“City
for the 21st Century” ?
or how big business and the
planning system threatens to destroy the quality of life in
NEW
– Update by Jean Saunders on the Swindon Local Plan
At a Swindon Trades Union Council meeting on November
5th, with a broad range of trade union and environmental
organisations present, it was agreed that Martin Wicks and Jean Saunders would
draw up a draft of a document which would outline some of the issues raised by
the proposed alterations to the Wiltshire and Swindon Structure Plan – 2016,
and the principles of an ‘alternative plan’ which would challenge the ‘free
market’ basis of the so-called ‘development’ of the town, What follows below is
the draft for discussion amongst all those present at the November 5th
meeting, and any other organisations or individuals interested in breaking the
consensus of the main political parties on the model of ‘development’ the town
is suffering.
The release of two draft town planning blueprints at the same time
can only add to public confusion about how they might object to the proposals.
This might be viewed as a cynical ploy by
The text below is a first draft for the comment of individuals and
organizations. Send us any comments or suggestions at the e-mail address shown
at the bottom of the page.
Draft Wiltshire and
Regional Planning Guidance for the south-west has
decreed that 3,000 new homes should be built in Wiltshire each year between
1996 and 2006. After this date, the
allocations may need to be changed to reflect any ‘under or overprovision’ of
homes. The draft Wiltshire Structure
Plan has distributed 43% of the new dwelling allocation to
There is no shortage of land
in
Despite all these land
allocations, house-building has only averaged about 800 completions a year. The Plan indicates that over 1,500 new houses would need to be
built each year in order to meet the new targets for
No doubt one of the drivers
for the Coate development is Carillion
(formerly Tarmac) who had an option to buy up all the farmland at Coate when the hospital site was up for grabs. Presumably, the university campus would be
built under the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Carillion
might gain again.
What
are the other pitfalls of the plan?
An
‘alternative plan’ in contradiction with the general direction in which the town
is being driven by a combination of a planning system which imposes
‘development’ against the democratic wishes of local people, obviously requires
a lot of work by individuals and organisations. What follows is only the first
step on that road. It is merely a draft for discussion. But it is a necessary
one if the ‘development’ juggernaut is to be halted. We welcome comments on the
text or on issues not covered.
“City for the 21st
Century”
If any
thing illustrated the folly of the local political establishment it was the
‘campaign’ to win for the town ‘City status’. Whilst
this might have looked good for the kudos of local politicians, for most local
people it would not make a jot of difference whether the place went under the
title of a town or city. What matters to them is the quality of life. The
‘development’ of the 1960s and ‘70s destroyed the life of the town centre and
reduced it to a place where people get drunk on a Friday or Saturday.
This is a
town where the Mechanics Institute, which was built by subscription of the Rail
Works workforce, has been left rotting for years, whilst the former Rail Works
itself has been turned into a monument of modern life, where shopping as a
“leisure activity” has been deified. There is a certain irony that you can
wander through it and see where people used to make things, whilst looking at
largely characterless goods, many of which have been produced by cheap labour
in ‘
The growth
of the town after the second world war was largely
based around the influx of overspill labour from
With the
decline of the Rail Works workforce the Council looked to diversification so as
to provide the necessary jobs for the local population. Mirroring national
trends, there was a shift from engineering to service industries, though given
the very large engineering base the change was all the greater.
In 1968
the Council produced “
However,
as the land which the Council owned began to run out there was a debate on
these projections. In 1984 the Council produced “A New Vision for Thamesdown” which raised the need for “consolidation”. In
1990 it organised a conference on the “Limits to Growth”. In 1991 a policy of
‘consolidation and improvement’ was adopted for the period after 2001. In the
decade up to 1991
“Broadly
strategic policy is of pursuing ‘consolidation and improvement’ in the area.
This involves encouraging business development both of incoming and indigenous
firms, in approved employment areas; whilst at the same time recognising that
the infrastructure of the area would inevitably worsen unacceptably if the high
growth rates achieved in the past two decades were to continue.”
(Thamesdown Borough Council Development Plan 1992/3)
In the
Public Inquiry into the Local Plan in October 1995 the Borough reiterated its
commitment to ‘consolidation’ and made reference to the danger of economic
growth pressures fuelling demand for further housing.
“If
employment developments are allowed much in excess of Structure Plan requirements
there is a danger that economic pressures could fuel demands for further house
building over and above that already planned for, or result in increased inward
commuting and further...congestion.”
(Thamesdown Borough Council 1995)
These pressures
were reflected in the increase during the decade up to 1991 of 24,000 jobs in
The
pressure for house building targets comes from national government estimates of
‘need’; based on forecasts which are notoriously difficult to make. In 1996 the
Tory government forecast a growth of 4.4 million households by 2016. As a study
of
“Growth
pressures will clearly intensify as we move into the next millennium.
The growth
of the town was based on land acquisitions made by the Council, at agricultural
prices. This at least meant that the Council had a measure of control on the
way which the growth was planned. However, local business began to buy options
on land which led to an increase in prices and the Council was priced out of
the market. This meant that the Council lost the ability to control growth, and
more and more the ‘developers’ have called the shots.
The
industrial development of the town since the decline of the railways has been
dependent to a large extent on the influx of foreign capital, some around ‘new
wave’ manufacturing. In 1997 employment in the internationally owned
enterprises locally was around 16,000. The town’s
employment structure has become integrated in wider national and global
markets. This makes it more vulnerable to the pressures of global markets.
Hence, despite major investment by companies such as Motorola we have seen
rounds of ‘down-sizing’ whilst call centres have recently closed.
The influx
of these companies has seen the adoption of US ‘industrial relations’ methods
and hence a growth in the non-union and anti-union work environment. The only
exception to this has been in Honda where the AEEU/Amicus was able to use
employment legislation to win a ballot for recognition.
Whilst it
is obviously the responsibility of the trades unions to tackle this challenge,
it is nevertheless true that the Council has largely remained silent on the
injustices perpetrated under the guise of ‘industrial relations’ by many of the
new firms.
One of the
other consequences of ‘globalisation’ which has had an impact on the employment
market has been the growth of foreign labour into cleaning and other low paid
jobs which local people will not do. There is now a veritable army of migrant
labour carrying out work of this sort, in a non-union environment, of course. There
have been a reactionary chorus about these people ‘taking our jobs’. In fact,
by and large, these people are filling a gap in the local employment market.
They should be welcomed and assisted in resisting their exploitation as a cheap
labour source.
The move
towards a unitary authority whilst it may have given the Council more control
over services provision, multiplied its problems. It was £12 million
under-funded in its first year. The move also meant that the new authority had
joint responsibility with Wiltshire County Council for the Structure Plan. The acquisition of land from the
Wiltshire County Council would test the mettle of an authority (and a political
party, Labour). Hence today, as the free market, growth at any price scourge
has taken over the body of the Labour Party, the whole
political establishment has adopted this orthodoxy. All of
the political establishment supported building on the
The
Thatcher government not only set about destroying the power of the unions, it
also set about destroying local democracy. Council house sales were designed to
create a ‘home owning democracy’ which would destroy the political base of
support for the Labour Party on Council estates up and down the country.
The
government gradually introduced central government controls on local councils.
Whereas at the start of her government 25% of the income of councils came from
the centre and the rest was raised locally, giving a greater element of
control, today the situation is virtually reversed. Councils are robbed of
business taxes whereas before they used to receive all of the business rate
collected.
Despite
the change of government in 1997 there has been no great change so far as control
from the centre is concerned. Councils have had more legal responsibilities
placed on them without a sufficient increase in funding necessary to carry them
out. Indeed, social services, which has been under pressure for years as a
result of the social crisis which was in part created by the ‘Thatcher
revolution’, and the lack of funding sufficient for local needs, now faces the
prospect of being fined for not providing accommodation for elderly people; the
famous health service ‘bed blockers’.
The 1991
census showed 7% unemployed, but 15% in Parks and Whitworth. In Central and
Gorse Hill wards more than 20% of men between 55 and retirement age were not
working. In Whitworth and Park nearly one in five of 16-24 year olds were not
working. Around half of houses in Parks and Whitworth did not have a car, over
40% in Gorse Hill, Central and Walcot. Over a third
of all children in Parks and Whitworth were living in poor families.
Conditions
have changed since then, but the patterns of poverty are unchanged. The 2001
census shows the low unemployment rate of 2.5% but another 2.4% are
“economically inactive” and 3.8% “permanently sick or disabled”. Although
self-defined, the census showed 15.3% of the population with “long term
illness”. A more objective indicator was the Disability Living Allowance, a
benefit paid to people under 65 who are disabled and need help with personal
care, and/or getting around. In August 2000 5,095 people
received this benefit. In addition the Attendance Allowance, which is
paid to people over 65, who are so severely disable physically or mentally that
they need supervision or a great deal of help, was paid to 3,140 people in May
2000.
In
addition 8.7% of people provided unpaid care.
In the
more working class areas percentages of these indicators are much higher. For
instance on Parks 7.5% were permanently sick or disabled, 4.1% unemployed and
4% “economically inactive”. This gives a very high figure of 15.1% economically
inactive or unable to work.
Whilst 8%
of households were
On Penhill in 2001 4.3% were unemployed, 4.7% economically
inactive and 7.4% permanently sick or disabled. Only 53.8% of the population
were economically active. 30.3% of households had no central heating and 44.8 %
had no car. 13.6% were lone parent household with dependent children.
Another
indicator of town-wide poverty was shown in the figure of 22% of households
without a car (in contrast 31.8% had two or more).
Today the
town has a burgeoning drug problem. The Charity Druglink
last year saw over 5,000 people, whilst 5,250 have seen their staff from
January to October this year.
The Coate
area
The
proposed changes to the plan include the alteration of the
urban boundary to enable the building of the new University, 2000 houses and for employment on all the land remaining
between the PFI hospital, the M4 motorway and Coate Water
nature reserve. The building proposed in this area would be an
environmental disaster. Siting a University in such
an out of town site would greatly worsen the already bad traffic congestion in
the town. With 8,000 students and several thousand staff there would be a
massive increase in traffic levels, even if some of it came off of the M4. A
student population would require accommodation which could not be found in the
area, unless, of course, it was purpose built. This is unlikely.
The
building would also mark the destruction of the ‘rural buffer. One of the
attractive features of life in
When
planning permission was sought for the building of the new hospital, objectors
were told that, it would not create a precedent for building in the area. Yet
local politicians appear to have conveniently forgotten this promise.
Housing Crisis
There is
an undoubted housing crisis facing the town. This is partly as a result of the increase
in prices of housing, which is a national phenomenon. Speculative building is
put up to a jerry built industrial standard, as exemplified by the
The cost
of housing in
The draft Swindon
Local Plan originally suggested a target that 30% of new homes should be
affordable and not on the free-market. However, the revised Local Plan now proposes
a target of providing just 50
affordable homes a year and the overall target has been deleted. Even the housing need survey of 2001 suggests
that the need for affordable homes is greater than 30%.
There needs to be a campaign locally for the right to
build Council housing in order to address this crisis. Whilst tenants have their complaints against the
bureaucracy of the Council and the service it provides, the recent consultation
on the future of the authority’s housing stock, showed that nearly 90% of
tenants who responded, wanted to maintain Council housing rather than to be
hived off to private owners, or indeed to Housing Associations which, despite
their ‘non-profit’ status are run as commercial businesses. Swindon TUC helped
to launch a campaign to maintain our housing stock
For a
number of years now there has been national Defend our Council Housing Campaign
which has brought together trades unions and tenants’ organisations, which has
successfully fought the privatisation of Council Housing in a number of areas.
(visit their web site at:
www.defendcouncilhousing.org)
The
history of Walmart in the
Privatisation
and PFI has had disastrous consequences for the town. The PFI hospital, as
campaigners predicted had insufficient beds as a result of the exorbitant price
of the scheme. The full-up signs were in place within weeks of its opening.
Whilst the Trust management has been forced to introduce more beds this has
been at the cost of using money from the operating budget.
The
decision of the Labour Council to privatise the Housing Benefit/Council tax
section proved disastrous. A massive backlog of work built up as a result of
which, old and frail people were receiving threats of eviction when their
benefit had not been paid, owing to the failure of the private company.
The crisis
of the educational system
was not, of course, merely a local phenomenon. Bureaucratic rules
from the centre, for instance, led to the proposal to close three schools owing
to falling rolls. But part of the motivation by local officials was the need
for new schools in the Northern Development area. For instance the Officers
Report which proposed the closures said:
“As well
as offering opportunities for more effective revenue expenditure the proposals
could generate capital receipts from the sale of surplus building and land
could be used to promote a range of Council policies…Rationalisation schemes
could produce capital receipts which could be used for…new building, furniture
and equipment to enhance the quality of the learning environment in a larger
number of schools.”
Such
policies, of course, have an environmental impact, increasing the number of car
journeys, particularly in the case of primary schools.
Subsequently,
the building of new schools, owing to the funding crisis, has been via the PFI
route no doubt with similar consequences to other PFI schemes in terms of poor
quality and greater expense.
In our
view
We believe
that there is a need for organisations and individuals who are campaigning in
various areas against the model of ‘development’ which threatens to greatly
worsen the environmental and living conditions of the local populace, to work
together, not only to campaign against the practical consequences of the
current course, but to begin to develop an alternative one. What follows below
is a first stab at the outline of an alternative. These are areas for further
elaboration.
10. Maintenance of
hot school meals for children, more than 1,000 get them free (owing to the lack
of income of their parent/s). Poverty remains very much present in the town.
11. Whilst the
tenants in a recent consultation voted overwhelmingly to maintain the town’s
Council housing, there remains much to be done to improve their standard (such as
putting central heating into all of them).
Not all
these things, of course, can be achieved locally. They relate to national
government policy. We need to link up with campaigns regionally and nationally,
as we did, for instance with the Defend Council Housing Campaign (which unites
tenants organisations and unions at the national level).
What is
clear to us, however, is that the questions of environmental degradation and
social inequality are intimately connected. Environmental and social conditions
are determined by a model of ‘development’ which places the interests of big
business, and the acquisition of profits above the interests of the local
population. This is the conception that ‘growth’ – an increase in economic
activity – is a good thing whatever its social consequences. We reject this way
which creates greater wealth at the expense of the increased exploitation of
greater numbers of people.
Send your comments to: martin.wicks@btinternet.com
The land take at Coate
is divided into:
·
at least 60ha for the University Campus
·
35ha of employment land in the south-east area of the site
This leaves about 96 ha for up to 2,000
dwellings, shops, community facilities "including a primary school"
and a small increase to the Park and Ride site at Commonhead
roundabout.
No doubt, this entire stitch-up is driven
by Carillian (formerly Tarmac) who had an option to
buy up all the farmland at Coate when the hospital
site was up for grabs. Presumably, the university
campus would be build under the Private Finance Initiative [PFI] and Corillion would gain again.
There is no justification for building
houses at Coate on the grounds that the “
Foothills of the
Located in the foothills of the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the
character and quality of the landscape at Coate has
received some special protection [Policy ENV10]. This designation would now be removed in
order to accommodate development at Coate.
The Policy for developing land next to
Sites of Special Scientific Interest [Policy ENV16] is being weakened
[obviously to accommodate development at Coate] in
that nature reserves of international importance are now deemed more important
than nationally designated ones. As the
Those involved in opposing the hospital
development will be aware of the tragic loss of about a dozen badgers who were killed on the road within days of the destruction
of their setts and foraging areas in the
There are several areas of archaelogical importance along Day House Lane.
The countryside around Day House Lane not
only requires protection in its own right, as it is the last vestige of
countryside left that is accessible to people of Swindon,
it also has historic connections with the well-known writer Richard
Jefferies. Jefferies grew up at Coate about 150 years ago and was famous for his books on
country matters along with his popular children’s story “Bevis”. His writing was influenced by his love of the
landscape around Coate Water and by the
Swindon Borough Council are now consulting on the proposed revisions to the draft Swindon Local Plan 2011.
If nothing else please would you respond to the new main policy
proposed for Coate DS3 and the affordable housing
policy H10.
You can view the draft document during
normal office hours (
Station Road
Late night opening Thursdays until
or,
Beckhampton Street
The Revised Deposit Draft of the Swindon Borough Local Plan 2011 can also be viewed:
www.esrswindonbc.net/swindonrevised
The response form [there are 4 pages that
download as jpeg files] can be obtained at http://www.esrswindonbc.net/~esrswindonbc.net/public_html/swindonrevised/form.html
Responses need to be submitted by
Forward Planning Group, Freepost SCE5251
Object to the inclusion of “an additional
Objection 2
General Policy DS1
Urban concentration of development
Object to the inclusion of land at Coate in the proposal map on the grounds that it is surplus
to requirement for development and that it is clearly not urban land
Objection 3
Policy DS3
Land for a university campus and
development at Coate.
Land allocation at Coate
in the plan to 2011 is excess to requirements for housing and employment use.
Moreover, in view of the sensitivity of the site, it is highly unlikely that
any development could take place at Coate in the Plan
period. Moreover, development of the
area would be in clear conflict with policy ENV16 Biodiversity: National
Sites.
Coate Water SSSI received its designation
as a national wildlife reserve by virtue of the presence of notified species
that include nesting wildfowl and birds that are adversely affected by human
intrusion that might include light pollution.
Aquatic wildlife can be irrevocably destroyed as a result of water
contamination as evidence from activities at the NDA that have affected Seven
Fields Nature Reserve – there are no water voles in the brooks now. The bird sanctuary at Coate
Water, which is essentially inaccessible to the public, is next to the proposed
development area. Moreover the Local
Nature Reserve [Day House Copse] would be completely engulfed in development
and species such as the badger would lose all their foraging land.
It was anticipated that house-building at
the SDA wouldn’t start until about 2006 in order to phase development, to
ensure that the NDA was nearing completion and that urban renewal took priority
before another
It would seem that just because
What guarantee could be secured to ensure
that any buffers safeguarded next to Coate Water SSSI
will not be developed in the future?
Objection 4
Plan Policy DS4
Master Plan/Framework Plans
Remove the inclusion of Coate as a development area from this policy for reasons
stated elsewhere
Objection 5
Plan Policy ENV10
Landscape Character Protection
Object to removing the landscape
character designation from Coate. The area is an
important landscape setting in the foothills of the North Wessex
Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Not only should the countryside here be protected in its own right, the
landscape has great historic and literary significance. The accomplished and well-known writer
Richard Jefferies grew up at Coate about 150 years
ago. He was famous for his books on country
matters along with his popular children’s story “Bevis”. His writing was influenced by his love of the
landscape around Coate Water and by the
There is no justification to change the
draft Policy. It is weakened by taking
key considerations out of the main text of the policy and placing the wording
in the sub-text. It is evident that there are so few internationally designated
wildlife sites in the
Support policy ENV18
Support
changes to Habitat and Species protection - the Local Plan changes propose
that species as well as habitats are afforded extra protection – this change in
policy is welcome.
Object to allocating 35ha of employment
land at Coate that is contrary to Policy DP10 of the
adopted Wiltshire and Swindon Structure Plan to 2011
and will provide a gross over-allocation contrary to Structure Plan
requirements.
Policy DP10 is the relevant planning
policy for the Development of the Swindon Urban area
and it states:
"At
Objection 9
Policy H3
Strategic Housing Allocations and Land at Coate
The allocation of 1,800 dwellings at Coate is surplus to requirement and contrary to Policy DP10
of the adopted Structure Plan that states:
"At
There is no justification for bringing
forward another
Indeed, the NDA alone has capacity to
meet the housing requirements of 1,150 new units a year for the next four
years. This gives a sufficient lead-in
period to commence development in the SDA in 2007. This assumes that the average house-building
rate of 800 houses/year increases!
Moreover, in view of the sensitivity of
the land next to Coate Water, it is highly unlikely
that this proposal would jump all planning hurdles and be brought forward
before the SDA.
Objection 10
Policy H4
Residential Development – Phasing and Monitoring
Delete text from the policy that states
“it is clear that phases shall not deliver the rate of completions required to
maintain a five year supply” and all supporting text in justification of the
phrase.
It is not proven that the phases laid
down for development will not provide a 5 year supply of land for housing. Monitoring shows that an
average of 800 new dwellings have been completed each year for the last
six years. The indicative figure in the
Structure Plan is that 1,467 new dwellings should be built each year to reach
the
The 2001 Housing Needs survey has
identified that there is an annual shortfall of 1,218 affordable dwellings a
year. In July 2003, there were 5,715
people on
Object that the criteria, for assessing
the component of affordable housing sought on sites,
has been increased from clusters of 15 to 25 or more dwellings and on sites of
1 hectare rather than 0.5ha. If there was no demand for affordable housing in
Object that the starting assumption that
30% of houses should be affordable has been deleted from policy H10 and
replaced with the wording that “a level of provision appropriate to the site,
taking into account information provided by the latest housing needs survey,
market conditions etc.” Whilst the
planning authority would still seek 30% provision on suitable sites, albeit
that this figure is too low to meet current needs, without a policy commitment,
developers will seek to wriggle out of any obligation. As a land-owner, Swindon
Borough Council has now lost its last major plot of land (that is the SDA)
where it can implement the 30% affordable home provision more easily. It is to be welcomed that the SDA planning
application provides for the building of about 1,350 affordable homes even
though the indication is that a far higher quantum of council houses is needed.
It will be even more difficult to secure
affordable housing provision on privately owned land unless developers are fully
aware that they are obliged to meet the need for affordable homes. Whilst the policy now seeks to secure
commuted payments in order to build affordable houses elsewhere if the
developer does not provide sufficient affordable houses on their plot, there is
no indication how much the commuted payment might be and whether it will secure
the housing needs survey requirements. The Supplementary Planning Guidance [paras 5.6-5.7] admits that the housing need survey of 2001
suggests that the need for affordable homes is greater than the 30% figure
suggested in the Plan. The 30% affordable target should be a minimum not a
maximum.
The policy also includes a target to
provide 50 low-cost dwellings a year for the open market.
Policy H12
Prestigious Low Density housing
Object to this new policy to deal with
the provision of prestigious housing to encourage heads of business and
industry to live in the Borough. This is
a licence for developers to break all the rules! The policy applies to buildings of
exceptional quality but it allows them to be built at sites that would not
normally be allowed. This exceptions
policy is not acceptable.
What guarantee is there that the
University maintains a presence in the town centre and at Oakfield should an
out-of-town site be developed? What
guarantee could be secured to ensure that any buffer land safeguarded next to Coate Water SSSI will not be developed in the future?
The Government's aim is to put the
The Government is consulting on a new Planning Policy Statement (PPS22) for
renewable energy. Up until now, planning
authorities have afforded little weight to the wider environmental and economic
benefits of proposals for renewable energy projects. The Government is seeking to reverse
this. The Government do
not rule out small-scale development of wind turbines in Areas of Outstanding
Natural Beauty and they now advocate that planning authorities should not
designate no-go buffer areas next to AONBs for the
provision of wind turbines. They also
advise that rural buffer designations should not be used in themselves to
refuse planning permission for renewable energy developments.
As such, not only are the changes
proposed to policy CF12 unacceptable, the policy may have to be relaxed to
allow wind turbine applications to be assessed in a more favourable
light.
For more information contact
Jean Saunders
Tel:
01793 783040