Beyond Green disappointed at dismissal of exemplary sustainable community at Pincents Hill

Pincents07_sketch-view

Beyond Green is disappointed by the Secretary of State’s decision to dismiss its appeal for a sustainable new community at Pincents Hill, Reading.

In his report, the Inspector concluded that Beyond Green’s proposals would be benign in their impact on biodiversity, impact on traffic, impact on other local infrastructure and many other areas in which objections had been made by opponents to our proposals. He also acknowledged many of the scheme’s benefits, including the delivery of a wide range of much needed housing, facilities and services and recognised that the sort of development proposed would allow residents to “to gain access to work and leisure facilities without the need for their own car.”

However, the Inspector took the view that there would be “harm to the landscape character of the area” and that “the effect on the wider spatial character of the area would be harmful… because of the effect as seen from important viewpoints” and it is primarily on this basis that the appeal was dismissed.

Beyond Green Chairman, Jonathan Smales, said:

“Obviously we’re deeply disappointed. We have worked hard on this project over some years and we presented a scheme that is compact, green, accessible, affordable, full of character and with a complement of facilities which would both enrich the community and mean that people could walk rather than drive to things they need to meet their everyday needs. We aimed to create a real place. There is no doubt that landscape issues on the fringes of the site are important here but in his report we believe the Inspector made no compelling case as to why they were seen to be paramount, giving succour instead to those of a narrow preservationist mindset.

“Our proposals passed the stringent tests of all the statutory environmental bodies. Moreover Pincents Hill would have been one of the lowest carbon developments in the UK…”

Read more in our press release below.

Beyond Green press statement – June 2011


Village Green application on Pincents Hill rejected

Beyond Green is delighted with West Berkshire Council’s decision to dismiss the Save Calcot Action Group’s application to register the Pincents Hill site as a Village Green. Its decision followed a seven-day public inquiry in June 2010 and was in line with the recommendations of Inspector Alun Aylesbury who examined evidence relating to claims that the land had been used as of right by significant number of inhabitants of the area for lawful sports and pastimes, for 20 years. Beyond Green’s evidence contested this claim, setting out in some detail the history of the site over the relevant period. This included the ongoing use for parts of the site for private grazing and agriculture, ongoing use of part of the site as a private garden and the use of much of the site as a pay-to-play golf course for most of the 1990s. Having considered both sets of evidence, the Inspector recommended rejection of the application and noted in his report that:

“It is because I markedly preferred and found more convincing the evidence of the Objector’s witnesses about the state of affairs during the active golf course years of the 1990s, to the evidence to a different effect which was called for the Applicant.”

Executive Chairman of Beyond Green Developments, Jonathan Smales, welcomed the decision, saying:

“Our proposals for high quality homes and community facilities at Pincents Hill have been attacked by some with great gusto; but the determination to oppose us and our ideas for much needed local housing, public open space and community facilities overtook the facts of the matter.

“Local people have been misled by SCAG and by others who have overly politicised the planning process, getting in the way of the evidence. It is now clear that this has been the case with regard to the Village Green application and it surely is the case with regard to the suitability of this site for development, with all the relevant authorities having agreed that the impacts on transport, ecology and local public services can be fully mitigated or even improved.

“It is time the propaganda and carefree scaremongering around this site and this project ceased and a fair and measured debate began.”

Pincents Hill Village Green press release 22nd Feb 2011
Village Green Inspector’s report January 2011


Sandleford Park raises questions for forthcoming EIP

In recent weeks we’ve asked a series of questions about West Berkshire’s apparently politically-motivated decision to allocate Sandleford Park as a strategic housing site for 2000 homes, in spite of its being ranked bottom of 12 sites in the council’s own sustainability appraisal of possible sites. These have been widely reported and others too have raised similar concerns in advance of the council’s Examination in Public of its Core including other landowners and elected representatives of those living near the Sandleford Park site, who have had no opportunity to give their views about possible development of the site. The Examination in Public runs from 2nd November for two weeks and takes place at Shaw House, Newbury. Links to some recent articles in the local press can be found below.

Inspection Begins, interview on Newbury Sound, 1 Nov 2010
Developer demands mini-town answers, Reading Chronicle, 28 Oct 2010More questions posed over Sandleford site, Newbury News 27 Oct 2010
‘Bias’ claims by developer, Reading Chronicle, 21 Oct 2010Developer’s information bid, Newbury News, 21 Oct 2010‘Pincents Hill was decided by politics’, Reading Post, 20 Oct 2010


Masterplan for Sandleford Park adds insult to injury

Beyond Green Developments (formerly Blue Living) has this week sent an open letter to Mr Lugg, Head of Planning and Trading Standards at West Berkshire Council, regarding the Council’s recent publication of a number of documents relating to Sandleford Park, a site allocated by the council for 2000 new homes in spite of ranking bottom of 12 sites in the Council’s appraisal of possible housing locations.

The documents include a masterplan for Sandleford Park, and a detailed note of a meeting held between promoters of Sandleford Park and 22 officers of West Berkshire Council, and raise a number of serious questions about the Council’s process in reaching the conclusions of its draft Core Strategy.

Jonathan Smales, Executive Chairman, said: “The mysterious elevation of Sandleford Park as a strategic site is inappropriate, unfair and another example of the politicisation of the planning process. We’ve been open and specific in our proposals for Pincents Hill and have suffered a local backlash for it. But what of the rights of people living close to Sandleford Park? This hugely inappropriate place for a strategic development has been clandestinely promoted by West Berkshire Council itself – firmly on the backfoot – and acting against all of its own advice on sustainability and other criteria. Meanwhile the wider community has been kept in the dark.

“The risible masterplan for Sandleford Park serves only to add insult to injury; this kind of political stitch up makes a bad joke of the planning system, of placemaking and of sustainability. The Council should be ashamed of itself.”

Pincents Hill Sandleford masterplan press releaseBeyond Green Developments letter to Mr Gary Lugg


Introducing Beyond Green Developments

BG-MAIN-LOGO

Blue Living is changing its name to Beyond Green Developments to reflect its integral role as part of the Beyond Green Group. We at Beyond Green set up Blue Living in 2008 to bring real change to the way developments are conceived, planned and delivered – by putting Beyond Green’s sustainability thinking into practice in our own developments.

Introducing Beyond Green DevelopmentsClick here for details of some of  Beyond Green Developments’ projects


Blue Living submits Freedom of Information request about Sandleford Park

Blue Living has submitted a request to West Berkshire Council under the Freedom of Information Act to discover how the final draft of a key local planning strategy was altered at the last minute to include Sandleford Park, a controversial new housing development at a historic parkland south of Newbury.

Jonny Anstead, Director, said “West Berkshire Council has a legal obligation to ensure that it bases its decisions about where to accommodate new housing on a firm evidence base. We want to be sure – as, no doubt, will the Inspector at the EiP – that the council’s preferred strategic housing locations are based on proper evidence, genuinely deliverable and not a matter of short-term political populism.”

Pincents Hill Sandleford Park press release



Blue Living explains its reasons for lodging Pincents Hill planning appeal

Blue Living has written to a range of stakeholders to explain the reasons behind its decision to lodge an appeal against the refusal of its planning application for Pincents Hill. At its core is the fact that the planning application for Pincents Hill did not receive a fair and proper hearing due to the overt politicisation of the planning process.

Jonathan Smales, Chief Executive, said: “There is a difference between localism and populism. We believe that line was crossed in a poor decision on Pincents Hill. We hope to demonstrate at the forthcoming appeal how Blue Living’s proposals for Pincents would bring a wide range of excellent benefits for people already living in the area, while meeting urgent housing need, and all at a comparatively low impact.”

The letter was accompanied by a newsletter update on the proposals which is also being delivered to 8,000 residents in the local area.

Pincents Hill appeal press releasePincents Hill stakeholder letterPincents Hill newsletter update


Appeal submitted for Blue Living development at Pincents Hill

Blue Living has submitted an appeal against the February 2010 refusal of its outline planning application for Pincents Hill. It aims to demonstrate that the reasons West Berkshire Council gave for refusing the application are not justified.

Jonathan Smales, Chief Executive, said, “Pincents Hill will create local jobs and deliver new community facilities that benefit both new and existing residents. We hope to demonstrate at the forthcoming appeal that Pincents Hill will avoid worsening local traffic, will improve public transport and will make it easier to walk and cycle, as well as preserving important natural features and improving public access to green space and open countryside.”


Last day of the Village Green Inquiry

The Village Green Inquiry closed today after hearing 2 weeks of evidence from local residents and landowners relating to the use of the land over the last 20 years.

Jonny Anstead, Director, said “Overall we feel that the Inquiry went well for us. The applicant’s evidence and witnesses were remarkably inconsistent and some of them were absolutely unbelievable. There was very little evidence produced for the various activities claimed and under cross examination these activities were reduced to single occasions rather than frequent events. For our part, we presented a clear and coherent version of historic events and we hope that the Inspector will recognise this in his recommendation to West Berkshire.”

The Inspector is due to report to West Berkshire Council with a recommendation in a few months time.


Village Green Inquiry on Pincents Hill begins today

A Village Green Inquiry relating to the area of land covered by our outline planning application for Pincents Hill commences today and is expected to last two weeks. The Inspector will hear evidence from the applicant, Save Calcot Action Group, landowners, and people who have knowledge of the use of the site over the last 20 years. He will then advise West Berkshire Council on whether or not the site meets the conditions to be designated as a Village Green.

Jonny Anstead, Director, said “We don’t believe that use of the former golf course and adjacent grazing land meets the conditions required to designate it as a village green and we’re confident that by the end of the Inquiry we will have demonstrated this to the Inspector. It seems clear to us that this process, which is very expensive both for us and for local taxpayers, has been motivated only by a desire to prevent development rather than based on any substantial evidence of qualifying use.”