal visit with both parties will be immediately after the Inquiry.

I think Dave is right to the extent that the owner is trying to make the hoardings less visually intrusive.  I still think the appeal will be dismissed.  The design would dominate the existing maisonettes.

My goodness - Dave is quick.  After posting I realised that my original wording might imply that I thought the appeal would succeed.  So I changed it as above, which is why the quote by Dave is different.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 28, 2009, 12:28:31 pm
The Planning Inspector conducting the Public Inquiry will visit the site.  He/she usually visits the location informally before the Inquiry in order to familiarise him/herself with the area.  The formal visit with both parties will be immediately after the Inquiry.

I think Dave is right and the owner is trying to make the hoardings less visually intrusive.

Wouldn't it be ironic if the inspector detested green.

 :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on January 28, 2009, 02:02:01 pm
Lovely picture Dave, shame it wasn't on a web cam and we could have all watched paint dry!!! ;) Job creation at its best.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 02, 2009, 05:04:13 pm
What do you know?  A new planning application was made last week to erect 1.8m high hoardings.  Welwyn Hatfield Council reference 2009/0180.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: peppermint on February 02, 2009, 07:20:23 pm
Imagine the cost of these flats should they ever get permission to build.    They will need to recoup the cost of putting up, taking down, painting and repainting the hoardings.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on February 03, 2009, 12:33:57 am
The family and I moved from Brookmans Park in 2004, to North Yorkshire. Recently, the villages of the South Craven area (see http://www.sutton-in-craven.org.uk/) were threatened with unsustainable amounts of building. In our case, the threat arose because a broke District Council were prepared to entertain developers who would find it cheaper to build on our greenfield (including Dales floodplains) than brownfield urban sites. No matter how much regeneration Leeds (and Bradford) could do with.

The residents (me included) managed to show the Council what democracy is (either that, or threatened revolution - it was a little hard to tell at times). They've since backed off. This was done by local people organising against "elected bodies" which seemed to have forgotten whose side they were supposed to be on. I write "elected bodies" because the support between residents and their own local councillors was critical to successfully defending our villages.

These threats *can* be successfully resisted. Best of luck.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: AnneK on February 03, 2009, 09:15:17 am
That sounds promising. Trinity, what did you do to discourage development of your village? Do you think any particular action caught your District Council's attention?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trinity on February 03, 2009, 11:58:56 pm
That sounds promising. Trinity, what did you do to discourage development of your village? Do you think any particular action caught your District Council's attention?
Having the local councillors on-side was most important initially. Craven District Council has quite a large number of independents, and a small Tory majority which took over from a Labour one in May 2008 (one of the reasons, I suppose, why they're broke). What that meant was that whilst the independents couldn't block the motion, they could and did make enough fuss to force the council to agree to presenting their case in some detail, to the public. That happened in two meetings - one in Skipton, the other in the South Craven secondary school local to the villages under threat. The Skipton residents hadn't heard anything about it. By the time of the second public meeting in South Craven they had bouncers on the door because the hall in which the meeting was held could only take 250 people. There were nearly 1000 outside. The council employees tried to give their presentations full of management speak and other flannel, but the public were, understandably, having none of it.

The council leader was left visibly shaken. At the next council meeting, which was supervised by a large public presence, the measures were comprehensively voted down.

The the economy fell apart and, for now, much of the threat has receded.

There are some things here that repay a little emphasis. We were voluble, but at all times civil. The council was in an electorally fragile position. The inviolability of those wards which are covered by the Yorkshire Dales National Park weakened much of the argument for building in South Craven. There was much press coverage locally, and on regional TV. The notion of building is not without some merit given the need here for a degee of affordable housing - but that argument was weakened by the idea of building everything *here* rather than spread thoughout the district. To be fair to the council, building quotas were attempted to be enforced from outside, by some regional quango ticking boxes. Much of the actual work was done by council employees who came in for a very great deal of criticism - though the real fault lay with the council itself and its lamentable communications, which enhanced the public perception that action was required immediately to head off dirty deeds.

This isn't to suggest any sort of template for the defence of BP and the surrounding villages - many of the circumstances will be different. But I do remember the place with fondness and would hate to see it wrecked. So I hope you're encouraged. Some resources that might be of use are the campaign's web site at http://www.nodisc.org/, and the archives at the Craven Herald, including http://www.cravenherald.co.uk/news/3784123.People_power_ends_Craven_housing_link_with_Leeds/

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 04, 2009, 03:34:04 pm
I will be putting on this website's calendar these three public meetings to be held by North Mymms District Green Belt Soc.

Monday 23 March 2009 . AGM at BP United Reformed Curch starting at 8pm.  Instead of a speaker after the business, there will be a presentation and discussion on 'Welwyn Hatfield Core Strategy issues and options' which include housing possibly on Green Belt land to the west and south of Brookmans Park.  At the meeting it is planned to have suggested response forms setting out arguments against this option.

Monday 30 March 2009.  North Mymms Youth and Community Centre, Station Rd, behind the catholic church, starting at 8pm.  This meeting will concentrate on housing options affecting Welham Green which are Parsonage Farm (between the village and the A1001 South Way) and Marshmoor, with suggested response forms.

Wednesday 1 April 2009.  Potters Bar United Reformed Church, Darkes Lane starting at 8pm.  This meeting will concentrate on housing options affecting Little Heath which are to build east of Little Heath, with suggested response forms.

These will be notified to every household in the Society's annual Newsletter due to be distributed at the end of February.  It will also say that anyone who would like copies of the response form(s) can get them from me.
 
Apparently the council's consultation period will be from 1 March to 30 April.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 04, 2009, 03:57:59 pm
Monday 23 March 2009 . AGM at BP United Reformed Curch starting at 8pm. 

Instead of a speaker after the business, there will be a presentation and discussion on 'Welwyn Hatfield Core Strategy issues and options' which include housing possibly on Green Belt land to the west and south of Brookmans Park.  It will also touch on other options of housing on Green Belt land at Welham Green and Little Heath.  At the meeting it is planned to have suggested response forms setting out arguments against this option, and also the other two options.

This meeting, and two others, will be notified to every household in the Society's annual Newsletter due to be distributed at the end of February.  It will also say that anyone who would like copies of the response form(s) can get them from Bob Horrocks.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 04, 2009, 04:02:23 pm
Monday 30 March 2009 at North Mymms Youth and Community Centre, Station Road, behind catholic church starting at 8pm. 

There will be a presentation and discussion on 'Welwyn Hatfield Core Strategy issues and options' which include housing possibly on Green Belt land to the north and east of Welham Green.  It will also touch on other options of housing on Green Belt land at Brookmans Park and Little Heath.  At the meeting it is planned to have suggested response forms setting out arguments against this option, and also the other two options.

This meeting, and two others, will be notified to every household in the Society's annual Newsletter due to be distributed at the end of February.  It will also say that anyone who would like copies of the response form(s) can get them from Bob Horrocks.

 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 04, 2009, 04:06:51 pm
Wednesday 1 April 2009 at Potters Bar United Reformed Church, Darkes Lane starting at 8pm. 

There will be a presentation and discussion on 'Welwyn Hatfield Core Strategy issues and options' which include housing possibly on Green Belt land to the east of Little Heath.  It will also touch on other options of housing on Green Belt land at Brookmans Park and Welham Green.  At the meeting it is planned to have suggested response forms setting out arguments against this option, and also the other two options.

This meeting, and two others, will be notified to every household in the Society's annual Newsletter due to be distributed at the end of February.  It will also say that anyone who would like copies of the response form(s) can get them from Bob Horrocks.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Custard on February 09, 2009, 01:39:04 pm
Does anyone know if the RVC received permission for their latest washing facilities etc?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 09, 2009, 02:25:52 pm
In reply to Custard, that planning application has been withdrawn.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: AnneK on February 09, 2009, 02:42:11 pm
Belated thanks, Trinity, for explaining what you did in the South Craven area. As you point out, circumstances are different in Brookmans Park. But it's still really encouraging to see that residents and local councillors in your area were able to affect a change in the council's housing policy. I hope we'll be able to do the same here if necessary.

I wonder if Grant Shapps will be attending any of the NM District Green Belt Society's upcoming meetings on housing.  It would be good to have his support and to hear his thoughts there . . .
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Custard on February 09, 2009, 02:44:11 pm
Thanks Bob - no doubt another application will arrive soon
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 17, 2009, 11:01:25 am
In March and April Welwyn Hatfield Council will be consulting on its Core Strategy – issues and options.  The implication for North Mymms is homes being built on our local Green Belt.  Three public meetings are being held by North Mymms District Green Belt Society in March and April - see Calendar section The following information is from the Council’s website.

Welwyn Hatfield Council is holding these 'drop-in' events where you can tell them what you think:

   Thurs 5 March  2.00pm - 7.30pm  Breaks Manor Youth Centre, Link Drive, Hatfield 
   Sat 7 March  10.00am - 4.00pm  White Lion Square, Hatfield Town Centre
   Wed 11 March  2.00pm - 7.30pm  Civic Centre (Main Hall), Prospect Place, Welwyn Village
   Fri 13 March  2.00pm - 7.30pm  Cuffley Youth Centre, Station Road, Cuffley
   Mon 16 March  2.00pm - 7.30pm  Campus West (Council Chamber), Welwyn Garden City
   Sat 21 March  10.30am - 5.30pm  Howard Centre (by M&S), Welwyn Garden City
   Wed 25 March  2.00pm - 7.30pm  United Reformed Church, Oaklands Avenue, Brookmans Park  
   Fri 27 March  2.00pm - 7.30pm  Hatfield Community Hall (next to Howe Dell School), The Runway, Hatfield

The 'Core Strategy Issues and Options' will be available to view from 4th March on www.welhat.gov.uk.  It will also be available at all libraries, Hatfield housing office, the Council offices in Welwyn Garden City, town and parish council offices (in Cuffley, Hatfield, Welham Green, Welwyn, Woolmer Green and Colney Heath) and Essendon Primary School.

The ‘Issues and Options’ paper includes research and analysis of trends undertaken to date and findings from public consultation on the planning challenges.  A Summary and Guide to the Core Strategy Issues and Options will be produced to support the consultation.

If you would like to be involved in the Core Strategy consultation, e-mail your details to planningpolicy@welhat.gov.uk or telephone the Council on 01707 357532.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 26, 2009, 05:43:42 pm
Our MP - Grant Shapps - is expected to speak at this Welham Green Meeting on 30th March

I think we are all very aware of his opinion of the East of England Plan requirement for 1,000 new homes in Welwyn Hatfield, and his 'NoWayTo10K' campaign.  This will give him the opportunity to speak on Welwyn Hatfield's imminent consultation document which includes options to build 748 more homes in North Mymms.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 21, 2009, 09:18:10 pm
A reminder that the meeting about local housing plans takes place on Monday evening.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 23, 2009, 11:16:44 am
Thanks for putting up the reminder, Dave.

It starts at 8pm in the United Reformed Church, Bluebridge Rd, Brookmans Park.  All are welcome.  The meeting is to be chaired by our President and local resident Gary Mabbutt.

WE are very pleased that Cllr Stephen Boulton will be speaking at the meeting.  He is a Welwyn Hatfield councillor for the Brookmans Park and Little Heath ward.  He is also the chairman of that council's Planning Control Committee.

The next public meeting on Monday 30th March will be at 8pm in the NM Youth & Community Centre, Station Rd, Welham Green.  We are equally very pleased that Grant Shapps, our local MP and Shadow Housing Minister, is due to speak.  That meeting will concentrate of the issues and options affecting Welham Green, and will have some discussion on Brookmans Park and Little Heath.

Similarly the final public meeting starts at 8pm on Wed 1st April, at the Tilbury Halls, (United Reformed Church) Darkes Lane, Potters Bar.  It will concentrate on Little Heath, but have some discussion on Brookmans Park and Welham Green.

So you have choice of three meetings.  The committee of the NM District Green Belt Soc looks forward to three lively evenings.

We feel very honured to have two such speakers at these meetings.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Local Walker on March 23, 2009, 04:32:25 pm
Could any info be given on other surrounding areas e.g. South Mimms, Cuffley and Northaw? Could you add that here if so?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 23, 2009, 05:59:28 pm
I cannot speak about South Mimms since that is in Hertsmere, but I will check it out and maybe post something later.

The various options put forward by Welwyn Hatfield Council include taking areas of land out of the Green Belt in and around North Mymms.  One option is Parsonage Farm which is north of Welham Green and south of South Way where the Cemetery is.  The council thinks that up to 1,300 new homes could be built there.  An advantage to the Government is that this land is owned by the New Towns Commission or whatever they are called now.

Another option is land to the east of Welham Green, namely Marshmoor.  The council thinks this land could accommodate up to 900 new homes.

Another option is land to the west and south of Brookmans Park.  The council thinks this land could accommodate up to 3,900 new homes

Another option is land to the east of Little Heath.  The council thinks this land could accommodate up to 200 new homes.

The consultation document gives other options for extending Digswell, Woolmer Green, Oaklands and Mardley Heath, Welwyn village, Cuffley, Hatfield and Welwyn Garden City..

If you add up the maximum number of new homes on all these possible areas,  land for almost 27,000 new homes would be identified.  This is far more than the 8,000 the council has to allocate.   
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 28, 2009, 09:53:06 am
From BBC News Online (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7969526.stm)

Home building plans 'in trouble'
A government pledge to build three million affordable new homes by 2020 is in trouble because of the recession, the housing minister has said. Margaret Beckett said the government must now look at ways to put the programme "back on track" once the downturn comes to an end.

Click for more (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7969526.stm).
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 28, 2009, 12:21:52 pm
Just a reminder that the NM Green Belt Soc is holding its second public meeting on Monday 30 March at 8pm in the NM Youth and Community Centre, Station Rd, Welham Green where our MP and Shadow Housing Minister Grant Shapps will be the main speaker.

The third and final public meeting starting at 8pm will be on Wed 1st April, at the Tilbury Halls, (United Reformed Church) Darkes Lane, Potters Bar.  It will concentrate on Little Heath, but have some discussion on Brookmans Park and Welham Green.

I am very pleased to say that Cllr Stephen Boulton will speak at this third meeting.  Those of you who missed his excellent presentation at last Monday's meeting will have this second opportunity.  About 180 residents attended that first meeting. 

People have been asking about the Newsletter which was handed out at last Monday's meeting.  They should be distributed to all homes in the next 10 days.  On behalf of the society I give many thanks to the 35 volunteers on our distribution team.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 05, 2009, 08:26:44 pm
The North Mymms and District Green Belt Society (NMDGBS) (http://website.lineone.net/~greenbelt/) has posted forms through local homes inviting people to reject five options in the Welwyn Hatfield Council's (WHC) Core Strategy. The form is headed 748 more homes?  Save your village - Save your Green Belt.

The form have bullet point lists putting what the NMDGBS considers is the case against:


All list concerns about the green belt, the lack of infrastructure (roads, transport, sewers, drains, schools etc), and invite local residents to reject the plans, sign the forms, add any comments and regurn them to the NMDGBS, which has undertaken to forward them to WHC.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 06, 2009, 04:34:56 pm
Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/news/april09/NMDGBS_response_forms.PDF) for a pdf of the response forms. They may be slow to download.

The North Mymms District Green Belt Society (NMDGBS) says it has received more than 300 sets of forms so far, with four weeks to go.  The NMDGBS says that taking into account the forms signed by more than one person this means that about 350 people have lodged their objections.  More than 240 responses were submitted via the collection boxes at Brookmans Park News and Dellsome Lane Post Office.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 08, 2009, 04:53:41 pm
Many thanks, Dave, for reproducing the Newsletter and suggested response forms.  And to everyone who has responded.

The first one, about where to locate any new site for gypsies and travellers, seems to be causing some confusion.

The consultation document offers three suggested types of location and asks people to mark them with 1,2, and 3 according to the person's order of  preference.  1 is for the person's most preferred option, and 3 for the least favourable type of location.  The form has already been marked 1,2, and 3 assuming that a Green Belt location is your least preferred option - such as Bulls Lane.  Naturally, you are free to list them in your own preferred order. 

If you agree with the suggested order then please just add your name and address, sign it and return the form to the Green Belt Society as indicated on the first page i.e. collection boxes at Brookmans Park Newsagency and the Dellsome Lane Post Office, or my home address.  Royal Mail is delivering them to my home using an ordinary second class stamp so it must be meeting that criteria.

Be assured that all we do not alter any forms.  We simply note how many we get in total, how many from each street (not individual addresses!) and then pass them on to the council.  Currently Peplins Way has produced the most number of response forms, and Marshmoor Crescent unsurprisingly second.

Our closing date is Thursday 30 April 2009 so that we get the last ones to the council by 1 May - their deadline.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 09, 2009, 11:35:19 am
Residents, local businesses and visitors to Welwyn Hatfield have two weeks left to have their say on how the borough will be developed over the next 15 years. And the council today warned that unless feedback is received via the online planning portal, or in writing to the planning policy team, it won't count. In a news release, mailed to this site, the authority says the public consultation on the council's Core Strategy - issues and options closes at 16:45 on Friday 1 May.  Click here (http://www.brookmans.com/news/april09/new_homes_comments_deadline_looms.shtml) for more details.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 28, 2009, 02:06:11 pm
A reminder that on Thursday morning 30th April I will removing the collection boxes from the two shops - Brookmans Park News and the Dellsome Lane Post Office.  So please ensure you put your completed response forms in them before about 10.30 am.

We have had a magnificent response with over 900 sets of forms signed by over 1,000 people.

If that does not convey the message to the council about not expanding our villages then nothing will.   ;D

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 01, 2009, 12:11:01 pm
Final figures show that the NM Green Belt Soc has received almost 1,200 sets of response forms signed by almost 1,400 people.  They have all been passed on to the council.

This is the largest response the society has had to any of its campaigns during the 14 years I have been secretary of the society. 

On behalf of the committee I give a huge 'Thank you' to everyone who helped in getting this result.  For example, we received responses from 126 residents who live in and near Northlands which is in Hertsmere and they would be directly affectd by any development east of Little Heath.  I also know that a number of people have been going round knocking on doors to ensure that as many people as possible completed response forms.

Thanks also to Cllr Stephen Boulton and our MP Grant Shapps who spoke at our public meetings.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 11, 2009, 02:54:42 pm
The planning appeal has been dismissed.  The Planning Inspector's report has just been issued and he decided the proposed development of 14 flats failed to 'respect and relate to the character and context of the area'.  It would 'sit uncomfortably in its surroundings to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area'.   He was also critical of other aspects but they were insufficient by themselves to warrant dismissal.

The full 6-page report can be seen on the Planning Inspectorate website being case number 2087216.

Enforcement action is being considered by the council to reduce the height of the hoardings from 2.5m to 1.8m as required in the conditions attached to the temporary approval of the hoardings until 30 Sept 2009.  It will most likely be a 'Breach of conditions' notice which is quicker and easier to serve than an enforcement order.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MikeL on May 21, 2009, 01:00:53 pm
Have just read this on the WHT web site. It seems like good news.

http://www.whtimes.co.uk/content/whtimes/news/story.aspx?brand=WHTOnline&category=News&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=newslatestWHT&itemid=WEED21%20May%202009%2009%3A01%3A33%3A260 (http://www.whtimes.co.uk/content/whtimes/news/story.aspx?brand=WHTOnline&category=News&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=newslatestWHT&itemid=WEED21%20May%202009%2009%3A01%3A33%3A260)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on May 21, 2009, 02:00:51 pm
Yes, I saw it on the BBC's lunchtime news, which also added that the Government plans to appeal.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 21, 2009, 02:21:39 pm
Great news, but I feel sorry for Welwyn Hatfield Council planning officers who must be wondering where to go from here, particularly if the Government (there is a misnomer if ever there was one) does appeal.

A major problem has existed ever since Decemebr 2004 when the East Of England Regional Assembly issued the first draft of the East of England Plan.  It was the lack of infrastructure necessary for the extra people to be housed and the extra businesses.

I fully support Grant Shapps comments quoted in the link above about not closing the A & E at the QE2.  Sadly I have had to make use of the A & E twice in the last few weeks but on each occasion I received fantastic treatment by the staff.  It would have been dreadful to have had to go all the way to the Lister Stevenage.   I have no experience of the Lister so this is not casting any slur on that hospital and its staff.  It is simply a question of distance.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 21, 2009, 09:49:35 pm
But don't we need more homes, particularly affordable homes? It may be great news for some, but won't it lead to problems for others? Or are the statistics about housing needs are wrong?

http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/statistics/2031households0309 (http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/statistics/2031households0309).

Our kids are going to need somewhere to live.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 22, 2009, 11:36:08 am
Can't disagree with Dave's comments.  However the High Court decision was not about the East of England Plan's housing and job targets for every local authority.  Here is part of an article on 24news.com which gives a fuller picture.

'A High Court judge ruled that the Government's policy strategy relating to proposed development at Hemel Hempstead, Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield was flawed and must be quashed and reconsidered

The three areas in Hertfordshire are identified as "key centres for development and change" in the East of England Plan, published by the Government in May last year.  Critics in the county say such large-scale development would result in huge pressure on the environment, with the loss of hundreds of acres of greenfield and green belt land, and could overwhelm the county's services and infrastructure.

Today (21 May 2009) Mr Justice Mitting ruled that alternatives to housing that will impact on green field sites and the Green Belt had not been properly considered before the policy strategy was adopted.  The judge ruled the Government had failed to comply with an EU directive and environmental assessment regulations that required reasonable alternatives to be evaluated.'

I hate to say it - no I don't! - but this (the loss of Green Belt and need for infrastructure) was obvious to North Mymms residents when over 800 sent letters of objection concerning the Welwyn Hatfield figures in the final draft of this Plan.  This petition was organised by the North Mymms District Green Belt Soc.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 22, 2009, 11:52:40 am
Thanks for that Bob. As far as you know, are there sufficient brownfield sites in Hertfordshire to accommodate the projected housing need?

Dave
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 22, 2009, 12:53:05 pm
Yes, if you include greenfield sites across the county outside the Metroplitan Green Belt.  50 years old and it still serves its original objectives.

Interestingly the Judge found that major greenfield housing growth north of Harlow was OK because the case for it had been adequately assessed.  Yes, I know, Harlow is in Essex not Hertfordshire!   ::)  Amongst other things, local residents argued that physical barriers like trunk roads and rivers meant it would create a separate settlement which could not be considered as an extension of Harlow.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on May 23, 2009, 09:51:04 am

 I think you are all missing the point of why we need all this extra land. In the last fifty years we have had a population expolsion of an acknowledged  20 million and rising. (this is a fact not a racist statement, just one of pure numbers) Immigration increased by 26% last year, (and thats on ever rising numbers) they have to live some where. One immediate step would be to lift the VAT from brown field sites and impose it on green field sites. This would encourge developers to use unused industrial areas, thus freeing  up millions of acres of unused sites, where needed, in city areas.   

Giving people some where to live does not just mean four walls, it means real  living. Children being able to have some where to play, seeing wild life, trees and fields, understanding that cows and chickens do not come from Tesco's.
 
 We are the most populated country in Eurpoe (yes, that does include Holland) so please remember, once green land is built on, IT IS GONE FOR EVER. What kind of legacy do you want to leave, we have a duty to leave this land better than when we arrived.

Grumpy Old Roy




 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 29, 2009, 12:15:55 pm
Further to the High Court ruling summarised above, this week's edition of Planning magazine says that the Government's (DCLG) legal bill will include 80% of Hertfordshire's cost, likely to exceed £50,000 and £15,000 of St Albans estimated £28,000 costs.  The magazine suggests the prospect of futher costs might deter the DCLG from appealing against this decision.

Of course, the bottom line is that we tax payers pay for it but this decision means that the whole country pays for most of the county's costs, not just residents of Hertfordshire.  One can but hope that the recession and current focus of MPs expenses might make the Government a bit more aware of the financial implication of actions.

A check on a map has answered my puzzlement about why 'North Harlow' was included in the court case brought by Herts County Council.  Harlow town is in Essex but the county dividing line is just north of the town, so the land in question is in Hertfordshire.

Further to Roy's comments, Hertfordshire claims to be the most densely populated county i.e. the highest number of people per acre.  Presumably this ignores Metropolitan local authority areas like Greater London, but it makes you think.  Residents of the county also have more cars per household and there is a huge number of vehicles passing through the county (M1, M25, A414 etc)  which explains why roads get jammed so often.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 22, 2009, 06:58:04 am
A report out today says we need more affordable housing or villages will die out.

From the BBC...

Quote
"A chronic shortage of affordable housing" is forcing "unprecedented" numbers of village pubs and shops to close, campaign groups have warned.

...rich commuters and second-home owners out-price locals who are the bedrock of local trade, the campaigners say. "

Click for more (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8111736.stm).
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 22, 2009, 11:11:30 am
The debate on where to put new housing, how many, and what type, is enormous.  Having worked for the Government housing quango - what was the Housing Corporation - for 25 years I could bore to to death on the subject, but try not to!

As far as North Mymms (Brookmans Park, Welham Green, Little Heath etc) is concerned, the existing villages are surrounded by Green Belt which for 50 years has kept these villages as very desirable places to live.  The house prices reflect that desirability, as ever. 

You could argue that the main need is for new housing to be cheaper than existing prices so that people can afford to buy, or rent, within the parish.  Major problems are that land is very expensive, and is Green Belt protected outside village boundaries. Another is that many property owners are enlarging their properties rather than move, thereby increasing the market price.  Should there be a total halt on any more extensions and rebuilds?  Should bungalows remain as bungalows?  The list of questions is huge, with no simple answers.

What we do know is that the East of England Plan requirement for 10,000 more homes in Welwyn Hatfield is now in limbo so there will be no quick resolution as to how many, and what type, of new houses will be built, and when.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 13, 2009, 10:59:23 am
You will not be surprised to learn that a new planning application has just been made for 14 flats at Green Close in two 3-storey blocks this time, instead of one block last time. The council reference is 2009/1260.  They also want to retain the hoardings at the present height - reference 2009/1391. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 13, 2009, 03:11:01 pm
What is the Green Belt Society's view on this new application ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 13, 2009, 05:02:57 pm
The society has no view at the moment having neither seen the plans nor held a meeting to discuss the planning application.  

However it is still 14 flats which is the same number as before.  One of the society's objections to the previous application was that there were far too many on this site.   Strangely the council did not refuse permission on that ground.  At the Planning Appeal the Inspector noted that the council did not demur from this density.  Reading between the lines one might assume the Inspector would have used this high density as a grounds for dismissing the appeal, but his hands were tied by the council's acceptance of it.  The trouble is that the council will now find it difficult to refuse this new application because of the same high density
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 14, 2009, 01:15:18 pm
Hertfordshire County Council has decided not to reattempt an appeal over a proposal for 10,000 homes of north of Harlow.

From Planning Resources.

http://www.planningresource.co.uk/news/ByDiscipline/Development-Control/919926/Hertfordshire-drops-Harlow-appeal/ (http://www.planningresource.co.uk/news/ByDiscipline/Development-Control/919926/Hertfordshire-drops-Harlow-appeal/)

subscription needed, but 30 free trial on offer.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 16, 2009, 11:29:16 am
Green Belt protection of our countryside still works despite attempts to build on it.

The owner of land at Station Road where the livery stables are (behind the metal gates), altered part of a building to form a small dwelling.  He waited more than 4 years and then applied for a certificate of lawfulness for the dwelling.  Since the conversion was done more than 4 years beforehand, permission had to be granted.  

He then applied for, and was refused, permission to pull down lots of the existing buildings and erect two detached houses.  He tried again to build one dormer bungalow but was refused again.  His appeal has also been dismissed this week as inappropriate in the Green Belt.  The removal of some buildings was insufficient benefit to justify approval for a materially larger dwelling in the Green Belt.  

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 02, 2009, 12:51:41 pm
The East of England Plan is now being reviewed so that it will cover the period up to 2031.  The existing plan which was adopted in 2008 stops at 2021.

A public consultation started today and will last until 24 November 2009.  The consultation document can be seen on www.eera.gov.uk.  Be warned - the document is over 7 Mb even though it is only 40 pages long.  It gives various scenarios for housing and economic growth.

The East of England Regional Assembly acknowledges that a significant proportion of the population do not have access to the internet.  A fifth of those that do, have non-broadband access making it time consuming to download large documents. In addition, there is still a large difference between the number of young and older (65+) people accessing the Internet. Therefore the consultation documents will be available in places which can be easily accessed by the public, including public libraries and local authority offices.  It may take a few days before they have been distributed.

The NM Green Belt Soc committee is to meet in two week's time when it will decide what action to take.  According to the EERA website, Green Belt Societies and Parish Councils will be amongst the various organisations to be officially consulted.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 21, 2009, 08:06:28 pm
A website has been set up to encourage people to have their say about proposed regional development. It's called Speak Up Hertfordshire. This from the site:

Quote
From September 2nd to November 24th 2009, The East of England Regional Assembly will be consulting the public across Hertfordshire on options for the region’s development up to 2031. The existing plan covers development up to 2021. This is your time to “Speak Up” about how you would like your county to develop over the next 25 years.

http://www.speakuphertfordshire.org.uk (http://www.speakuphertfordshire.org.uk)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 22, 2009, 10:42:19 am
North Mymms District Green Belt Society will be distributing a Newsletter on this consultation to every home in North Mymms in early October.  Attached will be a suggested response form.  Add your name and address, sign it and add your own comments if you wish,  and return it to the society by 19th Nov.  Collection boxes will be in Brookmans Park Newsagents and Dellsome Lane Post Office as usual, or mail it to my home.  This will enable us to count the number of responses.

The responses will be forwarded to the East of England Regional Assembly before their closing date.

You can view the consultation document and make your own comments on their questions via www.eera.gov.uk.  The document has now been split into a number of pages so it is quicker to download each page.  

  According to the EERA website, Green Belt Societies and Parish Councils will be amongst the various organisations to be officially consulted. 

Three weeks into the 12 week consultation and the Green Belt Soc still has not been notfied by the EERA.  Libraries and councils will not received printed copies of the document, and there is no printed response form.  You can send a letter, email or use the response facility on their website if you are computer-literate which not everyone is.  I have complained to Cllr Derrick Ashley about this lack of publicity.   He is the chairman of the EERA committee responsible for this.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: AnneK on September 23, 2009, 10:14:34 am
This is so sloppy. An online document that takes an age to download, hard copies and response forms failing to materialise at libraries and council offices, no consultations with local organisations as promised - it all reinforces the impression that the Government is determined to push through its plans for the area after getting knocked back by the High Court earlier in the year.

Or, could it be that the EERA is winding things up a bit early? I keep reading that various quangos may be up for the chop after the general election. We can but dream . . . :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 23, 2009, 02:57:04 pm
Or, could it be that the EERA is winding things up a bit early? I keep reading that various quangos may be up for the chop after the general election. We can but dream . . . :)

All regional assemblies are being wound up, as far as I know.  In 2010 the EERA is handing over its roles to the EEDA (East of England Development Agency).  Big differences are that the new one (not new really since it already exists) is geared to development and I do not think it has any elected members.  At least the EERA has councillors on it such as Cllr Derrick Ashley who was elected onto Herts County Council.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: AnneK on September 23, 2009, 03:56:46 pm
Good Lord, so this EEDA will be even less accountable than the EERA? Astounding. Thanks for explaining, Bob.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 25, 2009, 04:57:13 pm
The latest planning application for 14 flats has been refused - Council ref 2009/1260.  The reasons included inadequate car parking which would lead to on-street parking which the locality has not got the capacity to accommodate.  The design would represent an unduly prominent feature within the street scene of Station Road.   It would fail to enhance the character of the area.  It failed to satisfy the sustainability aims of the District Plan and there was no Section 106 money towards various local amenities.

Presumably there will be an appeal.  
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 06, 2009, 02:28:55 pm
North Mymms District Green Belt Society will be distributing a Newsletter on this consultation to every home in North Mymms in early October. 

One or two of our usual distributors are unable to help with this delivery.  One delivers about 120 Newsletters in Little Heath which could be split into two rounds, and another might be a delivery round of 85 in Brookmans Park.

Any volunteers please?  You can contact me using the icons at the side of this posting as usual.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 19, 2009, 08:26:09 am
Just read this on the Welwyn Hatfield Council site.

Quote
Urban assessment could help to meet new homes requirement

A technical assessment of urban sites with the potential for housing in the borough has identified that 3,280 new homes could be built in Welwyn Hatfield. The 81 sites identified could provide space for new dwellings over the next 15 years.

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/planning/news/urbanassessmentcouldhelptomeetnewhomesrequirement (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/planning/news/urbanassessmentcouldhelptomeetnewhomesrequirement)

It doesn't say where the local urban development would be.

Bob H, any wisdom on this?

Dave
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 19, 2009, 02:46:52 pm
This is news to me, but it is encouraging that the council seems to be doing all it can to save the Green Belt from being eaten into.

Could I take this opportunity to thank the various people who have volunteered to help distribute Green belt Soc newsletters.  The current one had been delayed slightly at the printers, but has now been received.  The distribution team should receive them in the next few days.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 21, 2009, 12:37:47 pm
Just in from WHC - a news release on the public consultation regarding future housing in Hertfordshire. Locals invited to attend a meeting on Monday 9 November at 6.30pm in the Fielder Centre, University of Hertfordshire.

Quote
The future of Hertfordshire is in your hands

Councillor Mandy Perkins, Executive Member for Planning and Environmental Health at Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council, wants to encourage as many people as possible to attend a public consultation in Hatfield over the future of housing in Hertfordshire.

The consultation takes place on Monday 9 November at 6.30pm in the Fielder Centre, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield.

Over the next 20 years, it is anticipated that the economy in the East of England will grow. The Government has asked the East of England Regional Assembly (EERA) to review regional planning policy to plan for new jobs and homes up to 2031 and beyond. The plan will set new housing and jobs targets for Welwyn Hatfield for the period to 2031.

This consultation event focuses on Hertfordshire and provides an opportunity for the public and interested organisations to discuss the choices available to plan for the future.

The consultation is free to attend but due to space in the Fielder Centre it is necessary to book your place, this can be done online at:

http://events.eera.gov.uk/eventdetails.aspx?id=932 (http://events.eera.gov.uk/eventdetails.aspx?id=932)

Mandy Perkins said: “The consultation will shape the next stage of planning; several scenarios will be put forward for discussion based on current figures. This is your chance to get involved and have your say on the future of your county, and Welwyn Hatfield in particular. It's really important that as many people as possible attend this consultation and make their views known.”

ENDS/PR/09/129
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on October 21, 2009, 07:46:09 pm
David

This is the Urban develpment site list-
http://www.whtimes.co.uk/flatfiles/story_pdfs/SHLAA.pdf
Interestingly Green Close is on the list and land between 150 & 152 Dixons Hill Road,
Welham Green which I have just driven past and actually looks like somebody's garden?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on October 21, 2009, 07:51:18 pm
If you try to register for tickers for the EEP public consultation at the Fielder Centre, in the event booking form on line you will be asked for 'Delegate Details', which is fine, but the form then asks for 'Company Details'. One can't skip this field as it is 'mandatory'. Obviously most 'public' will be just that at a 'public' consultation, not 'company' delegates. I spoke to a James Cutting at EERA, who admitted 'it shouldn't require that' and of course the public will be admitted. He suggested just putting a '.' (dot) in that field and you should be able to register. Just so you know, it works!  Possibly they will amend the site, but as of this evening, it is still the same. Registration is necessary as space at the venue will be limited.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on October 28, 2009, 10:42:06 am
With the local green belt society's new Newsletter just out focusing on proposals for thousands of new homes in Welwyn Hatfield, and a coach party of BP residents off to the Commons this evening, it's opportune that Grant has been speaking about planning.

He featured in Paul Waugh's Evening Standard blog (http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2009/10/nimbys-or-yimbys.html) yesterday evening. Waugh links to Grant's speech, which talks quite a bit about Welwyn Hatfield.

I'm not commenting on the content, just flagging the links.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on October 29, 2009, 09:26:31 am
I like the localism thrust, but a few questions occur.

1. Where's the money to come from? I thought the aim was to cut state spending.

2. What's to stop a Labour council granting permission for social housing in Conservative wards and using the bunce in Labour wards?

3. What if a council just doesn't want to play? Voters, knowing that most of the projected population increases are forecast to be caused by immigration, might just say no thanks to more development, especially perhaps where the infrastructure was already under most pressure. In other words, given the choice, some councils might prefer to stay nimbies despite the bribes.

This would be a terrible outcome for a minister whose brief was to turn nimbies into yimbies (Grant's formulation last night and Waugh's in his blog post headline). Suppose the crowded areas where more people wanted to live just said, "No more, thanks"? Would a Conservative government then act to overturn the local democracy they themselves had enabled?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 08, 2009, 12:11:00 pm
Third time lucky, or not depending upon your point of view.

Check out the planning section on www.welhat.gov.uk for a new planning application reference 2009/2507 for 14 flats at Green Close.  The full description is ERECTION OF 14 RESIDENTIAL UNITS COMPRISING OF 9x2 BED AND 5x3 BED IN TWO/THREE STOREY BLOCKS INCORPORATING UNDERCROFT CAR PARKING, SURFACE CAR PARKING AND LANDSCAPING

The consultation period expires on 6 January 2010!  Happy Christmas.

I have not had time to study this new application so cannot comment at the moment, except the standard of English in the description is not great.  'Comprising' should not have 'of' after it.   :mblah05:
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on December 08, 2009, 12:23:03 pm
Hi Bob,

Thanks for that. Best put a link to the actual application rather than to the home page of the council. I will add it here to save everyone having to search.

https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/detail.asp?AltRef=S6/2009/2507/MA&ApplicationNumber=&AddressPrefix=green+close&submit1=Go (https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/detail.asp?AltRef=S6/2009/2507/MA&ApplicationNumber=&AddressPrefix=green+close&submit1=Go)

Dave
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on December 08, 2009, 02:54:16 pm
There is also an appeal against the enforcement notice to remove the green hoarding.  Click here (https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/detail.asp?AltRef=S6/2008/2193/FP&ApplicationNumber=&AddressPrefix=Green+Close&Postcode=&CaseOfficer=Miss+R+Neil&ParishName=North+Mymms&AreaTeam=&WardMember=&DateReceivedStart=&DateReceivedEnd=&DateDecidedStart=&DateDecidedEnd=&Locality=&AgentName=&ApplicantName=&ShowDecided=&DecisionLevel=&Sort1=FullAddressPrefix&Sort2=DateReceived+DESC&Submit=Search) to read it. All representations have to be in by 30 December.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on December 19, 2009, 09:49:28 am
A reminder that if you want to support the council in enforcing the removal of the ugly green hoarding in the village centre, get your letters in now.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tailspin on January 30, 2010, 09:47:53 am
A property developer has won his battle to outwit planners by building a £500,000 home disguised as a barn on protected Green Belt land.

Alan Beesley and his wife Sarah had faced eviction from their two-storey house but the Court of Appeal ruled that the couple had acted within the law.

Mr Beesley was granted permission to build a barn for agricultural use in 2002 and from the outside the property, near Potters Bar, Hertfordshire, looks like any other hay store surrounded by farm machinery.

And the result....................

The judges also ruled that Welwyn and Hatfield Council must pay £21,184 in legal costs..............


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247050/Property-developer-outwits-planners-building-500-000-home-disguised-barn.html#ixzz0e5U27rAL (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247050/Property-developer-outwits-planners-building-500-000-home-disguised-barn.html#ixzz0e5U27rAL)

Is there any justice.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on January 30, 2010, 08:06:10 pm
The citing that 'they were subject to a spate of burglaries' as one of the reasons that they did what they did is somewhat rich. Does this person think that entitles him to not follow the due planning process? Are not all of us subject to the potential or have also been the victims of crime? Welwyn Hatfield tax payers now have to fund this. Irrespective of whether one agrees or disagrees with the planning process, it exists. I am along with all other council tax payers having to fund his choice to 'exploit a legal loophole'. Thanks >:(
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: PS on January 31, 2010, 08:32:33 am
'Surely, when its finances are at full stretch, there are more worthy causes than challenging the decision of three Court of Appeal Judges?'

Looks like Welwyn Hatfield have a plan to challenge this further - this of course would be foolish and ends up costing the taxpayer more. I am afraid that property developers, in my view, in the main are simply crooks. Seems like this one is no exception. Personally, having dealt with one + crooked estate agent some years ago - I have very little time for them. Thankfully, back then, we won the battle !!! 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 01, 2010, 11:01:14 am
This four-years without being found out is a cut-off which is exploited and I could name several dwellings in this area that have taken advantage of this policy. 

I do recall one property near Welham Green where the judge ruled against the property owner, but I do not know if it was pulled down.  It is hidden from public view which is how it went undetected for more than four years.  Pity other judges do not take the same line.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Angel on February 03, 2010, 06:31:01 pm
Thought this might be of interest! Farmer Loses Battle To Save Secret Castle (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100203/tod-farmer-loses-battle-to-save-secret-c-870a197.html)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tailspin on February 03, 2010, 08:26:22 pm
I wonder what the judges saw differently in this case to order the house (castle) to be pulled down?  ???

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: awill on February 04, 2010, 11:08:29 am
Apparently the case turned on the fact that the judge argued that the taking down of the hay bails hiding the property (after the four years of finishing the actual house had elapsed) constituted part of the building process and that therefore the four years hadn't elapsed! Flimsy, but a welcome decision nonetheless!

 ;D

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 04, 2010, 04:42:17 pm
The article says

'Reigate & Banstead Borough Council said the removal of the tarpaulin formed part of the building operation and issued an order to demolish it.'  It seems that this was the difference betwen the two cases.

My guess is that if an application is made to put windows in the blank walls of the local Northaw property, it will be turned down, and Welwyn Hatfield might be able to use the Reigate ruling to enable them to get the building pulled down.  There is a full article in the current WH Times about it.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 05, 2010, 03:34:18 pm
The third, and latest, planning application for 14 flats at Green Close has also been refused by the council's planning committee.  Ref 2009/2507, it was refused for this reason:-

The proposed development, by reason of the design, height and the space around the buildings would result in a cramped form of development which would be an unduly prominent feature within the street scene of Station Road and Green Close. As a result the development would represent an inadequate standard of design that would fail to enhance the character of the area. The development fails to comply with Planning Policy Statement 1 and Policy D2 of the Welwyn Hatfield District Plan 2005

An appeal against refusal of the second application ref 2009/1260 is scheduled to be heard at a Public Inquiry on 6 May 2010, at Campus West.  Details nearer the time.  (Date amended - see below)

Because of this appeal, the council cannot pursue any enforcement action against the hoardings.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aidan Winwood on February 15, 2010, 10:37:14 pm
Hi Bob,

I know this since they have sent a message with colour picture and details to our flat, obviously hinting for support.  Is this legal?

Yours,
Aidan
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 16, 2010, 12:01:19 pm
Hi Aidan

I assume you have received a letter from the applicant's agent enclosing a new proposed site layout plan showing extra car parking spaces.  This may have been sent to anyone who commented or objected to the application - copies are on the Council's website as part of the documents for the application.

You can't blame them for trying since there is a lot of money in this project, but you can choose to ignore it.  The appeal decision should be based on the application as it stood at the time it was refused by the council, and not some later amendment.

The Planning Inspectorate has now announced that the appeal starts at 10 am on Thursday 6th May 2010 at the council offices, Campus West, Welwyn Garden City.  I have amended my previous posting to avoid confusion over the date of the Inquiry.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 07, 2010, 01:08:25 pm
A BP resident has recently made me aware of the web pages at -

http://tinyurl.com/ygjxosf (http://tinyurl.com/ygjxosf)

They give an easy-to-access insight, in the developers' own words, as to what local landowners are planning for Brookmans Park.

Apparently:

1)    Leach Homes thinks the Leach Fields are no longer worthy of being a designated wildlife site, so can be built on (shame for the wildlife there!).

2)    The owner of Friday Grove doesn't want any building near his house in Warrengate Road, but does want to develop Friday Grove.

3)    The owner of Raybrook Farm (stables) wants to offer his land for housing - 480 (!) new houses in total, if I read that correctly.

4)    A well-known local developer supports their views (he would do).

Note that all of these developers are lobbying to develop the south of BP rather than the west, because they own the land - never mind what would suit the area or the residents. If they all get their way, BP households could double.

In the Parish Plan questionnaire coming at the end of April, there is a question on local development. Please make sure that you give your views on this. eg if you think that a small percentage growth in households would be reasonable, please say so and also say where.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 07, 2010, 02:58:00 pm
1)    Leach Homes thinks the Leach Fields are no longer worthy of being a designated wildlife site, so can be built on (shame for the wildlife there!).

When accesses to the Leach Fields were closed off some 15 months ago (time flies!) I asked what protection was  given by the wildlife site designation.  The answer was that it was not really a protection, more a means of obtaining grants to improve the wildlife on the site.

The developers stances are simply what you would expect when they own land, even in the Green Belt, since they are only interested in developing it for housing, significantly increasing its value.

We are now in limbo waiting for the election results, the outcome of which may change the climate for house building.  The rate of building new homes has already slowed significantly due to the recession.  Even if Labour get in again, your guess is as good as mine as to how much money will be available for housing in the next decade.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on April 07, 2010, 03:21:58 pm
What an eye opener !!
It seems that just about every local landowner, big and small is clamouring to have their land taken out of the green belt to enable development. They come out with ridiculously transparent arguments to support their claims when they have already sold any morals or scruples they had to the devil - just to make £££
Sad Sad people
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 07, 2010, 11:09:16 pm
Hi Mermaid,

Well done posting this, and well done the local resident who dug the link up.  I have been reading through some of the comments. Seems the developers are keen to get building.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Therock on April 11, 2010, 04:03:23 pm
Regarding wealthy landowners, I like the way that between 10-12 houses are being built in Westfield just of the A1000, and if I read the advert correctly they are all for rent. this I think used to be the old Westfield Farm.. Its very funny how people buy land to save the Green Belt and then Build on it.....Funny Old World
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on April 12, 2010, 09:31:56 am
If we are reading it correctly, Welham Green will just about join Brookmans Park which will just about join Little Heath  :(
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: stevea on April 12, 2010, 12:37:00 pm
Yes, with a few travellers sites in between  ;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: stevea on April 12, 2010, 10:26:39 pm
Travellers site near Brookmans Park - can pigs fly!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: PS on April 13, 2010, 04:47:43 am
Travellers site near Brookmans Park - can pigs fly!

Well - maybe they'll start to use the New Brookmans and integarate with the local residents LOL
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 13, 2010, 12:57:55 pm
Leach Fields

Welwyn Hatfield Council have just extended the Tree Preservation Order 429 2009 placed on certain trees last May.  It now includes 16 mature elm trees, a field maple and a hawthorn.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MikeL on April 13, 2010, 01:27:28 pm
Has anyone checked that they are still there?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 14, 2010, 02:37:41 pm
Has anyone checked that they are still there?

A bit difficult since there is no access to the fields now
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: nicholasac on May 09, 2010, 12:21:24 pm
The law quite reasonably grants deemed consent if no one has objected to the new building for 4 years.

How pathetic and small minded to whinge about it now, if no one was bothered for 4 years.

Just envy, I suppose.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 18, 2010, 02:23:37 pm
Erect a block of 14 flats at Green Close, Bradmore Green, Brookmans Park - second application ref 2009/1260

This planning application was refused by Welwyn Hatfield Council.  It went to appeal and has been dismissed today 18th May.  The Planning Inspector decided that the southern elevation (facing Station Road) would be inappropriate in the context of the wider street scene and unacceptable.

the link to the Planning Inspectorate report is  http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/ShowDocuments.asp?Case=COO.2036.300.8.2893544&docView=DECISION (http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/ShowDocuments.asp?Case=COO.2036.300.8.2893544&docView=DECISION).  Click on the symbol next eto document name, then on the next line, then on the next line to appear.  Sorry I could not give you a better linkage but that is the way the website works.

There have been 3 planning applications for this site, all refused permission.  The first two have now had their appeals dismissed. The third application (ref 2009/2507) was refused on 21st Feb 2010.  An appeal can be made up to six months after the refusal date i.e. by 21st August 2010.    

Hoardings aroud the site.

Now that this appeal has been dismissed, Welwyn Hatfield Council can take enforcement action to have the hoardings reduced in height to 1.8m.  The action could be for the removal of the hoardings completely since there is no planning pernmission for any development
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on May 18, 2010, 02:30:54 pm
Let's hope the hoardings go completely   >:(
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aidan Winwood on May 19, 2010, 01:47:25 am
Yes, totally agreed.  Much as we've probably all got used to them now, they were never legally allowed and they should come down.  No arguments, no [minimal] reduction, just get rid of them...

We shouldn't have to 'get used to/no longer notice' anything like this.

Yours,
Aidan
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 27, 2010, 12:07:31 pm
Hoardings aroud the site.

Now that this appeal has been dismissed, Welwyn Hatfield Council can take enforcement action to have the hoardings reduced in height to 1.8m.  The action could be for the removal of the hoardings completely since there is no planning pernmission for any development

Sorry about this but I have now found out that the land owner won an appeal against enforcement action re the hoardings.  So they can stay.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on June 01, 2010, 07:20:52 pm
I find it completely mystifying that a single person or their company can continually defy the local council and the wishes of the local population by erecting and then leaving such an eyesore.
 Is the council really that powerless that this individual can continually ride roughshod over the planning laws?

What would happen if a chain hooked up to a powerful lorry got accidently caught around the fence and it was pulled down. Or better still, that fence was then built around the homes of company directors.  Does any one know the name of the company or where the directors live?

Seriously though there must be some law to thwart this blatant disregard to the community?? If not, then it is justice stood on its head.

I hope they are reading this, power to the people I say.

Grumpy Old Roy
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on June 01, 2010, 09:05:36 pm
I caught the last half of an item on the radio yesterday and can't find any reference to it in the paper today.  Did I hear correctly that the new coalition will abolish the Regional Authorities, abandon the instructions to build 3 million houses by 2020 and give local authorities autonomy in defending the Green Belt. 

Or was it in my dreams?   :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on June 02, 2010, 07:52:10 am
I agree entirely Grumpy Old Roy. Clearly these people are playing the system which tells us the system needs changing. Hopefully Grant will look at the question of enforcement along with everything else to do with planning and housing.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 02, 2010, 02:45:04 pm
It was no dream.  On 27th May 2010 the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, issued this letter to Chief Planning Officers.

It said:

'Abolition of Regional Strategies

I am writing to you today to highlight our commitment in coalition agreements where we very clearly set out our intention to rapidly abolish Regional Strategies and return decision making powers on housing and planning to local councils.  Consequently, decisions on housing supply (including provision for travellers sites) will rest with Local Planning Authorities without the framework of regional numbers and plans.

I will make a formal announcement on this matter soon.  However I expect Local Planning Authorities and the Planning Inspectorate to have regard to this letter as a material planning consideration in any decisions they are currently taking.'

Wow!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 02, 2010, 02:50:01 pm
The owner won a planning appeal against the enforcement action which was decided by the Planning Inspectorate.  I do not have a copy of the report so I cannot tell you why the decision went that way.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on October 18, 2010, 09:03:49 pm
A revised planning application S6/2010/2167/MA for 24 flats has now been submitted.
Included in the application is a document called 'Unilateral Undertaking' which appears to be a legal document offering contributions to the district and county councils for the following if planning is passed (I think!)
Library £1,981
Youth £322
Childcare £958
Nursery Education £3,105
Sustainable transport £12,375
Does this mean we can now buy planning permission? Or is it part of Grant Shapps idea that planning should be allowed if there are financial benefits to the local community? If so, when did that start - I thought the idea was the local community were to be involved in the planning process, Or have I got it all wrong?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 19, 2010, 12:36:21 pm
Contributions towards off-site costs are a long established feature of large developments and are known as Section 105 agreements.  There was a similar condition in the Claregate, Gt North rd, Little Heath approval.  Tesco, Potters Bar had to pay for alterations to the road layout for the traffic lights etc at the entrance to their car park.  Even before that Tesco paid to have a new hospital before they redeveloped the old cottage hospital to create their current supermarket on the site of the old hospital.

What a Section 105 agreement does not do is over-ride planning policies.  It is a means of getting money out of the development to fund local facilities.

This 4th attempt at developing this Green Close site will need careful consideration as to whether or not it overcomes the reason why the Planning Inspector dismissed the last appeal.

As to changes in planning policies, there have been lots of announced intentions, but what is not clear is when actual changes in policies take place legally.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on October 19, 2010, 01:02:14 pm
What a Section 105 agreement does not do is over-ride planning policies.  It is a means of getting money out of the development to fund local facilities.

Good, that's reassuring although it still looks like payola to me!!
Well they say you learn something new every day. Thanks for the info.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on October 19, 2010, 03:41:57 pm
A revised planning application S6/2010/2167/MA for 24 flats has now been submitted.

Looks like a pretty squeezed in development, the building covers just about every bit of land with not much left for grass and foliage (bearing in mind that much of the area on the south side is the embankment for the bridge)


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: BrookyP on October 19, 2010, 06:10:38 pm
do we need these in the village...i thought the whole point of a village was that it remains so.

elevations look nice but it will crowd out the area and good luck to the person trying to keep the flats (if built) car park free of non residents....

not for me on many levels....bp
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on October 20, 2010, 04:54:05 pm
Memory is not what it used to be!  It is a Section 106 agreement, not 105, just in case anyone was thinking of correcting my mistake   >:D

The second appeal ref 2009/1260 was dismissed and can be read in the documents on www.welhat.gov.uk (http://www.welhat.gov.uk) for that application.  The Planning Inspector ( originally mis-typed without the 'l' - maybe a Freudian slip of the subconscious mind?) decided that the building's southern elevation would sit uncomfortably in its setting and would appear overly large in the context of the site, especially given its proximity to the embankment boundary to Station Road.  

Here are the Green Close and Station Road elevations of the refused appeal design - hopefully this will not infringe copyright since the plans are already in the public domain.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 22, 2010, 11:51:36 am
The latest planning application for 14 (Epiphany must have mis-typed 24 in the posting above) flats at Green Close is on the agenda of the Welwyn Hatfield planning meeting this Thursday 25 November 2010.  Planning Ref 2010/2167.  The officers recommend  refusal  mainly because:

The proposed building, by virtue of its excessive height and scale, and unacceptably close proximity to the application site’s southern boundary with Station Road, would result in an unduly cramped form of development. As such, the proposed building would appear overly large in the context of the site and thereby create an over prominent and dominating feature particularly within the street scene of Station Road and also the wider surrounding area. The proposal would therefore represent a form of development of an inadequate standard of design that would fail to respect and relate to the established character and context of the area.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on November 22, 2010, 01:34:20 pm
OOps! - sorry
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on November 26, 2010, 12:24:31 pm
I was unable to attend the WHBC Planning meeting on Thursday evening but am told this latest application was rejected unanimously by the committee.

Maybe the developer will get the message?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on November 26, 2010, 12:55:35 pm
I would imagine that anyone who had bought the land (I'm sure I saw somewhere for in the region of £1M) would be desperate to some sort of return - I would expect another application for something slightly smaller will follow soon  ::)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on November 26, 2010, 11:47:18 pm
I just don't understand what was in the developer's mind. Maybe it's lack of imagination on my part, but why would anyone want to live between a pub and a quadruple railway line?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ferdie on November 27, 2010, 10:17:13 am
I just don't understand what was in the developer's mind. Maybe it's lack of imagination on my part, but why would anyone want to live between a pub and a quadruple railway line?
A trainspotting alcoholic  :icon_jokercolor:
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: peppermint on November 27, 2010, 09:19:16 pm
There are already many people living in Green Close ...... are they all alcoholic trains spotters  :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on December 06, 2010, 07:44:33 pm
I understand the desire to get what you can on the land but so far all they are doing is exasperating everyone. A smaller, ,more practical plan would be more difficult to oppose and might have more chance of getting through.

I guess if they pay the fees they can apply as many times as they like?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: milkmade on December 06, 2010, 10:24:39 pm
there is not enough parking space in the village now!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on December 07, 2010, 06:08:15 pm
Any application will have to deal with parking provision as the rejected ones have tried to do.

You may be surprised to learn that the policy on parking spaces includes a maximum number not a minimum!

The main objections before concerned the overbearing nature of the design, high ridge height and contrast with the local street scene.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on January 29, 2011, 11:04:16 am
Today I've received a planning letter from WH Council stating that an application has been made to retain the [illegal] hoarding for a further 18 months.

Is there any point objecting to this ?

Personally it doesn't directly affect me although I think it is intrusive and detrimental to an otherwise attractive village centre. It must have effectively rendered any flat in Green Close unsaleable.

What do people think ? Any comments Bob ?

The reference is "Variation to condition 1 of appeal decision APP/C1950/C/09/2116609"
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on February 03, 2011, 11:50:20 am
What do people think ? Any comments Bob ?

This application has not yet been considered by the Parish Council so this is simply my personal view.

The developer must have got the message by now that 14 flats will never get approval.   We must also assume that the housing market will recover and the land will be developed for fewer properties. 

The land owner seems to think planning permission will be given in the next 18 months giving him another 3 years at least to put up some housing.  Should he have to pull down these hoardings now and then be allowed to put them up again when planning permission is granted?  If this current application is refused I feel certain a Planning Inspector will uphold any appeal and give approval.

The main thing is the height.  The hoardings were supposed to be reduced in height, as was done at 2 Georges Wood Road where permission has now been granted for 2 houses, not the approved 9 flats.   ;D

Is it worth getting into a lather over a few excessive inches / centimetres in the height of the hoardings? That is for you to decide.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 01, 2011, 02:47:57 pm
North Mymms District Green Belt Society is holding its AGM on Monday 28th March 2011 starting at 8pm in the main hall, United Reformed Church, Brookmans Park.  All are welcome.

There will be the usual reports on the activities over the last year, and election of committee officers and members.  A few committee members have left due to moving away, or lack of time, and we would welcome some new faces.  If you would like to join the committee but are unable to attend the AGM, please contact me beforehand and let me know.

After the business we are delighted to say that Kevin Fitzgerald will try to enlighten us on how the Localism Bill might affect us, and particularly the protection of the Green Belt.  He is the Director of the CPRE (Campaign to Protect Rural England) - Herts Society and has spoken before at our AGM.
We did try to get Grant Shapps but parliamentary business makes it impossible for him to attend a Monday evening meeting.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on April 07, 2011, 08:15:49 am
Hurrah. The Beesleys have lost, though it went all the way to the Supreme Court.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1374193/Couple-lose-battle-500-000-home-hid-inside-barn.html
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tailspin on April 07, 2011, 10:59:27 am
At last sanity prevails............but

"Mr Beesley, 40, yesterday revealed that his legal fight to remain in the house, which may be destroyed, has cost him tens of thousands. He said: ‘We are absolutely devastated. We are gutted. It’s been our home for nine years and now we are in limbo."

I am absolutely devastated its cost him "tens of thousands".  He should not have flaunted with the law in the first place.  Is he going to re-imburse the WH council for their legal costs?

And what will finally happen to the house?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 12, 2011, 11:12:56 am
The title of this topic needs to be changed since, ultimately, he did not outwit the planners.  They won in the end.  Unfortunately it has cost we Council tax payers money to take this case to the Supreme Court and presumably even more to ensure that this house is destroyed.  There is no way that the council can let this go, having gone so far. 

I am told that the judges thought this was the second most blatant case in the country, the most being the house built behind a haystack.

Not mentioned, but presumably the house was built on Green Belt land.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 12, 2011, 11:23:52 am
The title of this topic needs to be changed since, ultimately, he did not outwit the planners.  They won in the end.

Hi Bob,

Have changed the heading as requested.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 13, 2011, 05:50:32 pm
WH Times article confirms that it was on Green Belt land.

The law quite reasonably grants deemed consent if no one has objected to the new building for 4 years.

How pathetic and small minded to whinge about it now, if no one was bothered for 4 years.

Just envy, I suppose.

Not envy, whinging or being small minded.   The Supreme Court decided that there was never any intention to build a barn, but deliberate deception from day one when he put in the planning application.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 02, 2011, 12:04:47 pm
How many more new homes should be built in Welwyn Hatfield, and where?

Welwyn Hatfield Council is carrying out public consultation on the number of new homes to be planned for in the borough over the next twenty years. The consultation runs from Monday 6th June to Monday 18th July. The responses to this consultation will inform the emerging Core Strategy which is the key planning document in the Local Development Framework. A summary leaflet ‘Core Strategy Consultation – How many new homes?’ discusses five alternative housing targets for the Borough. The leaflet and background papers can be found on www.welhat.gov.uk (http://www.welhat.gov.uk)  and at various locations including those listed below.

How to respond
On www.welhat.gov.uk (http://www.welhat.gov.uk) click on “How Many Homes?” to read the leaflet and background papers and then complete the questionnaire online. Or print it, complete it , then send it to the Planning Policy Team, Welwyn Hatfield Council, Council Offices, The Campus, Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire AL8 6AE

Paper copies of the leaflet and the questionnaire are, or will be, available at:
- The Council Offices, The Campus, Welwyn Garden City Hertfordshire AL8 6AE
- Brookmans Park Library, Bradmore Green, Brookmans Park AL9 7QR
- North Mymms Parish Council, 1A Bushwood Close, Welham Green AL9 7YZ (Mon, Wed & Thurs)

If you wish to submit a petition either on paper or online, please go to www.welhat.gov.uk/epetitions (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/epetitions) to learn more on how to do this. Anonymous representations will be ignored.

The consultation deadline is 5.00pm on Monday 18th July 2011. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on June 02, 2011, 08:00:57 pm
What about that big field just behind Swanley Bar Lane - you could pack a whole bunch
of houses in there - nice view of Gobions too!
(Just joking Bob!!)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on June 02, 2011, 10:14:20 pm
Thanks Bob.  In case we don't get around to it immediately, could you give us a reminder a few days before the deadline, please?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 06, 2011, 09:02:37 am
From the council....

Core Strategy Consultation - How Many New Homes? will be available for you to view and comment between the following dates:

Start date: 06/06/11 09:00

End date: 18/07/11 17:00

Please select the following link to view this event:

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/core_strat/csht (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/core_strat/csht)
 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 06, 2011, 05:04:56 pm
Sorry to have misinformed you.  This stage is purely about overall numbers in the borough, and NOT where they might go.  Only after the target number has been agreed will there be consultation (maybe in 2012) on where they might be built.

The consultation document offers a range of 5 possible target numbers of homes to be built ranging from 2,925 to 14,400 in the 20 years from 2011 to 2031.  The detailed discussion suggests that the lower figure should not require any loss of Green Belt land, and the highest figure suggests the loss of about 660 hectares ( about 1,600 acres) of Green Belt land.

What about that big field just behind Swanley Bar Lane - you could pack a whole bunch
of houses in there - nice view of Gobions too!
(Just joking Bob!!)

The detailed discussion includes various possible sites around Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Little Heath but none, fortunately, at the rear of my home    ;D  Phew.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 06, 2011, 07:44:37 pm
The detailed discussion includes various possible sites around Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Little Heath but none, fortunately, at the rear of my home    ;D  Phew.

Glad to hear it, Bob - you don't want your view of the incinerator and those lovely amber red sunsets blocked.

 ;)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 29, 2011, 12:06:09 pm
In September 2010 the fourth and latest planning application ref 2010/2167 for 14 flats at Green Close was refused by Welwyn Hatfield Council.  Although nobody seems to have been made aware of it, an appeal was lodged.

The hearing has been held and on 7th June the Planning Inspector dismissed the appeal.  The main issue in this latest appeal was the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surroundings.  The Inspector concluded that 'the present appeal scheme, due to its overall size and cramped nature, would cause harm to the character and appearance of the
surroundings within Brookmans Park village centre.'
 

He went on to say 'I am also keenly aware that, for the appellants, the sequence of appeal
decisions on this site, must have been a frustrating process. But these considerations do not justify a development that would be too large for the site. There is nothing to suggest that a lesser development could not be viable'
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on June 29, 2011, 12:47:56 pm
Thank you very much for the update Bob. Is there any news on the green fence?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on June 29, 2011, 11:01:17 pm
Local residents may be interested to know that at the North Mymms Parish Council meeting tonight, following a vote, the Parish Council decided to write to the Borough Council recommending option 2.

Option two on the plan is based on a continuation of Welwyn Hatfield's provisional target and involves building an average of 290 new homes in the district each year. This will also involve an estimated 182 ha of land being taken out of the green belt (for reference, the area of Brookmans Park which is currently built up is 114 ha)

Whilst the district plan indicates that with this option most of the growth will occur around Hatfield and WGC, it does not rule out developments more locally, noting 'Whilst no large scale expansion of our villages would be necessary, this would not rule out some small scale development around villages where this is supported locally and the infrastructure could cope'.

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on June 30, 2011, 10:31:40 am
Well done to the inspector. Lets hope they get the message now and do something appropriate.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 30, 2011, 12:58:51 pm
If we are stuck with the green fence panels could we turn it into a positive?  How about an art exhibition with people painting pictures on it for charity?

Seems like someone has already used the space behind for flytipping an old mattress.  Have added a few pictures to a dedicated photo gallery in the forum if anyone is interested.

http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php?action=media;sa=album;in=16 (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php?action=media;sa=album;in=16)

(http://www.brookmans.com/forum/MGalleryItem.php?id=1056)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 30, 2011, 01:34:03 pm
Thank you very much for the update Bob. Is there any news on the green fence?

To be honest, I doubt if anything will happen about the hoardings.  The owner is bound to put in a new planning application - hopefully taking the Inspector's comments on board and for it to be for fewer dwellings.  Once approved it will be legitimate to have the hoardings. 

Also Welwyn Hatfield's enforcement team has had a complete change of staff this year and the current staff are having to prioritise their backlog and workload.  This hoarding is likely to be low down on that list.  I know of a number of cases in North Mymms alone which need more urgent action, and the team covers the whole of the borough.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 30, 2011, 01:50:28 pm
Whilst the district plan indicates that with this option most of the growth will occur around Hatfield and WGC, it does not rule out developments more locally, noting 'Whilst no large scale expansion of our villages would be necessary, this would not rule out some small scale development around villages where this is supported locally and the infrastructure could cope'.

Unfortunately I was unable to attend that meeting.  However it is important to note these words in that extract ' small scale development around villages where this is supported locally '.  If we are to believe what the Government says, this is where 'localism' comes into play.  Residents will have to give their OK to any development around their village.  How this would be done in real life has yet to be explained.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 30, 2011, 02:44:22 pm
If we are to believe what the Government says, this is where 'localism' comes into play. 

You mean you are having doubts about what politicians say? 

 ;)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on June 30, 2011, 06:06:33 pm
The owner applied for retention of the hoarding back in January and the application is still
pending!
Surely six months is more than enough time to have at least made a decision about this,
change of staff or not.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 01, 2011, 10:44:35 am
When an appeal is lodged it 'freezes' all planning applications for the site.  The decision may affect what the council then decides on the outstanding application(s).  In this case the appeal decision was issued on 7th June so it has not been six months, only 3 weeks to date.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 01, 2011, 01:55:16 pm
When an appeal is lodged it 'freezes' all planning applications for the site.  .

IMO a crazy system. Surely a more logical way would be to apply the planning rules as they
exist and then amend the situation if and when an appeal is granted.
It seems weighted in favour of the applicant and appears to be attempting to save hassle and
expense for them, even tho they deliberately flouted the rules in the first place.
The current system allows developers and illegal developments to simply play the system.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on July 02, 2011, 05:25:12 am
Quote from Bob Horrocks

Quote
If we are to believe what the Government says, this is where 'localism' comes into play.  Residents will have to give their OK to any development around their village.  How this would be done in real life has yet to be explained.

Our local MP is also a minister in the department promoting localism - and covers housing.

Maybe he could be invited to pop in and explain.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alex on July 02, 2011, 02:36:23 pm
I have been told that one of the possible sites is Golf Club Road. I cannot find anything re this, can Bob enlighten me please?

thanks
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 02, 2011, 07:18:48 pm
Hi Alex

Check out this link -

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/core_strat/csht?tab=files (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/core_strat/csht?tab=files)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Greybeard on July 02, 2011, 07:51:58 pm
If you live locally, you should have received, or shortly get, two newsletters from the Green Belt Society. The yellow one explains the alarming prospects seriously!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on July 03, 2011, 01:16:28 pm
Why would the Parish Council vote for Option 2 when they must know that most of their parish residents want to keep the Green Belt?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on July 03, 2011, 03:45:02 pm
Yes indeed, a very good question. When the North Mymms Parish Plan is published, you will see that 72% of North Mymms residents voted to have NO new building whatsoever, and those that said they wouldn't mind some building, didn't want it to be taken out of the Green Belt.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on July 03, 2011, 05:44:04 pm
Bob, is there any way we can question the Parish Councillors about their reasons for this decision?  The AGM was 1st April and it's a long time to wait until the next one.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on July 04, 2011, 11:58:34 am
Well actually there is some logic in the freezing effect otherwise the green hoarding would have been up and down half a dozen times in the last couple of years. Whats needed is fast action on enforcement now.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 04, 2011, 12:57:52 pm
the green hoarding would have been up and down half a dozen times in the last couple of years.

Exactly my point!! - more hassle & expense for the developer - maybe a deterrent to this sort
of thing being erected without permission in the first place?

As for enforcement the main problem at the moment is that no decision had been made on an
application for retention of the hoarding made back in January so a bit difficult to enforce anything
at the moment.

IMO the ideal scenario should have been no need for any hoarding at all until permission is granted for a development and it then becomes a building site with the attendant H & S issues, and if and when any illegal development takes place prior to this it should been dealt with promptly & decisively.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 04, 2011, 02:46:45 pm
IMO the ideal scenario should have been no need for any hoarding at all until permission is granted for a development and it then becomes a building site with the attendant H & S issues, and if and when any illegal development takes place prior to this it should been dealt with promptly & decisively.
Legislation is going through Parliament which is designed to virtually stop retrospective planning applications.  The effect in cases like this would be to prevent a hoarding being erected and then planning permission applied for.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 05, 2011, 04:35:58 pm
Bob, is there any way we can question the Parish Councillors about their reasons for this decision?  The AGM was 1st April and it's a long time to wait until the next one.

Although I have not seen the draft minutes of the parish council meeting, if I had done them they would simply say that the matter was discussed and on a unanimous/majority (whichever) vote option 2 was agreed.  The minutes should be on the parish council website after approval at the end of July.  Maybe James can add something since he was there.

I have been told that one of the possible sites is Golf Club Road. I cannot find anything re this, can Bob enlighten me please?

The Green Belt Soc on yellow paper currently being circulated to all homes in North Mymms contains this extract from the consultation papers:

Option 5 could expand Brookmans Park by up to 98%.   
Suggested expansion of Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Little Heath could be at these locations, giving approximate numbers of dwellings:

100 at South of Bulls Lane, Welham Green (Skimpans Farm) 
705 at East of Welham Green (Marshmoor)
190 at Friday Grove, Hawkshead Road, Brookmans Park (car boot sale fields)   
263 at South of Bluebridge Ave, Brookmans Park (Leach Fields)   
190 at Peplins Wood, Brookmans Park     
  18 at West of Golf Club Road, Brookmans Park
  14 at East of Golf Club Road, Brookmans Park
135 at Bell Lane, Bell Bar (behind the Cock O’ The North)
115 at East of Swanland Road, parallel to A1(M) west of Brookmans Park
115 at East of Little Heath
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on July 05, 2011, 07:56:40 pm
It was a majority decision and as Bob says the minutes probably wont show a lot more than that. I can say on a personal level that the full supporting papers had been read and considered which included references under option 2 to more inward investment, protection of the green belt for many years and improved infrastructure (sewage and water etc). Option 2 also reflects the existing WHBC interim plan so in practical terms is the most realistic. We added to the response that we noted the emphasis on avoiding linking up separate settlements and that whilst small add-on building might be within or round the villages, larger developments would be well away from the parish. Options 3 upwards were found to be increasingly unacceptable so the debate was between 1 and 2.

The meeting was open to the public and one member of the public was there.
Everyone can put their personal response in.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 07, 2011, 05:46:31 pm
The Green Belt Society Newsletter has produced over 250 responses so far.  Excellent! They should be delivered to Welwyn Hatfield Council tomorrow.

Every home should have received the Newsletter by now - it is the one on yellow paper.  Please ensure that you let us have your completed response form by next Friday 15 July so that they can be delivered to Welwyn Hatfield Council by its deadline. 

Collection boxes are in the Brookmans Park Newsagency and Dellsome Lane Post Office.  You can also send them to my home address (on the Newsletter).

It might sound obvious but please put your name and address on the form - someone signed one but did not enter any name and address so it had to be thrown away.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Helen on July 08, 2011, 09:42:49 am
Hi Bob, can we put more than one name on the yellow form or should we be photocopying it for the extra householders? Don't want to do the wrong thing & have our form thrown away!

Thanks.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on July 08, 2011, 11:29:12 am
Hi Bob, can we put more than one name on the yellow form or should we be photocopying it for the extra householders? Don't want to do the wrong thing & have our form thrown away!

Thanks.

I was just wondering that myself! I'm assuming that however many names one puts on the yellow form, it will still only get counted as one response, whereas one for each family member (over 18?) would get counted separately?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 08, 2011, 02:41:06 pm
Hi Bob, can we put more than one name on the yellow form or should we be photocopying it for the extra householders? Don't want to do the wrong thing & have our form thrown away!

Thanks.

Not sure how Welwyn Hatfield Council records the number of people who comment.  Both alternatives have been used by respondents.  My wife and I both signed the same form.  Apparently there has been a delay in getting Newsletters out to a couple of roads but the deliverers have promised to do it this weekend.

The important thing is to sign a form and send it to us for forwarding to the council.  It will be too late to complain after the council takes land out of the Green Belt which is what will happen with options 2-5. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 08, 2011, 02:53:23 pm
On 7th July 2011 Welwyn Hatfield Council refused permission to retain the hoardings.  The reasons were:
Following the refusals of three previous planning appeals for this application site (planning applications S6/2010/2167/MA & S6/2009/1260/MA & S6/2008/918/MA) there is now insufficient evidence to justify the retention of the existing hoarding on this prominent site in the streetscene for any further temporary time period. This existing hoarding has a harmful appearance on the established character and context of the area, as this part of Brookmans Park is not characterised by tall walls or hoarding. The presence of this hoarding therefore appears as an alien feature in this locality
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 08, 2011, 03:15:24 pm
So does it have to be removed by any particular date ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 08, 2011, 03:44:12 pm
Just in from WHC via email.

PRESS RELEASE

Housing consultation is drawing to a close

There is still time for local residents and interested groups to tell Welwyn Hatfield Council how many homes they think should be built in the borough in the next twenty years. The consultation period ends on 18 July.

Councillor Mandy Perkins, Executive Member for Planning and Business said, “We would encourage local residents and interested groups to respond on this very important consultation. We know that we have a steadily increasing population with people living longer and a shortage of affordable homes. People are also choosing to live on their own, and to be closer to work or family. They all need to be able find suitable accommodation for their needs. Similarly, without further housing, we may not attract the investment necessary to create new jobs and improve our infrastructure. “

The council is consulting on 5 alternative targets which reflect government projections for housing growth, previous regional targets, long-term trends, recent housing targets or no release of Green Belt:


A sustainability appraisal has been carried out to consider the potential social, environmental and economic impacts of each target. This information has been published as part of the consultation to allow people and organisations to make an informed decision on which target is best for the borough.

Though five targets have been put forward, local residents and interested groups can suggest their own target as part of the consultation.

You can respond or download a questionnaire online at www.welhat.gov.uk (http://www.welhat.gov.uk) or pick up the consultation leaflet and questionnaire by either visiting your local library, parish council office or the main council office in Welwyn Garden City.

Alternatively, you can call 01707 357532 to have a leaflet and questionnaire sent to you. All responses must be received by the council no later than 18 July 2011.

END

Note to editors:

Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council must publish a Core Strategy, a key planning document in the Local Development Framework. Important elements included in a Core Strategy are: housing, employment and infrastructure.

The council consulted on its Core Strategy Issues and Options paper back in March 2009. At the time, the council was working in conformity with the East of England Plan’s target of 10,000 new homes between 2001 and 2021.

After the Issues and Options paper was published, this housing target was deleted by the High Court because it decided that alternatives had not been properly considered by the Secretary of State.

However, this consultation was not in vain. Over 6,700 comments were received and these will still be taken into account when the council publishes its Core Strategy in the future.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 11, 2011, 11:48:52 am
So does it have to be removed by any particular date ?

The refusal notice does not give any time for removal of the hoarding.  Two months would be generous.  If not removed by the end of August, a note to the council enforcement officer would seem to be appropriate.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 11, 2011, 02:28:17 pm
So does it have to be removed by any particular date ?

The refusal notice does not give any time for removal of the hoarding.  Two months would be generous.  If not removed by the end of August, a note to the council enforcement officer would seem to be appropriate.

I bet the council wouldn't be short of volunteers if it put the word out.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: peppermint on July 12, 2011, 12:38:24 pm
Maybe the hoardings could be donated towards the development of the skate park in Welham Green.   In reality they will probably be dumped in a layby in Bradmore Lane. :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: BrookyP on July 12, 2011, 06:33:16 pm
sadly that ply will probably be scrapped and at £26 per sheet maybe it should be donated to the skate park...bp
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 18, 2011, 04:54:57 pm
All responses to the NM Green Belt Soc Newsletter have now been delivered to the council.

Nearly 600 response forms with over 700 names on them    ;D

The total of names is an estimate since I did not count how many were on the initial delivery of over 250 forms, but a reasonable guess has been made.

Many thanks to everyone who replied, to the Newsletter delivery team, and Brookmans Park News and Dellsome Lane Post Office for having the collection boxes. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on August 04, 2011, 12:41:08 pm
Bob, is there any way we can question the Parish Councillors about their reasons for this decision?  The AGM was 1st April and it's a long time to wait until the next one.

The minutes of the full parish council meeting held on 29 June 2011 have now been added to www.northmymmspc.org (http://www.northmymmspc.org) uk. As already stated above, I was unable to attend the meeting.  Item 30 B - Planning includes this extract

Councillor Boulton declared a personal interest as he had already expressed a view on the Borough Council Cabinet and Housing and Planning panel.  Councillor Everard and Storey had already declared an interest (minute 25).

i.                     Core Strategy ‘How Many New Homes?’ - Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council

Councillor Horrocks’ report, distributed with the agenda, proposed support for Option 1 and Councillor Hastings response supporting Option 2 were considered.  During discussion on the issues it was agreed that only Option 1 or Option 2 in the consultation document would be acceptable.  A ballot of members who had not declared an interest was taken: one member voted for Option 1 and three members voted for Option 2.  It was agreed to write in response to the consultation that the Parish Council recommends Option 2 with development concentrated in and around the main towns, small accretions on existing settlements may be appropriate in certain circumstances but development on the Green Belt must be towards the end of the plan period.


In the last few days, several people have told me of someone claiming that that the parish council has given consent to housing at Peplins Wood.  He or she does not know what they are talking about.  First of all it is untrue as you can see from the minutes of the meeting.  Secondly no planning application has been made.  Thirdly, Welwyn Hatfield Council is the local planning authority so a parish council cannot give approval even if an application had been made.

I have a fair idea who is opening his mouth without engaging brain.  If he continues to spread falsehoods he will get a short and pointed instruction where to go. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: BrookyP on September 03, 2011, 12:23:57 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14772680 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14772680)


saw this on bbc today bp
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 05, 2011, 11:24:43 am
BrookyP might also be interested to know that according to the Daily Telegraph, our own MP Grant Shapps, as Housing Minister, has said the National Trust should withdraw its petition against this draft National Planning Policy Framework.

This is somewhat strange since he is an avid user of petitions against the New Barnfield Incinerator, the reduction of facilities at the QE2 hospital and road noise from the A1(M) to name but a few.  Why does he think it right for him to use petitions and not the National Trust?  The CPRE (Campaign to Protect Rural England) is also opposing this draft policy change.

On the face of it, this draft preseves the existing safeguards provided by Green Belt designation but......
My worry is the presumption of approval of 'sustainable' development on land which is not Green Belt or an area of outstanding natural beauty, or one or two other types of designation.  Sustainable is such a weasel word.  Veolia are naturally claiming that the New Barnfield incinerator will be sustainable, but others claim otherwise.  Once built it will be there for a very long time. 

Also there is a direct conflict with 'Localism' and Neighbourhood Plans.  These concepts will mean nothing if a huge company is able to 'prove' that a proposed development would be sustainable.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: BrookyP on September 05, 2011, 12:09:11 pm
The way i see it is the Conservatives cant (have failed too?) get the economy going so are going for new housebuilding "thing" to justify their shakey positions, try to stimulate growth and thus look like they are doing something.

It will all amount to nothing and we can all rest easy knowing our hard earned tax dollar has been frittered away on reams of studies and proposals that will all end up in landfill.

Still at least we will have a big incinerator to burn it all in.

BP


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on September 05, 2011, 01:13:55 pm
It will all amount to nothing

Unfortunately you might not be right about that - George Osbourne has now chucked his weight
behind it because as you quite rightly point out, it will be a nice little earner - sod the countryside!
Grant Shapps does what Eric Pickles wants, Eric Pickles does what George Osbourne wants,
George Osbourne does what David Cameron wants.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14782205 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14782205)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on December 19, 2011, 03:31:03 pm
Here we go again...

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on December 19, 2011, 04:01:23 pm
And another one... potentially a lot of building work going on in and around Green Close in the near future....

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 19, 2011, 05:32:39 pm
Comments or objections to both are required by 11 January 2012.  Strange how they both came in just before Christmas.  Good job I don't have a suspicious mind.

To save anyone having to check back, there was an application WHBC ref 2008/0658 to demolish the 12 maisonettes and replace with 24 flats.  It was withdrawn when the first application was made for 14 flats on the area now with hoardings round it.  The parish council objected to 2008/0658 as being a 4 1/2 storeys high and out of keeping with the surrounding area due to over-dominance of the mass of the building.  I have not seen the plans for the new application but it will be interesting to see what changes have been made.

There have been several applications, all refused and appeals dismissed, for 14 flats on the area behind the hoardings.  The new application is for only(!) 10 flats.  Again I have not yet seen the new plans to see what changes have been made.

Incidentally, the hoardings should have been taken down by now but this new application means they can stay until a decision, and any appeal if refused, has been decided.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on January 30, 2012, 04:25:59 pm
Incidentally, the hoardings should have been taken down by now but this new application means they can stay until a decision, and any appeal if refused, has been decided.

Others will have got a copy of this notice of an application to keep the green hoarding in the village up for another 18 months. But for those who haven't, here it is. Click on the image for the document.

(http://www.brookmans.com/news/january12/hoading.jpg) (http://www.brookmans.com/news/january12/green_hoarding.PDF)



Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 02, 2012, 05:07:23 pm
And another one... potentially a lot of building work going on in and around Green Close in the near future....

I see this has finally been given Planning Permission (with Conditions) - Just shows, if at first
you don't succeed try, try, try again!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bedlam on March 03, 2012, 05:55:13 pm
And another one... potentially a lot of building work going on in and around Green Close in the near future....

I see this has finally been given Planning Permission (with Conditions) - Just shows, if at first
you don't succeed try, try, try again!

What's the problem???

This developement will greatly benefit local businesses and services due to increases of much needed custom.  The only minor downside would only be the very small increase in local road traffic, as most new residents would be attracted by the convenience of the close proximity of the railway station.

IMO there's no problem in WelHat's granting of Planning Permisson for this developement, bring more of it on, build more properties and liven-up the area!!

A question which has to be asked is how many objectors drive a 4x4 or car less than a mile to the village to shop, hairdressers, railway station  etc or for a school run and clog-up the roads???
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bedlam on March 03, 2012, 07:29:47 pm
TBH......

If there was never ever no recent devolopment then Brookmans Park would never exist.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on March 03, 2012, 10:40:43 pm
This was bound to happen in the end. The plans have become more sensible with each application and hopefully we will now end up with something which improves the village centre.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 04, 2012, 08:47:35 am
I guess it's a greed and need thing. There must be a need for flats locally as the demographic changes with older people wanting to downsize and younger people needing to move in. The greed is when developers try to squeeze in an inappropriate development to try to get maximum return (which is understandable). However, developers are not charities so I imagine that if there are fewer units the cost will be adjusted to ensure profit margins are maintained. 

And I agree with Bedlam. Nothing stands still and a nice development of flats in the village can only be good news for local shops and services.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on March 04, 2012, 10:27:13 am
Although generally the need theory is good, the fact is locally new flats have been hard to sell at the prices demanded and we see the site at the end of Georges Wood Road has still not even been built, presumably because it is not yet viable for the builder. Permission was granted years ago so there is no guarantee when the Green Close site will actually be finished. If it is done and is filled quickly it can only help the village centre which let's face it is not booming.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 04, 2012, 11:56:02 am
There must be a need for flats locally as the demographic changes with older people wanting to downsize

It's a misapprehension - beloved of developers and estate agents - that all elderly people wanting to downsize will therefore want to move to a flat. Without exception, all the older people my mother and I know at the moment, say that given the choice, they might consider moving to a smaller house or a bungalow, but absolutely not a flat.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on March 04, 2012, 12:11:29 pm
The maisonettes in Station Close when put up for sale are normally on the market for not very long at all. Could this be because they are not built as luxury apartments and therefore have a sensible price within the range of first time buyers etc? I am sure if the green close development was built in a similar style they would go very quickly. But I guess there is not so much profit in that, so they build these flats with 3 bedrooms all of which are en suite instead and charge three times as much...
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 04, 2012, 06:14:59 pm
I think 'greed' is a little strong. The developer wants to make a profit, but that's no more greedy than me wanting to be paid by my employer is greedy. The triangle of land was waste land, unsightly and not put to any good use. It is exactly the sort of land new building should happen on. If the developer builds luxury properties that people don't want or can't afford then he will have to suffer the loss. Eventually the properties will fall in price to the point where they reach a viable price and they will be bought.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 05, 2012, 06:23:21 am
I think 'greed' is a little strong. The developer wants to make a profit, but that's no more greedy than me wanting to be paid by my employer is greedy.

Of course developers want to make a profit. If you consider the whole sentence I wrote:

The greed is when developers try to squeeze in an inappropriate development to try to get maximum return (which is understandable). However, developers are not charities so I imagine that if there are fewer units the cost will be adjusted to ensure profit margins are maintained. 

If the initial development had been appropriate to the area and had not been "Too cramped, overdeveloped, unduly dominating, and failing to reflect the established character of Brookmans Park (http://www.brookmans.com/news/september08/green_close_station_road_development_plans_rejected.shtml)," then this might not have dragged on for almost four years.


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 05, 2012, 06:26:23 am
There must be a need for flats locally as the demographic changes with older people wanting to downsize

It's a misapprehension - beloved of developers and estate agents - that all elderly people wanting to downsize will therefore want to move to a flat. Without exception, all the older people my mother and I know at the moment, say that given the choice, they might consider moving to a smaller house or a bungalow, but absolutely not a flat.



I don't think anyone is saying that "all elderly people wanting to downsize will therefore want to move to a flat."

We are all different. Some may want a smaller house or a bungalow, some may want a flat.

All a development of flats offers is choice.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on March 05, 2012, 11:54:22 am
The triangle of land was waste land, unsightly and not put to any good use. It is exactly the sort of land new building should happen on.

Isn't this latest application for the other side of Green Close though - ie the demolition of the existing flats  ?? If so then it's nothing to do with the green hoarding around the triangle of land.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 05, 2012, 01:16:48 pm


Isn't this latest application for the other side of Green Close though - ie the demolition of the existing flats  ?? If so then it's nothing to do with the green hoarding around the triangle of land.

There are TWO applications at the moment - see reply 137 & reply 138.
The one that has been passed is on the triangle of land.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on March 05, 2012, 01:56:49 pm
Thanks for the clarification
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 25, 2012, 11:52:26 am
All those who value wildlife and our nature reserves need to keep across this developing story (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/mar/25/wildfowl-wetlands-george-osborne-planning).

Quote
Wildlife legacy of Captain Scott in danger from chancellor's bid to tear up habitat protections

The head of one of the country's most important wildlife organisations has warned that changes in planning regulations, to be outlined by the government this week, could devastate the country's fragile natural reserves.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Nobby on March 25, 2012, 07:47:47 pm
In May 2010 David Cameron pledged to lead the "greenest government ever". Hmm.
I suspect pesky newts will be blamed again for all our economic troubles.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 27, 2012, 07:35:42 am
Make the most of the public footpaths, open countryside, woodlands and nature reserves while you can. They may not be there forever.  Best not take them for granted.  Get out as often as you can, stride out (if you can), enjoy the fresh air and take loads of pictures.

Quote
Planning system awaits overhaul in England
Changes to the planning system in England, which are expected to make it easier to gain consent for large-scale projects, are coming into force later. Ministers have suggested creating a "presumption in favour of sustainable development" to ensure more homes, offices and factories are built.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17514730 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17514730)]Planning system awaits overhaul in England
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 28, 2012, 09:40:27 am
From the Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/hands-off-our-land/9170136/Hands-Off-Our-Land-campaigners-hail-a-good-day-for-anyone-who-cares-about-the-countryside.html)

Quote
Hands Off Our Land: campaigners hail a 'good day for anyone who cares about the countryside'
Campaigners have welcomed the Government’s decision to water down planning reforms that threatened unrestrained building across swathes of the English countryside.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on March 28, 2012, 03:25:16 pm
The new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) can be seen on  http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/nppf. (http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/nppf.)

A 3-page section on Green Belts has replaced the 10-page Planning Policy Guidance Notes 2 (Green Belts).  Obviously the detail of PPG2 has gone but at least the basic protection of Green Belts has been preserved.

There is no reference to what were called 'Major Developed Sites in the Green Belt' which locally means New Barnfield, the RVC Campus, and Queenswood School.  Also gone is the PPG2 page on 'Re-use of buildings in the Green Belt - additional advice' which advised on Agricultural buildings, residential conversions and Listed buildings.

The four paragraphs in PPG2 on Affordable Housing are  replaced by ' limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan'. 

The one-paragraph section of PPG2 on gypsy sites has been replaced by a new and separate 12-page policy guide.

The old PPG2 contained a lot of waffle and the main points appear to have been preserved.  In relation to our local issues, it will be interesting to see what effects there will be on the current New Barnfield application and the current appeal against refusal of a gypsy site at Thunderbridge Yard, Bulls Lane (next to the railway bridge), both in the Green Belt.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on April 27, 2012, 03:29:33 pm
Planning application 2011/2654 - Green Close - demolish the 12 maisonettes and erect a block of 18 flats and 6 town houses.

This application was rejected at the Borough Council planning control meeting yesterday evening 26 May.  I spoke against it on behalf of the parish council, and Clive Bennett also spoke against it as vice chairman of the NM District Green Belt Society.  It was rejected because the bulk and mass would be out of character with the area, or words to that effect.  I can let you know the exact wording once it has been published.

The committee chairman, Stephen Boulton, expressed why he was against the proposal noting, amongst other things, that the buidings would be the tallest in Brookmans Park. They would be even taller than the block of 10 flats recently approved on the boarded up site between Green Close and Station Road.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peter Hastings on April 27, 2012, 08:11:35 pm
Well done Bob.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 01, 2012, 04:46:50 pm
It was rejected because the bulk and mass would be out of character with the area, or words to that effect.  I can let you know the exact wording once it has been published.

The actual wording of the refusal was 'The proposal by reason of its size, overbearing and bulk would be contrary to Policy D2 of the Welwyn Hatfield District Plan 2005'.

As stated above, your parish council and Green Belt Society both objected to this application.  Both spoke at the planning meeting.  Also on the agenda was a planning application in Welwyn where that parish council had objected but the officers recommended giving approval.  That parish council did not speak at the planning meeting and the committee approved the application without discussion. 

This shows that it is worthwhile for the parish council to attend the meeting and expand on why it objected.   The committee does not always agree with the parish council but they do appreciate the fact that someone has taken the trouble to speak to them face to face.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mr Green on May 01, 2012, 10:36:55 pm
Well done Bob.

Here, here
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on May 24, 2012, 02:28:28 pm
Regarding the recent refusal of permission to demolish the 12 maisonettes in Green Close and erect 24 flats and town houses (Planning ref 2011/2654), someone is putting words into my mouth which I have not said.

I am supposed to have said that the applicant is not able to appeal against this decision.  Not true.  To the best of my knowledge there is nothing to stop the applicant from appealing against this decision.  Since the committee went against the officers' recommendation, an appeal could be expected.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Therock on June 13, 2012, 07:35:59 pm
Can someone tell me why the Caravan site approaching Welham Green station on the left hand side, has now another 6-10 Mobile homes/caravans parked on there?.  This is opposite Marshmoor Lane . I wonder if this is a Legal site.


[edited to fix the context after splitting it from another thread - John Fraser]
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 14, 2012, 01:23:27 pm
The site is officially know as 'Two caravans, Foxes Lane'.

There is planning permission for part of the overall site for 'Retention of use as a gypsy site, comprising of 3 static caravans, parking for 3 touring caravans and six vehicles and retention of gates and brick wall'.  This was in addition to the permitted siting of a static caravan on another part of the site, making a total of 4 pitches on the overall site.  A pitch comprises a static caravan, a touring caravan and parking for vehicles.

Planning application ref 2010/0960, as described above, was refused by Welwyn Hatfield Council but the subsequent appeal was allowed on 2011.

Recent activity involving earthworks (possibly new foundations for more pitches) is being investigated by the council's enforcement officer.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Therock on June 14, 2012, 01:48:07 pm
Cheers Bob!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Pescarese on June 14, 2012, 02:29:21 pm
Can anyone tell me what the status of the site on Bulls Lane? This seems to be occupied most of the time by at least 2 caravans. Is this another site and are more planned for Welham Green?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on June 14, 2012, 02:54:44 pm
Thunderbridge Yard, Bulls Lane (just east of the railway bridge) was refused permission in 2011 for 2 gypsy / traveller pitches.  The owners appealed and the informal hearing took place on 9 May 2012.  The existing planning permission given in 2011 is for 10 stables.

As at a few minutes ago, the Planning Inspector had not issued her report.  This is usually issued within about 2 weeks of the hearing.  The reason for the delay is unknown and speculation is pointless.  It could be anything from illness of the inspector to her seeking clarification on the new national policy for gypsy / traveller sites issued in March this year. 

The new policy says, in effect, that new gypsy / traveller sites should not be approved in the Green Belt as a result of a planning application but should be done as part of the normal process of updating the District Plan.  Welwyn Hatfield Council is updating its 2005 District Plan and should be issuing its 'Core Strategy' draft for consultation soon.  A draft was about to be issued in March / April 2012 but has been delayed while the council checks it for conformity with the new National Planning Policy Framework issued in March 2012.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on July 30, 2012, 03:54:10 pm
The Thunderbridge Yard, Bulls Lane appeal was allowed on 24 July 2012 granting a temporary permission for four years subject to various conditions.

The Inspector found that the site was unsuitable for this purpose due to the flood plain location and noise from the adjacent railway line.  However significant weight was given in favour due to the immediate unmet need for sites, the majority of the appellants’ need for a site, and the lack of alternative sites. 

The Inspector noted that consultation on the WHBC Core Strategy is due this summer.  Consultation on gypsy site allocation is due in late 2013 / early 2014 for adoption in 2015.  Therefore a 5-year supply of specific deliverable sites will not exist for about 3 years.

The RTPI Planning magazine published 27 July 2012 said that Community Secretary Eric Pickles is now asserting the pre-eminent importance of councils maintaining a five-year supply of housing land.  Accordingly he has approved two housing developments which, possibly, he might not have done beforehand.

A new National Policy on Travellers Sites was issued in March 2012.  This appeal decision seems to have complied with Mr Pickles’ latest pronouncement (U-turn?) yet it flies in the face of the March 2012 national policy in several respects.  North Mymms Parish Council is writing to our MP, Grant Shapps, about this.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: chicken legs on July 31, 2012, 11:27:15 pm

The RTPI Planning magazine published 27 July 2012 said that Community Secretary Eric Pickles is now asserting the pre-eminent importance of councils maintaining a five-year supply of housing land.  Accordingly he has approved two housing developments which, possibly, he might not have done beforehand.


Are these two housing developments in our area, Bob?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on August 01, 2012, 12:27:23 pm
Are these two housing developments in our area, Bob?

Fortunately no.  1,000 houses were approved on unallocated land in the countryside at Bishop's Cleeve, Gloucestershire, and 350 at Burgess Farm, Worsley, Salford, Greater Manchester.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: memsal9 on August 01, 2012, 03:25:41 pm
As someone that has followed Thunderbridge case quite closely the decision by the Appeal Inspector doesn't surprise me and all the signs were pointing to an approval. Although permission was granted for four years this will almost certainly become permanent (family stability, human rights and past precedent etc) so this is just delaying the inevitable.

This decision together with Foxes Lane (Two Caravans, Welham Green) I suspect will open up similar sites within the Greenbelt to potential purchase and development as Traveller / Gypsy sites in the absence of alternative sites made available by the local authority. Remember, the main argument against this site (other than Greenbelt of course) was health and safety i.e. site within flood plain, very close to railway line and noise vibration etc yet permission was still granted but other sites will not be so demanding.

So, where does this leave Greenbelt policy and its impact on the wider community? The way I see it is this, the main arguments which in the words of the Inspectors outweighed harm caused to the Greenbelt in both Thunderbridge Yard and Two Caravans were the 'immediate unmet need for sites', 'lack of alternative sites' and the 'personal needs of the appellant'. Fair enough, however every single one of these points can be applied to many ordinary families who live within the Greenbelt and wish to develop and extend their homes driven by increasing families whether by additional children, caring for elderly parents or change in circumstances due to disability etc. Long term changes to the economy and negative financial outlook are stopping many families from doing what they would have done in the past namely upsizing and buying a larger property. There is therefore very little alternative then to extend their own homes.

Quite simply if Greenbelt rules are relaxed for some members of the community then this is simply unfair and is discrimination against the wider community. All this will do is to create anger and resentment which no one wants.  The words from the Appeal Inspector above should apply to all and by this I mean families who can prove they are in need of the extra living space and not to developers out to make a profit.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on August 01, 2012, 09:22:02 pm


So, where does this leave Greenbelt policy and its impact on the wider community? The way I see it is this, the main arguments which in the words of the Inspectors outweighed harm caused to the Greenbelt in both Thunderbridge Yard and Two Caravans were the 'immediate unmet need for sites', 'lack of alternative sites' and the 'personal needs of the appellant'. Fair enough, however every single one of these points can be applied to many ordinary families who live within the Greenbelt and wish to develop and extend their homes driven by increasing families whether by additional children, caring for elderly parents or change in circumstances due to disability etc. Long term changes to the economy and negative financial outlook are stopping many families from doing what they would have done in the past namely upsizing and buying a larger property. There is therefore very little alternative then to extend their own homes.

Quite simply if Greenbelt rules are relaxed for some members of the community then this is simply unfair and is discrimination against the wider community. All this will do is to create anger and resentment which no one wants.  The words from the Appeal Inspector above should apply to all and by this I mean families who can prove they are in need of the extra living space and not to developers out to make a profit.

The same argument could be just as equally used for the homeless or young people unable to afford to first time buy in the area that they grew up in, and with no hope of social housing being available they could just buy a plot of green belt land at agricultural prices and plonk a mobile home on it, but of course that would not be allowed.
The Greenbelt should be protected at all costs, the same for everybody. for all in the future to enjoy.





Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Cheesemonster on August 01, 2012, 10:22:07 pm
Strange how they say they don't have anywhere else to live as I pass the site every working day on the train and apart from an empty mobile home there is never anyone there so where are they staying currently?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 04, 2012, 12:13:20 pm
The Thunderbridge Yard, Bulls Lane appeal was allowed on 24 July 2012 granting a temporary permission for four years subject to various conditions.

The Inspector found that the site was unsuitable for this purpose due to the flood plain location and noise from the adjacent railway line.  However significant weight was given in favour due to the immediate unmet need for sites, the majority of the appellants’ need for a site, and the lack of alternative sites. 

I have added a map, below, to help those not familiar with the area.

View Larger Map
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on August 07, 2012, 03:26:14 pm
Strange how they say they don't have anywhere else to live as I pass the site every working day on the train and apart from an empty mobile home there is never anyone there so where are they staying currently?

They will be away finding work.  Their usual area of search is the south coastal area.  As I said to the Planning Inspector, why do they need to have a home base at Welham Green when their area of work is so far away?  The only apparent reason was a relative living on the 'Pylon' site on Barnet Road Potters Bar near the M25 bridge.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 07, 2012, 05:13:54 pm
They will be away finding work.  Their usual area of search is the south coastal area.  As I said to the Planning Inspector, why do they need to have a home base at Welham Green when their area of work is so far away? 

The same could be said of me. I live in Brookmans Park but I work in Zimbabwe, Kenya, Uganda, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Vietnam, Cambodia and a load of places a lot further away than the south coast.  I need a home to return to in order to be with my family and friends.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: memsal9 on August 08, 2012, 07:02:00 pm
They will be away finding work.  Their usual area of search is the south coastal area.  As I said to the Planning Inspector, why do they need to have a home base at Welham Green when their area of work is so far away? 

The same could be said of me. I live in Brookmans Park but I work in Zimbabwe, Kenya, Uganda, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Vietnam, Cambodia and a load of places a lot further away than the south coast.  I need a home to return to in order to be with my family and friends.

So the whole 'immediate unmet need for sites' and 'the personal needs of the appellant' is a red herring. The planning system has yet again been abused and the Appeal Inspector fell for it. I suspect the inspector was always aware of this and coupled with the recent case in Essex which was televised on national TV it appears she went for the 'safe' option (but I suspect if she lived nearby her decision may have been different!).

Can the Local Planning Authority appeal against this decision? As per my earlier post, the issue here is the inconsistency of the Appeals system. If an ordinary young couple with children with the same needs as those of the travellers had built a small house on that plot they would have been refused permission with treat of enforcement action.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on August 10, 2012, 01:00:39 pm
I need a home to return to in order to be with my family and friends.

The diffference is that your house is not in the Green Belt. If you bought some Green Belt land and tried to build a house on it, you would not get permission.  If you built a house you would be required to remove it, at your cost.  There have been two recent Court cases, one near Potters Bar where someone got permission for a barn but built a house which looked like a barn from the road.  The other was the memorable one looking like a castle built behind stacks of hay.

The parish council has taken this up with Grant Shapps as the local MP, Housing Minister and Local Government Minister.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 27, 2012, 07:56:16 am
The issue of the protection of green belt land has been discussed on the BBC's Today programme this morning, with claims from the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) that about 1,000 hectares of green space is earmarked for new housing and industrial areas. The CPRE says the green belt is under threat, the government says it's protecting the green belt.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19387961 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19387961)



Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on August 28, 2012, 03:30:52 pm
about 1,000 hectares of green space is earmarked for new housing and industrial areas. The CPRE says the green belt is under threat, the government says it's protecting the green belt. 

There is a big difference between 'green space' and 'green belt'.  Green space is simply open undeveloped land and has no safeguards.  Green belts are areas of land designated as such in the district / borough plan - now called a 'Local Development Framework'.  Green Belt land is protected in various ways, and these protections continue in the National Planning Policy Framework issued in March 2012.  Our local MP and Housing and Local Government Minister, Grant Shapps, is adamant that the Green Belt safeguards will continue. There is said to be existing planning permission for nearly 500,000 dwellings nationally, so it is not lack of planning permission that is stopping more homes being built.  So there is no need to give permission for any new housing on Green Belt land.  The problem, in my humble opinion, is lack of finance and overpriced housing. Mortgages are much more difficult to get, and 125% mortgages are a thing of the past, thankfully.   'Experts' reckon house prices need to drop 30%.  There is also a problem of S106 agreements in conditions for some planning consents (where developers agreed to pay for some 'off-site' works or other funding nlt directly involving the development) and they are now unaffordable due to the drop in house prices.

However his boss, Eric Pickles, has recently approved several large housing developments.  The main reason, or so it appears, is because the local council has not demonstrated that it has designated enough land for housing to meet the expected need for the next 5 years.  Welwyn Hatfield is in this situation and Planning Inspectors have just used this argument to approve a temporary 4-year permission for gypsies at Thunderbridge Yard, Bulls Lane (Green Belt land) - see separate topic on this subject.  That is the threat to Green Belts.  Why cannot Mr Pickles acknowledge that councils need time to ensure their local planning policies agree with the new national policy issued only in March 2012?  Rome was not built in a day and councils need time to adjust.

Hope this is not too technical   >:D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Therock on September 20, 2012, 09:09:58 pm
Whilst walking past the Travellers site today which is next to Welham Green station, There appeared to be at least 10 caravans/mobile homes. The Good news is that 3 of them had brand new vans with the logo Tree Felling on the side. thought this  site  was for 4-6 homes??? Still who cares  do what you want, but dont throw litter or you will be presecuted>
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on September 21, 2012, 03:14:26 pm
Four pitches have been approved and each pitch can accommodate one mobile home and one touring caravan, making a total of eight.  If there is an excess and it is only temporary then the council is highly unlikely to take any action.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on November 12, 2012, 03:23:38 pm
The council is carrying out public consultation on the Ernerging Core Strategy from Monday 12 November 2012 to Friday 18 January 2013.

The Emerging Core Strategy sets out the council's preferred strategy for planning in the borough over the next 15 years and if adopted will be the key planning document in the Local Plan.

There is a 'Consultation Event' this Wednesday 14th November at the URC in Brookmans Park 2.00pm - 8.30pm


http://www.brookmans.com/NMPC/WHBC%20Emerging%20Core%20Strategy%202012.pdf
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 12, 2012, 03:37:24 pm
Have tweeted.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on November 14, 2012, 09:54:29 am
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 12, 2012, 03:59:22 pm
The NM Green Belt Soc is distributing a Newsletter to all households in the parish.  the reason is that Welwyn Hatfield Council is consulting everyone on how many new homes should be built in the borough by 2029, and the suggested numbers in each town and village.

the bulk of new housing is recommended as being added to the two main towns with some spread round the villages.  Obviously the two towns would like less which means more added to the villlages.  In the case of North Mymms parish, the planners noted the strong response to the prevous stage of consultation and suggest only 50 more homes in the parish.

Could I urge you to complete and return the response form to the Green Belt Soc by 31st December to show strong support for the North Mymms figures.  If you don't then you may easily find that pressure from the two towns will force the planners to add more homes to our villages.

You can influence the future! ;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on December 12, 2012, 04:21:42 pm
Bob

Do these figures relate to social housing or private homes built by any developer or individual?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Nobby on December 12, 2012, 07:00:29 pm
Thanks for keeping us up to date, Bob.
Is there any indication at this stage as to where the 50 new homes for North Mymms might be built?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 13, 2012, 02:11:11 pm
the figures are the minimum total of all types of housing.  Across the borough they plan for 35% of new housing to be 'affordable' tenures, with 70% of it being rented and 30% 'other' tenures such as shared ownership.

At this stage the council is only wanting agreement on total figures for each settlement, with specific sites left to a future stage.    For Brookmans Park the existing approvals, but unbuilt, include the conversion of 2 Bradmore Way into 4 flats and the 10 flats approved at Green Close on the land boarded off.  No doubt the maisonettes on the other side of Green Close will get approval for demilition and replacement by more dwellings.  Welham Green has already got approvals for far more that the suggested figure of 5 being

- 22 Dellsome Lane demolish and erect a block of 10 flats
- 121 Dixons Hill Rd demolish and erect 6 town houses 

For Little Heath the council has identified 'contingency' sites for 12 dwellings.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bob Horrocks on December 28, 2012, 03:20:53 pm
You will have seen another topic on this Forum about the Hatfield Garden Villagers taking action against the proposed number of new homes in that area as shown in the current consultation on Welwyn Hatfield's Emerging Core Strategy.

You should have received a Newsletter from the North Mymms District Green Belt Society urging you to support that consultations proposal of a limited number of new housing in our parish.  A copy is attached.  Although the council has extended its consultation period to the end of January, the collection boxes will only be in the two named shops until the end of December.

Do support the Council otherwise you may find our villages are given a far larger figure for new housing. 

http://www.brookmans.com/greenbeltsociety/NEWS%202012%20-%20Nov.pdf
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on December 28, 2012, 03:29:34 pm
Hi Bob,

Thanks for that. I downloaded your Word doc, saved it as a pdf, uploaded to our server and embedded in your last post.  If people hover over the document they can print or save.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trekbat on January 06, 2013, 03:25:40 pm
While BP has a separate section, people may want to pay attention to what is going on in Hatfield - after all, it is a nearby town but mainly to avoid any nasty surprises that may impact on BP residents (like the incinerator) or because of other general interests (like preserving the Green Belt - especially as it produces useful things like Oxygen, which we're likely to need more of given the aforementioned incinerator). And also because you're probably paying a lot more in Council tax so you'll probably want to get value for your dosh.

Please note: due to its length it's in two halves and this information has already been posted on Shapps site]

WHBC Emerging Core Strategy 2011-2029 Consultation - Hatfield section

WELWYN HATFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL EMERGING CORE STRATEGY 2011-2029 [Consultation closes: 31 January 2013]
http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs)

"16.1 The main challenges and drivers of change for Welwyn Hatfield are set out in the Welwyn Hatfield Now chapter.  Additionally, particular challenges for Hatfield include:

    Hatfield town centre and High View neighbourhood centres are run down.
    The transport interchange between the university, railway station, town centre and the Galleria needs to be improved.
    There has been a significant increase in the number of houses in multiple occupation in Hatfield leading to areas of high concentration particularly around the university campuses.

16.1 Vision and Objectives for Hatfield

Vision for Hatfield

‘Shaping the future of Hatfield though better integration’

16.2 By 2029 a more positive image of Hatfield will have been created building on the strengths of a more diversified economy, its role as a sub regional destination for employment and higher education and through the regeneration of its town and neighbourhood centres.  The development of a new neighbourhood north of Hatfield will have been planned with the necessary supporting infrastructure.  Improvements between key public transport interchanges will provide better east/west accessibility. Ellenbrook Country Park will have become established providing a habitat for wildlife and opportunities for access to natural open space.  Together these actions will have created a well designed, well connected and cohesive Hatfield.

Objectives for Hatfield

16.3 As well as the borough wide objectives, a set of local objectives have been developed for Hatfield.

    HAT1:  To secure the regeneration of Hatfield town centre and to ensure that the redevelopment reflects the needs of local people, including local jobs.
    HAT2:  Provide for an enhanced transport interchange between the town centre, the university, the Galleria and the railway station.
    HAT3:  Support the redevelopment of High View neighbourhood centre.
    HAT4:  To maximise the benefits of the University of Hertfordshire whilst balancing the accommodation needs of students with the needs of the resident community.
    HAT5:  Improve the integration of Old Hatfield with the rest of the town whilst preserving and enhancing this heritage asset.

16.4 Objectives HAT1, HAT2 and HAT4 are addressed by policies in this section of the Core Strategy and objectives HAT3 and HAT5 are addressed by a policy in the Centres, Services and Facilities chapter. These objectives focus on particular issues for Hatfield, but they form part of a wider overall strategy for the town to maintain and enhance its role, among other things:

    as a main centre for employment in the borough
    as a centre for shopping, as well as its network of neighbourhood centres
    as a centre for community services and facilities, including sport
    as a regionally important centre for higher education
    to provide for affordable housing.


16.5 New dwellings in Hatfield

16.30 In line with the Settlement Strategy, within the borough, by 2029, about 3,230 new dwellings will have been delivered in and around Hatfield.  Of these about 1,110 dwellings will have come forward within the existing town.  For the remaining 2,120 dwellings, land will have to be released from the Green Belt on the edge of Hatfield for new development.  The largest sustainable opportunity for development within the borough around Hatfield is at a broad location to the north west of the town.


16.20 In addition, consultation also highlighted the need to raise the profile of the university as a cultural asset and to capitalise on the presence of the university to promote knowledge based industries."



Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trekbat on January 06, 2013, 03:25:54 pm
RESPONSE FROM HATFIELD TOWN COUNCIL:
http://www.hatfield-herts.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Council-Minutes-12-December-20123.pdf (http://www.hatfield-herts.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Council-Minutes-12-December-20123.pdf)

Pg C18-19:

"56. WELWYN HATFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL EMERGING CORE STRATEGY 2011-2029

Members noted the consultation.

RESOLVED that the following comments be made;

Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan

Infrastructure should be in place BEFORE any housing development takes place. All s.106 money or Community Infrastructure Levy should be lodged with the Borough Council prior to development to avoid situation similar to de Havilland site.

We would also like to see allotments and a community orchard.

Core Strategy

This Council recognises the need to provide much needed housing balanced against loss of the Green Belt, however, the Town Council are concerned that we are only being given one option to consider. We believe that there must have been other options which we and the community should have been consulted on.

We endorse the Charrette approach to building new communities with the tolerance or even approval of the existing community which will be affected. This should have been used in this case rather than giving the community one option to comment on.

Some of the agricultural land being used is the best in the County and it is against Policy to develop prime agricultural land.

We oppose the coalescence of Lemsford with Hatfield. Hatfield needs as much Green Belt as any other Town.

Hatfield has seen massive development in the last decade, it would be good to have a period of stability prior to creating another large community again. Under no circumstance will Hatfield bear any more housing than the 2,000, if the Panshanger option is not adopted another housing area will have to be found in Welwyn Garden City.

We believe that infrastructure should be in place (and adopted by the local authority) before development of houses commences, please see our comments on the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

The Town Council is concerned at the lack of facilities at QE11 hospital and believe that this should be resolved prior to any further development.

The consultation timetable has not been convenient, having been postponed many times and some residents believe that this has been done deliberately to stifle healthy debate and is contrary to localism.

Policy CS7 - Members consider 30% affordable housing appropriate for Hatfield in line with Welwyn Garden City.

There should be no Houses in Multiple Occupation permitted on the new development.

Policy CS17 - All new student accommodation should be concentrated on campus. (delete the words “whenever possible”.)

The Town Council accepts that hard decisions have to be made regarding future housing needs and we commend the Borough Council for setting out their proposals, however, this document only sets out one option which some of the community perceives to be the only option and "a done deal". More work needs to be done to change that perception.

(Action: Town Clerk)"


COMMENTS / CONSIDERATIONS:

There are a number of positives in HTC's response:

- banning HMOs on the new development.

- highlighting the lack of consultation and the limited option.

- improving transport access.

- restricting student accommodation to UH campuses.

- insisting that there is a ceiling to Hatfield's share.
 
- insisting Section 106 monies are claimed in advance.

However:

- nothing about reducing the existing extremely high number of HMOs in Hatfield ie. enforcing housing covenants.

- no insistence that WHBC first complete housing on brownfield sites - Hatfield town centre and Highview (possibly Mount Pleasant) - before allowing any development on Green Belt (their line appears to be that we've granted planning permission but can't force them to build - while that is true of the average development it conveniently ignores the fact that for Hatfield town centre and High View the council is the client and that both involve their compulsory purchase powers).

- no comment on the apparent over-emphasis on the interests of the University of Hertfordshire - as opposed to those of local residents (UH is a major employer but so is Ocado).

- no comment on restoring civic amenities like library access (not heard a rational justification for WGC to have two - one with 7-day access - while Hatfield, their repository for social needs cases and home to a huge number of students only has one the size of the smaller of the two WGC libraries with only 5 day access - and two of those are half days).

- could have included restoring the road bridge connecting The Great North Road as a specific way of helping reduce journey times and congestion.

Believe most long term Hatfield residents will dispute Hatfield has been maintained - let alone enhanced - by WHBC.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trekbat on January 12, 2013, 10:05:48 am
Just looking at some of the comments at (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/ (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/) ) and it seems possible that some people are getting confused by the process / wording.

In particular, there are a number of people who indicate disagreement ('no') with proposed strategy but go on to answer 'no' to whether they think a change is necessary - which I understand to be 'no' to the  outlined strategy needs changing ie. I don't agree with it but I don't think it needs changing.

I suspect the people may be mistakenly thinking that they are saying 'no' to the proposed outlined strategy and in reality DO want it to be changed (although it is possible that it is me who is getting confused).
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: trekbat on January 15, 2013, 12:19:16 pm
One for those interested in the green belt and / or WHBC plans, methinks:

"REMINDER:
The Council Core Strategy presentation/consultation event is TODAY, Tuesday 15 January, 2:00 pm – 8.30pm at Green Lanes Primary School, Green Lanes, Hatfield, AL10 9JY.

Please attend, so that we can show the Council strength in numbers."

http://savehatfieldgreenbelt.wordpress.com/ (http://savehatfieldgreenbelt.wordpress.com/)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on January 30, 2013, 04:54:22 pm
Tomorrow is the last day to comment on the Emerging Core Strategy! You can do this online at:

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs)

North Mymms Parish Council and the North Mymms Parish Plan Implementation Group are supporting:

Policy CS3 Settlement Strategy which proposes that there should only be infill development within Brookmans Park, Little Heath and Welham Green
Policy CS4 which states that there are no plans to release Green Belt land around Brookmans Park, Little Heath and Welham Green.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on January 30, 2013, 05:05:44 pm
A word of warning about the innocuous-sounding phrase 'affordable housing'. This does not mean new homes that our young people might be able to afford! It means social housing (used to be known as council housing), and there is no guarantee to whom it would be made available.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on February 14, 2013, 08:00:51 am
I heard last night from someone that a developer is trying to buy Brookmans Park Primary School in order to flattened it, rebuild it on part of the fields and build houses on any remaining land???

Can't believe this is true but just wanted to see if anyone else has heard this?  Surely it couldn't happen, could it??
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mighty Oak on February 14, 2013, 08:08:00 am
I heard something similar a few weeks ago to do with plans to build at the end of Bradmore way including a new primary school and to develop the area of the current school with new houses.  Dismissed it at the time as there have been rumours to build on the fields at the end of Bradmore Way for a number of years
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aqila on February 14, 2013, 01:35:07 pm
I can't see a planning app on the Welwyn Hatfield site. 

https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/welcome.asp

I've looked under both Bradmore Way and Peplins Way.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on February 14, 2013, 04:03:02 pm
This may be more than a rumour. This document http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5985&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5985&p=0) indicates a developer is interested in Peplins Woods and various bits of land owned by Brookmans Park Golf Club. It seems to show what parts of Brookmans Park may be right for development.

Please note that I am posting in a non-official capacity. I do not know what document these pages have come from, or when it was compiled because there is no identification with it that I can see, but even if it is historical, it is interesting.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on February 14, 2013, 07:20:09 pm
A developer tried to build a house on land taken from a garden on the Peplins Way linkway.

There was massive opposition from locals and I cannot imagine for a moment that Peplins and Bradmore Way residents would allow any development of the school site without a fight.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aqila on February 15, 2013, 12:31:53 pm
These roads are very narrow, and parking reduces them to a single lane for most of the length.  Increasing the number of houses and thus cars needing access would be a nightmare.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on February 18, 2013, 09:03:12 pm
Just heard this rumour again and this person said they have heard from about 3 seperate sources.

Apparently the school is to be rebuilt on the fields at the end of Bradmore Way with housing, then the current school site will have more houses built on it???

Is that why there are so many houses up for sale around that end of the school that backs onto the fields???

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: katem on February 18, 2013, 10:26:52 pm
I also heard recently from a local Surveyor that planning permission is being submitted for 200 houses on the land at the end of Peplins Way. They also apparently want to acquire the land that the school is on. The trade off would be that the developers will demolish the current school build a new one to accommodate the extra population in BP
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on February 19, 2013, 10:52:01 am
Surely this is green belt land at the end of Bradmore ? This would effectively mean that Welham Green and Brookmans Park would merge.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Conor on February 19, 2013, 11:09:02 am
I think (although could be wrong) that you are more likely to be given permission to build a school in Green Belt rather than housing as it may be seen as special circumstances, which presumably is why the developer has gone for this approach. The timing of the rumours - about the same time as the council is debating the 'emerging core strategy' for planning growth purposes - cannot be a coincidence.

All the same, building in that location makes little sense to me for reasons that have already been raised - the large increase in traffic along Bradmore Way, encroaching the space between Brookmans Park and Welham Green, the fact it is green belt and also I think that the draft emerging core strategy document only called for very limited development in the Brookmans Park area on existing land not in the green belt (e.g. the land by the railway and Green Close). Let's hope that is enough to stop things going any further.

Conor
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on February 19, 2013, 11:25:18 am
If they do build new houses over there they will have to come up with some appropriate local road names. Incinerator Close might be appropriate.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on February 19, 2013, 11:42:40 am
They could extend the cul-de-sac on Bradmore Way northward so that it came out on Bulls Lane. This would give a second entrance into these roads.

That new road could be called Incinerator Evencloser
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on February 19, 2013, 12:22:38 pm
They could extend the cul-de-sac on Bradmore Way northward so that it came out on Bulls Lane.

That was, surprinsingly, the original plan

Quote
A proposed new road from Bradmore Way to Bell Bar was not approved; though approved later, in 1936, it was not made.

from http://www.brookmans.com/history/kingsford/chfour.shtml (http://www.brookmans.com/history/kingsford/chfour.shtml)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on February 19, 2013, 05:54:29 pm
So I'm 77 years behind the times. I'm catching up :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on February 20, 2013, 07:41:09 am
 :( Missing Bob's reasoned, measured, informative and informed posts already  :(
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 01, 2013, 11:32:16 am
I heard this morning that the plans involve moving the school to the field at the end of Bradmore Way and 300 dwellings on the site of the existing school.

Is anyone able to verify this?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on March 01, 2013, 12:16:41 pm
300 dwellings on the site of the school ???

That's more than the number of houses in Bradmore and Peplins combined so unless they're high rise flats that doesn't seem very likely.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 01, 2013, 02:53:30 pm
Developers love to pack 'em in - rabbit hutches with tiny gardens = maximising profit.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mr Green on March 01, 2013, 06:36:02 pm
I heard this morning that the plans involve moving the school to the field at the end of Bradmore Way and 300 dwellings on the site of the existing school.

Is anyone able to verify this?

Don't know about the number of houses but the plan IS to move the school.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on March 02, 2013, 11:41:36 am

Don't know about the number of houses but the plan IS to move the school.

So what is this 'plan'

Or is it just an idea by a greedy developer ?

Can't find any reference to it on the council website so looks like that's all it is.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: theResident_00 on March 03, 2013, 07:08:40 pm
I also heard recently from a local Surveyor that planning permission is being submitted for 200 houses on the land at the end of Peplins Way. They also apparently want to acquire the land that the school is on. The trade off would be that the developers will demolish the current school build a new one to accommodate the extra population in BP
I have a small hunch that they might close St Mary's and Brookmans Park schools, and make a bigger primary school in-between the two villages. If they did that, of course, we may as well be called Welham Park! :-\

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 04, 2013, 11:28:58 pm
Linked to this post is a document from Aurora Properties outlining their proposal to develop the field at the end of Bradmore Way with 90 properties plus a new primary school along with redevelopment of the existing BP Primary School site with 14 properties and flats.

http://goo.gl/0ciF1 (http://goo.gl/0ciF1)

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/8015650/Brookmans_Park_Greenbelt_Development.pdf

Note: Edited to embed the pdf link for easier access.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 05, 2013, 06:47:48 am
Hi Mark, 

I edited your post above to embed the pdf you were linking to in order that people who are interested can have easier access. For future reference, if you copy and paste the url of the pdf in your message and add the pdf code

Code: [Select]
[pdf][/pdf]
You can do this by either manually adding the code or by highlighting the url and clicking on the pdf button (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/Themes/default/images/bbc/pdf.gif) above the message box you will embed the document in your message.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 05, 2013, 06:52:43 am
If this oes go ahead, do a percentage of new homes now have to be for council tenants?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 05, 2013, 07:44:44 am
I believe so, possibly as high as 35%.

And the new phraseology is 'Affordable Housing'.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 05, 2013, 08:07:58 am
If this goes go ahead, do a percentage of new homes now have to be for council tenants?

I believe so, possibly as high as 35%. And the new phraseology is 'Affordable Housing'.

Moving people out of council housing to affordable housing (either for rent or for purchase) must be a good thing because it will free up council stock for people who need homes.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: BrookyP on March 05, 2013, 08:21:23 am
Looks like in a nutshell:

the primary school site will be turned into houses/flats and care home

end of bradmore will be new estate of bigger houses

new school/scout hut

bigger golf course

access to under used woods

someone makes a few quid

Brookmans park loses a bit of its "magic"

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 05, 2013, 09:32:01 am
For those who may have missed it (it's on the previous page of this thread) Mark Drinkwater added a pdf of the proposal (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/topic,4055.msg32166.html#msg32166). I am adding it again here so that it is on this page for those who got up late today.

 ;)

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/8015650/Brookmans_Park_Greenbelt_Development.pdf
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aqila on March 05, 2013, 12:55:40 pm
Looks like in a nutshell:

the primary school site will be turned into houses/flats and care home

end of bradmore will be new estate of bigger houses

new school/scout hut

bigger golf course

access to under used woods

someone makes a few quid

Brookmans park loses a bit of its "magic"

I think there is a bit more in that nutshell...
More green land/wildlife habitat is lost
Brookmans Park joins up with Welham Green, and eventually Hatfield
The current inhabitants of Peplins and Bradmore are seriously affected both during development and after. 
The issue with the school run is not just the parking, it is the queues of traffic.  This problem will increase.



Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 05, 2013, 01:40:22 pm
Surely there has to be some sort of public consultation on this. If the vast majority of residents object they can't proceed??

The document says 'The village of Brookmans Park has the capacity to accommodate new homes without causing any harm or burden to the community. In fact, the opposite is true. The new development would add to the viability of Brookmans park.'  What utter rubbish. The roads round Peplins can barely cope as it is without adding a new school and umpteen houses. Bluebridge road is already dangerous - especially around school time with out the new traffic and it is a separate village with its own identity not part of the Hatfield/potters bar sprawl.

Can we find out when these plan get public consultation?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 05, 2013, 04:41:08 pm
Surely there has to be some sort of public consultation on this. If the vast majority of residents object they can't proceed?

Perhaps you could start a petition?  http://www.change.org/en-GB/start-a-petition (http://www.change.org/en-GB/start-a-petition)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MikeL on March 05, 2013, 05:47:26 pm
It's interesting that the developers proposal makes reference to the the Emerging Core Strategy section CS.3 in support for their plan. However this in fact includes the point that the maximum number of new homes to be built in Brookmans park between 2011 and 2029 should be 30, and none in the existing green belt. Obviously, this strategy has not been finalised, but let's hope it is adopted. I hope that everyone took the opportunity to comment positively on it when we had the chance (the closing date for comments was Dec 31st). A leaflet was put through everyone's door by the Greenbelt Society urging you to do this.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MikeL on March 05, 2013, 05:51:52 pm
Link to the Emerging Core Strategy Document http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs?pointId=1342004935413#section-1342004935413 (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs?pointId=1342004935413#section-1342004935413)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 05, 2013, 06:53:34 pm
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/03031319 (http://companycheck.co.uk/company/03031319)

http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/alan-w-d-perkins-frics/25/25/1ba (http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/alan-w-d-perkins-frics/25/25/1ba)

After a bit of googling it would appear that-

Alan Perkins & his wife Pauline are Aurora Properties Ltd. Alan Perkins attended Chancellors School.

Aurora Properties Ltd do not appear to have a website.

The company's registered address is Catherine Bourne Farm, Mimms Lane, EN6 3LY surrounded by green fields (albeit a bit near the M25).

A previous development is Brookmans Court - don't know where that is - could it be Bluebridge Court?

Aurora Developments do not appear to have built much at all - most of their work has been consultancy or management of various projects.

They do not appear to have much cash in the bank.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on March 05, 2013, 09:08:45 pm
Is this payback for losing out on developing both the sites he owns in Peplins Way. 

The blurb from Aurora makes him sound like the caring, sharing benefactor of Brookmans Park!!!  What's the game plan???

Care home for the elderly - can see the sales pitch now as he knocks on our elderly residents doors offering them a more practical living space at this time in their life, without the need to be uprooted from the village they have lived in for some considerable years and even better he is offering a part ex-change deal on their house!!!!   

Finally, does anyone know if this is the same A Perkins whose name appears on leaflets etc from Grant Shapps "promoted by A Perkins" or merely a coincidence. :icon_scratch:

Considering this is public knowledge, I am most surprised we have not heard anything from the school's head or governing body.  Maybe we will get a Parent Mail 'New term .... new site'
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 05, 2013, 10:11:24 pm
It's interesting that the developers proposal makes reference to the the Emerging Core Strategy section CS.3 in support for their plan. However this in fact includes the point that the maximum number of new homes to be built in Brookmans park between 2011 and 2029 should be 30, and none in the existing green belt. Obviously, this strategy has not been finalised, but let's hope it is adopted. I hope that everyone took the opportunity to comment positively on it when we had the chance (the closing date for comments was Dec 31st). A leaflet was put through everyone's door by the Greenbelt Society urging you to do this.

Apparently 450 people responded directly to the NM District Greenbelt Society which considering
it was for the whole of North Mymms and bearing in mind the population of Brookmans Park
alone is approx 3500 I feel it is a bit disappointing.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mannyd on March 05, 2013, 10:57:20 pm
I'm lost even on the logistics of this! Excuse my ignorance. So, presumably if the developer gets the go ahead, he would have to build the new school first? Right. So, current 350 children not only having to dodge the erratic parent drivers, but also now all trucks etc needed for the new build? And where exactly do the extra 15 children per school year come from (currently 45/school year, and rising to 60). Does the school really have THAT long a waiting list?

I would hate to be a resident along Peplins/Bradmore - but as someone else said, it will take away quite a lot of the BP charm.


Oh, and can someone explain where that document came from (the planning one) and who has had access to it - seems to me that the school know a lot, and the residents not a thing!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grant Shapps MP on March 05, 2013, 11:06:52 pm
Finally, does anyone know if this is the same A Perkins whose name appears on leaflets etc from Grant Shapps "promoted by A Perkins" or merely a coincidence.

No connection whatsoever. The developer is well known in Brookmans Park, originally from the village. The A Perkins on my literature is Amanda Perkins who was acting agent, from Welwyn, and is a well known local councillor, but definitely not a developer! 

Note: Edited to fix quote reference.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 06, 2013, 07:21:17 am
Seeing as you have replied Grant Shapps, I wondered what you feel about these developments and can shed any light on whether this IS going to happen or is just a rumour?  If it does, are timescales in place for development. 

I think the governors and headmaster should also be asked directly as it seems they know a lot more than anyone else does.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on March 06, 2013, 07:57:23 am
As far as I am aware....

No planning application or similar has been submitted. This document I believe comes from a response to the Council's Emerging Core Strategy Document which was put out for responses late last year. This was one response received out of many (including many submissions by the Green Belt Society, see above). The council are now looking at all the responses they have received. They are due to publish their emerging core strategy, dealing with growth of housing within the Borough, towards the end of this year.

Once the strategy has been published, if it recommends this area is suitable for building on, then the developer would be free to put in a planning application which local residents would be free to comment on. Following a strong response from the Green Belt Society, the draft core strategy only recommended building around 30 houses in Brookmans Park, on land which is not currently part of the Green Belt (the land around Green Close would seem to be the area earmarked). This document I believe is an attempt to sway the Council's mind to allow more building in the local area. Time will tell whether they have been successful.

James
(Posted in a personal capacity, not as a member of North Mymms Parish Council)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on March 06, 2013, 12:19:51 pm
There's more info about the core strategy online here:

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=458 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=458)

It looks like there is another opportunity for comments and final revisions this time next year, with adoption of the strategy still nearly two years away.

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 08, 2013, 05:53:02 pm
Interesting newsletter from the school today.  I really feel now that this may already be a done deal, it all seems very advanced and I think the school know quite a lot.

(http://i.imgur.com/XGgUUR0.png)


Note: Edited to embed image of pdf.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 08, 2013, 07:55:23 pm
I have removed an image featuring scout leaders, local residents and scouts until someone can establish who owns the image and whether the parents/guardians of the two younger scouts in the picture gave their consent for the image to appear on a public forum.  Subsequent post referring to the image have also been removed.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 08, 2013, 08:08:31 pm
http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/stalwart_celebrates_50_years_a_scout_1_1470753 (http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/stalwart_celebrates_50_years_a_scout_1_1470753)

This is where the photo came from, it was in the WH Times, so I presume that parents would have had to give their permission for the picture then.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 08, 2013, 08:15:25 pm
http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/stalwart_celebrates_50_years_a_scout_1_1470753 (http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/stalwart_celebrates_50_years_a_scout_1_1470753)
This is where the photo came from, it was in the WH Times, so I presume that parents would have had to give their permission for the picture then.

Thanks for clarifying Saffie. I presume the image belongs to the WHT (because there is no information stating otherwise) and will probably be covered by the copyright notice at the foot of the page which reads ...
Quote
© 2013 Archant Community Media Ltd. All rights reserved.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 08, 2013, 08:31:42 pm
Ok,  I believe this is in the public interest, there is nothing wrong with carrying a link to another website and I don't believe this is breaching copyright laws.

I just thought the photo was interesting showing our MP, in the company of this property developer, handing an award to the scout leader. 

This is already in the public domain on the WH Times website.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 08, 2013, 08:38:51 pm
Ok,  I believe this is in the public interest, there is nothing wrong with carrying a link to another website and I don't believe this is breaching copyright laws.

Hi Saffie, you are right. There is nothing wrong with linking to another website. That is not a breach of copyright.  The issue is the image, which I am presuming belongs to the WHT. Just because the newspaper has published it doesn't mean others are allowed to reproduce it without the newspaper's permission.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 08, 2013, 08:48:15 pm
Thanks, I just wanted to point that it seems this scheme has obviously been a long time in planning.  It seems odd that Mr Alan Perkins would be pictured in a photo with the scout leaders and Grant Shapps, what is his connection to the scout group??  Why would he need to be involved in this Longevity Award Cermony, Can someone tell me that? 

One of the earlier posts mentioned that a new scout hut is not the plans for the Bradmore Fields development.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 08, 2013, 08:57:02 pm
It seems odd that Mr Alan Perkins would be pictured in a photo with the scout leaders and Grant Shapps, what is his connection to the scout group??  Why would he need to be involved in this Longevity Award Cermony, Can someone tell me that? 
Hi Saffie, the article you linked to offers an answer to your question about the developer's connection to the scout group. It describes him as "an explorer scout leader" who, according to the article "gave a speech recounting some of Lem’s adventures and misadventures in scouts."
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 08, 2013, 09:07:51 pm
Hmmmm, ok - we will just stick to the WH Times version. 

I think you will find that a lot of people are unhappy about how these plans that were just a rumour have now emerged to be very real, and possibly a lot more advanced than any of us realised.  People are passionate about maintaining our lovely village and scared of what these developments could mean for all of us.

I don't see anything wrong with trying to keep people up to date with any developments/rumours we hear as we have now learnt how true they can rapidly become.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 08, 2013, 09:28:45 pm
I don't see anything wrong with trying to keep people up to date with any developments

Of course, that is what a community discussion forum is all about.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 08, 2013, 09:42:13 pm
Thanks, I just wanted to point that it seems this scheme has obviously been a long time in planning.  It seems odd that Mr Alan Perkins would be pictured in a photo with the scout leaders and Grant Shapps, what is his connection to the scout group??  Why would he need to be involved in this Longevity Award Cermony, Can someone tell me that? 

One of the earlier posts mentioned that a new scout hut is not the plans for the Bradmore Fields development.

Alan is an old friend of recipient of the award. I believe they were both scouts in Brookmans Park at the same time. He also had a long relationship with the scout movement, being an Explorer Leader. He was the ideal person to give a speech, which was both amusing and affectionate.  Grant was invited as a local figure who had a different connection to recipient of the award. Probably 200 people where there when the picture was taken. I think most only knew Alan vaguely if at all.

Whatever you feel about this development please don't involve a celebration organised by the parents and leaders for a remarkable achievement by a remarkable man.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: etc. on March 08, 2013, 09:55:44 pm
If this gets passed it would make for a very "interesting" school run...
Children, cars, residents, bin lorries, delivery vehicles to both school, care home and the many residents, OAP mobility scooters, meals on wheels, funeral processions, doctors, nurses, cleaners, scouts, ramblers, dog wakers, golfers, forestry commission, cyclists, postmen, builders, commuters, school coaches...etc. etc. etc.!

Goodness knows if an ambulance or fire engine would get through.

Would not be happy if I lived down such a bottleneck!  It is already - at certain times - full to breaking point.

Actually, maybe they would be wise to put in plans for a pub down the end (they could call it The Aurora!).  It might give people something to do instead of sitting in Perkins Way man-made traffic jam!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on March 08, 2013, 11:27:20 pm
Whatever you feel about this development please don't involve a celebration organised by the parents and leaders for a remarkable achievement by a remarkable man.

Couldn't agree more.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 09, 2013, 08:25:35 am
I think it is important to ensure that this thread doesn't get personal and that it focuses on discussing the issue of any proposed development.  Any comments attacking individuals or making allegations against those involved will be removed. Any concerns can be raised as part of the planning process.  This link explains how.  http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4831. (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4831.) Here is an extract from the site.

Quote
How do I comment on a current application?
If you feel that an application would have a positive/negative affect on you, your property or the surrounding area, you may want to comment on the application. To help you decide the plans are available at the council's offices at The Campus, Welwyn Garden City and also on the council's online planning applications database. Comments may be made by:
  • Selecting Comment alongside the application you wish to comment on via our online planning applications database
  • Writing to the planning department at the following address - Development Management, Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council, The Campus, Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire AL8 6AE
  • Emailing the planning department at planning@welhat.gov.uk
  • Alternatively you may want to ask your local Councillors to speak on your behalf. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on March 09, 2013, 02:34:29 pm
Just to re-iterate, as far as I am aware it is NOT a planning application and no such application has been submitted. It is purely a response to the core strategy document

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 09, 2013, 10:25:40 pm
The school newsletter says a planning proposal has been submitted to the council.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on March 09, 2013, 10:48:49 pm
The newsletter shown above states that a planning 'proposal' has been submitted to the council.

As I stated above, I believe this was in response to the emerging core strategy, or something similar. This is, I believe, different from a formal planning application. However,happy to be corrected if anyone has definite proof. It would be helpful if the original poster can clarify exactly where he obtained that document from?

You can read over 1000 (!) other proposals, comments etc to this consultation on the Welwyn Hatfield website at

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs?tab=list (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs?tab=list)

Click on the link below to view all planning applications submitted to the council so far this year from North Mymms Parish (you will need to click the search button)

https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/search.asp?ParishName=North+Mymms&DateReceivedStart=1%2F1%2F2013 (https://fastweb.welhat.gov.uk/search.asp?ParishName=North+Mymms&DateReceivedStart=1%2F1%2F2013)

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 10, 2013, 05:20:04 pm
I think there is a lot to recommend this proposal. A larger and more modern school would be of benefit, access to a field and woodlands would be extremely attractive to the scouts, we'd all gain access to underused woodlands and the extra houses would generate more business for the shops. I doubt the extra houses would change Brookmans Park very much.

The major negative factor in my mind would be the extra traffic at the bottleneck infront of Brian's. I'm not convinced that is able to cope as it's already pretty bad durring the school run.   
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bedlam on March 10, 2013, 10:53:47 pm
If this plan goes through, a high proportion of these dwellings would be allocated to Housing Association and asylum seeker/homeless/traveller families.

Obviously, this plan would be welcomed and promoted by our ultra Politically Correct Brookmans Park.com  society, or would it?

Please comment.......
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 11, 2013, 11:56:55 am
I think that is exactly what people that I have spoken to are worried about and I am sure there will be a lot of opposition to these plans when they finally become available.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 11, 2013, 12:22:51 pm
The major negative factor in my mind would be the extra traffic at the bottleneck infront of Brian's. I'm not convinced that is able to cope as it's already pretty bad durring the school run.

There is also the danger that this would set an unwelcome precedent for development on the greenbelt surrounding Brookmans Park. Every field that backs onto the village could become a target for developers.

Also, building 100+ houses and a school equates to a lot of lorries / grabs / trades etc etc.  Unless there was a creative proposal to accessing the site, the disruption whilst the construction went on would be significant and detrimental to the residents and shopkeepers alike.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 11, 2013, 01:33:36 pm
If this plan goes through, a high proportion of these dwellings would be allocated to Housing Association and asylum seeker/homeless/traveller families.

Hi Bedlam,

Do you know how the homes would be allocated if the proposals go ahead or are you just expressing your fears?  I would guess that if they are commercial sales they will go for the market price, whereas if the proposal is to provide social housing the homes will go to those in most need and highest up on the waiting list.

Obviously, this plan would be welcomed and promoted by our ultra Politically Correct Brookmans Park.com  society, or would it? Please comment.......

You don't always need to attack those who think differently to you.   ;)   A healthy diversity of perspectives and opinion in our forum rants is a good thing surely.  :)

Also, building 100+ houses and a school equates to a lot of lorries / grabs / trades etc etc.  Unless there was a creative proposal to accessing the site, the disruption whilst the construction went on would be significant and detrimental to the residents and shopkeepers alike.

Hi Mark,

I was wondering about that. How many school terms, months, perhaps years would such a proposal take to complete?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 11, 2013, 02:01:23 pm
I think there is a lot to recommend this proposal. A larger and more modern school would be of benefit, access to a field and woodlands would be extremely attractive to the scouts, we'd all gain access to underused woodlands and the extra houses would generate more business for the shops. I doubt the extra houses would change Brookmans Park very much.

The major negative factor in my mind would be the extra traffic at the bottleneck infront of Brian's. I'm not convinced that is able to cope as it's already pretty bad durring the school run.

Current Goverment planning legislation in the form of the National Planning Policy Framework,
March 2012 in the section Protecting Green Belt Land clearly states that inappropriate development
is, by definition harmful and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.
I do not believe there are very special circumstances for this development.
If the school requires modernisation/enlargement then this could be done on the existing site.
The woodlands are readily accessed from footpaths in Bell Lane and Bulls Lane.
We are already spoilt in this area for managed woodland with excellent access, Gobions and
Northaw Great Wood are two such examples.
The scouts already have excellent camps in Phasels Wood, Kings Langley and Cuffley with numerous other open areas and small woodland available to visit locally along with an extensive
local footpath network.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 11, 2013, 03:11:42 pm

Hi Mark,

I was wondering about that. How many school terms, months, perhaps years would such a proposal take to complete?

The proposal states on page 3 that they will "deliver the new primary school and new homes in years 0 - 5 of the Plan period" - so it looks like they are estimating 6 years in total.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 11, 2013, 05:48:04 pm
Is this development "inappropriate"? Is that a matter of opinion or is there a definition of "inappropriate"?

Building a school on a new site would be cheaper (at least to the tax payer) and less disruptive to the children than redeveloping the existing site, even if this is possible.

The winter months in the scout hut can be difficult. For the scouts an external meeting is planned every three to four weeks in winter. If the weather is good on a meeting scheduled to take place in the hut it is very difficult to hold the meeting outside as it means crossing station road onto a thin strip of land by the road which is less than ideal.

This may cause other parcels of green belt land to come into play, but each case should be examined on its merits and its merits alone.

The main issue in my mind remains access to the area. This could be dealt with, but extending the road to Bulls Lane. Although this is not planned.

I appreciate people living in the area my not want it because they feel it will change the character of their neighbourhood and this is a valid complaint. However, the plan has some merit and should not be dismissed out of hand.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 11, 2013, 05:57:02 pm
No, it is not a matter of opinion, as already stated the development is inappropriate by definition because the proposed development is within the greenbelt and there are no special circumstances.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 11, 2013, 06:08:40 pm
Sorry, epiphany I can't see where that was already stated.

What would constitute "special circumstances" for building the Green Belt?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 11, 2013, 06:35:14 pm
Sorry, epiphany I can't see where that was already stated.

What would constitute "special circumstances" for building the Green Belt

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf)

National Planning Policy Framework -

Protecting Green Belt Land (Section 9, Page 19)

87. 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.
88. 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.
89. A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as
inappropriate in Green Belt. Exceptions to this are:
● buildings for agriculture and forestry;Achieving sustainable development | 21
● provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation
and for cemeteries, as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt
and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;
● the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in
disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;
● the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same
use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;
● limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local
community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan; or
● limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously
developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use
(excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact
on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land
within it than the existing development.

I do not believe that the harm caused to the Green Belt by building 90 houses is outweighed
for the reasons already stated.
There is possibly a case for the Scout Hut to be built as it would satisfy the criteria and access to the open space and Peplins Wood could be improved without the need to develop the site.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: JLC on March 11, 2013, 09:36:42 pm
http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/stalwart_celebrates_50_years_a_scout_1_1470753 (http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/stalwart_celebrates_50_years_a_scout_1_1470753)
This is where the photo came from, it was in the WH Times, so I presume that parents would have had to give their permission for the picture then.

Thanks for clarifying Saffie. I presume the image belongs to the WHT (because there is no information stating otherwise) and will probably be covered by the copyright notice at the foot of the page which reads ...
Quote
© 2013 Archant Community Media Ltd. All rights reserved.

Technically I think the copyright should probably refer to me as I took it!  However I was delighted that it was used to celebrate Lem's 50 years of scouting!

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Conor on March 11, 2013, 10:51:12 pm
As well as the threat of development to the North, residents may be interested to know that the RVC appears to be strongly in favour of development to the South of it, and has submitted a response to the Council stating this.

One of their submissions to the strategy can be found below.

Conor

http://www.brookmans.com/news/march13/rvc.pdf

Edited to embed pdf.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 12, 2013, 09:03:27 am
Landowners, don't you just love 'em!. With the dust only recently settled from the recent proposal
to build 5K houses the RVC is at it again with a thinly veiled attempt to increase the value of their land by a huge % from agricultural to development value with a transparent, vacuous objection to the core strategy.
No doubt the other prime suspects at Raybrook Farm, Friday Grove and Leach Fields (same land owner as Aurora proposal) have submitted similar.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 12, 2013, 11:50:05 am
This article from The Telegraph was brought to my attention earlier.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9923680/Moonlighting-planning-officers-help-builders-exploit-vulnerable-councils.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9923680/Moonlighting-planning-officers-help-builders-exploit-vulnerable-councils.html)

It would appear that certain councils are being actively targeted by developers.

"...planning rules being introduced within weeks would make certain councils “very vulnerable” to development. His staff could identify these local authorities so that they could be targeted by a developer, he said.

Mr Folkes also highlighted a “big business opportunity”. Under new rules, councils have a year to develop and adopt local plans which set out where building can take place. Dozens of councils in England have yet to adopt local plans, meaning they have to allow developments deemed to be “sustainable”.

He said: “The Government has told councils they must maintain a five-year supply of housing land … but if they fall below that they are very vulnerable … If they haven’t got that identified, and a lot of them haven’t got it identified, they’re very vulnerable to losing an appeal.”

It's my uninformed impression that Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council, with its Local Development Framework, has its planning house in order and would be unlikely to be targeted in this way.

Is anyone more informed able to confirm this impression?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 13, 2013, 01:29:39 pm
Is anyone more informed able to confirm this impression?

The silence is deafening!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 13, 2013, 08:18:51 pm
I don't understand the need to increase capacity into the school, for the last few years a number of children seem to be coming in from Potters Bar, Welham Green and Hatfield suggesting that the village is not filing the school anyway.  These extra places mean that more children will be coming in from further afield encouraging more people to drive into the village on any of the four roads in, two of which are privately owned, how do these residents feel about the increased traffic on these roads they pay to mange and upkeep?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 15, 2013, 11:19:53 am
I don't understand the need to increase capacity into the school, for the last few years a number of children seem to be coming in from Potters Bar, Welham Green and Hatfield suggesting that the village is not filing the school anyway.

The village and local area cannot be filling the school. If it was, then then children coming in from as far away as Totteridge would not be able to get a place.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Rosy545 on March 15, 2013, 01:18:45 pm
Peplins Wood is actually quite a small area of woodland, virtually undisturbed, and full of wildlife, with Deer Badgers, Foxes, Rabbits, and hundreds of birds, including birds of prey. The floor is carpeted with mosses ferns and bluebells, we have managed woodlands already in Brookmans Park and nearby, Opening up this little haven of wildlife with access for all, whilst a lovely idea wood be detrimental to the wildlife.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 17, 2013, 04:00:06 pm
Looking at the congestion issue again, if a school was built at the end of Bradmore Way and the traffic left to its own devices cars would drive up Bradmore Way, drop the children off and turn round driving back down Bradmore Way. This would reduce the traffic on Peplins Way at the cost of doubling the school trafic on Bradmore Way. To my mind Bradmore Way is too narrow for the rush of cars traveling in both directions. At the very least double yellow lines would be required, but I doubt this would be sufficient. Alternatives would be


I would also suggest the road is widened outside the News Agent by removing the three parking spaces and the extension to the pavement which contains three bollards. Widening the short one way roads by narrowing the pavement outside the bakers and Stations and changing the road outside The Village Vet to oneway would also reduce congestion.

 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 17, 2013, 04:48:41 pm
I would suggest the village is left alone by Aurora Developments to start off with!!!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 17, 2013, 05:25:40 pm
I think each application should be judged on its merits. An important part of this judgement includes the views of the residents. But your post appears to say "no development under any circumstances", which doesn't seem reasonable.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 17, 2013, 06:02:30 pm
I'm not saying that, but I think taking away huge amounts of green belt land for a new school (not needed), more houses (not needed), etc, etc is wrong.  The only person gaining rally is Mr Perkins and his bank balance!!  I am sure if all this was happening at the end of your garden you would not be happy. 

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 17, 2013, 06:29:20 pm
Also...Where will this stop, maybe he will be after Gobions next!!  Are any local fields safe??  If we let this land go, then surely all other fields surrounding the village are fair game, what makes them any different?

The only reason I can see why a school, care home and scout hut have been included on Auroras Plans is to tick the relevant boxes to get building approval, surely by providing these services to the local area is stands a better chance of getting permission to build in green belt land?? 

Also my question of access has not been answered, as 2 out of 4 roads into the village are private, will the roads be able to cope with more traffic, do the residents on the private roads pay for the maintenance of these roads and how do they feel about the extra traffic that will be using them?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 17, 2013, 06:32:52 pm
As I said, the residents opinions are important. If it were happening on my road I may well object and I would expect my opinion to count, but I would not expect to have a veto.

If this goes ahead the developer will benefit. That is the nature of the society we live in. They will take the bulk of the financial risk and the largest share of the profits. But others will benefit:

I'm not convinced this is a good idea or that it should go ahead, but it definitely has some merit.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 17, 2013, 06:40:45 pm
But my concern is where does this developement stop.  All your points are fair but I feel very sorry for the people that live in Bradmore and Peplins who have this hanging over them. 

I am sure if this was backing on to all the supporters gardens it would be a different story.

We are very lucky to have such a lovely village and I think development should be considered very carefully as it could open a lot of other doors to developers in the future.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Aloo on March 17, 2013, 07:44:35 pm
Given the amount of trucks and construction work that will be required, why not also locate a replacement for Heathrow airport in Brookmans Park.   There are bound to be economies of scale from such a development and it would attract much needed investment to the village.   
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 17, 2013, 07:58:55 pm
I would like to know what our MP, ex housing minister thinks of these plans?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mannyd on March 17, 2013, 09:18:07 pm

The only reason I can see why a school, care home and scout hut have been included on Auroras Plans is to tick the relevant boxes to get building approval, surely by providing these services to the local area is stands a better chance of getting permission to build in green belt land?? 



I agree - I think these items have been added as a sweetener to the deal. The developer is not concerned with these things - IF these plans are agreed (and my personal opinion is to hope they aren't), I hope there's a schedule of building with the scout hut coming near the top.... maybe sceptical but I can just see them finishing their profitable housing development then finding a reason not to do the hut
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on March 18, 2013, 10:31:54 pm
A tale of caution. 2 becomes 1

If you want an idea of what Brookmans Park of the future would look like, then look backwards to another lovely Hertfordshire village spoilt by the scourge of the developer  - Abbots Langley.  I lived there 20 years ago and it was a village very similar to BP.  A village surrounded by fields.  When I went back on a nostalgic visit some 10 years or so ago, I was appalled.  I hardly recognised the place. The green fields between Abbots Langley and Leavesden had disappeared, replaced by pop up housing estates along the 1 mile that divided the 2 villages.  The heart and character has been ripped out and now the whole area is merely a sprawling extension of North Watford.

I fear despite the spiel this will be repeated and BP and WG will become one  :(
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bobb on March 19, 2013, 01:32:53 pm
I've been watching this thread with much interest - summing up:

The vast majority of residents do not want this development. Pretty sure over 90% of Peplins area residents object. Many other BP residents also object and would, I'm guessing, far outweigh the approvers.

The roads can't handle it. Major reworking of the roads would be needed including the reduction of path/verge width - which being used by children walking to school may become dangerous (reducing pavement width on the road to a school surely can't be sensible!) The village paths & parking would get reduced when parking is already poor at times.

5-6 years of development means years of congestion, heavy lorries, noise, ruined verges etc for all BP residents

New school and scout hut would appear to sweeteners to the council to approve green belt development. A new school is not needed as local kids as far out as totteridge are getting places as it is undersubscribed. Also how would increased children in the primary impact the entry to Chancellors?

BP joins up with WG - once village definition is lost it can not be regained and sprawl is highly likely

The untouched woodland is likely to see wildlife impact and there is no requirement as we already have the wonderful Gobians ( not to mention the impact to wildlife during construction)

Green belt land would get developed and it would appear to most reasonable folk that there are no special circumstances. This would leave other fields and green belt subject to potential further development

Some of the 'soul' of BP would be lost

If I remember rightly it was only a few years ago that a developer thought about building on leach fields and blocked access, destroyed habitat and reduced quality of life for BP residents. This action affected many residents for the worse and only through the skill and hard work of a few brave souls did we get access restored (even though it is not a patch on what used to be there). I would hazard a guess that should this get the green light then leach fields would be fair game. Then there is the field at the top of the hill, you know the one that's been trying to sell for ages - fair game as well? Golf course - could easily squeeze a few houses on there....

I also note that our MP has been silent on his view - as ex-housing minister I would be very interested in his view on this development and the suitability for development in BP. I know he reads the forum and has already responded in this thread so would kindly ask for his feedback?

If there is help needed to campaign against this - count me in.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mungroo on March 19, 2013, 01:43:36 pm
ultimately the population is increasing...all need somewhere to live...
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bobb on March 19, 2013, 02:11:11 pm
Not wishing to be rude but "all need somewhere to live" does not address the real objections and points raised on this specific development in BP. Can we keep on topic please.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: tombakhurst on March 19, 2013, 05:38:09 pm
I think there are some possible disadvantages which haven't been mentioned yet but correct me if I'm wrong.

Surely it would not be just the next-door residents that it should be of significant concern to... The school being extended to accommodate students from further afield would cause many more cars arriving up from The Great North Road each morning and afternoon, presumably most parents will use Moffats Lane as the road to make their way down to the village because of the bumps on Brookmans Avenue. This would mean that Moffats Lane would have many more cars making their way down and this would cause a lot of congestion with the other Chancellors cars; heightened by the commuters parking on Moffats Lane because of the expensive car park.  :icon_scratch:

It would be positive for the individuals on the waiting list if the residential development is council housing, it may not be; I'm not certain. I don't think it should, but if it is built it may make Brookmans Park less desirable to live in for buyers and bring down property prices for the rest of us? This may be cancelled out with the benefit of a new school but I'm no expert.

Finally, I don't think the disadvantages should be overlooked by the council or residents due to the 'sweeteners' which are being put on the table by the company. Don't get me wrong, they would be very beneficial to groups in the community but how hard would it be for the council to do it themselves?

Please feel free to shoot my instincts down in flames - I am not nearly as informed as the rest of you.

Tom   :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: larrylamb on March 19, 2013, 07:47:14 pm
I think there are some possible disadvantages which haven't been mentioned yet but correct me if I'm wrong.

Surely it would not be just the next-door residents that it should be of significant concern to... The school being extended to accommodate students from further afield would cause many more cars arriving up from The Great North Road each morning and afternoon, presumably most parents will use Moffats Lane as the road to make their way down to the village because of the bumps on Brookmans Avenue. This would mean that Moffats Lane would have many more cars making their way down and this would cause a lot of congestion with the other Chancellors cars; heightened by the commuters parking on Moffats Lane because of the expensive car park.  :icon_scratch:

It would be positive for the individuals on the waiting list if the residential development is council housing, it may not be; I'm not certain. I don't think it should, but if it is built it may make Brookmans Park less desirable to live in for buyers and bring down property prices for the rest of us? This may be cancelled out with the benefit of a new school but I'm no expert.

Finally, I don't think the disadvantages should be overlooked by the council or residents due to the 'sweeteners' which are being put on the table by the company. Don't get me wrong, they would be very beneficial to groups in the community but how hard would it be for the council to do it themselves?

Please feel free to shoot my instincts down in flames - I am not nearly as informed as the rest of you.

Tom   :)
As the residents of Georges Wood Road, Mymms Drive and Brookmans Avenue have to meet the cost of maintaining their roads, Im sure on this point alone, this would bring a fair proportion of opposition to any plans that would increases traffic.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mannyd on March 19, 2013, 08:18:02 pm

Finally, I don't think the disadvantages should be overlooked by the council or residents due to the 'sweeteners' which are being put on the table by the company. Don't get me wrong, they would be very beneficial to groups in the community but how hard would it be for the council to do it themselves?



Lets be honest, if it were a choice of letting the development go through, or the residents funding a new scout hut, I know where I'd be sending a donation
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 19, 2013, 08:58:57 pm
Is the scout hut that bad??  Can they not use the Willowbrook buildings?? 

Have never been in, so don't know anything about it really.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mannyd on March 19, 2013, 09:32:35 pm
It is.... basic! It's very cold, very noisy, and does seem to require a fair bit of maintenance (it's a wooden building). I'm sure John will tell you more - I'm just seeing it from a parent cub/beaver perspective!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 20, 2013, 08:07:36 am
Why can't they use the Willowbrook buildings or the Community Centre in Welham Green?  Most of these types of groups Brownies, cubs etc are run from church halls, I assume this has been explored?

As much as I understand the need for it, I don't want a new housing estate as pay off for the scouts having a nice new hut!! 

Can lottery funding not be explored for this purpose??
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 20, 2013, 08:12:40 am
How about the scouts using the school??, te have loads of space for outdoor activities??
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 20, 2013, 08:18:38 am
I wonder what would happen to the scout hut land if vacated?  Anyone knows who owns it and what it's worth at current market prices?  Also, is it green belt or a patch of land that can be developed?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 20, 2013, 12:33:37 pm
The hut isn't too bad at all, although there are some aspects which could be improved. For me the advantage would be having woods and open land next to the hut, available for use during winter meetings when the weather is good.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 20, 2013, 01:03:35 pm
I wouldn't concentrate too hard on the scout hut. It's nice to have, but only as an additional benefit. The school is of more importance. Of course these were added to sweeten the deal, but is that a bad thing?

With the regards to losing Green Belt: This is important, but each development and each loss of Green Belt must be looked at on its merits. As Green Belt is lost what remains becomes more important and the barrier to develop on it becomes higher. I don't feel it's reasonable to block this development because of what the next development may or may not be.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 20, 2013, 01:38:30 pm


With the regards to losing Green Belt: This is important, but each development and each loss of Green Belt must be looked at on its merits. As Green Belt is lost what remains becomes more important and the barrier to develop on it becomes higher.

There should be no development in the Green Belt, period. It was created for a reason and the criteria has not changed, if anything with an increasing population it is more important now than ever before.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 20, 2013, 02:09:02 pm
As Green Belt is lost what remains becomes more important and the barrier to develop on it becomes higher.

John, are you able to cite any evidence that supports this?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bobb on March 20, 2013, 04:05:30 pm
The new school is not needed!

It is currently undersubscribed by 'local' children so capacity is not the issue. The governors have not prior to this requested or mentioned any major developments or requirements for urgent, massive modernisation to my knowledge so it can be assumed to be perfectly serviceable as is.

The school has been included purely to try and get approval to build on green belt land where there are no special circumstances. The current school site could be re-developed as it is large enough - the only reason to move it is to justify new houses on green belt. I think "As Green Belt is lost what remains becomes more important and the barrier to develop on it becomes higher" is clutching at straws personally.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on March 20, 2013, 07:07:47 pm
As Green Belt is lost what remains becomes more important and the barrier to develop on it becomes higher.

John, are you able to cite any evidence that supports this?

It is patently obvious that if a limited resource has any value then the unit value of the remaining resource will increase as the resource is diminished. It is basic economics, supply and demand, but if your question is genuine I can supply plenty of publications on the matter.

There is forecast of a national shortage of primary school Warning over acute shortage of primary school places (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9138541/Warning-over-acute-shortage-of-primary-school-places.html). I do not know how the local area is affected by this.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not saying I think this development should go ahead, I just feel it should not be dismissed without proper consideration.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on March 20, 2013, 08:24:32 pm
There might be a national shortage of primary schools, but there is not a need for a bigger one in the village.  Let them build a bigger one in an area that NEEDS one.  Only a few years ago they closed Sunnybank school in Potters Bar, if the need in our local area is so desperate why was that school closed.

Also St Mary's is very unsubcribed, with a number of classes only having 12-15 children in, therefore I do not believe there is a need for a bigger school in BP. 

Back to the green belt issue, once again, I am sure if you had purchased a house that backed onto Green belt, that you were told was safe and is now under threat of having houses, school, scout hut etc built on - I am sure you would be making more of a fuss.

Again, also how is all this extra traffic going to get in and out the village.

The whole plan is madness and the more people I talk to, the more I realise what a fight Mr Perkins will have on his hands if he thinks this is gong ahead.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on March 22, 2013, 09:35:37 am
As Green Belt is lost what remains becomes more important and the barrier to develop on it becomes higher.

John, are you able to cite any evidence that supports this?

It is patently obvious that if a limited resource has any value then the unit value of the remaining resource will increase as the resource is diminished. It is basic economics, supply and demand, but if your question is genuine I can supply plenty of publications on the matter.

My question is genuine.  Do you have evidence of planning applications on the greenbelt being refused on the basis that preceding developments have already eaten into it?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tubbs on March 29, 2013, 09:00:34 pm
Question to Mark Drinkwater: How did you obtain the Aurora document (your post 4th March)? I've tried to find it on the web, without success. Knowing how you got it would be helpfull.

Aurora's document appears to at least be a bit of 'kite flying' to would-be investors; why else would they describe how good BPark is - we already know that!

Of course, what they don't say is how much their scheme would spoil it: how it would displace BPark children from getting a place at Chancellor's (because of the same 'straight line priority' rule that caused so much anger / pain 6 / 7 years ago) so they'd have to go elsewhere(Mount Grace, Onslow St Audrey's);and how those journeys would break Herts Councils own sustainable rules; and how the competing traffic flows through the village (to BPark in one direction, to Chancellors in the other) will increase danger to kids and likley require Bradmore Way to be turned into a tree-less dual carriageway to a roundabout where the green is now; and that all the above (and the priperty oversupply) will cause house prices to drop particulalrly at the village end. (all their new houses will be sold by then, so hey! Ho!).

Ps: Take a look at an accounts web to get a view of Aurora's financial standing.. And ask people in the Brookmans Way about their experiences..
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: tyrrell on March 29, 2013, 10:01:17 pm
I wonder if Mr Pickles has a say in any of this?  :-\  (Eric Pickles Secretary of State)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tubbs on March 29, 2013, 10:24:24 pm
We are brought to the subject of Housing boith of itself and via related issues discussied in this Forum: see Immigration and 'Will Brookmans Park School be moved to make way for houses?' (if I remember correctly).

I notice how, in te 'core stragegy' documents, and the former 'East of England Plan' the word 'Sustainable development' appears time and again. One wou,d reasonably believe that 'sustainability' is a word related to environmet issues. But no! In the aforementioned documents, it's plain that it's being hijacked to whatever government wants it to mean to justify short term economic decisons. So you'll probably get housing developments because they have been deemed to be... sustainable! (But you might have to walk a lot futher to get to the trees...).
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: green on March 29, 2013, 10:45:54 pm
I notice how, in te 'core stragegy' documents, and the former 'East of England Plan' the word 'Sustainable development' appears time and again. One wou,d reasonably believe that 'sustainability' is a word related to environmet issues. But no! In the aforementioned documents, it's plain that it's being hijacked to whatever government wants it to mean to justify short term economic decisons.

That's quite true - according to the National Planning Policy Framework (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf) the government doesn't use the phrase 'sustainable development' only to refer to environmental considerations, but also economic (strong, responsive and competitive economy) and social (strong, vibrant and healthy communities) dimensions.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 30, 2013, 08:52:06 am

 And ask people in the Brookmans Way about their experiences..

 ???
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tubbs on March 30, 2013, 11:16:56 am
Correction and to clarify: Ask people in Peplins Way / Bradmore Way about recent experiences with a property developer. Not pleaseant..
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on March 30, 2013, 03:59:01 pm
I agree with the person who said they thought that the proposals were  a spot of kite flying. That's my opinion too. It's blatant opportunism and, lets' face it, I don't think that many of us are fooled by the 'philanthropy' inherent in the new school and scout hut offer. (And why should the scouts take precedence anyway; hey, we live in a multicultural society so what about a mosque instead?) For all we know, the new school may well be another ill-conceived PFI and we'll all end up paying five times what it should really have cost the educational authority - or is it really a gift in which case I'd be looking deep into the horse's mouth, but I digress.

I think it's clear that the nature of what Brookmans Park offers to children and their families (and what brought my family here) is under some threat. One thing that might help is to apply to WelHat to ask for at least some of the area to be considered for scheduling as a conservation area.  There will be some opposition of course but it pains me to have witnessed so many original 1920s and 1930s properties in the area being pulled down to be replaced by out of proportion, grotesque, Chav Palaces.

Of course I blame our government who patently lack any economic imagination or in fact the slightest comprehension of macro-economic theory and the potential damage that yet another property boom/bust will do to this country's already very fragile economy.

Brookman's Park isn't twinned is it? May I propose Nicosia?



   
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tubbs on March 30, 2013, 04:43:23 pm
Do the Planners care, are they doing there job? Are the appointed Councillors doing there's?



Edited to remove image of a private residence for privacy reasons.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on March 30, 2013, 05:20:24 pm
I do not like the property at all but Brookmans Avenue is a road where afaik no two houses are the same.

So whilst I don't like it, I wouldn't want to see a situation where planninmg rules were so limiting you could only build a narrow range of styles - otherwise the road would look like so many thousands of roads where all the houses look much the same.

All the house in the picture needs IMO is to be painted cream or another warmer colour, some more natural coloured paving and some plants / grass / greenery and it would look OK. But that's just my opinion and I'm sure the owner likes it just the way it is.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 30, 2013, 05:26:22 pm
Do the Planners care, are they doing there job? Are the appointed Councillors doing there's?

Hi Tubbs,

I have removed the image of the private residence you attached to your post for privacy reasons. I don't think it's fair to post pictures of the homes of people living in the community as examples of inappropriate design.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on March 30, 2013, 06:01:15 pm
Sorry about the spelling. I can spell 'onest I kan.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on March 30, 2013, 06:12:46 pm
Quote
Local planning authorities are obliged to designate as conservation areas any parts of their own area that are of special  architectural or historic interest, the character and appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance

Without wishing to pour cold water on your plans, I am not sure how you would link Bradmore Way to the above description of a conservation area?

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tubbs on March 30, 2013, 08:15:46 pm
Whilst I have to respect Dave's decison as Moderator (in pulling my photo of the offending (offensive) building in Brookmans Avenue), I focused on this building for several reasons.

First: I find it an eysore out of keeping with both the road and the area. Other posts have rightly said that there is variety in Brookmans Avenue. And a good thing there is. But the building in question, in my view, goes way beyond any reasonable 'variety' or 'architectural style'. I's just a monstrosity.

Second: It's built out to the very limits of what is allowed in the building regulations fro proximity, view, affect on neighbours.

Third: 1&2 above suggestes that whoever commissioend this building had or has no thought for the community. it's as if he is saying: screw you', I don't care, this is what I want.'

Fourth: A straw pole suggests that many local people, if asked, share the views above (or  something very similar).

Fifth: At the present time it is still under construction, it appears. The point of the Planning System is surely that the building designs are kept controlled to suit local circumstances and well being; architectural critiscm is legitimate. So at what point does critiscm (which can be positive and negative) by members of the affected community become 'off limits'?.

Sixth: It does seem that the planning authorities, and those elecetd by the community to represent them and guard their interest, have not done theior job on this occasion. Do we sit in silence? What happens next time?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on March 30, 2013, 09:05:03 pm
I guess that everyone has access to the applications received by WH council and with plans being available online it's easy to do so (well at least compared to having to take a trip to the town hall)

Out of interest, does anyone know if any objections were made to buildings in Brookmans Avenue ? (Not wanting to highlight any particular building) If no objections were received then we have to assume that the people living nearby did not have any issues.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: tyrrell on March 30, 2013, 10:00:55 pm
The Parish Council objected saying that the development would be totally incongruous and out of keeping with the character of Brookmans Ave, incidentally the house in front has a "sale agreed" sign board and the house at the rear on Moffats Lane has a "for sale" sign board up. Guess you can draw your own conclusions. WH Council don't make it easy to object as they post your letter on the internet for the public to see. People in the village do have issues, it's just that there's no easy way to address them.   
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 30, 2013, 11:24:51 pm
Someone I know well has the property behind the one in question, and yes, it's up for sale, but at least there's some conifer screening at the back.

People do have issues - plenty of them - but the Welhat practice of putting letters of objection (with names and addresses) on the internet for all to see, means that people in more vulnerable positions are wary of possible reprisals.

I cannot understand why anybody would buy an attractive property in a lovely area, only to tear it down and put up something at complete odds with everything else around. It's a form of vandalism. Money obviously doesn't confer good taste!

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 31, 2013, 08:02:22 am
I have split a number of recent posts from the Brookmans Park school development thread because they seemed to be focussing more on a number of single, new developments, their appropiateness to Brookmans Park, the march of the developers, fear of objecting, and the changing character of the village. 

The thread about a proposal to build on the site of Brookmans Park school can be found here.

http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/topic,4055.msg32568.html#msg32568 (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/topic,4055.msg32568.html#msg32568)


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 31, 2013, 09:20:19 am
The whole issue of appropriate development on an individual basis in North Mymms is one that the North Mymms Parish Plan Implementation Group would like to take further. We are currently looking for more committee members to help with certain projects, and this issue is one that we would like to take forward, but need more willing volunteers.

There are the 'big' issues, such as - should Welhat allow the building of a house completely out of character with all of those around it - and smaller issues such as - should there be a requirement to apply for planning permission if it is intended to grub up a front garden to replace it entirely with driveway.

When we were talking to North Mymms residents in the research stage of the Parish Plan, appropriate development, ie keeping the 'character' of the area, was felt to be very important, but we need the manpower to be able to engage more with planning departments.

The NMPPIG is supported by the Parish Council, but is not part of it and is completely apolitical. If you haven't yet seen the published Parish Plan, it's on the front page of this website at the top left-hand corner.

Our next meeting is in April.





Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 31, 2013, 09:29:28 am
Hi Mermaid, thanks for that.  I am embedding The Parish Plan you refer to here for ease of access.

http://www.brookmans.com/plan/final.pdf
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 31, 2013, 10:42:52 am
The Parish Council objected saying that the development would be totally incongruous and out of keeping with the character of Brookmans Ave, incidentally the house in front has a "sale agreed" sign board and the house at the rear on Moffats Lane has a "for sale" sign board up. Guess you can draw your own conclusions. WH Council don't make it easy to object as they post your letter on the internet for the public to see. People in the village do have issues, it's just that there's no easy way to address them.   

The way I understand it after watching 'The Planners' - the extremely interesting and I would highly recommend current series on BBC 2 is.....

1. Usually only immediate or very near neighbours are actually notified of a planning
 application although anyone can object  (All current and decided applications are displayed weekly  on the Planning Dept website)

2. If more than 5 objections are received the final decision will automatically be passed to a                                       
planning committee comprised of locally elected councillors who have the power to overturn any
    planning department recommendation. These people are supposed to represent us!!

3. Interestingly one of the planners said when interviewed that it is not the quantity but the quality
of objections that mattered, an  example being one objection based on pertinent current planning  legislation is of more value than 500 objections based on emotion alone.

It appears to me that local authorities are under such enormous pressure from central Government
to meet targets that any application that conforms to planning 'rules' will be passed irrespective
of how many people object  - including the Parish Council and Green Belt Society.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 31, 2013, 10:59:42 am
and smaller issues such as - should there be a requirement to apply for planning permission if it is intended to grub up a front garden to replace it entirely with driveway.





If the driveway requires a crossover into the road then I believe planning permission is required
along with the requisite amount of vision splay.
I was under the impression that any driveway constructed currently should now be with permeable
materials only to avoid water run off, yet I am frequently being surprised to see impermeable materials such as block paviours and tarmac still being used ???
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 31, 2013, 11:07:48 am
Quote
Local planning authorities are obliged to designate as conservation areas any parts of their own area that are of special  architectural or historic interest, the character and appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance

Without wishing to pour cold water on your plans, I am not sure how you would link Bradmore Way to the above description of a conservation area?

James

I have always felt that Water End would be a good candidate for a conservation area because it
such a relatively unchanged small hamlet of approx 30 dwellings - 5 of which are Grade II listed
and is worthy as preserving as such.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: larrylamb on March 31, 2013, 11:53:55 am
I am staggered that this thread has been allowed to continue, It is obvious which property is being discussed, even after the photograph was removed, this has become personal.

Due process has obviously been adhered to, permission was granted.

Do you think the owners of the house would approve of their house being discussed openly on a public forum?

The house is modern and yes it does stand out from the rest, so do a lot of houses when they are new, let the owners enjoy their property peacefully as you do yours.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: larrylamb on March 31, 2013, 01:01:56 pm
and smaller issues such as - should there be a requirement to apply for planning permission if it is intended to grub up a front garden to replace it entirely with driveway.





If the driveway requires a crossover into the road then I believe planning permission is required
along with the requisite amount of vision splay.
I was under the impression that any driveway constructed currently should now be with permeable
materials only to avoid water run off, yet I am frequently being surprised to see impermeable materials such as block paviours and tarmac still being used ???
Block paviour drives are permeable, the blocks are designed so water runs between each block through the sand into the aggregate sub base.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 31, 2013, 01:12:10 pm
I have always felt that Water End would be a good candidate for a conservation area because it
such a relatively unchanged small hamlet of approx 30 dwellings - 5 of which are Grade II listed
and is worthy as preserving as such.

That's a very good idea, would you like to come along to our meeting and propose it?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 31, 2013, 01:28:48 pm
I am staggered that this thread has been allowed to continue, It is obvious which property is being discussed, even after the photograph was removed, this has become personal.

This discussion is not about a particular property; it's about the planning process.  A photograph was removed within minutes of it being uploaded to protect the privacy of one property owner. No addresses of properties and no names have been published. Planning is a valid local concern.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 31, 2013, 04:53:10 pm
I have always felt that Water End would be a good candidate for a conservation area because it
such a relatively unchanged small hamlet of approx 30 dwellings - 5 of which are Grade II listed
and is worthy as preserving as such.

That's a very good idea, would you like to come along to our meeting and propose it?

I would love to, when and where is the meeting in April? and what is involved in proposing?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 31, 2013, 09:01:03 pm
Hi epiphany, and we would love to see you  :)

The next meeting is on Wednesday 24th April at 7.30pm and I can let you know the venue nearer the time. There is no 'formal' process to propose something, you just join in the meeting and have your say, it's all very friendly.

Our Chair is Sheila King, we usually have a representative from the Parish Council attending, and our committee members are a mix of those who represent organisations like the 3 North Mymms Churches, the Scouts, North Mymms Youth Group, Gobions Woodland Trust, the WI, the History Society etc etc, and other people who come along just because they're interested in doing something for their community.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 01, 2013, 08:22:29 am
It seems that a few of the respondents on this thread know Mr Perkins, could they please encourage him to join this thread and be straight with the community about his plans and what stage they are at.

Also Mr Shapps - still nothing from you!!!!!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Tubbs on April 01, 2013, 11:17:54 am
'Aurora's document appears to at least be a bit of 'kite flying' to would-be investors'.

All the public responses to the Welyn Hatfield Council's Core Strategy consultation are on line. A necssarily quick look through the list shows that lots of individuals and organisations - private and public - responded. But I never noticed one from Aurora, or Mr Perkins as its owner; or one from the golf club - maybe I missed them. So it does appear that rather than put its proposals in the public domain for early scrutiny, Aurora circulated its prposals to a select few.

Can someone tell  me - does the Brookmans Park Primary head teacher and the governors have the authority to discuss the 'new school' with a property develoer. Herts Council owns the school, not them. Perhaps they misunderstood. Any one from the school like to comment?

And shame on you Whites estates and the golf club.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on April 01, 2013, 06:38:06 pm
Water End - capital idea! But how about our green and pleasant litle Green with all its convenient (sustainable, carbon neutral, eco-friendly, local) shops and the flats above, complete with orginal sales office (now Fine & Country)? The sales office alone ought to be grade 2 listed at the VERY least.

Surely to goodness the green is worth preserving? Before it's replaced with a roundabout. Your choice. OUR choice.

Letchworth we may not be (and >20 years or so behind), but what remains of our small oasis needs a bit of protection - currently it appears to enjoy very little.

The date's in my diary...Perhaps Green Fox would like to pop along if he's not too busy?



Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 01, 2013, 07:16:16 pm
Hi Chungdokwan, we would be pleased to see you too and I'm hoping that Tubbs could also join us.

Should be an interesting meeting  :D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 01, 2013, 08:05:48 pm
Can anyone come?? 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 01, 2013, 08:39:25 pm
Yes, anyone who would like to contribute to their local community in North Mymms is very welcome indeed  :)

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: tyrrell on April 01, 2013, 09:58:52 pm
Tubbs - My understanding is that the Governing Body of Brookmans Park Primary School owns the school and not Herts County Council, so effectively the head teacher and governors are at liberty to talk to who they want to including Mr Perkins. Typically in this kind of set up any sale of the school would require the consent of the Secretary of State.

So as Saffie rightly says our local MP should get involved because inevitably it is likely to get political. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 02, 2013, 08:32:29 am
Please let me know details, my husband or I will come.

Thanks  :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: larrylamb on April 02, 2013, 08:52:57 am
Hi epiphany, and we would love to see you  :)

The next meeting is on Wednesday 24th April at 7.30pm and I can let you know the venue nearer the time. There is no 'formal' process to propose something, you just join in the meeting and have your say, it's all very friendly.

Our Chair is Sheila King, we usually have a representative from the Parish Council attending, and our committee members are a mix of those who represent organisations like the 3 North Mymms Churches, the Scouts, North Mymms Youth Group, Gobions Woodland Trust, the WI, the History Society etc etc, and other people who come along just because they're interested in doing something for their community.
How many would you be expecting to attend?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 02, 2013, 06:11:57 pm
How many would you be expecting to attend?

The numbers are fluid. We have a core committee of about 15, others who help with various projects from time to time, and sometimes guests - eg recently we've seen members of the Welham Green Residents Association and also North Mymms Social Club.

As long as we know in advance who is coming (because if a local organisation is kindly hosting the meeting, we need security passes), anyone who wants to contribute is welcome.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on April 02, 2013, 07:05:27 pm
Sounds extremely dubious to me so I will check.

Meanwhile...

My gut feeling is that UK plc 'owns' public (in a non-private - public school, non-Eton - sense) schools and that the management of them is delegated, via the secretary of state for education, to local authorities. The headmaster is to all intents and purposes a sort of civil servant chief executive and the governors are generally but possibly not exclusively non-executive directors (school teachers may be seconded to such positions I understand and cleary the head teacher will be). Surely school governors are not shareholders in the school? As a taxpayer and local resident I am nonplussed that such a 'constituted' body (aka the governors) can enter into so far informal discussions with a third party private company regarding a - again, so far - tentative planning 'application' for a new school (and associated x2 housing estates) without proper local public consultation.

Is there a lawyer out there? If there is, care to provide a professional opinion on this?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on April 02, 2013, 07:16:24 pm
Just a thought.

Might there possibly be a restrictive covenant(1) on the school premises and associated playing fields? That might well require an Act of Parliament to overturn.

(1) A provision in a deed limiting the use of the property and prohibiting certain uses.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on April 02, 2013, 08:54:25 pm
BP is a Foundation school which were set up to replace grant maintained schools.  It is state-funded however the governing body has more freedom than community schools in the running of the school.

Some foundation schools, also called trust schools, have a foundation or trust that owns the land and buildings. Otherwise the land and buildings are owned by the governing body. 

I have no idea what the position is with BP or who make up the governing body as there is no information on the school site.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on April 02, 2013, 09:17:40 pm
Question to Mark Drinkwater: How did you obtain the Aurora document (your post 4th March)? I've tried to find it on the web, without success. Knowing how you got it would be helpfull.

A friend gave it to me as I have a scanner. How they got it, I don't know.

There is a rumour that another version of this document exists with a much higher density of development indicated (300 dwellings).
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on April 04, 2013, 05:20:24 pm
Good grief! That really is opportunistic thinking. So that's why the new school's needed, because as sure as eggs is eggs there's little requirement for a new one without more houses. It's a sort of inverse Catch 22.

There's far too much secrecy and subterfuge for my liking. I'm sure that we can reply on some of the UK's democratic ideals and processes to redress the balance?

The next general election is just over two years away, if anyone wanted a reminder.

No pressure...





 

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on April 07, 2013, 09:21:31 pm
Preserving what we have in Brookmans Park before it's too late.

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/local/conservation-areas (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/local/conservation-areas)

Green or new roundabout, tree lined roads or tree less ones with yellow lines?  It's a not a panacea, but may well be  a step in the right direction.

Not In My Brookmans Park - Yeah...*and proud of it by the way.

NIMB-Y
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on April 09, 2013, 09:18:44 pm
Quote
A friend gave it to me as I have a scanner. How they got it, I don't know.

There is a rumour that another version of this document exists with a much higher density of development indicated (300 dwellings).

It would be nice to see some evidence if you're going to speculate.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 10, 2013, 10:34:23 am
Hi RuralFox,

Welcome to the forum.  I have removed a few lines from your second post because they questioned the integrity of another forum member.  I have sent you a personal message to explain.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on April 10, 2013, 11:44:24 pm

You can read over 1000 (!) other proposals, comments etc to this consultation on the Welwyn Hatfield website at

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs?tab=list (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/local_plan_consultation_november_2012/ecs?tab=list)

I have had a look at some of the comments to the proposals, interestingly there are detailed proposals and comments from Alan Perkins where even in 2009 he was supporting development in BP and has provided a plan identifying areas for development.  More interesting though at that time 2009 he was adamant in declaring the following;

Quote
"My interest is mainly in the area of Brookmans Park, where I grew up and maintain many family and community ties.  However, many of my comments apply equally across the whole Borough.

"For the sake of clarity, I have no interest whatsoever in any of the sites that I have identified for potential development and my comments are genuinely intended to assist the provision of new housing, whilst causing the least harm."

The document containing the transcript which is available to the public is attached.

http://www.brookmans.com/pdfs/alanperkins%20scan%20csio6645.pdf

Note: Edited to embed the pdf.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 11, 2013, 07:27:36 am
Hi Peeplins, I embedded the pdf in your post above.  I found the map associated with the document interesting with six sites numbered.  Two pages from the document below.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on April 11, 2013, 08:55:56 am
Thank you for posting Peeplins - very interesting reading, particularly the comment "minor traffic improvements through the village green".
I notice that he fails to mention that he is actually a property developer who stands to make a substantial personal financial gain from any of these proposals.
In addition I notice that he seems to actually be opposed to any development on RVC land, I wonder
why hmmmm?
Alan Perkins appears in this document to be some sort of planning authority, I wonder what his
expertise and qualifications really are?. Are his opinions any more valid than yours or mine?
Some of his proposal sites appear to be purely opportunistic such as Bell Bar or poorly
researched such as Warrengate Road (flood plain).
In particular he appears to have shot himself in the foot with the statement "Unless the QEII hospital is saved and expanded, the provision of new homes in the borough should not proceed
at all.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on April 11, 2013, 09:01:59 pm
David, thanks for doing that.  Yes the map was interesting and oddly familiar especially site marked as No1!!

Epiphany ~ it's worth mentioning that more recent commentary was submitted contained within 2 documents of at least 30 pages and min 5Mb each, so too large to share on here.  However it is relatively simple to click on the name of any individual which will then bring up all proposals / comments submitted by any named individual.  Admittedly I have not read them all in detail (what can I say it was late and I was tired!) however it is apparent he attends such meetings and takes meticulous notes.

I'm curious what the core strategy for the rest of Hertfordshire is especially around the Ridge area.  I understand there is plenty of land to build on over there.  Wonder how one would go about suggesting suitable areas for development  ;D

As an aside on leaving for work the other morning 7.30 there were 3 cement lorries making delivery to the corner plot in Peplins.  The shape of things to come?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Rosy545 on April 14, 2013, 09:08:33 am
The corner plot you mentioned is another Mr Perkins development, he brought the corner house, split the garden up got permission for a 4 bed detached house and managed to get the Restrictive covenent lifted, despite huge opposition, so I would be wary of thinking any of his plans were 'pie in the sky'.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 20, 2013, 10:54:47 am
Our North Mymms Parish Plan Implementation Group is meeting this coming Wednesday 24th April.

Those who have expressed an interest via this thread have been sent a PM with an invitation. Please reply ASAP so that we can finalise the agenda.

Our Chair Sheila King has written an article which has appeared on page 5 in the latest Chancellor's Community Newsletter. If this is of interest to anyone, please ring Sheila on the number given, or PM me.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 20, 2013, 11:05:03 am
Anyone got any further info on this.

I have just heard from a local estate agent that it seems likely the school will move but not as many houses will get through!

Fed up of listening to rumours, how do we find out for sure what has been proposed etc.

Still no answers from A Perkins or Mr Shapps on anything!!!  Your silence speaks volumes!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on April 20, 2013, 07:21:54 pm
No planning application has been made as yet.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on April 24, 2013, 09:40:43 pm
I see in the Welwyn Hatfield Times today that there were 96 applicants for just 45 places at Brookmans Park Primary School.  51 families were therefore disappointed.

The developer is offering a new primary school with additional capacity, a new scout hut, a care home for the elderly and 90 new family homes.  The community benefits are therefore significant, so why shouldn’t new families have the opportunity to move into the village?

I also see in the “Letters” to the Welwyn Hatfield Times that Councillor John Dean says it will be necessary to “revisit” areas for new housing development including the villages.

I am also told that the Vet College is (very quietly) proposing 300 new homes on land to the southwest of Bluebridge Road, without any apparent community benefits, so if there must be new development in Brookmans Park let's make sure the village gains something for the community.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bedlam on April 24, 2013, 10:37:07 pm
It's interesting to see that, generally speaking, the main PC/Lefty protagonists on here and elsewhere that welcome wholesale immigration are against the building of homes locally to accomodate them. Think about it!  ???
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on April 24, 2013, 11:08:24 pm
I see in the Welwyn Hatfield Times today that there were 96 applicants for just 45 places at Brookmans Park Primary School.  51 families were therefore disappointed.

Where do the 96 live are they all from Brookmans Park?  I know the school is hugely popular with residents from other villages and PB
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on April 25, 2013, 02:18:51 am
It's interesting to see that, generally speaking, the main PC/Lefty protagonists on here and elsewhere that welcome wholesale immigration are against the building of homes locally to accomodate them. Think about it!  ???

Ah, the "PC/Lefty protagonists" again.  And who are these people who "welcome wholesale immigration"? This sweeping generalisation might be a point worth discussing if there were a shred of evidence to support it.

 ::)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 25, 2013, 08:19:16 am
The last couple of years intake has kids coming in from Hatfield, WGC, and even North London.  Are there not schools in that area they can attend.  I think if you look at those figures closely you will see that the vast majority of those applying are coming from much further afield.

Why should we ruin our nice little village with new housing developments etc, for SOME people who are happy to live further in other areas but want to come to our school and are just making the figures seem that they are from the local area, when they aren't.

They are all just trying their luck.  If its a low birth year, as my child's was then children who never expected to get those places do, therefore, more cars into the villages and round those three small already congested roads. 

Maybe we should install a dual carriageway down Bradmore Way and let as many children in as want to come!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mannyd on April 25, 2013, 09:09:57 am
Having grown up on a big housing estate - I count myself as very fortunate to live somewhere rural/village.
My children know the shopkeepers, and most people in our road. The majority of their school friends live in the village or a short drive away (Welham Green etc). And they can be in the "countryside" or woods for walking within 5 minutes (on foot, not by car!).

Brookmans Park is VERY lucky to have all this. BUT we pay the price in terms of high costs of housing (comparable houses in Potters Bar are much cheaper - because we have a village-premium!)

I don't think it's true to say that residents are ANTI housing - BUT most live here because of the village "lifestyle". By building (in percentage terms) a big housing development, aren't we taking that away? And that's before we even start on the Green Belt issues.

Surely it is better to build somewhere like Potters Bar? Maybe then they could have a new/upgraded school, then their children would be able to walk to school rather than beeing driven to Brookmans Park?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on April 25, 2013, 08:16:07 pm
The admissions policy of Brookmans Park Primary School is on their website.

http://www.brookmanspark.herts.sch.uk/files/files/rec-admiss-13-14.pdf (http://www.brookmanspark.herts.sch.uk/files/files/rec-admiss-13-14.pdf)

The website states there are 45 places available each year and children are selected with geographical priority from the area of:

 “Great North Road, Kentish Lane, Grubbs Lane, Woodside Lane, Wild Hill Road, Great North Road, Bell Lane, Bulls Lane, Station Road, Bradmore Lane, Warrengate Road, Swanland Road, Hawkshead Lane and Swanley Bar Lane. (A definitive map showing the area covered is available from the School Office)”.

The catchment area, for the first 45 places, therefore has a radius of approximately 1.5 miles from the school.

For the year commencing September 2013, Brookmans Park Primary School received 96 applications for 45 places.

Quote
The last couple of years intake has kids coming in from Hatfield, WGC, and even North London.  Are there not schools in that area they can attend.

I doubt very much that Brookmans Park Primary School has any children from North London unless there are very special circumstances!

The Welwyn Hatfield Times has published the places available at each primary school in the borough together with the number of applications.  There are some notable examples such as Birchwood Avenue, Hatfield 107 applications for 30 places, Countess Anne, Hatfield 123 applications for 30 places, Green Lanes, Hatfield 200 applications for 30 places and Howe Dell Hatfield 197 applications for 60 places (to name but a few).  So if kids are coming to Brookmans Park Primary School from Hatfield it’s probably not through their choice.

There is clearly a need for increased capacity and new primary schools in the borough, which would certainly include Brookmans Park if the Vet College build 300 new homes on their site in Bluebridge Road.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mannyd on April 25, 2013, 08:29:10 pm
That catchment area you state is only where they first look to fill the places - you can apply wherever you live. In my children's classes there are children from Potters Bar, Welham Green, Welwyn Garden. So, priority goes to village children - the remainder are filled with others. Judging by the number of cars coming from Welham Green and Potters Bar directions in the morning, I would say there's a fair % that don't live in the village
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on April 25, 2013, 08:46:37 pm
So, based on your logic, new family homes in Brookmans Park would be a good thing.  The school would then be full of local children who can walk to school.  Problem solved!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 25, 2013, 09:04:38 pm
Ruralfox or maybe you should change your name to Urbanfox as you seem happy to support unnecessary housing development on green belt land.

Anyway Mannyd and I both have children at the school so have first hand knowledge of where children come in from.  I think if you read back on this forum and look at posts from Mark Drinkwater you will see that some children in fact have come in from North London, and there are regular intakes from Hadley Wood, Potters Bar, Welham Green, Essendon, Hatfield and WGC.

I fail to understand why people think its ok to rip up precious green let land and fill it with ouses, there are many underused or derelict sites that would benefit from this development.  The old Sunnybank school site for example has been left standing since the children left about 4 years ago, why don't people look at that. 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on April 25, 2013, 09:13:15 pm
I fail to understand why people think its ok to rip up precious green let land and fill it with ouses, there are many underused or derelict sites that would benefit from this development.  The old Sunnybank school site for example has been left standing since the children left about 4 years ago, why don't people look at that.

Sunnybank School site is in the borough of Hertsmere, outside of Welwyn Hatfield. Welwyn Hatfield will be told to find a number of new housing sites within their borough which is what the core strategy document will be deciding. I am sure brownfield sites will be prioritised however the fact remains we have a growing population and an increased need for housing, particularly in the South East. If all the brownfield sites have been used there will be no choice but to take some land out of the greenbelt.

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on April 25, 2013, 09:28:48 pm
Having grown up on a big housing estate - I count myself as very fortunate to live somewhere rural/village.
My children know the shopkeepers, and most people in our road. The majority of their school friends live in the village or a short drive away (Welham Green etc). And they can be in the "countryside" or woods for walking within 5 minutes (on foot, not by car!).

Brookmans Park is VERY lucky to have all this. BUT we pay the price in terms of high costs of housing (comparable houses in Potters Bar are much cheaper - because we have a village-premium!)

I don't think it's true to say that residents are ANTI housing - BUT most live here because of the village "lifestyle". By building (in percentage terms) a big housing development, aren't we taking that away? And that's before we even start on the Green Belt issues.

Surely it is better to build somewhere like Potters Bar? Maybe then they could have a new/upgraded school, then their children would be able to walk to school rather than beeing driven to Brookmans Park?

Hear Hear!!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on April 25, 2013, 10:32:51 pm
Quote
Ruralfox or maybe you should change your name to Urbanfox as you seem happy to support unnecessary housing development on green belt land.

Saffie, I have simply stated facts and figures which are published by authorities and are publicly available.  Sorry if those facts and figures don’t suit your campaign.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on April 25, 2013, 11:20:32 pm
Facts & Figures should be understood in context. 

Applications for BP have dropped from peak of 111 in 2009. 

When looking at other nearby schools it is worth noting Cranbourne & Ladbrooke in Potters Bar, applications have increased over same period. 

More notably schools in Hatfield have seen year on year increases in applications:  For 2012, 1147 applications for 417 places!!

See attached figures
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 26, 2013, 06:52:24 am
'My campaign' merely involves saving our village, one of the main reasons that everyone would move to BP is that it remains a quiet, traditional village.  If we allow developers to move in and ruin that then we all may as well move to Barnet, Enfield, WGC etc.  As what makes BP so nice will be lost by more homes, more traffic etc. 

The main reason for containing this development is that if it is allowed then where will it stop!  We could end up finding ourselves joined up with Welham Green or Potters Bar by housing if we all just lie back and let it happen.

The RVC are already trying to develop on the opposite side to Mr P aswell.

Once again, I wonder how many of these people who are happy to support the development live round Bradmore, Peplins - I bet none of them.  Ask yourself how you would feel to look out and the once lovely rolling countryside you looked onto replaced by red bricks and a car park for the school.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 26, 2013, 07:25:16 am
The Developer's plans involve taking land out of Green Belt and he would have to prove special circumstances to justify that. Thankfully, we have a very active Green Belt Society and I would urge everyone to pay up their subs and get behind them.

Secondly, the RVC plans are a response to the Emerging Core Strategy, not a planning application. As I understand it they are hoping to be able to provide accommodation for students and perhaps some staff. But again, they have to demonstrate special circumstances to take land out of Green Belt. Although their consultants have recommended a particular site as being the best of the 3 or 4 they had to choose from, there is no guarantee that this will be the one to go through to application.

It's time for Brookmans Park residents to get involved if we don't want the developers to have it all their own way and ruin the village. I think it's time to set up a Residents' Association, as Welham Green has recently done so successfully. I'll start a separate thread on this subject.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on April 26, 2013, 07:55:43 am
Well you can count us in and I am sure if you advertise in the shops you will get many others as no-one I have spoken to want it to happen.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on April 26, 2013, 09:08:24 am


Welwyn Hatfield will be told to find a number of new housing sites within their borough which is what the core strategy document will be deciding. I am sure brownfield sites will be prioritised however the fact remains we have a growing population and an increased need for housing, particularly in the South East. If all the brownfield sites have been used there will be no choice but to take some land out of the greenbelt.

James


The Green Belt should not be built on - otherwise as each successive application is approved it will ultimately cease to exist.
The bigger picture needs to be looked at  - if all brownfield sites are used in Welwyn Hatfield (questionable) then brownfield sites elsewhere in the UK should be utilised.
The population distribution in the UK is not sustainable and needs to be addressed.
Having arbitary housing figures handed down from elswhere does not work - as clearly demonstrated recently by the East of England 10k debacle.
All obviously IMHO.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on April 26, 2013, 09:26:49 am


It's time for Brookmans Park residents to get involved if we don't want the developers to have it all their own way and ruin the village. I think it's time to set up a Residents' Association, as Welham Green has recently done so successfully. I'll start a separate thread on this subject.

There used to be a North Mymms Residents Association that finally demised in 2000 due to lack of
interest.

http://www.brookmans.com/news/april02/vnmra.shtml (http://www.brookmans.com/news/april02/vnmra.shtml)

In 2002 a thread was started by David Brewer re an online residents association.

Are the people of Brookmans Park more community minded today? I have my own thoughts on this!

Perhaps the combined threat of the proposed incinerator and building on the Green Belt might
be enough to galvanize a wider community spirit?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on April 26, 2013, 08:35:15 pm
A little bit of research on the Council’s website reveals a lot of information.  It seems that seventeen Green Belt sites around Brookmans Park were considered for new housing by the Council.

The only site taken forward by the Council to its next stage of assessment is the Vet College land to the southwest of Bluebridge Road (known as “Land East of Royal Veterinary College” - coloured orange on the Council's plan).  The Council assesses capacity for between 230 and 484 new homes on this site.

You can view all of this information in the Council’s Website:

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5987&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5987&p=0)

and

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0)

As Mr Bentall has said in several of his previous posts, there is no planning application at present for the land in Bradmore Way.

The real threat of development in the Green Belt seems to be on the Vet College land to the south of Brookmans Park.

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/file/2473281 (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/file/2473281)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: mannyd on April 26, 2013, 08:56:58 pm
I'm lost as to which bit of the Vet College Land we're referring to! Anyone care to enlighten someone that dropped Geography pre-O-levels?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on April 26, 2013, 09:43:00 pm
A little bit of research on the Council’s website reveals a lot of information.  It seems that seventeen Green Belt sites around Brookmans Park were considered for new housing by the Council.

The only site taken forward by the Council to its next stage of assessment is the Vet College land to the southwest of Bluebridge Road (known as “Land East of Royal Veterinary College” - coloured orange on the Council's plan).  The Council assesses capacity for between 230 and 484 new homes on this site.

You can view all of this information in the Council’s Website:

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5987&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5987&p=0)

and

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0)

As Mr Bentall has said in several of his previous posts, there is no planning application at present for the land in Bradmore Way.

The real threat of development in the Green Belt seems to be on the Vet College land to the south of Brookmans Park.

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/file/2473281 (http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/file/2473281)

This is not true and also misleading.

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5985&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5985&p=0)

The Bradmore Way site (Brp 12 on map) is clearly shown on this supporting document as being
suitable for the development of 190 homes because it is on open land. close to village centre and
local facilities and adjoining settlement. The only stumbling block being no evidence of landowner
interest in developing the site.

According to Aurora Properties Ltd proposal they can now formally confirm that the landowner is
willing and able to develop the site.

Therefore the Bradmore Way proposal is very much on the agenda.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 26, 2013, 10:04:21 pm
I'm lost as to which bit of the Vet College Land we're referring to! Anyone care to enlighten someone that dropped Geography pre-O-levels?

I believe it's the large field behind The Gardens.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on April 26, 2013, 11:48:59 pm
Dear Epiphany,

The information I posted today is based on research from the Council’s own website.  I have supplied links to the Council’s documents, which provide the Council’s own assessment of the Vet College land and its housing capacity.  I have no reason to doubt the honesty or integrity of the Council.

I apologise if you misunderstood my post.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on April 29, 2013, 03:57:26 pm
I see in the Welwyn Hatfield Times today that there were 96 applicants for just 45 places at Brookmans Park Primary School.  51 families were therefore disappointed.

Many of these applicants will not be local. It would be interesting to know how many families from the village / local area specified in the admissions criteria did not receive a place at the school.

I am also told that the Vet College is (very quietly) proposing 300 new homes on land to the southwest of Bluebridge Road, without any apparent community benefits, so if there must be new development in Brookmans Park let's make sure the village gains something for the community.

I imagine Aurora are saying the very same thing to all who will listen!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on April 30, 2013, 12:14:33 am
I see in the Welwyn Hatfield Times today that there were 96 applicants for just 45 places at Brookmans Park Primary School.  51 families were therefore disappointed.

Remember that parents were allowed to specify a choice of 4 schools - so 96 applicants named BP Primary as one of their 4 schools. I don't think there is a breakdown anywhere of what number named it as their first choice. I would expect, for example, all those who were thinking about applying to St Marys Welham Green as a first choice would probably have named BP as their second choice. It doesn't mean they were necessarily disappointed if they actually got in to a school higher up their preference list!

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on May 01, 2013, 07:18:59 pm
I smell a whiff of something rather unpleasant on the wind and it's not the pre-ghost of the New Barnfield Incinterator.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on May 02, 2013, 04:03:50 pm
Living next door to the field in question my neighbours and I are most at risk.
After discusing it with our MP he is of the firm, sincere opinion that it will not happen, Bradmore Way is just too narrow, even with the verges cut back. However, my antenna is telling me there is a looming problem, maybe not now, but it is heading our way  in the very foreseeable future.

Let me remind you all once again, We do not have a HOUSING PROBLEM, we have an uncontrollable POPULATION PROBLEM, and it aint going to stop or go away until our career politicians acknowledge it. 
Our wishes and needs appear to be of no concern when brave decisions are required on housing, and green belt. Look up Nick Boles’s view, despite being a liberal masquerading as a Tory moderniser (read liberaliser) who gives not a jot about the green belt, and he is supposed to be on our side, phew.

Having been around for some eighty summers none of the above will affect me. So, unless, by your votes you make it quite clear that our countryside is not for negotiation by any party our grandchildren will not be able to witness any greenery from Potters Bar to Welwyn.

None of the above needs any working out, do something now or Brookmans Park as you know and love will be gone in twenty/thirty odd years or less. (tempus fugit, take my word for it)

Grumpy Old Roy


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: RuralFox on May 03, 2013, 09:17:06 pm
I see that a letter in the Welwyn Hatfield Times this week from “Garden City Preservation Society” (Hatfield) http://savehatfieldgreenbelt.wordpress.com/ (http://savehatfieldgreenbelt.wordpress.com/) and “Panshanger People” (Welwyn Garden City)  http://panshangerpeople.org.uk/ (http://panshangerpeople.org.uk/) accuses Brookmans Park, Cuffley and Welham Green of “NIMBYism”.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 04, 2013, 08:00:30 am
I see that a letter in the Welwyn Hatfield Times this week ... [quote shortened] ... accuses Brookmans Park, Cuffley and Welham Green of “NIMBYism”.

I have not read the letter (I don't have the paper and couldn't find it online), but, personally, I am open to appropriate development that meets established needs. The changing demographic requires an open mind to these things. Unfortunately, labels such as nimby don't really move the debate forward. Rather, they tend to reduce discussion to sweeping generalisations and name calling - in much the same way the term PC is used when debates over social change reach a certain stage.

In none of my discussions with friends about development in the area have I detected so-called nimbyism. All recognise the area needs to evolve and seem open to the right solution that meets local needs.

By the way, here is the Wikipedia definition of a nimby.

Quote
NIMBY (an acronym for the phrase "Not In My Back Yard"), or Nimby, is a pejorative characterization of opposition by residents to a proposal for a new development because it is close to them, often with the connotation that such residents believe that the developments are needed in society but should be further away. Opposing residents themselves are sometimes called Nimbies.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on May 04, 2013, 12:22:05 pm
It is the word 'appropriate' and the phrase 'the right solution to meet local needs' which should be the overriding factors in any local development.

However, unfortunately, 'appropriate' to a developer often means 'that which will make the most profit'.

Again, 'local needs' means different things to residents and local government/developers. Residents might possibly be amenable to a few pretty starter homes for the younger generation, and additional housing (purpose-built bungalows with a little garden, not flats!) for the elderly who want to downsize but still stay in the village. Residents also want to keep the village atmosphere and not lose huge swathes of Green Belt. Government is looking for quick results in terms of large numbers of houses built within the next 5 years and 'Affordable Housing' (the new word for council housing), and developers want to cash in on land they hold in the Green Belt.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: MikeL on May 06, 2013, 12:10:23 pm
Let’s be honest, there’s only one reason that anyone wants land taken out of the green belt and that is for profit, and the potential profits to be made are huge. All this altruistic talk of benefits to the local community and balancing their needs etc. is just words to try and convince those in power to release the land.   Vast areas of green belt land around towns and villages have been bought by developers (and potential developers) on the hope that they will eventually be able to get the land taken out of the green belt. It’s really a form of gambling, but one where you don’t really stand to lose your stake money but stand to make an enormous profit. Almost like winning the lottery. The losers in this process are the existing residents of the area who see their quality of life reduced along with the value of their properties (albeit a relatively small amount, but multiply that by several thousand homes and it’s a very large sum).

Personally, what I would like to see is a system whereby the only way land can be taken out of the green belt is by it being compulsory purchased by the local council at agricultural/green belt rates. The land could then be sold on to developers at the market rate. I’m sure the pressure for the release of green belt land would drop enormously if there were no profits to be made by the land owners. When green belt land really had to be released then all the existing community would benefit and not one lucky individual.

Just my thoughts, for what they are worth!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: PS on May 06, 2013, 04:24:35 pm

Personally, what I would like to see is a system whereby the only way land can be taken out of the green belt is by it being compulsory purchased by the local council at agricultural/green belt rates. The land could then be sold on to developers at the market rate. I’m sure the pressure for the release of green belt land would drop enormously if there were no profits to be made by the land owners. When green belt land really had to be released then all the existing community would benefit and not one lucky individual.

I would welcome the idea too [albeit compulsory purchase would be a little over the top] - it would also allow the councils to generate 'revenues' and thereby reduce the ever increasing pressure to lower service levels for the local community. That way, they could provide better services due to extra income, whilst at the same time 'control' how much development really needs to be done. No pressure for developers to push the authorities to build rabbit hutches etc.

And of course would stop the developers from mass profiteering that only sees the profits go into their hands only, and not for the benefit of the community.

 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on May 08, 2013, 03:48:28 pm
And just in from your Golf Club, who may also see a buck in all this even though the course will then be almost completely surrounded by housing and might therefore be deemed a less attractive proposition.

Worth reminding the golf club that (a) the land in question is, I believe, designated Green Belt and is not just a 'green field', (b) 'there is widespread resistance to the idea of building on Green Belt land in North Mymms because residents want to preserve the ambience of the villages.' (extract from the Parish Plan) and (c) a whopping ninety seven percent (97%) of the respondents to the recent Parish Plan Questionnaire said that the GREEN BELT BOUNDARIES WERE IN THE RIGHT PLACE.

Last time I looked, we lived in a parliamentary democracy. 97% is quite a high proportion of, one may reasonably suspect, eligible voters.

As ye sow...

http://www.brookmans.com/pdfs/BP%20Golf%20Club%20and%20Land%20Development%20Proposals.pdf

Edited to embed document


 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 08, 2013, 04:48:42 pm
Have tweeted.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Paul Zukowskyj on May 12, 2013, 01:24:53 pm
I thought I'd try and help people understand what's been happening on this.

WelHat Borough Council are developing their 'Emerging Core Strategy' and have been for a number of years. One of the first steps of this is to ask landowners if they'd be willing to put their land forward for development. Lots said yes, hence the 1000+ responses.

After the 2012 consultation, which was the subject of the North Mymms Green Belt Society campaign, WHBC identified a range of 'zones' they're intending go forward as potential development areas to meet housing policy requirements for new housing. Due to the level of opposition, including from the NMGBS, none of the zones identified were within North Mymms Parish.

Assuming the ECS is adopted, any developer proposing development outside the zones would be very unlikely to be granted permission, so the proposal is effectively dead and buried.

If the ECS isn't adopted, WHBC would have a much more difficult time stopping development they considered inappropriate as a developer could use the national policy and lack of adopted local plan to claim very special circumstances.

I believe the NMGBS will be pushing for adoption of the ECS. At least two groups in Welwyn Hatfield will oppose adoption. These are a residents group from Hatfield Garden Village and users of Panshanger Aerodrome, both identified as in a development zone. There may be issues that would prevent the ECS being adopted, not least environmental requirements that may well not have been met by the strategy as it currently stands. The strategy will be scrutinised by a planning inspector at a hearing in public either later this year or early next.

I hope that provides some useful information for those with a concern either way on this.

If I don't respond to replies its because I'm still rather busy getting my head around being a County Councillor!

Regards,

Paul
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on May 13, 2013, 11:02:07 am
Dear all,

I have removed a few posts from last night and this morning commenting on the design of a property in the village because it seems unfair to allow a debate about a person's home in a public forum. This thread is now locked to avoid a repeat.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on May 17, 2013, 10:09:44 am
Thank you Paul. Very helpful. Very measured (will Brookmans Park School have to make way for new homes post).

Now that the intellectual lightweight Michael Gove has stepped in with his size 3s to lecture us all on social mobility, whatever it means, I think it's worth pointing out that:

1. There were 710,000 empty houses in ENGLAND alone in November 2012.

2. Of the 710,000, 259,000 houses had been empty for > 6 months.

3. Hertfordshire had >10,000 empty houses (2.18% of the total current housing stock of 471,000) last November.

4. Welhat alone has >800 empty homes.

So, why the urge to build on our green belt? Because it's much easier and more lucrative of course.

Can we afford the bursting of another property bubble and another banking crisis? Does our current government have anything else up its economic sleeve other than this ill-conceived lightweight policy? Will it stimulate our economy? My German colleagues think that our current knee-jerk economic policy based almost entirely as it is on stimulating the housing market is absolutely hilarious. I tried to laugh with them, really I did, but try as I might, I couldn't even raise a wry smile.

My final point is this. Build affordable houses where there are jobs available. Where is the industry in this area and therefore where are the jobs? In or very close to the cities and larger towns - that's where the jobs are.
 Is our public transport 'affordable'? What's the current price of a season ticket to Moorgate these days eh? And petrol and diesel. Affordable?

For social mobility read social engineering.

Ref: All figures taken from www.emptyhouses.com (http://www.emptyhouses.com)

 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on May 17, 2013, 04:42:36 pm
Apologies.

This is the correct web site address where a full set of housing statistics is available and can be downloaded.

http://www.emptyhomes.com (http://www.emptyhomes.com)

 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: BrookyP on May 22, 2013, 12:07:50 pm


saw this in the local paper re the flats

http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/village_flats_and_houses_plan_unveiled_1_2202604 (http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/village_flats_and_houses_plan_unveiled_1_2202604)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Grumpy Old Roy on June 18, 2013, 07:44:03 am
I am given to understand that, allegedly, a developer was observed measuring the road and verges in Bradmore Way. This I presume was to gather information to ascertain how much the road could be widened to accommodate the enormous increase in traffic for a proposed development. This is not good news

I note the comments, sustained development, what does that mean? In our case next door to it means, years of building work, lorries by the hour past our door, lost of outlook, wild life and tranquility. Worse still, when completed, another 200 or 300 journeys past our doors daily, the village centre gridlocked, daily parking wardens, more shops (a mini Tescos) and so on. PLease do not say it will not happen, thats the consequenses of sustained development.

To use the phrase sustained development in context with Brookmans Park is completely inappropriate, sustained development is self perpetuating. Where does it stop, when Potters Bar is joined up with Stevenage? With our rapidly increasing population that’s what precisely sustained development eventually means.

To stop these embryonic proposals action is needed now and a local meeting with all concerned would be a first positive step. It will be an opportunity for our representatives, local councillors, to stand up and be counted on an unequivocal, yes or no basis.  Another Bradmore Way resident and I spoke to our MP Grany Shapps who appears to be against the plans.

Thoughts and positive ideas on this proposed despoliation would be appreciated.

GOR
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 18, 2013, 09:43:45 am
Hi Roy,

I have merged your latest post with an existing thread on this topic.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on June 18, 2013, 05:58:05 pm
I have heard that the proposed development is no longer going ahead???  This has come frm the school who have said they have declined plans to move to a new school on that site.

Can anyone confirm this?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 18, 2013, 06:16:56 pm
Can anyone confirm this?

Hi Saffie, I have tweeted to see if anyone on Twitter knows.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: saffie on June 26, 2013, 07:30:53 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HHazYY_OIo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HHazYY_OIo)

Just found this online.  They seem to know more than us!!!!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 26, 2013, 08:31:25 pm
Just found this online.  They seem to know more than us!!!!

Pity there was no effort to look into the claims that the new school will be "eco-friendly producing 25% of its own energy needs on site", and that the car park will "cancel out any congestion on the school run". 

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on June 26, 2013, 11:38:15 pm
So what was the public consultation then ?

As a local resident I don't recall being asked my views ?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on June 27, 2013, 07:36:44 am
Every resident was invited to comment on Welwyn Hatfield's Emerging Core Strategy document last year - over 1000 responses were received from various individuals and companies about where any new housing in the borough should go.

James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 27, 2013, 09:08:58 am
Every resident was invited to comment on Welwyn Hatfield's Emerging Core Strategy document last year - over 1000 responses were received from various individuals and companies about where any new housing in the borough should go.

James

Hi James,

That is correct, but this video is not about the Welwyn Hatfield's Emerging Core Strategy document but, specifically, about the future of Brookmans Park Primary School.

It could be easy to think, after listening to the piece, that there has already been a consultation about this proposal in particular.  For example, the intro, voiced by the pupils, states..

"A problem for our local primary school"

Then the script continues ...

"A planning application has been released by Aurora Properties for the demolition and movement of Brookmans Park Primary School. The school is expected to move ..."

So at that point the story is about this one plan. However, it then continues.

"The public consultation closed 31 January 2013 after the public expressed some opposition to the plan."

The rules for these school 'news' reports are quite clearly laid out by the BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/schoolreport/16220838 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/schoolreport/16220838)

The project is all about encouraging the students to exercise journalistic skills in in order to tell stories.

The guidelines, above, explain how they should "fairly represent both sides of an argument", and tells them how to use phrases such as "according to..." in order to attribute claims made in a piece.

I think those who put the video together did a great job, and the students looked and sounded good, but, in the absence of the points set out above by the BBC, the piece comes over more as an exercise in how to write and present a PR script rather than a piece of journalism for a news bulletin.

And, of course, it leads to the concern originally posed by Saffie who found the video...

Just found this online.  They seem to know more than us!!!!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on June 28, 2013, 11:09:08 am
Seems an odd choice of topic. Whose idea was this? I must try to find out.

Moving on...(and sorry for the repetition of previous postings)

For additional clarity.   

"Since March 2012. Planning Authorities have been urged strongly to follow the National Planning Policy Framework's (NPPF) detailed advice when considering whether to permit additional development in the green belt. In the green belt there is a general presumption against inappropriate development, unless very special circumstances can be demonstrated to show that the benefits of the development will outweigh the harm caused to the green belt. The NPPF sets out what would constitute appropriate development in the green belt.

"According to the NPPF, there are five stated purposes of including land within the green belt:


"Once an area of land has been defined as green belt, the stated opportunities and benefits include:


Building a school of any sort on designated Green Belt land cannot be classed as 'very special circumstances.' It is, in my opinion, highly unlikely that a school will ever be built on the Green Belt land at the end of Bradmore Way or on any other piece of Green Belt land, nor will houses gain planning permission for those very same reasons, despite the determination of property developers.

Also in my personal opinion, the reason that Brookmans Park school may be over-subscribed is because (a) its catchment area has increased over the years to encompass areas well outside Brookmans Park and North Mymms generally and (b) parents perceive it to be superior to other state primary schools in the area. Perhaps the local education authority ought first to consider improving the other local schools first rather than bizarrely considering increasing the size of the one that appears to be more attractive to parents. That's really lazy thinking. Bring them all up to at least the standard of BP school, which itself could benefit from a better OFSTED report and better maths teaching in particular.

So, what can be done instead with those nice fields at the end of Bradmore Way? They'd make a really nice nature reserve, particulaly for residents of Welham Green who could walk there through Peplin's Wood rather than having to drive to Gobions open space. The land could have new pathways created for walkers and also cyclist to use. It's a real shame that the fields are currently inaccessible. What a great new resource this would be. We also ought to consider new cycle routes generally to meet sustainability requirements. I've never - ever - seen a child cycling to Brookmans Park School or even Chancellors, for example, yet  a large group of them, including Chung junior have just completed their cycling proficiency course. Yes I know, Bradmore  Way is too narrow for even a cycle path, but it's a nice thought and preferable to all the big cars and off-roaders meandering up the road. A cycle path through the Bradmore Way fields to Chancellors might also be feasible.

So, why don't we have a new thread with positive, sustainable ideas for possible alternative uses for the Bradmore Way fields? I wonder also if there aren't grants that could be obtained either nationally or even from the EU.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 28, 2013, 12:25:51 pm
So, what can be done instead with those nice fields at the end of Bradmore Way? They'd make a really nice nature reserve, particulaly for residents of Welham Green who could walk there through Peplin's Wood rather than having to drive to Gobions open space. The land could have new pathways created for walkers and also cyclist to use. It's a real shame that the fields are currently inaccessible. What a great new resource this would be. We also ought to consider new cycle routes generally to meet sustainability requirements. I've never - ever - seen a child cycling to Brookmans Park School or even Chancellors, for example, yet  a large group of them, including Chung junior have just completed their cycling proficiency course. Yes I know, Bradmore  Way is too narrow for even a cycle path, but it's a nice thought and preferable to all the big cars and off-roaders meandering up the road. A cycle path through the Bradmore Way fields to Chancellors might also be feasible.

So, why don't we have a new thread with positive, sustainable ideas for possible alternative uses for the Bradmore Way fields? I wonder also if there aren't grants that could be obtained either nationally or even from the EU.

Great idea. I have tweeted your suggestion.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: tombakhurst on June 29, 2013, 09:52:52 pm
So anyone heard much news about the new development? I am hoping the objection from the majority of residents would already have deterred the council from even considering accepting the proposal...
I'm hoping the reduction in posts in this discussion suggests that it is not going to go ahead.

Anyone have a different opinion? Would be interested to hear your point of view...  :)

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 02, 2013, 06:30:52 am
Has this one blown over, or are things moving ahead behind the scenes?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on August 02, 2013, 04:24:13 pm
David, have a look at the Agenda for WHC meeting of the Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel on 08/08/2013 ( www.welhat.gov.uk (http://www.welhat.gov.uk) then click committees ) then click on Public Report Pack and read the first 300 pages which gives an update of the position.

Reading between the lines and taking John Deans letter to the Welwyn Hatfield Times of 24/04/2013 into account it looks like Brookmans Park will be expanding.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 02, 2013, 08:22:20 pm
David, have a look at the Agenda for WHC meeting of the Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel on 08/08/2013 ( www.welhat.gov.uk (http://www.welhat.gov.uk) then click committees ) then click on Public Report Pack and read the first 300 pages which gives an update of the position.

Could you summarise here for those who don't have time to trawl through 300 pages, please?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Alex on August 04, 2013, 08:33:28 am
Motherchuck,

don't seem to be able to find the 300 pages- probably me, but could you help please?

thanks

Alex
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 04, 2013, 08:53:42 am
Motherchuck,

don't seem to be able to find the 300 pages- probably me, but could you help please?

thanks

Alex

I think he was referring to the embedded document below. There was a step missing in the instructions.

Note: The public reports pack pdf is big so will take some time to appear, depending on your connection speed.

Public Reports Pack 08/08/2013

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=8260&p=0

Here is the agenda for the meeting.

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=8259&p=0

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on August 04, 2013, 10:53:56 am
Interesting to note A.Perkins in the list of councillors at the base of the agenda.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 04, 2013, 02:47:16 pm
Interesting to note A.Perkins in the list of councillors at the base of the agenda.

Wouldn't that refer to Cllr Amanda (Mandy) Perkins?

http://welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4375 (http://welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4375)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on August 05, 2013, 01:36:04 am
John Dean, leader of the council and member for Brookmans Park, in a letter to the Welwyn Hatfield Times April 24 2013 edition, said:
 ' .....The recent consultation exercise drew several thousand individual responses together with a number of petitions. . . . .It has also
generated submissions from landowners across the borough not just in terms of sites around the two main towns, but other land around
our villages.
        We will now be taking stock and carefully considering all of the submissions that we have received and it will almost certainly
result in revisions to the Core Strategy, including revisiting areas we have considered in the past such as around the villages. '

Note: The 'villages' refers to the 'large villages' as in the rejected Option 6 of Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Cuffley.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 05, 2013, 03:15:00 pm
Any sizeable development around Brookmans Park would require land to be taken out of Green Belt, which is not acceptable to the vast majority of BP residents.

Once again I'm going to point out that under current Government rules, any new development over 5 dwellings must contain 35% social housing. To qualify for this so-called 'affordable housing', potential residents must be on the Council's housing register, so that's probably not many/any current BP residents, or their young people who will actually benefit.

In any case, I believe that the numbers quoted for housing needs are not accurate, have been exaggerated and should be re-visited.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on August 05, 2013, 04:54:16 pm
Any sizeable development anywhere in Welwyn Hatfield Council area would require land to be taken out of the Green Belt such as Panshanger and Hatfield Garden Village where the council have proposed building 700 and 2,000 homes respectively.

The majority of residents that live there do not find it acceptable either, but that is the Council's choice for housing sites that the residents of the district were consulted on earlier this year.

To understand the current situation read the Public Report Pack that David posted yesterday.

A letter to the Chief Executive of the Council Mr M Saminaden from Panshanger People is also interesting reading:

http://panshangerpeople.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Letter-to-Chief-Executive-of-WHBC-M-Saminaden-on-ECS-180413.pdf

Edited to fix broken pdf link and to embed using the forum pdf embedding function, which looks like this (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/Themes/default/images/bbc/pdf.gif) and is in the message tool bar.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: LMS on August 09, 2013, 05:00:47 pm
Item on BBC News website re traveller sites:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-23621154 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-23621154)


Does anyone know whether the site in Welham Green (by the side of the railway, not the Show Peoples field) is a legal site and if it is how many vans are supposed to be there? They seem to be so packed in, there would be be serious consequences should a fire break out, they are far too close together. Are the sanitary facilities sufficient for such numbers?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on August 10, 2013, 12:00:38 pm
There was a meeting of WHC Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel 8th August and they voted to agree that officers of the council continue with technical work regarding the Emerging Core Strategy relating to how many new houses and where they can find suitable
sites to put them.

Members were told that there had been thousands of responses to the public consultation objecting to the proposed sites at Hatfield
Garden Village and Panshanger with the majority of responses stating that the larger villages should be allocated some.

It was agreed that the Council would issue e-letters to update residents. Anyone can register for an e-letter on their website.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on August 10, 2013, 01:43:39 pm

http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/moving_goalposts_delay_welwyn_hatfield_housing_blueprint_1_2325021 (http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/moving_goalposts_delay_welwyn_hatfield_housing_blueprint_1_2325021)

FYI - Important changes to Core Strategy.

From Panshanger People website......

Headline changes to the Core Strategy timeline:

Proposed next consultation of the  revised Core Strategy is now autumn 2014, it was autumn this year.
Final adoption of plan is now sometime in 2015. Previously it was winter 2014.
More work will be done to re-evaluate how many homes are needed in the borough, the total number therefore is likely to go up or down. More information will also be sought from local land owners and those responsible for building new infrastructure.
The technical work around Panshanger airfield and the Green Belt review is expected to go on until Spring 2014.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: pbafc on August 21, 2013, 12:39:47 pm
They have been granted permission (retrospectively of course, after concreting and moving in before planning permission was given) for a certain number of static and movable caravans, but have been in breach of this for some time. I have been in numerous email conversations with cllr. Keith Pierri who assures me that environmental health are on the case. Not sure if anything has been done about this as yet but I presume that as per normal the travellers can act with impunity. This even went as far as Grant Schapps who as someone who apparently knows and cares about this community didn't even know the site was there and based all correspondence on the legal site over the road! If I remember correctly permission was given as the people who moved onto the site are related to the owner.........all 30 caravans of them....... ???

I would suggest making contact with Keith if you have any queries regarding this - even though it looks like he can't do anything he does at least respond to emails very promptly with as much of a sympathetic ear as his job will allow.

Looking at previous discussions on this throughout this forum I shall now await the barrage of 'live and let live' posts from those who maybe, just maybe, don't live a stones throw away from this eyesore and all the issues that have and will come with it.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: pinchefalise on August 21, 2013, 01:18:28 pm
It seems to me that all these sites are occupied by non-travellers (ie permanent residents) who live in caravans and avoid paying taxes. How do they get away with it?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 21, 2013, 03:43:32 pm
Many residents have now received a colour flyer from Jones Lang LaSalle, showing an artist's impression of the latest proposed development in Green Close.

This proposal is to demolish the 12 existing maisonettes and to re-develop the site to provide 16 family homes - 8 three bedroom and 8 four bedroom - with private parking and private gardens.

JLL is inviting residents' views on the plans.

The Brookmans Park Residents Association has written to Mark Connell, the Director of Planning and Development at JLL, to invite him to a meeting with members of the BPRA to discuss the plans.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on August 21, 2013, 04:38:09 pm
Looks a lot better than previous proposals for flats although inevitably the houses are very close to each other, overlooking each other and not really in character with the rest of the area.

But something really needs to happen as the current site and hoarding is a bit of an eyesore
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: BrookyP on August 21, 2013, 05:00:17 pm
looks better than a line of 8 x 4 ply hoardings ;D
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 21, 2013, 05:10:57 pm
The land enclosed behind the hoardings is the subject of a separate proposal.

The flyer refers to the line of maisonettes, numbers 1 - 12 Green Close.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Buster on August 27, 2013, 08:46:34 am
Have they purchased the maisonettes already?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mark Drinkwater on August 28, 2013, 04:15:19 pm
I wonder if the name Brook Park Developments is coincidental.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on September 19, 2013, 08:26:34 am
Below is the latest copy of the strategy document mailed to this site by WHC.

http://www.brookmans.com/pdfs/65181WHCcorestrategy.pdf
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: SimonB on October 19, 2013, 08:07:39 pm
Hello,

Hoping whether anyone on this board can help or point me in the right direction.

I am looking to make contact with a landowner in or around brookmans park who may have a field set aside or free from crops and away from livestock who may be interested in allowing access on an ongoing but infrequent basis.  Ideally the field should be around 100m x 300m and be away from main roads and accessible by a 4x4.  Use of the field would be quiet, fully insured, legal and have no impact on the area, access by no more than one vehicle. 

Would be happy to go into further details on request.

Many thanks,

Simon.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on October 20, 2013, 10:43:26 am
The RVC is a major landowner in the area so might be worth giving them a call ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on October 22, 2013, 09:30:26 am
Simon please state the use of the field before we go any further.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on November 06, 2013, 02:18:39 pm
From WelHat's planning portal. A very useful new application that allows residents to get automatic alerts about planning applications near them. Click on the link below to access the application and to register for alerts.

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=5371 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=5371)

You can now keep up to date with planning applications in your area with the Alert-it tool.
 
Alert-it enables you to sign up for automated email alerts on planning applications within a distance of 500 metres from where you live.

Upon signing up, you can specify what types of planning applications you wish to be informed of, be they neighbours' extensions, a change to a business or new housing developments.

This new service does not affect residents' statutory rights to be notified of planning applications made by immediate neighbours, which will be done regardless of whether or not someone has signed up for the Alert-it service.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Nimbus on November 30, 2013, 07:55:18 pm
I've just come across this page: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/24/labour-pledges-five-new-towns-housing (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/24/labour-pledges-five-new-towns-housing)

I thought I was reading just some unjoined-up thinking, like the desirability of plonking new towns along HS2 (which presumably won't stop there, because it's not stopping many other places either).

Then this:
"Outside London, the local authorities with the greatest need for new homes due to rapidly rising populations are East Cambridgeshire and Welwyn Hatfield in Hertfordshire, according to government figures."  >:(


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: LMS on December 01, 2013, 03:01:52 am
Another recent post tells us that our population in North Mymms has dropped quite dramatically so I do wonder where these figures all come from.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on March 06, 2014, 05:11:29 pm
Development now has planning approval.

http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/townhouses_to_replace_village_homes_in_brookmans_park_1_3399724 (http://www.whtimes.co.uk/news/townhouses_to_replace_village_homes_in_brookmans_park_1_3399724)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on March 06, 2014, 08:19:20 pm
As the number of dwellings is more than 5, does this mean a % will have to be for social housing?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on March 07, 2014, 09:58:47 pm
Just looking at the planning application documents. Apparently, according to the planning statement (October 2013) prepared by Jones Lang Lasalle, "1.10 the project team has consulted widely with the local community and engaged with key consultees INCLUDING Brookmans Park Residents Association and North Mymms Parish Council........"

Sorry am I missing something here, anyone know which key BPRA representative(s) we're consulted with, as I do not recall this discussed at any of the meetings I have attended!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 07, 2014, 10:04:31 pm
No they haven't 'consulted' or 'engaged' with the BPRA.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on March 07, 2014, 10:12:55 pm
Have just reached bottom of document, apparently consultation constitutes sending an email to BPRA  :-\
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 07, 2014, 10:57:17 pm
They did leaflet the village late last summer with an artist's impression of how the townhouses might look and inviting responses from residents. I have no idea if anyone responded. We - BPRA - did send them an email asking for further details, but didn't get a response. The WH Times this week carries a report that Welwyn Hatfield councillors agreed the proposals, despite opposition from the North Mymms Parish Council which objected to the overdevelopment of the site and the use of grey slate as being out of keeping with the area!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on March 11, 2014, 12:34:21 pm
WELHAT have published a brief update on the progress of their Core Strategy. This can be found on p6 of the latest WH Life magazine, or click this link to look on the BPRA blog:

http://www.brookmansparkra.org/2014/03/welhat-core-strategy-update.html (http://www.brookmansparkra.org/2014/03/welhat-core-strategy-update.html)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on March 11, 2014, 01:29:36 pm
And the latest newsletter - dated February 2014 - is embedded below.

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=8697&p=0
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on April 16, 2014, 11:56:05 am
Members of Brookmans Park Residents Association attended the North Mymms Parish Council Annual Parish Meeting last week to hear Councillor John Dean talk about Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council's Core Strategy, due to be published for public consultation in the Autumn this year.

In just over a year, the central Government target for new homes to be built in Welwyn Hatfield has shot up from 7,000 to 16,000, most of which will have to go on Green Belt land in the district.

A full report is on p5 of the Welwyn Hatfield Times this week.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: 6546837 on June 03, 2014, 02:56:47 pm
Hi All,

I am new to the forum.

I know there has been lots of discussion on building in Brookman’s Park which I have looked through but I still couldn't really answer the following question.  Will the field South of The Gardens (I believe currently owned by the RVC) be developed into a housing estate?

I am a resident concerned about the negative impact on the value of my house this may have and more importantly the fantastic view I currently have.  On top of this, I like many others do not have the appetite for the village to be expanded onto green belt land.  Any information greatly appreciated.

Many Thanks,
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on June 03, 2014, 04:15:57 pm
Hi, welcome to the Forum.

The RVC 'estate' you mention has been submitted for consideration in response to the emerging Core Strategy, but nothing is settled and there is yet to be a consultation, probably in the Autumn. The RVC own 4 pieces of land around BP that could be used for housing, but their advisors plumped for the field you mention, behind The Gardens. The idea is for student accommodation and staff housing, plus of course 35% 'affordable housing'.

Every landowner in and around BP has offered their land for development.

If you would like to join those of us who are fighting against inappropriate development, please join us in the Brookmans Park Residents Association, and also, of course, the North Mymms Green Belt Society who do a sterling job in the area.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: 6546837 on June 03, 2014, 04:26:38 pm
Thanks Mermaid....

I think this is what I have read in what i can find on the council web sites.  Very sad news and no doubt there will be no stopping it not matter how hard we try.  And of course we have to try.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on June 13, 2014, 11:46:01 am
Ten days have passed since 6546837 and Mermaid raised the possibility of new housing at Brookmans Park again and yet no further posts.?
Last year Councillor John Dean stated in the Welwyn Hatfield Times that the larger villages which includes Brookmans Park were most probably going to have some new housing.
Also Mermaid posted 16th April 2014 that Councillor Dean had stated at the North Mymms Annual Parish Meeting that : " The Government target for new homes in Welwyn Hatfield has shot up from 7,000 to 16,000, most of which will have to go on Green Belt land in the district."
Councillor Dean asked at the meeting for some " open thinking and calm debate and it would be more equitable for all communities if each agreed to take a share of the requirement " reiterating that " it is better to keep control of our own environment "
So is it not time that residents woke up and started a debate and thus possibly have some influence where any new housing should go
around Brookmans Park before it's too late ?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 13, 2014, 03:14:17 pm
So is it not time that residents woke up and started a debate and thus possibly have some influence where any new housing should go around Brookmans Park before it's too late ?

I am not sure it's a case of residents needing to wake up. I think quite a few are wide awake concerning the issue of development. The issue is where would be the best place for any development if it is forced on the area/community through local authority obligations/agreement. 

Could you inform us of the options? I am aware of only 1) the RVC field south of The Gardens and west of Bluebridge Road, 2) the area of land north of Peplins Way, and (I am not sure about this) but was there a plot 3)to the south of Bradmore Lane and west of Station Road. 

Are they the sites under consideration? Are there more?

I think it makes perfect sense for new houses to be built in Brookmans Park, including affordable housing for those who want to but can't get on the housing ladder, and council housing for those who are unable to afford their own home.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on June 13, 2014, 04:33:15 pm

So is it not time that residents woke up and started a debate and thus possibly have some influence where any new housing should go
around Brookmans Park before it's too late ?
It is impossible to have any meaningful debate until the actual housing figures for the individual settlements have been finalised.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on June 13, 2014, 04:41:59 pm

Could you inform us of the options? I am aware of only 1) the RVC field south of The Gardens and west of Bluebridge Road, 2) the area of land north of Peplins Way, and (I am not sure about this) but was there a plot 3)to the south of Bradmore Lane and west of Station Road. 

Are they the sites under consideration? Are there more?



Many sites were put forward by various landowners but so far only one in Brookmans Park has been considered as suitable and available and that is the RVC field south of the Gardens.

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0)




Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on June 13, 2014, 05:11:03 pm
Ten days have passed since 6546837 and Mermaid raised the possibility of new housing at Brookmans Park again and yet no further posts.?

So is it not time that residents woke up and started a debate and thus possibly have some influence where any new housing should go around Brookmans Park before it's too late ?

As mermaid quite rightly mentioned and IMO, this is a subject that BPRA will be keen to seek support from concerned residents with to help support and shape strategy for our community.  Whilst we can procrastinate on the forum about new developments, actions speak louder than words!

Motherchuck, you sound like a resident concerned about the impact of any proposed development around the village, and therefore sound like the right person to actively support BPRA in shaping strategy.  I assume you are a member and have had the opportunity to attend meetings as I am sure you support would be most welcome!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 15, 2014, 08:06:28 am
I have merged more than a dozen existing forum threads about housing in and around Brookmans Park in order to keep them in one place for contextual reasons. As always, please check whether a thread already exists before starting a new topic. Now merged, the topic is the most viewed on the site in the nine years since the new forum was launched. It has been viewed more than 2.5 million times. If you spot a thread that I've missed and which should be merged please send me a personal message and I will merge it. Thanks, David.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on June 20, 2014, 12:12:34 am
Peeplins raised some interesting points June 13th. " BPRA will be keen to seek support from concerned residents "
Judging by the lack of responses so far there don't seem to be any concerned residents and if there are any they will have a problem
attending any BPRA meetings as there is no information on the BPRA website when and where they are.

David has posted that "housing around Brookmans Park" is the most viewed topic on the site having been viewed more than 2.5 million
times but the few prepared to post a response and thus start the "calm debate" referred to by local Councillor John Dean should be a
cause for concern for everyone by wasting the opportunity to influence the WHCouncil which sites around Brookmans Park would be
preferred for the new housing which is coming.

Anyone awake yet?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Conor on June 20, 2014, 07:17:15 am
It is my understanding that precious little can be done until the council release the likely number of new dwellings that the local area is expected to absorb. What is the point in debating where and when we think housing should go when we have no idea how many we need?

Conor
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on June 20, 2014, 07:43:28 am
Conor is quite correct, the Local Plan should be unveiled in the Autumn for consultation.

As far as the BPRA is concerned, we have issued an invitation to the new Head of Planning and Policy at Welhat to come and address a public meeting in BP, we have also invited John Dean to come to one of our meetings, and we are attending a meeting with the NMPC next month.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 20, 2014, 08:40:35 am
As far as the BPRA is concerned, we have issued an invitation to the new Head of Planning and Policy at Welhat to come and address a public meeting in BP, we have also invited John Dean to come to one of our meetings, and we are attending a meeting with the NMPC next month.

Hi Mermaid,

Where is this information updated? I can't find it on the BPRA site (http://www.brookmansparkra.org) where the last entry was two months ago, and the events are not listed on the calendar on the same site (http://www.brookmansparkra.org/p/calendar_23.html) and nor are they listed in the section of this forum set up for the BPRA (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/board,30.0.html), or on the BPRA Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/BrookmansParkRA) or the BPRA Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/BrookmansParkRA).

I think Motherchuck makes a valid point about trying to find out what local people think. And, particularly the local residents association.

Judging by the lack of responses so far there don't seem to be any concerned residents and if there are any they will have a problem attending any BPRA meetings as there is no information on the BPRA website when and where they are.

It would be good to have updates, at least in the BPRA forum section here (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/board,30.0.html) so that residents can keep abreast of developments.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on June 20, 2014, 09:08:16 am
We are awaiting replies from the people concerned, then will post the relevant dates and venues.

We have a stand at Village Day and will delighted to see anybody at stand no 15.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on June 20, 2014, 09:16:43 am
We are awaiting replies from the people concerned, then will post the relevant dates and venues.

We have a stand at Village Day and will delighted to see anybody at stand no 15.

Thanks Mermaid.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on July 01, 2014, 10:40:24 am
Mermaid posted 20th June that the new Head of Planning also John Dean local Councillor and Leader of the Council had been invited to
talk to residents at a meeting of the BPRA.

This would be an excellent opportunity to hear the views of local residents where new housing should be built around Brookmans Park
and thus influence the WHCouncil BEFORE the WHCouncil try to influence the residents with the Draft Local Plan coming in a couple of
months.

As the next BPRA meeting is 10th July have the invitations been accepted and will new housing development be on the agenda ?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on July 01, 2014, 11:27:41 am
If you look at my post regarding the next meeting on the 10th July, and our blog, you will see that we have Vikki Hatfield, Parking Services Team Leader at Welhat coming to talk about parking in BP.

We are still finalising arrangements for John Dean, but expect him to be able to attend our 14th August meeting.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on July 02, 2014, 11:21:11 am
If you look at my post regarding the next meeting 10th July you will see that the question was will new housing development be on the
agenda ?
If you look at the minutes of the North Mymms Parish Council Annual Meeting 9th April you will see at item 7 the summary of John Deans speech.
He is clearly saying to residents think where you would prefer to have new housing, debate it and let WHCouncil know.
If no preference is made then WHCouncil will tell residents where they want new housing development in the Draft Local Plan which residents can then comment on individually.
Think about it. Which option is likely to be more favourably considered by the Government Inspector at the public enquiry next year ?
Sites preferred by the Brookmans Park Residents Association after calm debate or sites imposed by the Council ?
If you wait until after the next BPRA meeting 14th August to research residents opinions it will probably be too late to get to the WHC
before they consult, most likely September. There should be a leaflet drop giving site options now to give replies to Mr Dean the 14th !
 
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 06, 2014, 08:33:29 am
He is clearly saying to residents think where you would prefer to have new housing, debate it and let WHCouncil know. 

My problem is that I don't know what areas of land around Brookmans Park have been identified as viable for development and are currently under consideration. Neither do I know who has offered up their land and put forward plans for its development.

Having scrolled through the various posts on this site, and having clicked around the WHC website, I am none the wiser - in fact I am more confused than ever. So much has been said, and so many lengthy documents uploaded to the WHC site, that I find it baffling. Perhaps it's me being thick. 

It would be helpful to list the options being considered so we can, as you say, engage in constructive debate and offer some considered input to influence the decision making process.

But what are we being asked to discuss/debate?

There have been posts on this site about the RVC land south of Brookmans Park, the land near the primary school, speculation about the 20 acre field, and somewhere (I can't find it now), talk about land south of Bradmore Lane and west of Station Road. Does anyone have a link, a map, a document or anything with the definitive list of what is under consideration? Or is it the case that any land that doesn't have houses on it at the moment is up for grabs?

If there is a definitive list of options, a poll could be created here in this forum, local residents could then be invited to state their preference in that poll and then they could expand on them in the associated thread .

I could create that poll, but, clearly, I don't have the information required to list the options. If someone has, and is able to post it here in this thread, or wants to send it to me via the internal message system, I would be happy to work on it.

David
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 06, 2014, 09:03:54 am


My problem is that I don't know what areas of land around Brookmans Park have been identified as viable for development and are currently under consideration. Neither do I know who has offered up their land and put forward plans for its development.


David

David

All the information you require is here - http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4681 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4681)

If you click on Appendix 1 you will see all the land that was put forward to Wel/Hat by various landowners and developers for consideration (some was even proposed by developers without the landowners knowledge!)

Appendix 3 will give you the maps to make sense of the plot reference numbers.

Appendix 2 summarises the sites that have been considered as suitable & achievable - there is only one around Brookmans Park.

We do not know at this stage how many houses Brookmans Park will have to provide, we are still waiting for the final figures to be announced this Autumn as the above is still under review.
It is impossible therefore to debate how much land should be released from the Greenbelt until these figures are known.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 06, 2014, 09:22:25 am
Thanks for this, epiphany, I will bookmark this post so that I have all this information for future reference. Very helpful.

We do not know at this stage how many houses Brookmans Park will have to provide, we are still waiting for the final figures to be announced this Autumn as the above is still under review. It is impossible therefore to debate how much land should be released from the Greenbelt until these figures are known.

If that is the case, why do you think we are being encouraged to debate the issue before we know what we are discussing? Could one consequence be that by using the 'if you don't decide someone else will decide for you' argument, some could use the results of such a debate as an indication that there is more of an appetitite for development in Brookmans Park than there really is?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 06, 2014, 09:54:01 am


If that is the case, why do you think we are being encouraged to debate the issue before we know what we are discussing? Could one consequence be that by using the 'if you don't decide someone else will decide for you' argument, some could use the results of such a debate as an indication that there is more of an appetitite for development in Brookmans Park than there really is?

John Dean has made it quite clear that all the larger villages in Welwyn/Hatfield are going to have to take a share of the 16,000 houses that are currently (the goalposts keep moving) being
projected as a requirement for the borough.

I am hoping that the final figure will be lower than this.

Although I certainly think that it is far better that local residents have input (including contesting unrealistic and unsustainable numbers) like you I am suspicious of how information could be
interpreted at this stage.

Until we know what the final figures are for Brookmans Park, Welham Green & Little Heath and indeed neighbouring Hertsmere who are undertaking the same process at the moment, I do not see
how we could decide what would be the most suitable site/s.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 06, 2014, 09:59:53 am

Although I certainly think that it is far better that local residents have input (including contesting unrealistic and unsustainable numbers) like you I am suspicious of how information could be interpreted at this stage.


Absolutely, consultations could be used (and data/input interpreted) out of context by some to further their cause.


Until we know what the final figures are for Brookmans Park, Welham Green & Little Heath and indeed neighbouring Hertsmere who are undertaking the same process at the moment, I do not see how we could decide what would be the most suitable site/s.


Agreed.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: concerned on July 06, 2014, 09:01:36 pm
 :-\ The residents of Brookmans Park need to wake up before it's to late on proposed future housing sites. If we don't get a neighbour hood planning group together we will be left with the local planning office deciding for us on sites and the number, and design/type of housing that will be built.
Complacency will only allow developers push for what they want, and not what is best for the village, when it's to late!!
So please come on residents, let's get together and help plan the future for the village, join the residents association and work at get this moving before it's to late.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on July 07, 2014, 09:57:23 am
A Neighbourhood Plan would be spearheaded by North Mymms Parish Council for the whole of North Mymms and the Brookmans Park Residents Association would certainly take part in that if it were to happen. There will be a meeting in July which will be attended by representatives of the BPRA, as well as the North Mymms Green Belt Society and the Welham Green Residents Association.

The BPRA exists to represent the residents of Brookmans Park. If you want us to carry your views forward, you can join by IM'ing me or leaving a message on 661669.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Nick Lees on July 08, 2014, 08:18:36 pm
Further to Epiphany's reply 904 (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/topic,92.msg35654.html#msg35654) referring to http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4681 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4681) and later http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5986&p=0), I have been told by Carol Hyland of WHDC on the 23/6/14 that this (in my opinion) biased, incorrect and flawed report is being reviewed:

'The SHLAA is being reviewed and will form part of the evidence base for the Local Plan.
 
The council proposes to consult on the Local Plan later in the year, scheduled for November/December 2014, so any comments you wish to make regarding the merits of any sites should be submitted at that time.' 

Whoever produced the report referred to above has only given positive reasons to use BrP6 south of The Gardens (NO negative reasons) and only negative reasons not to use the other sites (NO positive reasons) - hardly unbiased. This makes you wonder if there is a 'done deal' with the vet college who I believe have decided BrP6 is their preferred site.

Hopefully the 'review' will will be unbiased and more comprehensive this time (if it's not a 'done deal')!

Edited only to fix gaps in text between links (cosmetic) and to add a link to the referred post.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on July 11, 2014, 05:35:41 pm
There has been another misunderstanding. Regarding the post by 'concerned' 6th July who said "if we don't get a neighbour hood planning group together we will be left with the local planning office deciding for us on sites" to which Mermaid has responded 7th July referring to a Neighbourhood Plan that is a completely different thing altogether.
'Concerned' is agreeing with my previous posts that the BPRA should be researching local residents opinions on where any development around Brookmans Park should go, ie. the least worst sites.
David has said he could use this site to carry out the research.
David also asked which land around Brookmans Park is the most probable land for any development. There are three main areas.
 1. The land at the end of Bradmore Way that WelHat have designated BrP12.
 2. The land east of Bluebridge Road known as Raybrook Farm(horses) and Friday Grove(sheep/boot sales) designated BrP10 andBrP9.
 3. The land west of Bluebridge Road and south of The Gardens owned by the RVC designated BrP6.
Alternatively just wait until the Draft Local Plan comes out and the cry goes 'I thought the new houses were all going to Hatfield & WGC'

(Note: edited to remove gaps in text and large blank space at foot of post)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on July 11, 2014, 06:22:46 pm
Th BPRA will not be researching until we have had our meetings with the NMPC in July and our meeting with John Dean and Stephen Boulton in August.

Research previously undertaken for the North Mymms Parish Plan (published on this site) shows that the majority of residents who responded were against any development whatsoever. It would be premature to go out and ask them now which development they would consider to be the lesser of the evils, when we don't even know yet what the villages might be asked to take.

(Note: Reason for edit explained to author)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 11, 2014, 07:18:25 pm
David has said he could use this site to carry out the research.

Hi motherchuck, since making that suggestion I have been convinced/persuaded by epiphany (see below) that to do so would be premature.

Until we know what the final figures are for Brookmans Park, Welham Green & Little Heath and indeed neighbouring Hertsmere who are undertaking the same process at the moment, I do not see how we could decide what would be the most suitable site/s.

On top of that, it seems some of the sites you have mentioned (according to the pdfs offered in epiphany's post) have already been ruled out - or am I missing something?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on July 12, 2014, 04:21:31 pm
Hi David I think you should look at the post from Nick Lees 8th July who quoted Carol Hyland at WHC " The SHLAA is being reviewed . ."

The link that epiphany posted related to sites for a housing projection of 6,800 ( 3,000 urban and 3,800 Green Belt ) but John Dean has now said the latest requirement is 16,000 so 13,000 Green Belt. It is therefore reasonable to assume that more sites will be required to accommodate the extra 9,200 and that sites previously found not suitable will be looked at again.

I don't know how long it would take you to set up a survey of residents opinions or how you would reach enough residents to let them know you were seeking their opinions, but I am sure John Dean and Stephen Bolton would be very grateful if they attend the next BPRA meeting 14th August.

(Edited to remove gaps in text)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 12, 2014, 04:31:33 pm
It is therefore reasonable to assume that more sites will be required to accommodate the extra 9,200 and that sites previously found not suitable will be looked at again.

But would there be any point in running a survey on assumptions?

I don't know how long it would take you to set up a survey of residents opinions or how you would reach enough residents to let them know you were seeking their opinions, but I am sure John Dean and Stephen Bolton would be very grateful if they attend the next BPRA meeting 14th August.

On reflection, I don't know enough about the issue to ask the right questions. I am sure the politicians you mention above have the resources to run their own surveys.

(By the way, I edited your post above because there were strange breaks in the text that made it hard to read. If you are copying and pasting from a text document, please try to edit out the gaps. It makes it easier to follow. Thanks)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Conor on July 12, 2014, 05:55:15 pm
2. The land east of Bluebridge Road known as Friday Grove(sheep/boot sales) designated BrP9.

I thought some of this land was being used for chicken farming now? Wasn't that why it was levelled earlier in the year?

Conor
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 12, 2014, 07:00:34 pm
the majority of residents who responded were against any development whatsoever.

This is a major issue. House prices are at silly levels and the young can no longer afford to get on the ladder. I'd like my children to be able to live in the South East if they chose to do so. The way things are going this won't be possible.

The problem is simple supply and demand and situation will not change without decreasing the demand or increasing supply. We're not going to be able to remove several million people from our population within a short enough time frame and to even attempt such a thing would be a social and economic disaster. The only alternative is to start building more houses and the houses can't always be built in the mythical land of somewhere else. We have to take some here. The field to the south of The Gardens seems ideal: It is in the corner of two roads, one of them the main road to Potters bar, so access would not be an issue; The houses here would be connected to the rest of the village and it would increase the stock of houses without adversely changing the character.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: elephant on July 15, 2014, 03:09:00 pm
John -

1) Perhaps you might like to let everyone know in which area you reside before recommending your solution to this issue? It can't but help to contextualise your views and allow us to know whether you would be directly affected or not by idea your raise.

2) You presuppose that adding to the housing stock in BP will reduce prices. It won't. The supply/demand issue won't be solved in Brookmans Park. A brief review of Estate Agent websites will prove that ANY property - flat, townhouse, semi-, detached, will be more expensive per unit that will solve your concern about the young getting on the ladder. Do you really suppose the any housing built on an RVC field will be within the reach of young people that can barely afford a starting deposit and then have to consider, for many, the punitive costs of commuting?
 
3) The south east is a big area. Why not alternatives in the local area that might be lower cost to acquire, more accessible to the young with reduced budgets and, for which there will be less competitive pressure from housing developers? Why not around the environs of Hatfield, the former BBC tower in BP or Welham Green?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 15, 2014, 03:53:56 pm
1 I have made no secret that I live on Bluebridge Road near Bluebridge Avenue.  You, on the other hand, don't say where you live or what your name is.

2 The problem will only be fix by building new homes in places people want to live e.g. Brookmans Park.

3 This is exactly what I meant by the mythical land of somewhere else.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 15, 2014, 04:08:44 pm
I have some sympathy for John's POV in that I too have children who will some day want to buy a property of their own.

However BP has always been an expensive area with expensive houses. That's part of it's character. Rightly or wrongly.

I would imagine the vast majority of people living in BP were not first time buyers and lived elsewhere - for example I grew up in BP and bought several peoperties elsewhere before buying in BP 12 years later.

I don't think it's relevant to say that if new houses are built in BP they (or at least some) should be low priced so first time / young / whatever buyers can afford them.

All housing is affordable, just not affordable by everyone - in a free market economy the cost of houses is whatever the market will stand - if no people can afford them then the price will fall - I've witnessed first hand several cycles in the boom / bust of the housing market in my lifetime.

Even if supply was increased it wouldn't necessarily mean cheaper houses in desirable areas like BP, that's just the way it is.

Personally I'd prefer not to have any new housing in BP and if there was I'd also prefer not to have any so called affordable or social housing - because I think it would change the character of the village - the very thing I'd imagine most of us moved here for. Perhaps uncomfortable for some  but that's how it is. There are lots of other places where 'affordable' housing could be built.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 15, 2014, 07:59:33 pm
People discussing the housing in the village might want to take a look at the 1926 sales brochure for the Brookmans Park Estate, published on this site (http://www.brookmans.com/history/estate/estate.shtml). There are some quotes that really need Harry Enfield’s Mr Cholmondley-Warner reading them out loud with a cheerful tune playing away in the background.   :)

Quote
Hatfield lies three miles away, in the other direction. Hatfield is the ancestral home of the Marquess of Salisbury, and it would be hard to find a spot, which embraces more completely, that indefinable charm of rural England than does the country between Hatfield and Brookmans Park. Gently undulating, well wooded and well watered, the march of civilisation has left it untouched in its natural beauty.

Quote
Expensive boundary walls and fences will be unnecessary and indeed out of harmony. Rustic posts and chains, comparatively inexpensive in first cost, will be more in keeping with these surroundings.

And there are four maps of the estate, the north-west section.

(http://www.brookmans.com/history/estate/mapnw.jpg)

The south-west section.

(http://www.brookmans.com/history/estate/mapsw.jpg)

The north-east section.

(http://www.brookmans.com/history/estate/mapne.jpg)

The south-east section.

(http://www.brookmans.com/history/estate/mapse.jpg)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: elephant on July 17, 2014, 12:49:33 pm
John -

1)   I haven't been asked to identify myself in registering for this website – so why should I, plenty of others don’t? But I can reassure you that I have been a resident of Brookmans Park for over 25 years and was a pupil at Brookmans Park (under Peter Evans) and DAOS in PB. My parents moved to their current residence in 1980. It's good to know that you won’t be affected by any of the proposed plans!

2)   Yes, people want to live here - but you specifically referenced your children who can’t afford to get onto the ladder. I sympathise. Neither can I. I do know, however, that I will never be able to afford to live in Brookmans Park. Are you proposing social housing, or just opening up land to private developers? Private developers are looking around Brookmans Park, and at its fringes, and those apartments I have seen advertised are beyond my price range let alone someone just starting out.

3)   I’m not sure I understand your point here…. I’m suggesting that there are locations where we can and should be developing property that is accessible to young people. Unless private developers are forced to price at an acceptable level they will price to the local market. A quick look in Statons window will reveal that ANYTHING in BP won’t be affordable without the government forcing the issue.

p.s. thanks, David, for the very interesting and amusing brochure ☺
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on July 17, 2014, 02:45:00 pm
It is worth remembering that any new development of over 25 homes MUST consist of 30% to be 'affordable' housing. These are Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council rules and would apply wherever building takes place. This could be council housing (although generally the council builds very little now), housing association housing, shared ownership etc. Any scheme put forward by a develop  - whatever the views of the landowner - which does not have this would not be given permission to proceed.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 17, 2014, 05:57:03 pm
Elephant, if you're channelling someone on where they live it would be polite and honest to say where you live too. It would <i>"contextualise your views and allow us to know whether you would be directly affected or not by idea your raise."</i>

I appreciate all the posts about new housing in BP would not being affordable for first time buyers. This is undoubtedly true, 'affordable' being a slippery term. However, when I said in the area I was thinking a little wider than that. If people read what I wrote they'd see it says "South East." Prices are too high in the South East and will remain so without an increase in supply. Very few (and certainly not enough) want the houses built near them. We will all have to put up with some and that fields look like the best place for us.

As house prices return to sane levels houses in BP will become affordable to more people. I can't see why this would be a bad thing.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 17, 2014, 08:07:24 pm
It is worth remembering that any new development of over 25 homes MUST consist of 30% to be 'affordable' housing. These are Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council rules and would apply wherever building takes place. This could be council housing (although generally the council builds very little now), housing association housing, shared ownership etc. Any scheme put forward by a develop  - whatever the views of the landowner - which does not have this would not be given permission to proceed.

Unfortunately 'affordable' housing is still not affordable to most - particularly the young, even if it is part buy, part rent. Our local council does not build council houses and housing associations are able to
charge 80% of current market rent- so not much discount there.

Rather than yet more traditionally built rabbit hutch new builds being constructed with the associated highbuild costs, radical thinking outside the box is required.

There are lots of new ideas for reducing build costs using non traditional construction methods and some brilliant innovative designs to keep costs down

Self build projects have also been successful in other parts of the country.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Nimbus on July 17, 2014, 09:41:15 pm
As house prices return to sane levels houses in BP will become affordable to more people. I can't see why this would be a bad thing.

They've not been sane since the Lawson bubble which left me behind in the mid-'80s! And that was when my earning power was at its peak, too.

For too long I held out the hope of sanity returning, but as has become transparently obvious during the present government, they're doing whatever it takes to prevent the negative equity conditions which would accompany this correction. This of course is funded at least partially by the stealth tax on savings as they are eroded by (actual) inflation while investment returns are paltry.

This is having unwelcome but entirely predictable consequences; the British residential property market has become seen as a better source of return than investments placed in more productive sectors of the economy, and having observed this, foreign buyers with a taste for a gamble are piling in. Some of their money may be of dubious origin, so the market doubles as a laundry. A similar flow from buy-to-let landlords is also supporting high prices, and the predicted rise in competition from this source, as pensioners start to take advantage of the chancellor's new pension fund rules in an attempt to better the miserly annuity rates on offer, is beginning to be fulfilled, as mortgage enquiries from this source are reported to be on the up.

So not much hope to be had, unless the economy is corrected, which won't be pleasant.

As far as 'affordable housing' is concerned, the cynic in me says that this is just a pseudonym for a subsidy for the first owners to take advantage of. Unless said housing is so bleak as to repel future buyers, surely it will rise to prevailing regional price levels within a couple of sale cycles?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 18, 2014, 09:32:19 am

There are lots of new ideas for reducing build costs using non traditional construction methods and some brilliant innovative designs to keep costs down

Self build projects have also been successful in other parts of the country.

I think the vast majority of the cost of developing property in the SE is the cost of land - not sure whether alternative building methods would make as much difference here compared with elsewhere.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 18, 2014, 02:04:34 pm

There are lots of new ideas for reducing build costs using non traditional construction methods and some brilliant innovative designs to keep costs down

Self build projects have also been successful in other parts of the country.

I think the vast majority of the cost of developing property in the SE is the cost of land - not sure whether alternative building methods would make as much difference here compared with elsewhere.

I believe developers usually work on thirds - one third cost of land, one third build cost, one third profit.


Agreed, land costs are higher in the SE but they are just part of the equation.


Making best use of available space with thoughtful design, use of alternative building techniques and self build can help to keep costs down.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 18, 2014, 07:59:27 pm
It looks like Tesco's decision could lead to the release of land for 700 homes in Welwyn Hatfield.

Tesco unlocks its landbank to build 4,000 new homes
£1bn building plan comes after revelation of 310 unused sites, with retail plans shelved due to shift in shopping habits

From the piece (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jul/18/tesco-unlocks-landbank-to-build-4000-new-homes)...

Quote
Among the Tesco sites set for housing developments following Friday's announcement will be Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, close to the retailer's operational headquarters, where it plans to build more than 700 homes on a site where it previously planned a store.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 19, 2014, 11:12:14 am
Tesco are completely revising their retailing strategy and there will be very few large (ie Extra) superstores built in future. Therefore many sites owned by Tesco will no longer be needed.

Given the land in WGC is probably  brownfield anyway this is excellent news for common sense
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 19, 2014, 02:26:55 pm
Given the land in WGC is probably  brownfield anyway this is excellent news for common sense

Has there been a study of available brownfield land in Welwyn Hatfield? Mind you, I am guessing there would be less profit and therefore the prospect might be less attractive to the developers.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: sasquartch on July 19, 2014, 03:52:19 pm
Dave - I don't know. It's always amazing how common sense seems to get ignored or forgotten - I'd like to see all new building on brownfield sites, it's the only way we can keep the green bits green. Once it's gone, it's gone.

But the area in WGC owned by Tesco is near the station and ex-industrial - so a good location for high density housing due it's proximity to the station and facilities.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 20, 2014, 07:05:30 pm
It's good to know that you won’t be affected by any of the proposed plans!

I missed that remark this first time round. I live on the road, I can see the field from my front and back gardens and a bedroom window and at weekends often walk the footpath that runs along the edge, so your remark is simply not true. If I am not affected enough, just how much does one have to be affected to be allowed an opinion? And should everyone on this thread be required to say where they live before their opinions should be considered?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 22, 2014, 07:41:32 am
If you want a truly radical solution to houses perhaps we should be looking at golf courses. BP's is about a third the size of the village and PB's is a similar size. A golf course has a fairly low density of use compared to a park or sports fields. When I walk across PB's golf course of a weekend I see few people using it and frequently see no-one.  The only people in the area who benefit from the golf course are those who both enjoy golf and can afford the membership  and those who's houses back onto the course.

If we used one of the courses to make an area for public recreation (e.g. a park) and built houses on the rest the local area would lose very little of worth, would gain an amenity and an area with little biological diversity could be built on. The other golf course could pick up the members so no-one would lose out too much.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 22, 2014, 09:14:57 am
If we used one of the courses to make an area for public recreation (e.g. a park) and built houses on the rest the local area would lose very little of worth, would gain an amenity and an area with little biological diversity could be built on. The other golf course could pick up the members so no-one would lose out too much.

Radical idea, but if we have to build on green belt then perhaps worth considering. I wonder whether there are restrictions on the development of land set aside for golf?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 22, 2014, 05:12:06 pm
If you want a truly radical solution to houses perhaps we should be looking at golf courses.

This idea has actually already been put forward for Potters Bar golf course by Hertsmere for their Strategic Land Avaiibility Assesment.

http://www.hertsmere.gov.uk/Documents/09-Planning--Building-Control/Planning-Policy/Local-Development-Framework/SHLAA-Site-assessment-Potters-Bar.pdf (http://www.hertsmere.gov.uk/Documents/09-Planning--Building-Control/Planning-Policy/Local-Development-Framework/SHLAA-Site-assessment-Potters-Bar.pdf)

See ref S44 . Plan for 508 houses.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 22, 2014, 06:03:16 pm
Just seen these tweets from The Campaign to Protect Rural England, asking the public to "Help us spot the wasted space where you live".

http://www.cpre.org.uk/how-you-can-help/take-action/waste-of-space (http://www.cpre.org.uk/how-you-can-help/take-action/waste-of-space)


Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on July 22, 2014, 06:42:43 pm
Don't forget the empty space. Flats and houses without occupiers.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Chungdokwan on July 22, 2014, 07:06:34 pm
Why stop at Golf courses?

Cricket pitches, bowling greens, football and rugby pitches, Gobions open space, the village green, my garden, your garden. Green is SO last week. Mi Casa-Su Casa.

Now some words from the songwriter Pete Seeger who died earlier this year. Sing along if you like.

Little boxes on the hillside
Little boxes made of ticky tacky
Little boxes
Little boxes
Little boxes all the same
There's a green one and a pink one
And a blue one and a yellow one
And they're all made out of ticky tacky
And they all look just the same

And the people in the houses all go to the university
And they all get put in boxes, little boxes all the same
And there's doctors and there's lawyers
And business executives
And they're all made out of ticky tacky and they all look just the same
And they all play on the golf course and drink their martini dry
And they all have pretty children and the children go to school
And the children go to summer camp
And then to the university
And they all get put in boxes, and they all come out the same
And the boys go into business and marry and raise a family
And they all get put in boxes, little boxes all the same

There's a green one, and a pink one
And a blue one and a yellow one
And they're all made out of ticky tacky
And they all look just the same

Is that what you want?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on July 22, 2014, 08:02:42 pm
I think I explained why golf courses.

If it were a choice between building on BP's  golf course and PB's I'd suggest BP's is better suited as PB's has a footpath,  which allows it to be used by walkers as well as golfers.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on July 22, 2014, 10:09:09 pm
Whether posters are being serious or not, the council cannot order that land is built on. They can only pick from pieces which have been offered for use by the land owners. I somehow doubt whether Brookmans Park Golf Club is going to voluntarily close so we're kinda back to square 1.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 24, 2014, 01:00:54 pm
I have put together the 34 aerial images of Brookmans Park taken in 1928 and 1947 in one easy to scroll page. They are all from the English Heritage Britain Above project. The way they are presented/formatted on the site was not very user-friendly. Click on the box below to access. Gives an indication of how the area has changed in a generation.

Brookmans Park from above
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: memsal9 on July 24, 2014, 01:42:21 pm
David,
I can't see the picks but you name me any area surrounding Greater London which hasn't gone through similar changes. It's simply the natural progression / evolution driven by being in close proximity to a city such as London and unless we go through a catastrophic disaster resulting in a reduction in population size there is nothing we can do to stop Brookmans Park expanding.

I agree 100% with John Fraser I think it is absolutely absurd and downright insulting that just in and around London we have thousands of acres of manicured fields / lawns used by very few individuals and I would rather see some of that land used for housing.   One of the main arguments from the CPRE and Greenbelt Society is that using such land would negatively impact draining resulting in flooding but for a start I’m not suggesting all such green spaces to be developed and secondly modern draining designs  (as well as old!) could deal with potential for floods.

Much of the surrounds of BP fall within the Greenbelt but I think that we all need to remember and accept that with population continuing to grow Greenbelt rules can ultimately only delay encroachment onto the Greenbelt. For those that do not wish to see BP grow any further than the only suggestion is for them to move out of BP and look for the next BP as it was in the 1950’s.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on July 24, 2014, 04:37:09 pm
I have put together the 34 aerial images of Brookmans Park taken in 1928 and 1947 in one easy to scroll page. They are all from the English Heritage Britain Above project. The way they are presented/formatted on the site was not very user-friendly. Click on the box below to access. Gives an indication of how the area has changed in a generation.




Much better! Well done. Any chance of a similar page for Welham Green?  :)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 24, 2014, 07:19:08 pm
Much better! Well done. Any chance of a similar page for Welham Green?  :)

Done, have put them both in a new thread in the history section (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/topic,4658.msg35907.html#msg35907) so as not to take this thread off topic.

 ;)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on July 25, 2014, 08:19:48 am
I have just posted a gallery of aerial shots taken over Brookmans Park and Water End in 2002 (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/topic,4659.msg35911.html#msg35911). Look closely and you might spot your house. The pictures, viewed alongside the other gallery of aerial shots taken in 1928, 1947 and 1952 (http://www.brookmans.com/forum/index.php/topic,4658.msg35907.html#msg35907), show how much the village and the area has changed in a generation.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on July 29, 2014, 08:37:17 am
I contacted the North Mymms Parish Council regarding attending a meeting last week that was going to have representatives from the
Brookmans Park Residents Association, the Welham Green Residents Association and the North Mymms District Green Belt Society but was informed that members of the public were excluded so would be grateful if someone could post some information about the outcome.

Also the BPRA have invited John Dean to speak at the next meeting 14th August presumably about development around Brookmans Park so would also be grateful to know if he accepted and will attend.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Peeplins on July 29, 2014, 02:05:41 pm
No doubt the minutes will be published in shortly and made available on their site! http://www.northmymmspc.org.uk (http://www.northmymmspc.org.uk)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: motherchuck on August 04, 2014, 01:24:16 pm
Doesn't look like it Peeplins and their last minutes were published over three months ago.

The BPRA have no minutes and have not even published any confirmation of the meeting 14th August.

Perhaps it's been cancelled through lack of interest in new development around Brookmans Park ?

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 04, 2014, 05:25:44 pm
Doesn't look like it Peeplins and their last minutes were published over three months ago.

The North Mymms Parish Council's minutes of all meetings page (http://www.users.waitrose.com/~northmymmspc/Minutes%20header.htm#top) states that:
Quote
"The minutes of meetings are added after they have been adopted at the next full Council meeting.”

However, that doesn’t seem to have been the case over the last three months. The last minutes were published on 30 April 2014. Since then, according to the NMPC meeting dates page (http://www.users.waitrose.com/~northmymmspc/MeetingDates.htm#top), there have been six planning committee meetings, two amenities committee meetings, and one finance committee meeting, as well as three council meetings in May, June and July.

So it seems the system may have broken down. Best raise it with the council. Contact details below taken from the NMPC site. The North Mymms Parish Council Clerk is a forum member and posted today in another thread, so perhaps s/he will be able to respond here.

The Clerk
North Mymms Parish Council
1a Bushwood Close
Welham Green
Hertfordshire
AL9 7YZ
 
Telephone 01707 268418
 
Email   northmymmspc (at) waitrose (dot) com
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 05, 2014, 09:40:31 am
I can confirm that Councillor John Dean will be attending the next meeting of the Brookmans Park Residents Association on Thursday 14th August 7.45pm at the Brookmans Park URC to talk about Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council's Local Plan. The Local Plan is still scheduled to be put out to consultation in the Autumn, following which it will be published next year.


Notices will be put up in the village shortly.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 05, 2014, 10:00:16 am
Tweeted and it'll appear on our Brookmans Park Newsletter Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/brookmanspark), too.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: memsal9 on August 06, 2014, 01:05:40 pm
I can confirm that Councillor John Dean will be attending the next meeting of the Brookmans Park Residents Association on Thursday 14th August 7.45pm at the Brookmans Park URC to talk about Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council's Local Plan. The Local Plan is still scheduled to be put out to consultation in the Autumn, following which it will be published next year.


Notices will be put up in the village shortly.

I fear there'll be no open minds at this gathering but merely a group of NYMBY's hell bent on opposing any changes to the status quo. The housing crisis, the inability of our young (and old) to buy and live anywhere in the vicinity of London let alone BP, who cares so long as 'I'm alright Jack'! As a local Planning Officer recently said to me in reference to local opposition to housing within the Greenbelt "it's all about the money".
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Adrian on August 06, 2014, 02:31:34 pm
I fear there'll be no open minds at this gathering


Then go to it.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 06, 2014, 03:16:12 pm
I fear there'll be no open minds at this gathering but merely a group of NYMBY's hell bent on opposing any changes to the status quo.

I think you might be pleasantly surprised if you popped along. You might find that we are not all Nimbys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIMBY).

 :)

The first point in the BPRA's constitution states (http://www.brookmansparkra.org/p/constitution.html):

Quote
1: To safeguard and promote the interest of residents in the area on matters concerning housing and the environment.

Some will be concerned that there will be too much, others that there is not enough. Personally, I am not against development. You are welcome to put your point of view, too.  Annual subs cost £5 per household - a bargain.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: memsal9 on August 06, 2014, 04:17:10 pm
I fear there'll be no open minds at this gathering


Then go to it.
As of Saturday I'll be basking beside a pool in the Med for a couple of weeks but will be searching for the minutes on my return!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 11, 2014, 02:37:13 pm
A reminder of the BPRA meeting this coming Thursday evening at 7.45pm at the Brookmans Park United Reformed Church. Councillor John Dean  is our speaker for the evening, coming to talk about Welhat's Local Plan and how it might affect Brookmans Park.

http://www.brookmansparkra.org/ (http://www.brookmansparkra.org/)

Please let us know if you would like to attend, and send written questions for Cllr Dean in advance to brookmansparkresidentsassoc@gmail.com

Or please leave a message on 01707 661669
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 12, 2014, 12:29:40 pm
If you have a question for Councillor John Dean, please do put it in writing before midday tomorrow so that I can give him advance warning. Our email is below if you'd like to email, or ask it in this thread, or tweet to @brookmansparkra

brookmansparkresidentsassoc@gmail.com
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 12, 2014, 01:53:02 pm
It has been confirmed that at the BPRA meeting on Thursday, Councillor John Dean will be joined by Colin Haigh, Head of Planning at WHBC.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: elephant on August 12, 2014, 02:16:22 pm
Hi Mermaid,
Many thanks to you and your group for organising this. I hope that a member of my family will attend.
Could I please ask whether open questions from the floor will be accepted? I'm not sure why all questions have to be put in writing in advance. Perhaps the group has thought of this. I'd have thought that the value of this meeting was in the open exchange of ideas and in the dialogue. Why should questions be interpreted as 'warnings'? Please don't interpret my comment as a critique - I'm of the view that any opportunity is a good opportunity, especially as facilitated by yourselves, but perhaps our Councillor might agree to a short period of Q&A? Thanks elephant
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 12, 2014, 02:24:23 pm
Questions will of course be accepted from the floor at the end of the talk.

The reason for asking for written questions in advance is so that Cllr Dean can make sure that he's covered everything in his talk as far as possible. Questions at the end can then focus on clarification and/or issues arising.

We are just trying to make the most efficient use of the time, as there is a lot to say.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: elephant on August 12, 2014, 02:30:43 pm
Thanks, Mermaid.
Perhaps I'm just a little more cynical. I would rather that the bulk of time were allocated to Q&A; I question the utility of a 'talk' informed by a set of questions. Seems a one-directional conversation to me.
Regardless, very intrigued to hear what is said.
I should temper my enthusiasm for this initiative in which our elected representative agrees to converse with his constituents. I would have thought that par for the course. Nevertheless, really pleased to learn about and support the BPRA.
Thanks, Elephant
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 12, 2014, 03:07:29 pm
A hashtag has been set up for people wanting to post questions for Thursday's BPRA meeting.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 12, 2014, 03:08:22 pm
I'm obviously not explaining it very well, sorry Elephant, I'll try again:

We have invited Cllr Dean to come and give a talk about WHBC's Local Plan - the background, the research that underpins the various areas of the Local Plan eg predicted population growth in Welhat district, predicted effects of internal migration (ie people moving into the area but working in London or elsewhere, people commuting into the area for work but living elsewhere eg Bedford), the targets that central Government will impose on WHBC to build enough houses to meet the predicted burgeoning demand.

It's the latter area that we all want to know about, but it's also important to know on what it is predicated. Hence the talk.

We ask for questions in advance just so that we can make sure everything's covered, and if there's anything that needs clarifying or looking up, that can be done before the meeting. It's not done to 'warn' anybody and the talk is not based on questions asked.

I'm anticipating that the talk will be about 15 - 20 minutes, which leaves an hour to an hour and a quarter (we close at 9.30pm) for questions from the floor, so yes, the bulk of the session will be Q&A and I'm guessing they will all be about development.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: elephant on August 13, 2014, 09:39:56 am
Thanks, Mermaid. That's very clear :)
Looking forward to a very positive meeting.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 13, 2014, 02:59:47 pm
Questions are being fed through to our Twitter @BrookmansParkRA

If you do not have Twitter, you can still view the tweets on our website http://www.brookmansparkra.org/ (http://www.brookmansparkra.org/)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 13, 2014, 03:32:38 pm
Let's hope WHC doesn't plan to merge villages as in Waverley. Could someone at Thursday's meeting seek that assurance?  Or should we keep quiet in case it puts ideas into heads?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-28768326 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-28768326)

Quote
Four scenarios have been put forward, which would all see houses built on green belt sites in Farnham, Godalming, Cranleigh, Haslemere and some villages. Council papers said a review had recommended four villages were removed from the green belt - Chiddingfold, Elstead, Milford and Witley.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 14, 2014, 08:14:30 am
A reminder regarding tonight's meeting at 7.45pm at the Brookmans Park United Reformed Church.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on August 14, 2014, 08:26:52 am
If you are on Twitter and want to follow any tweets about tonight's meeting you can use the hashtag #BPLocalPlan (https://twitter.com/hashtag/BPLocalPlan?src=hash) and you will be taken through to the latest stream of tweets using that hashtag. See below.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 15, 2014, 11:40:05 am
Great meeting last night with over 100 people attending to hear Councillor John Dean talk about WHBC's Local Plan, following which Cllr Dean and Head of Planning Colin Haigh took questions from the floor.
We will get notes from the meeting up on the BPRA website in the next couple of days, but in the meantime the main points are:





Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 15, 2014, 06:17:54 pm
Following the meeting last night, Colin Haigh, Head of Planning at WHBC has emailed the BPRA:

"Thank you for the invite last night. Hopefully you and those who attended found it a useful meeting.

As discussed, if anyone would like to be added to our Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Consultation database, then please encourage them to send their name, address and email details to:    planningpolicy(at)welhat(dot)gov(dot)uk

As a result of doing so, they will be informed about key stages of the plan process, consultation periods, public events, etc. I am more than happy for this advice and email address to be hosted on your Residents Association website."
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Mermaid on August 18, 2014, 04:16:08 pm
Councillor John Dean's talk on WHBC's Local Plan is now available in full on the BPRA website:

http://www.brookmansparkra.org/ (http://www.brookmansparkra.org/)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: epiphany on September 18, 2014, 10:36:51 pm

12.500 new homes for Welwyn Hatfield 2011-2031

http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=5817 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=5817)


Local Plan Update Page 15


http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9437&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9437&p=0)


Brookmans Park - 380 dwellings (19 p.a.)


Welham Green - 360 dwellings (18 p.a.)


Little Heath 140 dwellings (7 p.a.)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on September 18, 2014, 11:11:24 pm
Local Plan Update Page 15
http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9432&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9432&p=0)

Brookmans Park - 380 dwellings (19 p.a.)
Welham Green - 360 dwellings (18 p.a.)
Little Heath 140 dwellings (7 p.a.)

But on the previous page (paragraph 9.11)

'This does not mean that this will be the distribution strategy for the Local Plan but it is useful to understand how the need for housing affects the borough'

So we cannot assume that those figures will be the ones that are finally published.

Cue lots of wild speculation!
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Bewildered on September 26, 2014, 02:31:04 pm
At yesterdays Council Meeting of the Housing and Planning panel the committee approved the Officer recommendation to adopt a housing need of 12,500 new homes in the Borough to be delivered over the next 20 years.  Much of this development will be on land which is presently Green Belt.  The Council proposes that all existing communities within the Borough should share the burden, with Brookmans Park having a proportional share of approximately 380 new homes.

Stephen Boulton (Councillor for Brookmans Park) specifically requested that all new development on existing Green Belt land should without exception, achieve the Council's requirement for Affordable Housing  (Social Housing).  He insisted that Minutes of the Meeting should record that requirement.

The Council's draft core strategy (Local Plan) from November 2012 (policy CS7 Page 62) requires all new development to provide 25% Affordable Housing in Hatfield, 30% in Welwyn Garden City and 35% in the villages.

If Brookmans Park is required to accept 380 new homes this would include 133 Affordable Homes.  These are not "Affordable Homes" in the sense that young people from Brookmans Park would be able to buy them.  These are homes to meet the demand for Social Housing from the Council's waiting list.

The Council has identified its greatest need for Social Housing in Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield but it proposes the greatest supply in the villages.  This is social engineering by any other name.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) makes provision (para 50 page 13) for developers to make a financial contribution to the Council for Affordable Housing to be provided where it is needed most.  This is a much more sensible approach than Mr Boulton's proposal to force Social Housing into the villages.

If 35% of all new homes are for Social Housing, only 65% of new homes would be available for sale in the open market.  So the house prices will continue to rise due to lack of supply.  This will not help hard working young people in the Borough to buy a home.

There is a proper debate to be had about the provision of Social Housing.  This can be achieved in a number of ways, as envisages by the NPPF.  Mr Boulton does not seem to want that debate in advance of the Council adopting its proposed planning policies.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: hilarycarlen on October 06, 2014, 10:00:26 pm
I say "Hooray".
Brookmans Park is a very good place for some social housing.
How come we're the only village I've ever seen that doesn't have any council housing?
OK, we are a posh village, but (praise be) we are not the kind of posh village where nobody can survive unless they have a car and a few £million.
The railway station, the sensible shops, the open spaces, the social opportunities for families and kids, the schools. the doctor's surgery - all of these things make the village a very useful place to locate some social housing.
Why talk about this as "a burden"?  Bring it on.
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: James Bentall on October 07, 2014, 10:25:26 pm
The council has published their updated guidelines of their maps showing areas which could be used for development, along with their justification for which ones are more favourable, finely balanced, or less favourable. You can find the info (as well as information about the public consultation which is coming after Christmas) by visiting this webpage:


http://www.welhat.gov.uk/localplan (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/localplan)


The maps of Welham Green, Brookmans Park and Little Heath can be found near the bottom of this file: http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9488&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9488&p=0)


Whilst the council's justification for each area can be found near the bottom of this one: http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9487&p=0 (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=9487&p=0)


The council have also released a press release which reads...


Quote

A report detailing potential sites for new development in Welwyn Hatfield has been published today (Tuesday 7 October).
The report has been prepared ahead of a meeting of Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council's Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel (CHPP) on Wednesday 15 October.  It will be the first in a series of meetings ahead of the publication of a draft Local Plan, the blueprint for future growth in the borough.
The CHPP meetings taking place over the forthcoming weeks will shape the draft document that will be put to Cabinet for approval on 17 December.  The plan will identify areas of land for jobs, housing and retailing, and identify those areas which are important to protect.  Once approved by Cabinet, an extensive eight week consultation will take place with residents, businesses, community groups, other relevant organisations and neighbouring authorities.  That consultation will begin in the New Year.
An independent report released last month indicated that 12,500 is the required number of new homes in Welwyn Hatfield for the period 2011-2031.  That report took into account a range of factors about growth and future need, birth rates and the age of the population, the movement of people in and out of the borough, future investment and the creation of new jobs.  It also looked at the need for additional affordable housing.
The council have agreed to share growth as fairly as possible throughout the borough, not just in and around the two main towns but around the borough's villages too.  This means recommending growth that is proportionate to the size of existing developments, as far as that is possible.
Councillor Roger Trigg, the council's portfolio holder for planning, housing and community, said: "If we want our children and grandchildren to be able to live in the borough in the years ahead, we have to accept that thousands of new homes will be needed.
"But the Local Plan is about more than just homes; it is about planning for growth while maintaining the distinctive character of our borough.  It means providing open space for people to use, and ensuring the necessary infrastructure is in place such as roads and schools.  It is about supporting the healthy future of Welwyn Hatfield, new jobs and a vibrant local economy.
"We are making the most of all the brownfield sites in the borough to provide housing, and are allowing change of use from office to residential, but this still does not provide sufficient space for the necessary growth.  That is why we need to look at assigning land that is currently green belt as suitable for new development.
"We are set to launch a consultation on our proposed sites in January and we really want to hear the views of our communities.  They will help inform the tough decisions that the council will need to make in the months ahead before we make further decisions affecting the future of the whole borough."


James
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: John_fraser on October 07, 2014, 10:33:40 pm
Looks like the Liberal Democrats are watching this board to get ideas. Build on Britain's golf courses to solve housing crisis, says Vince Cable. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/11146976/Build-on-Britains-golf-courses-to-solve-housing-crisis-says-Vince-Cable.html)
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 08, 2014, 09:17:00 am
The council has published their updated guidelines of their maps showing areas which could be used for development, along with their justification for which ones are more favourable, finely balanced, or less favourable. You can find the info (as well as information about the public consultation which is coming after Christmas) by visiting this webpage: http://www.welhat.gov.uk/localplan (http://www.welhat.gov.uk/localplan)
James

Hi James, thanks for that, very helpful. I have gone through the various documents and picked out a few of the areas being considered in Brookmans Park, Little Heath and Welham Green (not all). I have copied the maps, the WHC conclusions and created (what I hope is) a more accessible précis of what is under discussion. Please IM me any corrections, typos etc. It should appear below, but if it doesn't show up (on some tablets), here is the link for the piece (https://medium.com/@bpnewsletter/where-will-the-new-houses-be-built-9abda0f18f9a).

Where will the new houses be built?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Cathy on October 08, 2014, 06:38:22 pm
To avoid confusion -
Today's Welwyn Hatfield Times says that there is a proposal in the new local plan to build homes on the New Barnfield former library site.
This is a mistake. I have told the reporter of his mistake.
The area called "Hatfield 11" is quite close to the New Barnfield site, but it is definitely not the New Barnfield site.
Welwyn Hatfield BC are saying that "Hatfield 11" is "less favourable" for housing than other sites for a quite a number of reasons.

Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 09, 2014, 09:01:10 am
I have updated the article below (https://medium.com/@bpnewsletter/9abda0f18f9a) to include all the areas being considered for housing in Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Little Heath. The piece includes maps, the council's description of the site and its conclusion as to whether the site is 'less favourable', 'finely balanced', or 'more favourable' for development.

Where will the new houses be built?
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 12, 2014, 10:30:34 am
WHC has just mailed me the latest on the Local Plan, embedded below. The document includes some important dates for your calendar. I have added them to the site's calendar but apologies for messing up the first post in this thread when I started updating the events listing. Sorry.

http://www.brookmans.com/pdfs/93331Local%20Plan%20Newsletter%20October%202014%20Issue%205.pdf
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Ex Libris on October 14, 2014, 07:09:45 pm
On Monday, 6 October, the DCLG published new guidance “underlining the government’s commitment to protect the green belt from development”. 
The documents can be accessed from links at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/councils-must-protect-our-precious-green-belt-land (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/councils-must-protect-our-precious-green-belt-land)
“The guidance explains that, once established, green belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional cases, through the preparation or review of the Local Plan.
It also states that housing need - including for traveller sites - does not justify the harm done to the green belt by inappropriate development."
Title: Re: Housing, planning, and development in North Mymms
Post by: Editor on October 15, 2014, 07:08:06 am
Thanks for posting this Ex Libris. I have tweeted (see below) your post and asked the DCLG @CommunitiesUK (https://twitter.com/CommunitiesUK) and the Campaign to Protect Rural England @CPRE (https://twitter.com/CPRE) whether these guidelines have any bearing on what happens in Welwyn Hatfield @WelHa