A housing developer wants to hear people’s views on its 500-home development for Walton before it’s submitted to Stafford Borough Council.
Hallam Land Management and Davidsons Development have distributed a consultation leaflet across Walton and will be holding an exhibition at The Lamb pub on Tuesday 21st May between 3pm and 8pm.
The developers say in the leaflet: “This consultation is your chance to have your say. Your views are important to us and will be considered as we progress our plans for the site.”
Here’s some information on the development from the leaflet:
Information from the exhibition at The Lamb will be available after the 21st at www.fpcr.co.uk/consultation and a comments form will also be available to download. You can also give your views by emailing mail@fpcr.co.uk or writing to FPCR Environment and Design Ltd, Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby DE74 2RH.
Comments must be received by Friday 7th June.
Related Posts:
26 comments
Ian
I suggest that all the house holders / tennants that may be affected by the outcome of the decision are contacted by mail and not presumed that they will or buy the local newspaper so they get the chance to air their views
Allan Skerratt
If you cut through all the statistics and information supplied by our altruistic planning experts.
You will see that SBC and the planners are not interested in what YOU want in YOUR town your opinions to them are worthless. Which is why the consultation process is designed so that MOST people are NOT consulted.
What I find most unpleasant is the totally arrogant attitude of SBC and the planners towards the residents of Stone particularly anyone who is prepared to question what they are doing to OUR town.
Allan Skerratt
Tony Dennis
Some interesting points on both sides. I know that Alan Skerratt is a local to Walton and why he has concerns. But who is Mark? he seems to have a wealth of knowledge and information on the subject, is he local to Stone and has a construction/development background. He seems very pro this scheme. Come on Mark all this information and no surname, tell us where you stand.
Allan Skerratt
Thanks gentleman I think we all know where you are coming from and have done all along. You dont live in our town but are happy to see it built on. Thanks.
No matter what the council want or what the planners say if enough people make enough noise changes happen.
For example 4700 people decided that despite the extensive consultation (NOT) they did not want a supermarket on Westbridge park and minds were changed..
Allan Skerratt
Ben
Allan,
I think you need to put this development into perspective.
Stafford is getting over 7,000 new homes, 2200 for Doxey, 2000 for Beaconside etc, which equates to 76% of the total housing allocation, Rural areas are taking on 12% and Stone is taking on 8% which equates to about 1000 homes over the next 5 years.
As stated previously for the last 2 years Stone has built approximately 6% of the housing stock needed in the borough with between 68 – 72 % coming from Stafford and between 29% – 32% from rural area. Despite you incorrectly believing that rural areas are not doing their fair share. I would argue that it is in fact the second largest town in the Borough that is not taking its fair share of the burden.
Allan, your comments regarding not living in Stone is irrelevant, you claim that we want Stone “built on” just because we advocate that more houses should be built in Stone, whereas you advocate that more houses should be built in Milwich, Barlaston etc etc etc. Why is it that you are able to comment on the housing allocation for other areas that you do not live in but you dont like it when others do??
Final points, if you want a thriving town you need a sustainable community, the fact is what you have got in Stone is an ageing population, with many youngster forced to live outside of the town due to the supply of housing not meeting demand, which forces prices up.
Allan, if you think strength of opposition is a barrier to developments you are deluded. Nobody wants developments near to them and therefore you are always going to get a large ground swell of opinion against any development…..,councils and Government are well aware of this and prepared for it. However unless action groups come up with any sound rationale, preferably supported by policy as to why the development should not happen the development will invariably forge ahead, admittedly there may be compromise etc.
I dont want to comment on WBP because clearly that is a seperate issue, but i would ask you whose minds were changed?? Not the borough councils, despite objections the mixed use allocation for WBP still remains in the local plan and will still be decided by the planning inspectorate as was alaways intended.
mark
Tony / Allan.
It’s not about wanting Stone built on, its merely a realisation that Stone, as the second largest town in the Borough has an important role to play in meeting the Borough’s housing target. As I have detailed above, despite Stone being the second largest settlement it is only expected to accomodate 8% of the Borough’s housing target over the next 20 years, this is less than areas such as Doxey and Redhill. Allan, it’s obvious from your posts that you are happy to see development anywhere but Stone. And in particular you would like Stafford and other rural settlements to take more of the burden? Doesn’t seem very fair does it given the level of development that they are already expected to accomodate?
Allan i’m afraid you are mistaken in believing that anything has changed with WBP, unless you have some inside knowledge about the draft local plan. As far as I am aware, no changes have been made to the draft local plan, as such WBP is still included as a mixed use allocation and will continue to be considered by an independent inspector. Do you know of anything different? I would expect the Inspector to take into account the consultation that has taken place, both officially and unofficially, however they do not have to pay any regard to it. The inspectors overriding consideration will be the planning arguments for and against, and whether the proposal is suitable based on justifiable planning arguments. I have no wish to go over old arguments but despite 4,700 people signing the petition, only 700 people objected to the scheme during the consultation period.
Tony, I am former Stone resident and a regular visitor to Stone. I am not pro the Walton scheme because I am yet to be convinced that it offers the best location to accomdate the 500 homes needed in Stone, I also believe improvements can be made to the scheme. As stated above, my posts have merely sought to provide some perpective and context for the number of homes being built in Stone. Despite the views of some, I do not believe Stone is being harshly treated, rather I believe the opposite is true. I genuinely believe that if SBC were minded too they could justifiably make a claim that more housing should be built in Stone, expecially in light of the proposed extenstion to Stone Business Park. More jobs, greater need for housing etc.
Flo
Sorry don’t have any facts or figures,does stone/walton really need more housing?
From what i see in the town, there is already an abundance of property that is un affordable for people, to buy in stone..Are there enough schools,Doctors etc for the town to cope,not to mention the problems with flooding etc..
Trevor Davis
Flo
Stafford BC has stated that 7000 homes are required in the borough, the reason why houses are unaffordable is due to the simple economics of supply and demand. There is a lack of supply and high demand which drives prices up, if there was greater supply demand would be met which lowers house prices. You only have to look at the astronomical house prices in London to see this. As part of the planning process Doctors, schools etc will be consulted on there ability to cope and additional capacity etc. If they can not cope the council can negotiate additional monies from developers to mitigate against this demand.
Ben Alcock
Allan
Also are you aware of the large number of houses planned for Baswich on the former police site? Also to say there has been few new builds in Baswich is incorrect. There is a new housing development to the bottom of Baswich near the industrial estate. Houses have also been built in Weeping Cross and in the Haywoods. There is a housing development oposite Swynerton army camp, although i dont know the exact date of construction it is within 25 years. Eccleshall has seen new developments near the town centre and is being allocated a greater proprtion of housing in terms of its size compared to Stone
Ben Alcock
Allan
A couple of points.
1. Housebuilders can not exclude people from buying houses in a particular area and why would they? We live in a free society where people are allowed to live where they want People relocate for a number of reasons i.e work etc and therefore by adopting a policy that you are advocating you will stop these people being able to buy new builds
2. However, as Mark has stated the reforms that the Government has set out in the Welfare Reform Act and the Green paper produced on Affordable Housing, plus other reports by Martin Cave every tenant matters and John Hills etc In all these reports it states that Affordable housing should be allocated based on need with social landlords given a list of criterias to establish this need The allocation of affordable housing has also been reviewed The consultation paper produced by the Government in 2011 and which was sent to all Social Landlords confirmed that Social Housing providers will be allocating future housing to those people with family links to the area or live and work in the area Therefore the affordable houses provided at Walton will be allocated to locals only
3. You state that the House prices will not be any cheaper than other parts of the Stone. This maybe the case but that is simplistic view to take. Housing affordability is only 1 issue facing homebuyers, however recent years this has become easier through lower interest rates and house prices falling in some areas. The main barrier for first time buyers is there inability to secure enough funds to pay the deposit required. The Governments new scheme to help individuals pay deposits has been welcomed by all housebuilders so it is highly likely it will be adopted in Stone
Allan Skerratt
Mark
You pick and choose which bits you respond to:
Consultation ??
Villages with no building ??
I agree there will be mechanisms for keeping the price of the affordable homes down. I do not doubt that. What I said in my original post was you cannot be sure they will be sold to people from Stone.
allan skerratt
mark
Allan, which bits have i been selective about responding too? I have addressed all the comments that you have made. The housing proposal at Walton has been included in the draft Local Plan, which was out on consultation less than a few months ago. You were perfectly aware of the mixed use allocation at WBP, which is also being promoted within the same document, yet you claim not to know about the proposed housing allocation at Walton. SBC cannot be blamed for people not reading the draft Local Plan thoroughly.
I’m sure that there are villages that have seen little, or no housing development in the Borough, however that does not dispute the fact that Stone is the second largest settlement in the Borough and, as such needs to provide a level of development that not only meets its own housing requirments but some of the Borough’s. Do you not consider this to be reasonable? Do you honestly believe that Stone should not be providing any new housing? Do you also believe that housing should only be built for existing residents and not those wishing to relocate to the area for whatever reason? What about those Stone residents that have moved out of the area to Stafford etc, should these people also be denied housing because they are not Stafford residents.
Ben
Allan, please see my post above. In 2010 32% of developments completed were in rural areas, 2011 29% of developments were in rural areas compared to 6% in Stone. I have also stated how many permissions were granted last year for the villages that you cited.
mark
Allan, the affordable houses can only be sold or rented to those people that can prove that they fit the affordabilituy criteria, as such there is a selection process (or sorts) for these properties. FACT.
The Police HQ, which believe is in the Baswich has been earmarked for housing and would expect this site to accomodate atleast 100 dwellings. House building has also occured in Weeping Cross. Approximately 80 units (I suspect) have been built just before you get to two hump back bridges on route to the crematorium. i assume that this in the Weeping Cross ward. A housing scheme has also recently been approved Eccleshall, as recently publicised in the Newsletter.
Notwithstanding the above, the 500 houses proposed in Stone is part of the next plan period, therefore, this is new provision and the housing distribution going forward is as above. Do you not think Stone should provide new housing given that its the seond largest ettlement in the Borough? Stafford is accomodating 5500 dwellings. Do you not think Stafford is taking more of its fair share, irrespective of which ward the developments are being built?
The local plan consultation has been on public consultation a number of times over the past 2 years. The plan is placed on public consultation for a 6 week period at each time and comments could have been made by post or online. The plan was recently on public consultation, did you not use this opportunity to review the plan and comment on wbp? I urged people to do so.
The local plan consultation has been publicised in the local press and on the councils website, as such surprised the professionals were not aware of it, or understand the local plan making process?
I take it by your posts that your also not aware of the proposed extension to stone business park? FYI the draft local plan includes 3 proposals for Stone; the mixed use allocation at wbp, the 500 houses ar Walton and the extension to Stone business park. Its too late to comment on the draft local plan, however you can still read the plan on the councils website. I would suggest that you read it because you will then be more informed.
mark
Allan, your post also fails to aknowledge that one of the mechanisms that affordable housing can be provided is through low cost market housing. this is where housing is set lower than the market value for that type of property in the area and its my understanding that the sale price is set by, o atleast agreed with, by the registered social landlords and local authority. As such your post is wrong in this respect. All the information that have provided can be verified by reviewing the draft local plan, reviewing the annual monitoring reports that set out how many dwellings have been built over the previous year or by speaking to a registered social landlord or planning consultant. Final point, as part of this development 30 per cent of the total number of dwellings will be set aside for affordable dwellings, which as I have previously explained can comprise of social rented, shared equity or low cost market housing. The type of affordable housing to be provided, as well as the mix of the affordable housing units is agreed with local authority and will form part of a section 106 agreement to ensure that they remain affordable.
Allan Skerratt
Mark again a very thorough and no doubt accurate account. This is my final post
The points I made in my first post are still valid:
1 houses cannot be selectively sold to certain sections of any community its against the law. So purchase will be open to anyone. FACT
2 the villages of Barlaston and Oulton, Baswich, Chartley, Church Eaton, Eccleshall, Fulford, Gnosall and Woodseaves, Haywood and Hixon, Milford, Milwich and Hilderstone, Seighford, Swynnerton, Weeping Cross. have seen vitually no housebuilding in the last 25+ years FACT for whatever reason.
On the issue of consultation I am sure SBC follow the rules on consultation. IE a couple of hours in a church hall in the middle of a weekday when everyone is at work. It is the issue which annoys the people I speak to the most. I had this conversation a few nights ago with 30+ mainly professional people and not one knew there had been a consultation at all. Conveniently unpublicised was a comment made. Working people with children do not have time to trawl through SBC website to find out the detail of the Borough plan.
Allan Skerratt
mark
Allan, all the statistics have been taken from the draft local plan, as stated in my original post. Please check the draft local plan to check the figures I have quoted. It is not possible to restrict the sale of the houses to Stone residents, however that does not mean existing residents will not benefit by the offers that have suggested in my post. The sale of the properties will be based on a first come first served basis.. Given that the properties are not yet on the market (or received planning permission)n residents of Stone have a head start on the rest of the population and can register their interest before the development becomes known, which again benefits Stone residents. In terms of the rented properties, in order to get a rented property you will need to be registered. I understand that as part of the criteria for allocating properties to those in need is based on family connections and ties, as such, again this will benefit Stone. Of the villages that you have mentioned, only Barlaston is a key service centre. The rest of the rural areas are not expected to accomodate more than a handful of dwellings. im also aware of housing developments being promoted in Barlaston. Your post fails to acknowledge the significant amount of dwellings that have been built in Stafford and the other ket service villages. It also fails to acknowledge that Stone, as the second largest settlement in the Borough needs to provide additional housing. You, and Stone residents have had consultation on the proposal for 500 dwellings in Stone because its been included in the draft local plan for the past 2 years. Over the years, SBC have consulted on the draft local plan and invited comments. What more consultation do you want? Final point, Councils are required to maintain a 5year housing land supply, currently stafford bc only has about 3 years. (Please refer to the castleworks planning appeal). Because SBC does not have a 5 year housing land supply it will encourage speculative housing developments to come forward eg TVT.
Allan Skerratt
Mark that is a very thorough reply with lots of statistics which no one can check and it totally misses the two points I made.
The ‘affordable homes for local people’ will be available to everyone. The Welsh have tried building houses for ‘locals’ only before and lost in court. So the houses will be available to anyone that wants them. The houses cannot be any more or less expensive than similar houses in and around Stone (simple economics). If they were significantly cheaper they would be snapped up by social landlords. So they wont be just for local people and they wont be any cheaper than any other similar house. There will be the same sort of deals that all builders use on their starter homes.
My second point despite your statistics says show me anything more than a handful of houses that have been built in the villages I have listed. In fact show me ONE house in Barlaston, Milwich , Hilderstone, Fulford, Chartley You can quote whatever figures you like. Instead try looking, you cannot show me any houses in those villages because none have been built for many years.
So I repeat:
I think the people of Stone should have a consultation exercise similar to the one for Westbridge Park to decide if they want another 500 houses.
I am equally sure they wont get it.
Allan Skerratt
Chris Evans
The timing of this proposal is rather questionable too. Presumably the land owner wants to sell off the fields now before the eventual purchasers realise that the proposed route of the new HS2 highspeed railway line will lie just 580 metres from the edge of the estate!
Chris
Councillor Mrs Jill Hood
Hello Chris I found it frustrating at the consultation held at the Lamb Inn that when challenged the traffic consultant said he knew nothing about HS2 and questioned my information . I gave him the HS2 maps I had , he took exception to me questioning why they failed to include the HS2 on their map,. His exhibition map was outdated and incorrect it included a Dr’s surgery that isn’t there. When I asked about traffic congestion he said the road would be widened, tongue in cheek, I asked which houses he would be demolishing and he said there would be a cycle path. Strange reply ! I spoke to many very angry residents who live in Walton and who explained to me how they felt they would be affected by the development, many of them cited problems they already have such as flooding and traffic congestion. Are they aware of the many under ground springs , the answer is no. All answers were text book similar to the ones Mark Alcock constantly quotes . We are dealing with real people here something which planners seem to forget . The biggest surprise of the night to me was when a consultant was asked about how Walton residents could get the best value for Walton from Section 106 money. His reply was it’s already been discussed and decided it will be invested in a bus and doctors surgery. This he told to a group of six people of which I was one. I’m a borough councillor Section 106 is a matter for council and not an off the cuff remark in a local pub. My personal opinion when this development was discussed was and is build them at Aston Lodge. Nimbyism at its worst !
Trevor Davis
Cllr Hood, I find your lack of knowledge of events in your own constituency staggering. The Walton development was identified in the local plan, which has been agreed by the county council and ratified by the Town council, therefore you cant now claim that you were unaware of the proposal.
HS2 route does not go through the development, it is near the development so I fail to see your point as to why it has a bearing. Furthermore the decision regarding HS2 has not been made yet.
The site is not on a flood plain I would urge you to read the reports conducted by the Environment agency which also confirm this.
“Text book answers” ?? don’t you mean planning policy?? something you seem totally unaware of….. it still makes me chuckle when I read your ludicrous suggestion that a supermarket should be built in an outlying village!!! Comedy gold!! and complete ignorance on your behalf.
Surely as a Cllr you must be aware of how Section 106 money is allocated and agreed??
Councillor Mrs Jill Hood
Hello Trevor, not once have i claimed I was unaware of the proposal. What I will state is that when this was first proposed me and my independent colleagues councillor Mark Green and councillor Rob kenney voted a strong and clear NO to this proposal while the Tories voted YES , of course they had been told how to vote. I’m so pleased I’ve brought a little sunshine into your life and made you chuckle, but I think someone must have been listening to me as we will now have a huge supermarket , (forgive me for not referring to it as a food store) built in Creswell just down the road from us.
mark
Allan, there are a number of different ways of providing affordable housing as well as the one that you have mentioned above. These include shared equity schemes and social rented properties, which registered social landlords would manage and allocate to people on their waiting list.
In addiiton, to this housebuilders are able to offer deals to first time buyers, such as 95% deposits etc, which makes them more affordable than second hand housing market. The main problem with affordability at the moment isn’t necessarily the house prices because the monthly mortgage repayments are affordable for most people. The key barrier to entry is the need for a 10 or 15% deposit, which is difficult for first time buyers, hence the attractiveness of new builds.
In terms of housing distribution across the Borough; Stafford is expected to accomodate 76% of the total housing requirement, Stone (as the second largest settlment) is expected to accomodate 8% and the key service villages of Eccleshall, Gnosall, Hixon, Great Haywood, Little Haywood / Colwich, Haughton, Weston, Woodseaves, Barlaston, Tittensor and Yarnfield are expected to accomodate 12%. The remaining 8% will go to the rest of the rural areas. To put this into perspective Stafford is expected to accomodate 5,500 dwellings, Stone 469, Key service villages 629 and the rest of the rural areas 297 (Note these figures are new provision and do not take into account previous completions. Based on past completions Stafford has accomodated 7,200 dwellings, compared with 800 dwellings in Stone). In light of the figures quoted, which have been taken from the draft local plan, do you believe Stone is receiving too much housing? It should also be noted that in the past the proportion of new dwellings built in Stone has been as high as 12%, as such the latest housing distribution actually promotes less dwellings in Stone (as a proportion) than in the previous local plan. Final point, its largely irrelevant as to whether Stone wants the extra 500 dwellings. SBC has a requirement to meet their housing needs and national goverment requires them to maintain a 5 year housing land supply, which they are currently failing to do, as such they have to build more houses. I’m afraid, Stone, as the second largest settlement has to take some of this burden.
Allan Skerratt
I have just read the proposals from Hallam Land Management and Davidsons Development for 500 new houses in Walton. There are a few sweeteners such as a cycle path and a park but these tend to be de rigueur on most new estates. They say there will be affordable homes for local people but for economic reasons they cannot be cheaper than any similar new house in Stone and for reasons of discrimination law they cannot be sold ONLY to specific sections of society. All interested buyers must have an equal opportunity to buy. So they are offering nothing new really. I do wonder, and this is only my personal view, why Stafford Borough Council continues to build more and more houses in and around Stone. In the many years I have been associated with Stone less than a small handful of houses have been built in other wards of the Borough Council such as:
Barlaston and Oulton, Baswich, Chartley, Church Eaton, Eccleshall, Fulford, Gnosall and Woodseaves, Haywood and Hixon, Milford, Milwichand Hilderstone, Seighford, Swynnerton, Weeping Cross.
Many of the borough councillors live in these pleasant country villages. Is this Nimbyism by our Borough Councillors.
I think the people of Stone should have a consultation exercise similar to the one for Westbridge Park to decide if they want another 500 houses. I personally think they should be built in Weeping Cross but as that is Mike Heenan’s ward that will not happen.
Allan Skerratt