Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

Although about two-thirds of homes are owner-occupied. The remaining third is split roughly 50/50 between social housing and private landlords.

[Sheilbh]

Re. British planning being an absolute disaster. A project to develop a derelict animal rendering plant that looks like the set of a horror film and hasn't been used for 15 years has been withdrawn, it seems like this was only challenged by one person but they took it to the High Court (and it's also always crazy that individual decisions like this end up going to the Secretary of State for appeals, for big projects or when councils want to shirk the decision)

Housing estate plans for old animal rendering plant at Thruxted Mill, near Chartham, withdrawn
By Joe Wright
[email protected]
Published: 05:00, 30 December 2021

Controversial proposals to build a housing estate at an abandoned animal rendering plant outside Canterbury have been dropped following years of planning.

Thruxted Mill, which has been likened to a "horror movie setting", was previously used to process cattle infected with BSE, known as mad cow disease.


Thruxted Mill, outside Chartham

The site, near Chartham, has stood empty for about 15 years, with there being widespread concern that the ground remains contaminated.

But developers eyed up the seven-acre plot for housing, and Trevor Heathcote - the man behind numerous companies, including Countrystyle Recycling - devised a scheme to build a 20-home estate.

The proposals were granted outline planning permission in 2018 by Ashford Borough Council, but a legal challenge from resident Camilla Swire halted the project's progress.

And now, three years after gaining the go-ahead, Mr Heathcote has withdrawn the application.

The bid proved divisive during the planning process, but former Secretary of State for Housing, Robert Jenrick, determined an environmental impact assessment (EIA) into potential land contamination was not necessary.

However, a legal challenge was launched and a High Court judge found the minister lacked "expert evidence" in reaching his decision. The ruling was therefore overturned and an EIA was required.

Now, 18 months down the line, the application has been pulled - without any sign of an impact statement being submitted.

A decision notice from this month signed by Ashford council's head of planning, Simon Cole, states how no further action will be taken due to the bid being "withdrawn at the applicant's request".

It is not known if the developer is considering a revised application or if the project is now dead in the water. The planning agents for the scheme did not respond to a request for comment.

Thruxted Mill was one of just four locations in the UK authorised to dispose of carcasses infected with BSE as mad cow disease crippled cattle numbers in the late 1990s.

Nearby residents had long complained about the smell and lorries bringing dead livestock to the site, with reports of piles of carcasses regularly being dumped in the yard area.

Back in 2018, it was estimated that the cost for developers to properly disinfect the Penny Pot Lane site would total £1.75 million.

Councillors recognised how the old mill "has the most dreadful legacy" and looked favourably upon the idea of giving it a rebirth as a housing development.

But with the plans now withdrawn, it seems the neglected site will remain an eyesore with an uncertain future.[/b

Worth noting that Camilla Swire is apparently a billionaire whose husband is one of the Swire family (of the Swire conglomerate) so probably not directly affected by general housing shortages/failure to build enough housing. From a quick Google it looks like she basically applies for judicial review of ever planning decision in her area - on the first page alone suing to stop another 400 home development and to stop a local vineyard from building a visitor centre

[Admiral Yi]

Any relation to the Swires of Downton Abbey?

[mongers]

Any relation to the Swires of Downton Abbey?

No these are just Swines.   

[Josquius]

I don't know... The objectors motives may have been rotten but requiring the developers to make sure the land isn't contaminated sounds like common sense to me.

[The Brain]

Aren't the operators of the BSE facility required to greenfield the site after use?

[Sheilbh]

I don't know... The objectors motives may have been rotten but requiring the developers to make sure the land isn't contaminated sounds like common sense to me.

Sure. But according to the judgement there'd been a "site investigation and risk assessment report", there was then a "phase 1 preliminary risk assessment" and a "ground investigation and generic risk assessment" (which involved digging eight trial pits acrosss the site for initial lab analysis). Following that they proposed further assessments and various measures to remediate the sites - which would have cost around £1.75million. All of that was submitted to the Environment Agency who wrote to the council saying if those remediation measures and assessments were done then their view was planning permission would be okay.

It was also recommended by the council Planning Officer, the council's Environmental Health Practitioner also provided an initial view which, like the Environment Agency's, basically said the remediation was enough to grant planning permission but they'd need to monitor the site and further steps might be needed. For what it's worth the people responsible for the Area of Natural Beauty that site's in also supported a development because anything's better than a derelict rendering plant

Planning permission was granted subject to loads of conditions including a broad one that they'd need to do whatever was necessary to satisfy the local authority Environmental Services requirements - and the developer would be consulting the Medical Research Council's Prion Unit to make sure the right testing was carried out.

It then went to Whitehall because of various claims from Swire's lawyers that it required an Environmental Impact Assessment (in addition to the above) under the rules about them. The civil servant involved who's a senior planning manager with over 20 years of experience basically said the conditions and investigations that the local authority were requiring provided enough safeguards to meet those requirements and they didn't need a separate Environmental Impact Assessment as well. The court found (and no doubt this is right) they'd got the law wrong, so acted irrationally and it was overturned.

There'd been lots done on that issue it just wasn't enough under the current law and the DHCLG apparently got that wrong. Maybe that is also necessary and it is crucial - but I think it's equally possible that a single person with deep pockets can make it incredibly expensive, if not almost impossible to build anything in their entire area by chewing up every decision with judicial review claims on the developer taking the wrong path through the bureaucracy/the wrong paperwork being filed in a way that I'm not sure is actually very helpful or necesssarily helps. As I say right now this one person with money to instruct solicitors and challenge every planning approval in her community is blocking developments of at least over 400 homes while they're going through the courts and can probably add enough extra legal costs to make it very difficult to build anything in that area.

Edit: Meanwhile I've just seen a Tory MP suggest that workers should only be given limited pay rises this year to "protect pensioners from inflation". I try not to buy into the generational conflict angle of everything in Britain - but it can be hard to avoid sometimes Worth noting, of course, that pensioners do have the triple lock on the state pension and while the earning element has been temporarily paused (to avoid increasing pensions by 10% in one year because of the earning impact of recovering from covid/first lockdown) it will increase at least keep pace with inflation.

[Sheilbh]

Aren't the operators of the BSE facility required to greenfield the site after use?

My underestanding is that it was already a brownfield site/rendering plant that was then one of a handful of sites authorised to deal with BSE during that crisis. So they haven't restored it and my suspicion is that's probably because it was already a contaminated site so there was nothing for them to restore for doing an extra bit of contaminating work?

[The Larch]

Worth noting that Camilla Swire is apparently a billionaire whose husband is one of the Swire family (of the Swire conglomerate) so probably not directly affected by general housing shortages/failure to build enough housing. From a quick Google it looks like she basically applies for judicial review of ever planning decision in her area - on the first page alone suing to stop another 400 home development and to stop a local vineyard from building a visitor centre

What is she, a serial NIMBYer?

[Sheilbh]

What is she, a serial NIMBYer?

Yeah my guess is that there's probably a lot of conservationist/environmentalist concerns that just sugar coat NIMBY absolutism.

She's on the local paris council is apparently an artist, patron or president or funder of various local good works like the local arts festival, disabled charities, very worried about the impact of parking, traffic and pollution on the local area. But practically seems to just oppose literally any building in the area.

She's an extreme example because she's married to a literal billionaire who's the Chairman of a huge Hong Kong-based property, shipping, aviation, manufacturing conglomerate. But there's plenty of people like that around the countryside who have enough money, aren't evil and do good stuff locally because they love the local area as it is but will spend money chewing up and challenging any attempt at development that might change the local area at all, ever.

Edit: And, obviously though they wouldn't acknowledge it, their NIMBYism does tend to reinforce their class position.

[The Brain]

They're garden variety nutjobs.

[Sheilbh]

There's a very thin line between them and pillars of the community though

[The Brain]

There's a very thin line between them and pillars of the community though

Yes.

[Sheilbh]

Mail on Sunday has done a poll of Red Wall seats specifically and found Labour's ahead by 16% - that would mean in the Red Wall seats alone the Tories losing about 100 seats. With losses elsewhere it's the third big polling indicator of a Labour majority

Funny how you can lose first time voters who went out on a limb to vote for your party by turning out to be (entirely predictably) untrustworthy and ineffective.

[chipwich]

How did prime ministers acquire military responsibilities if the position emerged form being the King's beancouter?