Nigel Rennie - Independent Candidate for Binfield

Campaigners told to accept need for new housing – we say they should come up with a credible and responsible plan.

Nigel Rennie — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:51:13 +0000

Campaigners told to accept need for new housing

By Jennie Slevin
December 04, 2012

http://www.getbracknell.co.uk/news/s/2125132_campaigners_told_to_accept_need_for_new_housing

Campaigners are being urged to accept development plans following research which shows the borough’s population is growing at an alarming rate.

The report warns there could be close to an extra 20,000 people living in Bracknell Forest by 2033, leaping from 117,000 people to 135,600.

Bracknell Forest Council’s Site Allocation Development Plan Document (SADPD) outlines plans to build an extra 10,780 houses across the borough by 2026.

But the Home Truths: South East report, released by the National Housing Federation, warns areas are not building enough homes to cope with the increasing population.

Response by Nigel:

Winstanley asks for a credible alternative. There are several, but BFC ignores all and any residents’ views and ploughs ahead with their insatiable desire to concrete over the countryside. The agreed South East Plan calls for 70% of housing to be built on brown land; BFC’s own Core Strategy has protection of the countryside at its heart, but the Council Executive and Planning Office ignore this.

What is the point in building everything far from the town? Towns are supposed to be where people live and have easy access to facilities and transport.

3M Building to have car park “done up”

Nigel Rennie — Sun, 26 Aug 2012 18:12:17 +0000

Nothing can sum up the dismal failure of Bracknell Forest Council regeneration more than the farcical attempts to redevelop Winchester House – alias the 3M Building.

Quite apart from absolutely nothing happening with the Bracknell Regeneration, more appropriately named the Bracknell Degeneration the tale of failure attached to the redevelopment of Winchester House has reached pantomime proportions. Witness events to date, and no I have not made any of this up.

January 2012

Comer Homes’ radical plans for 3M building

By Hugh Fort

Proposed replacement of 3M building

January 13, 2012
One of Bracknell’s most hated eyesores could be reduced to rubble in the summer if plans for an “iconic gateway” to the town are approved.

Comer Homes, owners of Winchester House in Bond Way, better known as the former home of 3M, have confirmed they are just weeks away from submitting the final plans for a spectacular development.

The plans for a block containing 311 flats, shops, restaurants and a gym will be submitted to Bracknell by the end of January.

There is already planning permission in place for two new blocks on the site.

However, the company wanted to change the design as SOM Architects felt the two blocks would look too much like the current building.

The new design will be higher than the 3M block and includes underground parking. The plans also propose knocking down another eyesore, the adjoining car park, and replacing it with a new parking block.

If successful, the developer will also provide a new home outside the block for Bracknell Market as well as a large garden area both outside and on the roof of the development.

Robert Sheppard, senior engineer for Comer Homes, said: “We’re looking at providing an iconic building for north east Bracknell.

“At the moment, the big, ugly empty office gives a strong feeling of 1970s’ Bracknell.

“Our plans suggest demolishing it and replacing it with a modern building which will provide an iconic gateway to the new Bracknell.”

NR comment – this last sentence seems ominous.

July 2012

“3M building” plans thrown out

By Hugh Fort
July 19, 2012

http://www.getbracknell.co.uk/news/s/2117333_3m_building_plans_thrown_out

Plans for 311 flats in place of one of Bracknell’s most hated eyesores have been thrown out after the developers failed to meet a deadline for a piece of vital paperwork.

Comer Homes had been hoping to demolish the Winchester House tower block, better known locally as the 3M building, and replace it with a spectacular, modern block of apartments.

Comer Homes’ radical plans for 3M building

However, planning law requires the company to submit a Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), detailing how the building work may affect the environment.

It has 21 days to do that after submitting an application, but has failed to meet that deadline.

As a result, the council has no choice but to throw the plans out.

NR comment – Is this starting to look familiar?

August

Winchester House car park refurb agreed

By Julie Spencer
August 02, 2012
http://www.getbracknell.co.uk/news/s/2118108_winchester_house_car_park_refurb_agreed

Planners may have thrown out proposals to turn Bracknell’s loathed old 3M building into modern apartments – but they have given permission to do up its car park ready for new residents.

Concrete louvres that surround the Skimped Hill car park are to be replaced with timber to make it attractive to potential purchasers of flats at the redeveloped Winchester House who need a parking space.

Permission was granted on July 12 for the work which is intended to complement the redevelopment of the tower block.

Bracknell Forest Council threw out the Winchester House application last month after developers failed to submit an Environmental Impact Assessment

NR comment – yes this is what we expected – a “done up” car park. Well it is some form of progress

DCLG report urges local action on shops

Nigel Rennie — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 19:55:22 +0000

DCLG report urges local action on shops

By Mark Smullian Thursday, 07 June 2012

Local plans need to take account of how to deal with economically declining parades of shops that lack the ‘critical mass’ to succeed, a government report has said.

Related Links

Parades of Shops – Towards an Understanding of Performance and Prospects has been issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government as part of its response to the Portas Review on local retailing.

It said local shopping areas were often a ‘barometer’ of an area’s socio-economic health and that local planning processes should support them as far as possible.

However, it said many suburban parades were too small to be viable long-term in the face of competition from large stores and online retailing, which “may point to the need for a more planned approach to the growth and managed decline of the existing, historic pattern of parades to arrive at a more sustainable balance of provision”, it said.

Local shops should be included in neighbourhood plans so that communities “understand the rationale for any planned changes in provision and that the function and form of neighbourhood parades going forward fully reflect the reality of local economic circumstances as well as local needs and views”, according to the report.

It admitted that neither the place-shaping role of neighbourhood parades nor their impact on local housing markets were well understood and called for further research on both issues.

“Local consultations suggest that the availability of local retail and service facilities can support housing market performance,” the report said.

“Conversely, poor quality parades can inevitably have a negative effect on local housing market confidence.

“This relationship seems intuitively unchallengeable but has not been the subject of any specific research or policy guidance.”

Communities and local government secretary Eric Pickles has also issued a guide for councils on how to protect local shopping parades, which recommends that convenience store owners should be encouraged to participate in neighbourhood planning forums.

The guide, Parades to be proud of: Strategies to support local shops, also sets out ideas to make parades safer by councils and retailers collaborating to buy lighting, CCTV and shutters and work with police on neighbourhood watch schemes

Involvement in neighbourhood planning forums would ensure that “local shops are factored into the future development and benefit from simplified planning like change of use rules”, Pickles said.

Parades of Shops – Towards an Understanding of Performance and Prospects can be read here.

Parades to be proud of: Strategies to support local shops can be read here.

Binfield Parish Council – 2:1 BIC win over Labour

Nigel Rennie — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:21:44 +0000

Election Result 19th Apil 2012: Nigel Rennie (Independent) 794 votes; David Fawcett (Labour) 439 votes. 2:1 vote in favour of Independents. Thank you to all the residents of Binfield who voted for me. Thank you also to the excellent Tellors and Council staff who stayed all day at the Polling stations and then even later at the count.

Despite a strong campaign from the Labour candidate David Fawcett, Nigel Rennie standing for the Binfield Independent Conservatives, came through as a 2:1 winner on the election announced last night. 1,235 residents turned out on a wet and cold day to cast their votes in the first contested election for over 8 years.

Nigel has been fighting for over a year against the plans by Bracknell Forest Council to build some 10,780 new houses in the northern arc of Bracknell with the majority of these being planned for the villages of Binfield and Warfield. This election result gives both a strong mandate to BIC and a warning to Bracknell Forest Council that the majority of residents are against their proposals and that a rethink is necessary.

The Case against Bracknell Council’s Housing Plans

Nigel Rennie — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:38:44 +0000

The Northern Arc Action Group (NAAG) in conjunction with Binfield Village Protection Society (BVPS), Crowthrorne Village Action Group (CVAG) have presented their case against the current proposals by Bracknell Forest Council to build 10,780 new homes in the northern arc of Bracknell. A full summary of their objections is given below. The proposals are also supported by Binfield Parish Council and Binfield Independent Conservatives.

http://www.narcag.co.uk/2012/03/16/sadpd-proposal-the-case-against-2/

Response by the Northern Arc Action Group

to Bracknell Forest Council’s Draft Submission Site Allocations Development Plan Document

Response Summary

The Northern Arc Action Group is a campaign group formed by local residents in direct response to widespread concerns in the community about the impact of Bracknell Forest Council’s housing development plans on Binfield and Warfield in the northern area of the borough. Founded in 2010 during the Council’s first consultation, there are currently 1,188 members on its facebook site.

The Northern Arc Action Group considers that the SADPD draft submission document is not founded on a credible evidence base, is not legally compliant and is unsound as set out in this document.

Despite its claims, the SADPD fails to follow both national and local policies in the emerging National Planning Policy Framework and its own approved Core Strategy, and is therefore not legally compliant. SAPDP policies SA5, SA6 and SA7 conflict with Core Strategies CS1, CS2, CS3, CS4, CS5, CS6, CS7, CS8, CS9 and CS15.

Full details are given later in this response document.

Furthermore, Policy SA7 (Blue Mountain Golf Course) is contrary to legally binding agreements signed by the Council and the land owner who is also the proposer of the development.

The plans to locate a secondary school and a football stadium at Blue Mountain are neither justified nor sustainable in this location, and they have not been adequately considered against alternatives. Local residents have not been given the opportunity at any stage of a consultation on any other options for these two particular proposals.

Like many aspects of the SADPD, they are being imposed by the Council without taking the views of the community into account and against the strong objections of more than 2,500 residents. The views of the community have been ignored throughout the whole process, with three consultations proving to be merely a worthless gesture, not engagement in “meaningful” two-way dialogue as indicated by the guidance of the Draft NPPF. We have been consulted and then ignored – with no significant changes being made to the Council’s “Preferred Option” as a result of the highly expensive consultation exercise.

There are grave concerns over the shortlisting process which reduced the original eight broad area sites proposed to the current four contained as urban extensions in Policies SA4, SA5, SA6 and SA7. All information, discussion and voting on the sites was restricted to the eight-member Executive (three of whom represent wards in Sandhurst where the only site proposed was dropped). At no stage was the full Council of 42 members allowed a free and democratic vote on the choice of sites.

At the Council meeting on 30 November 2011, they were simply asked to adopt the Draft SADPD for submission to the Secretary of State – and a whipped vote was applied by the ruling Conservative party to ensure that the document was approved.

We contend that adopting the SADPD in such a fashion was a breach of the Council’s own Code of Conduct, which therefore renders the Draft SADPD not legally compliant.

Wokingham Borough and Windsor & Maidenhead Councils confirm that they have had no cross-border consultation approaches from Bracknell Forest Council, as required under the Localism Act and the Draft NPPF. Wokingham BC is objecting to the proposals for sites adjoining their boundary.

The scale and location of the three major developments proposed would cause irreversible damage to the traditional village character of Binfield, which has already taken its share of new housing in recent years.

Blue Mountain and Amen Corner North and South are identified in the Council’s own Core Strategy, adopted only four years ago, as Gaps to prevent the coalescence of settlements (Bracknell with Binfield, and Binfield/Bracknell Forest with Wokingham, respectively), and to be protected from development which would lead to the merging of settlements. If the proposals are allowed in their present form, they would result in one continuous settlement, merging Bracknell with Wokingham and losing Binfield’s identity as a separate village. The token minimum amount of green space allocated in the SADPD is insufficient to prevent this happening.

The Council has failed to explore adequately the alternative of converting or redeveloping as affordable housing some of the more suitable 1.5 million sq ft of empty office buildings on brownfield sites in and around Bracknell town centre, its top priority and most sustainable location for housing development, according to the Core Strategy.

Another major green area of the northern arc is to be lost through Policy SA9 (Warfield) which has already been adopted as a major growth location for up to 2,200 homes. Detailed planning discussions with developers are causing great anxiety and anger among residents in that area, and safeguards should be required in the detailed plans to ensure that Cabbage Hill is free from all development in order to protect its wildlife and the open vista which are important to the quality of life for residents; and to protect the village identity of old Warfield from being lost through coalescence with the new development.

In the report on the Examination into the Core Strategy DPD in 2007, the Inspector noted:

“Whilst the detailed layout of CS5 (Warfield) will be developed through an AAP (Area Action Plan), the Council will seek to secure the majority of Cabbage Hill as publicly accessible open space.”

Of particular concern to the NAAG is the fact that the Council has based the development of the whole north Bracknell expansion area on the delivery of a secondary school at Blue Mountain, which has legal constraints on it. Local residents are prepared to fight through the courts against any variation of Section 52 and lease agreements on Blue Mountain, which could threaten the deliverability of the only new secondary school site considered by the Council. It has steadfastly refused to consider alternative options, although this is the least sustainable option, representing the greatest distance for the maximum number of pupils to travel.

In summary, the key issues of our case are:

Dependence on the availability of Blue Mountain Golf Course for development is unsound due to legal constraints
Locating a secondary school for the whole north Bracknell expansion area at Blue Mountain is unsustainable and may be undeliverable
There are major conflicts with the Council’s adopted Core Strategy
The proposals fail to meet many of the objectives of the emerging National Planning Policy Framework
Bracknell Council’s 10,780 Housing Demand Forecast for the period 2006-2026 is overstated and not founded on a credible evidence base
The consultation carried out by Bracknell Forest Council is flawed
There was inadequate assessment of alternatives when choosing the “preferred” broad areas
The Infrastructure Delivery Plan (SAL 34) which supports the Draft SADPD is unsound
Provision for healthcare needs in the SADP is unsound

The above assertions are each covered in more detail, together with supporting evidence, within the body of this document.

We would like to make it clear that the Northern Arc Action Group is not against new housing being built, nor does it contend that north Bracknell is the wrong location for some new development. But residents are very concerned about the cumulative impact of Bracknell Forest’s housing development plans when considered alongside those of neighbouring Wokingham Borough Council.

Action groups join forces to protest against Council housing plans

Nigel Rennie — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:29:32 +0000

Calls for Blue Mountain Golf Club homes plans to be scrapped

By Hugh Fort
March 20, 2012

Housing campaigners in Binfield are calling for plans for 400 homes on a popular local golf course to be completely dropped from a controversial housing plan.

The Northern Arc Action Group (NAAG) is urging Bracknell Forest Council to keep to a legal agreement which states the Blue Mountain Golf Course in Wood Lane must remain a golf course or recreational facility.

‘Don’t bulldoze Blue Moutain Golf Club’

They say it is an important gap between Bracknell and Binfield and want the council to honour the initial agreement by removing it from the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (SADPD).

NAAG and the Crowthorne Village Action Group (CVAG) have both sent detailed responses to Bracknell Forest Council’s consultation on its SADPD.

Both groups say the council’s proposal to have 10,780 houses built in Bracknell by 2026 is based on out-of-date information and breaks several of the council’s own policies.

The two groups have been working together to go through more than 2,000 pages to submit their responses.

Key development sites in the plan include the golf course in Binfield, 400 homes at Amen Corner in Binfield, 2,200 homes on land near Cabbage Hill in Warfield, 400 homes at Broadmoor Hospital in Crowthorne and 1,000 homes on the old TRL site in Lower Wokingham Road, Crowthorne.

The full story can be found at: http://www.getbracknell.co.uk/news/s/2110409_calls_for_blue_mountain_golf_club_homes_plans_to_be_scrapped

Who turned the lights off?

Nigel Rennie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:47:30 +0000

Can anyone spot what all these buildings in central Bracknell have in common, apart from the 1,000′s of pigeons perched on the ledges?

Highview House above Mothercare

Gingers Court

Enid Wood House above Peacocks

None of them have any lights on. That is because there is nobody in occupation. Homes and offices, all empty.

What excuse will Bracknell Forest Council come up with this time. Watch this space, you may have to wait several years though.

Meet your local MP Adam Afriyie

Nigel Rennie — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 08:05:23 +0000

Your invitation to meet our local MP Mr. Adam Afriyie.

Binfield Village Protection Society invite you to meet your local MP Mr. Adam Afriyie,

On Friday 14^th October at 7.30 p.m.

After welcome and comment from the BVPS Chair, Mr. Afriyie will address the meeting and take questions from the floor about the planning issues facing the village.

The meeting will take place in the Copse Suite,at Jocks Lane Community Centre, Binfield Road, RG42 2BH

There will be cheese and wine refreshments provided and a donation of £5 would be appreciated towards BVPSfunds. Doors will open at 7pm when refreshments will be served in the Coffee Shop and donations and subs will be collected.

There is limited seating but excellent parking available.

To discuss the current planning issues facing the village

ADAM AFRIYIE MEETING

Adam Afriyie has accepted an invitation to speak to members of Binfield Village Protection Society at this fund raising event on Friday 14^th October. Members of BVPS are invited to support this event with members of the public invited to join in. Refreshments are available to all and there will be an opportunity to join BVPS.

Residents of Temple Park and Bracknell Town will be aware that the Blue Mountain Golf Course is particularly under threat from a football stadium, a very large education facility and 400 houses – bringing excessive vehicle access and destroying the green gap between Binfield and Bracknell. This is exasperated by the Coalition’s recent discussion papers on changing planning laws, i.e. the National Planning Policy Framework which is widely regarded as a developers charter.

Blue Mountain Golf Course is a popular and successful pay and play golf course open to all members of the community. Blue Mountain is a local employer, which, in addition to golf, boasts a conference centre for business meetings, exhibitions, conferences, is hired to host wedding receptions, dinner dances, weight watchers and other clubs, social events, auctions, as well as their annual firework display. All these attract people from across the Borough and well beyond. Additionally, local people use the footpaths adjoining Blue Mountain to walk, jog and exercise their dogs in a safe environment.

Blue Mountain was created when part of Park Farm, was taken to build the Temple Park housing development in 1990s. Bracknell Forest Borough Council placed a condition on the development, to create a pay and play golf course and provide a green gap between Binfield and Bracknell settlements, protected by a long lease.

There is a complex leasing chain in place, with the head leasehold interest owned by Bracknell Forest Borough Council. The 125 year lease is dated 16th February 1990 and its term runs from 16.2.1990 under Title Number BK284466.

Please join us and enter the debate in saving our countryside and green open spaces from bricks, mortar, concrete and tarmac and the excessive traffic it will bring onto an already overloaded environment.

********************************************************************************************************

We accept / are unable to accept your invitation to Adam AfrIyie , MP.

We will bring / enclose a donation of ………………… and our membership subscription for BVPS ……………………………………. Total of ……….

Received with thanks by the Chairperson of BVPS.

NAME —————————————————————-Tel. Nos.——————————-

Address ——————————————————————————

e-mail ——————————————————————————–

PayPal ——————————————————————————–

Return to the Treasurer, C/o Southfield, St Mark’s Rd., Binfield, Berkshire, RG42 4AT

******************************************************************************

Can LibDemCon Localism work ?

Nigel Rennie — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 20:23:50 +0000

The latest fashion of how we can destroy our countryside while at the same time appearing not to comes through a couple of Government initiatives namely the Localism Bill and changes to National Planning Policy Framework. Through these somewhat innocuous and beguiling titles we are being led down a path that will give developers a right that they could not have dreamed of even in their wildest imaginations – that there will be a presumption to allow development.

Whilst we can only applaud the developers ability to lobby brain dead politicians and pay vast sums into party coffers, even they could not have begun to imagine such an outcome. The right to be able to build on any piece of land anywhere in the Country, unless residents can prove that they do not have such a right. This is a bit like a presumption of guilt and you have to prove innocence.

That is not what localism is about Mr ConLibDem Party, read the book again. Localism is about giving real power and authority to local communities and giving up the right to centralist government. Localism is about central government only being involved in national and international policies and leaving local people to manage their own affairs. It is not difficult and in fact the UK is one of the few Countries in the Western world NOT to have adopted such policies and retain power among an elite centre who have no qualifications other than they have been elected by a minority of the population (normally less than 36%). Localism is not about giving real power to developers and none to the community, this will inevitably lead to discontent, disagreement and challenge.

True Localism works. What is being promoted barely covers a couple of sentences in the plan. Localism is about devolving power not rationing out selective parts and retaining control from the centre.

25% of Bracknell offices stand empty

Nigel Rennie — Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:09:12 +0000

For much of the last century, the general demand for office accommodation in Bracknell has been relatively low, particularily when compared to the current over supply of offices throughout the region. Bracknell stands out as being particularly poor.

The Bracknell area is dominated by telecoms and technology companies and lacks other forms of business to stimulate demand. The present credit crunch and recession have merely hastened the increase in office supply.

Demand for floor space in 2011 is currently at a very low level. 2010 was a relatively good year with about 190,000 sq ft let, but this barely dented the supply, which in fact increased further during the year.

The availability of Bracknell offices currently stands at about 1,500,000 sq ft.

Overall the total stock of offices in Bracknell is estimated at approximately 6,000,000 sq ft of which about 25% is currently available. This is significantly higher than the regional average of around 15%.

The overriding conclusion is that Bracknell possesses too many empty office buildings, some of which will never re-let as offices. Easthampstead Road alone has over 200 sq ft of empty offices; more than the total uptake in the town during the whole of 2010.

The result of this has been that rents and freehold values have fallen sharply and that incentives increase. However these initiatives have little overall effect apart from the more modern buildings. It is not uncommon for a tenant to be able to secure a 24 month rent free period if taking a 5 year lease term at close to or less than the headline quoted rent. Quoted headline rents have fallen for the best space by nearly 25% from the mid to upper £20′s to mid-teens £’s. Even with this most of the buildings so affected have not been let. There is simply insufficient demand.

So the burning question is, that with all of this knowledge, why does Bracknell Council persist with their policy of building more homes on green land and not make use of this empty space? 1.5m sq ft of office space equates to about 1,500 housing units. Add this to the recognised 4,000 housing units that can be built on brown land in and around the town centre and they will achieve more than half of the total housing being demanded by central government.

Even the Chancellor, George Osborne wants to make use of such space and yet this advice from central government is being ignored by Bracknell Council http://citywire.co.uk/money/budget-2011-osborne-could-turn-old-offices-into-new-homes/a480428

Having homes in and around the town centre would revitalise the centre and create the need to invest that is badly needed. It would also stimulate new and diversified business, which would in turn have a positive effect on office demand.

Extending this same logic, at the moment there is permission to build 1,500 new houses at Jennets Park, 2,200 houses at Cabbage Hill and a further 750 at Amen Corner. Surprise surprise the Council have now complied with the government requirement. So why on earth are they pushing to build even more on every piece of green land that they can find in Binfield and Warfield?

Last and not least, the biggest question is why they have to build so many houses at all? There is no demand, the economy is slowing down and banks are not lending.

Create the demand by revitalising the town; create the infrastructure that business needs; create a quality of life and well-being for residents of the Borough and most of all protect our environment for future generations. Now that’s a plan.