Transcript Time Line of Events

Time Line of Events
Former RAF Coltishall Eco Town Bid
Summer 2005



The Government announced through the Ministry of Defence
that no successor military or Government use had been
identified or proposed for the facility and therefore the base
would be advertised for disposal through Defence Estates.
Scottow Farm Estates asks the MOD if the land that was
originally compulsory purchased from them, when the RAF
Station was built, be returned to them for agricultural use once
more on the closure of RAF Coltishall.
The Government declines to sell the site back to Scottow Farm
Estates.
2
Early 2006



North Norfolk District Council presents a paper ‘Disposal of
RAF Coltishall’ to the RAF Coltishall Task Force, set up to
ensure the site is marketed expediently, and sympathetically
with respect to its location and in consultation with the local
population.
The Task Force was concerned that the site should not be
‘moth balled’ and thus fall into a state of disrepair as had
happened in former closed military bases.
Local communities and businesses had lost economically from
the closure of the RAF base.
3
Autumn 2006


Defence Estates appointed agents Drivers Jones to market the
site.
Drivers Jones included a position paper prepared by the local
authorities in the information pack used for potential bidders.
4
1st November 2006




The first of viewing dates arranged for prospective bidders
takes place
Further viewing dates are arranged for 16th November, and 6th
December.
Mr Richard Davies (Norfolk based developer) viewed the site
and outlined his proposal for a new eco settlement on the site
to Officers from NNDC and the County Council.
Both Councils advised that the proposal would raise significant
issues in terms of the prevailing and anticipated planning
policy framework for the area, strategic location and the
capacity of the local highway network.
5
22nd November 2006


An announcement is made that the Home Office are
considering the site as a detention centre for asylum seekers.
There are local concerns about this proposal. Councils spend
time and resources considering the implications for the local
communities and submitting their views
6
Early 2007
During the early part of 2007 local communities and the local
authorities heard little, if anything, formally from the Home
Office or Defence Estates regarding the future use and/or
disposal of the site. In the late autumn the proposal for the site
to be used as a category ‘C’ prison by the Ministry of Justice
was made public
7
Later in 2007





Ownership of the site transferred from the Home Office to the
Ministry of Justice
Plans for the new Prison were submitted
Subsequently, the new prison plans were passed by North
Norfolk District Council using 30 acres of the total 650 acre
site.
One of the planning conditions involves the Ministry of Justice
providing 30 acres for the planting of a community woodland
to compensate for protected trees felled to accommodate the
prison.
The site is 660 acres, minus the prison and woodland site,
leaves approximately 600 acres remaining for other uses.
8
rd
23
July 2007-
Eco-
town Prospectus published by DCLG






Eco-towns will be small new towns of at least 5-20,000 homes. Places with
a separate and distinct identity but with good links to surrounding towns
and cities in terms of jobs, transport and services
The development as a whole to achieve zero carbon and to be an exemplar
in at least one area of environment technology;
A good range of facilities within the town including a secondary school,
shopping, business space and leisure;
Between 30 and 50 per cent affordable housing with a good mix of tenures
and size of homes in mixed communities;
A delivery organisation to manage the town and its development and
provide support for people, businesses and community services
We will also continue with targeted funding for Growth Areas, New
Growth Points and eco-towns including a £300m Community Infrastructure
Fund over the next three years’.
9
March 2008
(DCLG scrutiny report compiled in March
but report not published until 3rd June 2008)



Communities and Local Government carried out an initial
scrutiny of the proposals in relation to the eco-towns criteria,
and where proposals met these, looked across government and
its agencies at the transport and environment issues and
opportunities in locations put forward. This publication
provides a summary for each assessment.
The report provides details for the Coltishall site and
responses from various other government
departments and agencies such as Natural England,
English Heritage, Defra etc and also views from local
District and County Councils and Highways etc
Details follow:10
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (2)
The number of homes proposed at Coltishall site-
10,000
( CETAG comment-Nobody locally was aware of this
figure that the DCLG were using in this scrutiny report in
March 2008-indeed ‘The Greener Future’ publication in
April 2008 by DCLG on Eco Towns specifically states
5000 homes at Coltishall and local parish councils were
unaware of a formal proposal for 10 000 homes until 9th
June 2008 at CETAG’s inaugural meeting)
11
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (3)





Question – posed for scrutiny report by DCLG
Does proposal include commitment /agreement by local
authority partners to growth?
Answer (summarised answer from DCLG)
Possible support by North Norfolk Council (where the site is
located). Not aware of support or objection by the Greater
Norwich councils of Broadland / Norwich City / S Norfolk
(CETAG comment- Not aware of views of
Broadland/Norwich City or Sth Norfolk and says
possible support from Nth Norfolk but Nth Norfolk were
unaware of the size being proposed by DCLG at this
stage.)
12
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (4)





Question posed by DCLG Scrutiny:Approach to environmental issue and impacts- environmental exemplar and
opportunity ?
Answers (summarised by DCLG) from Natural England, Environment
Agency and DEFRA
Expensive new infrastructure needed and uncertainty over ability to issue
discharge consents into R Bure because of water quality issues in the
Broads . Relationship with Norwich water cycle strategy needs to be made.
However, given the levels of growth at Norwich, the cumulative impacts
are potentially severe especially due to drainage into the river and its
impact on the Broads
Extremely sensitive catchment. 30km directly upstream of Broads SAC,
environment may not be able to accommodate level of building.
13
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (5)


Question - Heritage views from English Heritage ?
Answer The fighter pen (WW2) and 1950s Blast Walls are
currently being recommended for scheduling. The setting of
these will need to be preserved which could in part be
achieved by maintaining the line of the runway and taxiways.
We would also hope to see a visual link retained whereby the
blast walls can be seen from the line of the runway. The late
1930s layout has some design value and English Heritage is
currently funding study
14
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (6)



Question-Approach to Transport. Issues and impacts on
network?
Answer (summarised by DCLG) from Department of
Transport and Highways Agency
The Northern Distributor road has no funding and there are
environmental issues surrounding the preferred route". A140
does not pass site, some link needed. Role of existing rail
likely to be very limited - need to develop a strong and realistic
public transport offer.
15
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (7)
Other comments listed in report are:
Government Office East GO-E – eco-town scheme relies on
NNDR going ahead which is by no means certain. However,
NNDR well-promoted by Norfolk County Council and the
Councils forming Greater Norwich. Strategic fit with growth
of Norwich also needs consideration.
16
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (7)
Report Summation:The summary section of the report categorised each bid
individually, on the basis of the reports from the various
agencies, into 4 categories labelled A-D
Details of categories are:A ) No significant issues at this stage
B ) Significant issues but can probably be addressed through conditions, studies etc
C) A location where growth is possible but major issues – assurance needed
D) High level constraints – reasons why growth in this location is unsustainable.
(Otherwise labelled ‘show stopper’)
17
March 2008
Initial DCLG scrutiny (8)
Coltishall site achieved category




C on transport,
Potential D on environment
Rated C/D overall
Final assessment of Coltishall site? - ‘C’ - (A location where growth is possible
but major issues – assurance needed).
( CETAG comment- Please note this information was not published until 3rd
June 2008 and even then not as a publication in it’s own right but as
additional information on the DCLG web site headed ‘further details’ under
a section named ‘How Eco Town proposals were assessed’ . Local
communities/councils were, in June, consulting on the basis of, initially, a
figure of 2500 - 5000 given by R Davies the bidder at his presentation in
April and then the figure of 5000 in the DCLG Eco Towns consultation
published in April).
18
April 2008
’Living A Greener Future’ DCLG’s Eco Town
Consultation published
Coltishall site is listed at 5000 homes in this prospectus
More specifics in this consultation to the Coltishall site include:‘ Proposed benefits An exemplar eco-settlement with a zero carbon
footprint, 5,000 eco homes with different sizes types and tenures. Business
and technology park accommodating 3,000 jobs. Over 100 hectares of
wetlands and open space, renewable energy sources, integrated transport
system and additional facilities including schools, shops, community
facilities, crafts centre, and heritage museum. The eco-town proposal would
make use of the former airfield site to provide a zero carbon new settlement
adapted to Norfolk needs and design character, with extensive proposals on
green infrastructure including creation of a new Broad, SUDs and local
renewables’
20
19
April 2008
‘Living A Greener Future’ (2)
General criteria for all eco towns :-
•
•
•
•
•
New settlement - minimum 5000 homes
Zero carbon build
Good range of local facilities - schools, shops, leisure
and employment
30-50% affordable housing
A new approach to area management
20
3rd April 2008
15 Potential locations for ‘Eco’ Towns announced by Ms Flint, Housing Minister
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Pennbury, Leicestershire: 12-15,000,
Manby and Strubby, Lincolnshire: 5,000
Curborough, Staffordshire: 5,000
Middle Quinton, Warwickshire: 6,000,
Bordon-Whitehill, Hampshire: 5-8,000
Weston Otmoor, Oxfordshire: 10-15,000
Ford, West Sussex: 5000
Imerys China Clay Community, Cornwall around 5,000
Rossington, South Yorkshire: Up to 15,000
10. Coltishall, Norfolk: 5,000 on a former RAF airfield
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Marston Vale and New Marston,
Bedfordshire: Up to 15,400
Elsenham, Essex
Rushcliffe, Nottinghamshire
Leeds City Region, Yorkshire (a number of sites admitted)
21
3rd April 2008





This consultation is the first of four key stages in the eco-towns process.
Stage One: Three month consultation on preliminary views on eco-town
benefits and these shortlisted locations;
Stage Two: Further consultation this summer on a Sustainability
Appraisal, which provides a more detailed assessment of these locations,
and a draft Planning Policy Statement.
Stage Three: A decision on the final list of locations with the potential to
be an eco-town and the publication of a final Planning Policy Statement,
later this year.
Stage Four: Like any other proposed development, individual schemes in
these locations will need to submit planning applications which will be
decided on the merits of the proposal.
22
9th April 2008






Twelve experts from the worlds of design, the environment, transport and
sustainability have signed up to join the Eco-towns Challenge and play a key role in
shaping eco towns.
The panel of leading figures will provide expert advice and support to developers
whose proposed locations were announced in the shortlist of fifteen potential eco
town sites.
They will also play an important role in challenging the developers to meet the
highest standards possible for sustainability and design in their final proposals.
They will address issues such as using resources and the site's natural assets and
opportunities efficiently, ensuring house designs are sensitive to local surroundings
and create homes people will want to live in, creating a vibrant and healthy
community for people of all ages to live in, and encouraging more journeys on foot,
bicycle and public transport.
The Eco-town Challenge panel will publish recommendations to each bidder on
how they could improve their vision for eco-towns development.
Housing Minister Caroline Flint said: ‘Up to ten eco-towns will be built by 2020
23
17th April 2008



Local parish councillors requested a presentation from R.
Davies on his ‘Eco Town bid’
The Presentation given was of an Eco ‘Village’ of 2500 to
5000 homes on the former RAF Coltishall airbase
Parish councillors presented the information to their respective
parish councils
24
9th June 2008





Glyn Williams of Swanton Abbott Parish Council invited other local Parish
Councils’ representatives to a meeting to discuss the Eco Town Bid
Representatives of NNDC, Broadland DC, and MP Norman Lamb also
attend
NNDC informs the meeting that an Eco-town Panel meeting in London
considered a Coltishall Eco Town bid of up to 10 000 homes
All parish representatives were concerned that little consultation has taken
place between Government and local government and the people they
represent.The deadline for submission of comments on the Eco Town
consultation is 30th June 2008, leaving 21 days to report back to Parish
Councils and local communities and feedback to DCLG.
Norman Lamb MP for North Norfolk states that he is unaware of any
further consultation period after 30th June and has no further information
that has been given to him as the relevant constituency MP.
25
9th June (2)

Local PC representatives decide to report back to their own
PCs as quickly as possible and do their utmost to make their
representations to government as individuals, as individual
Parish Councils and as a group formed from this meeting.
Coltishall Eco Town Action Group
or CETAG is formed
26
23rd June -Ministerial Visit



Ms Flint, Housing Minister, visits RAF Coltishall for a
presentation with Henry Cleary, lead official on Eco Towns
within CLG
Ms Flint hears a presentation from the bidder with plans for
10,000 homes on and outside the original site. The lake has
been reduced to accommodate the extra houses and
infrastructure and also doubled up as a ‘means of treating the
towns sewage’ using reed bed technology.
The additional 5000 homes are to be located at the southern
end of the site down towards the Bure valley.
27
23rd June - Ministerial Visit (2)

NNDC presented their views and their reasons to oppose the bid and
stressed that local councils had been preparing their own Local
Development Frameworks for some years with careful planning with regard
to the whole structure of Norfolk and that the ‘Eco’ Town did not fit into
Local Plans. North Norfolk DC are actually above Government targets on
new houses.

Norfolk County Council presented reasons as to why the bid should be
opposed. The transport links, and other infrastructure required, the location
unsuitable for commuting to and from employment and the lack of
sufficient on site employment. The feasibility studies from NCC all deemed
the project unsustainable

All present, other than the bidder and his team, reiterated the basic reasons
for opposing the proposed development in this location.
28
23rd June - Ministerial Visit (3)

The Carbon Reduction Team UEA stated that although initially at the 2500
size they were willing to assess the bid as possibly having credibility, this
scheme was no longer an ‘Eco’ Town but simply a new town. The bidders
claims of attracting people world wide to a new Science Park (as part of
their 3000 total on - site employment target) was ‘pure fantasy’ in this
location

Ms Flint advised that there would be a further 3 months consultation period
after 30th June whilst the Eco Town sustainability appraisals were taking
place and bidders would, as part of their appraisals, have to prove that these
consultation with the local communities had taken place.

The meeting was advised that the shortlist of up to 10 of the bids would
follow these appraisals in early Autumn 2008.
29
June 2008
Publication of notes and recommendations from the Eco-Town Challenge
Panel on sites proposed for Eco Towns








Coltishall - extracts from the report and challenges to the
developer team from the report
The comprehensive approach and presentation is impressive.
The proposal posed pertinent questions and is developing a strong vision;
however,
The location presents major challenges
The area has low economic activity and a narrow employment base. The
proposal is not yet persuasive enough around the issue of employment at
Coltishall.
The transport strategy is the principle issue in rural Coltishall - Examine the
viability of upgrading the Bure Valley railway to tram-train standard into
Norwich. Develop the business model for the bus network and explore
traffic management options.
Explain how a resident’s carbon footprint will be reduced by 80% in 2020.
Detail how the development will achieve zero carbon throughout the town,
both for new and existing buildings.
30
30th June 2008








Response to government on the Eco town consultation
North Norfolk District Council
Norfolk County Council
Broadland District Council
CETAG (a group representing 14 local parish Councils)
Individual local parish Councils
Many individuals
ALL OPPOSED THE ECO TOWN PROPOSALS FOR
COLTISHALL ON THE BASIS OF WELL
RESEARCHED AND CONFIRMED SUSTAINABILITY
ISSUES.
31
30th June 2008



CETAG ‘flies a flag’ at a protest of all ‘Eco town action
groups’ across the country at 10 Downing St. along with other
well known action groups such as B.A.R.D. and Oppose
Hanley Grange.
CETAG representatives speak on behalf of parishes at NND
full council meeting
NND full council vote unanimously against the ‘Eco’ Town
bid.
32
July 2008

Living a greener future - progress report published.

No details of Coltishall scheme included.

Reference made to a review of alternative schemes in the
Greater Norwich area

Challenge Panel publish notes of second meeting - Coltishall
not included in the various assessments / comments.
33
Other interested parties




English Heritage have scheduled part of the site confirming their interest in
the fighter pen and the blast walls mentioned in their initial report to the
DCLG
The Polish Government has an interest in the site since Polish squadrons
fought alongside the British RAF in WW2 and flew out of Coltishall from
1943-1947 Indeed Coltishall Air Base was totally under Polish Control
from August 1945 until February 1947 when the base was officially handed
back to RAF control. However there are no graves in the grave yard for the
‘Polish period’ post 1943 and thus it is possible there may be Polish Airmen
buried on site in unmarked graves
English `nature have confirmed there are wildlife-protected species known
to be on site
The majority of the site is classified as ‘greenfield undeveloped’, with
a minority brownfield where the buildings are already in existence, (this
does NOT include the runway) a portion residential (Annington Homes and
private individuals own the former RAF houses) and thus most of the site
does not have a ‘footprint’ of previous building.
34
2nd August 2008

Rackheath is announced as a possible alternative to the RAF
Coltishall site with potential of up to 4000 homes

Broadland DC had been in negotiations with the Government
as part of The Greater Norwich Partnership and suggested that
funds government were offering for infrastructure might help
build the Northern Distributor Road.
35
nd
2 August
2008 (2)
Quotation from EDP on Rackheath bid

A Broadland District Councillor said “The north east sector is an area which has been
identified as an area for planned and managed growth and Rackheath is a part of this.
“We would want any houses planned to be as carbon neutral as possible for environmental
reasons and also to keep fuel bills affordable for the generations of families we hope will live
in them.
“The most important next step now is to talk to local residents about how they would like to
see their community grow and develop. We are looking forward and planning for the long
term needs of our communities. Managed growth needs to be sustainable and well thought
through with jobs and infrastructure to support any growth.”
And addressing the importance of the Northern Distributor Road (NDR) alongside the
Rackheath plan, South Norfolk Council leader John Fuller said: “If the government wants to
see an eco-town, and Rackheath is considered suitable, then it must fund the infrastructure to
provide it, and that includes the NDR.
“That's the deal Norfolk people would expect us to agree and which they would support. They
should not be short-changed on this”.
36
August 2008


CETAG questioned DCLG whether the inclusion of Rackheath
as an Eco-Town bid meant that the Coltishall bid was dropped.
The reply was that both bids are very much alive and are being
assessed for sustainability and hopefully results of the initial
appraisal stage will be available in September.
37
The present situation







The local area has had no consultation as promised by Ms Flint Housing Minister /
DCLG
The ‘Eco’ town bidder is alleged to be considering legal action concerning granting
of planning consent for the category C prison.
The Local Government Association are threatening legal action of the whole
Government process pertaining to their Eco town Policy
The B.A.R.D campaign are questioning, in the High Court, the legality of the
Governments imposition of new towns on a national basis regardless of local
planning forecasts carefully worked out over years.
The announcement of the shortlist of Eco towns has been delayed until early 2009
The Coltishall eco town bidder is threatening to pull out all together BUT under
present circumstances this does not prevent another bidder seeking to develop the
site
Some of the nationwide bids have been dropped by the land owners and or bidders
e.g. Hanley Grange in Cambridgeshire, meaning that the shortlist of up to 10 is now
from a shorter list of possibles meaning both Coltishall and Rackheath have a
higher probability of being chosen.
.
38
Now and the future
CETAG are working hard to represent the views of the local
communities on any plans for the former RAF Coltishall.
CETAG wants to be engaged in any present, or future plans for
the site and try and ensure that it is not just left to decay as
many former MOD sites have been, but used for a purpose
acceptable and in sympathy with its location, surroundings and
economy
39
The latest Information received

“The situation at Coltishall is unusual because following the Minister's
visit it became clear that the scheme for Coltishall was not being further developed
by the promoter at the present time while an alternative scheme was put forward by
the Greater Norwich Development Partnership. Both schemes are currently being
evaluated as part of the CLG sponsored Sustainability Appraisal by Scott wilson
and we hope to publish this later this month - that will trigger the formal start of the
second period of 3 month consultation. Depending on the report of the
Sustainability Appraisal it is likely that only one of the Norwich schemes would go
forward. If that were to be Coltishall we would certainly put in hand the detailed
local consultation which the Minister described and we would expect from the
promoter also. If not we would not be taking forward an eco-town scheme for this
location.
Apologies that there has been this uncertainty but I would expect it to be resolved in
the next 3 weeks”.
Ref. Henry Cleary DCLG September 2008
40
What next?







That is the history and the main reasons for CETAG’s
opposition are clear and ‘well publicised’
See
www.cetag.co.nr for full details
Questions now have to include what might happen in the
future as well as resolving the eco town issue.
What do you think?
What would like to see happen at RAF Coltishall?
Do you agree that CETAG should be part of any future
negotiations to ensure that the local communities have a say in
their local community?
Have your say tonight!
Ask the panel for their views
41