Hagley homes delay down to legal questions over council report

2:52pm Wednesday 5th December 2012 in News

ARGUMENTS about a controversial Hagley housing application will continue over Christmas after planners shelved the issue at the last minute.

Bromsgrove District Council's planning committee was due to give their verdict a proposal by Cala Homes for a 175-property development on Monday night (December 3).

However the item was withdrawn just before the planning meeting was due to start following threats of a legal challenge from Hagley and Clent Parish Councils.

Hagley Parish Council chairman Steve Colella revealed Bromsgrove Council had received a letter from a barrister on Monday afternoon raising concerns about a report by council officers recommending the plan should be approved.

Cllr Colella said: “The purpose of this advice is to consider the lawfulness of a decision by the committee if it were to grant permission.

"The concern was raised in the formal objections from me, Hagley PC, Clent PC and from the appointed planning consultants (RCA) but was not sufficiently recognised in the officer’s report."

Protestors argue the homes, earmarked for a site on Kidderminster Road, would put too much pressure on village roads, schools and medical services.

The item was pulled from the agenda after council bosses decided they needed to seek their own legal advice before making on a decision.

Leading anti-Cala campaigner, Francesca Evans, from Hagley, said: "I think we have shown them we mean business and that we have grounds to stop this going ahead.

"The barrister's letter summed up concerns that due process had not been followed, and that the land had to be treated legally as greenbelt. It questioned a number of assumptions by the case officer as being inaccurate."

Cala Homes say their plans include a million pound contribution to road upgrades in Hagley while other services will also get cash boosts for improvements to cope with extra residents.

Darren Humphreys, regional managing director for Cala Homes Midlands, said: "We understand Bromsgrove District Council's decision to defer while they consider the points raised by the parish council in their legal opinion submitted on Monday afternoon.

"We will continue to work with the district council and understand that a decision on our application will be made at the next available committee."

Although no new date was set for the application to be considered, a spokesman said Bromsgrove District councillors are keen to deal with the matter as soon as possible.

Cllr Colella added: "It extends the period of uncertainty for all parties, however, the legality and appropriateness of the site for development has been raised on many occasions over several years by Hagley Parish Council and the elected ward councillors.

"All parties need to be sure that the correct process has been followed."

Comments(34)

No to CALA says...
4:55pm Wed 5 Dec 12

Thank god for the Parish Council's diligence.

It may cost CALA £1million to put in traffic lights, cycle ways, pedestrian routes and an sixth exit.

It's no upgrade.
It's the bare minimum to get the application passed.

NO TO CALA

Report this post »

ozpat says...
10:21am Thu 6 Dec 12

TUT TUT TUT,

Spitting the dummy again No To Cala! All their proposals are upgrades that is part of the agreement. The recent planning investigation into traffic pollution, flow, flooding, change in environmental aspects etcetera have all been met and a "no objection" verdict concluded. If these are the minimum required as you put it, then why would you not want something better? I guess we shall have to see what 7th Jan brings, I do hope the build goes ahead and the whole community benefits from the upgrades and prosperity to the area they will bring!

Report this post »

dudley old boy says...
2:25pm Thu 6 Dec 12

could always build a young offenders home there

Report this post »

frandroid says...
2:58pm Thu 6 Dec 12

Anyone who thinks that one million will be enough for a proper travel system to BENEFIT Hagley and all who travel through then please lay your sums down in black and white and clear English.

Before I started this campaign I believed that 'experts' actually came out to sites and would have a good overall understanding of the positioning of a potential development site and that all their calculations were done in an unbiased way, putting the needs of a current community first. However I have come to see that this is not the case - 'modelling' reports are used which are easy to manipulate when a particular outcome is specified. Some other 'experts' don't come out to site, they assess from maps/models and won't know the area personally or have experienced the peculiarities of the Hagley traffic system which is outdated and does need investment. I think most people can see that it needs full overhaul not a half baked scheme like this (unless they have their fingers in some Cala pie and aren't thinking of others, only their own profit) . Maybe Lord C should sell off some DIFFERENT areas of his land that won't impact everyone as badly, put in the services and infrastructure the community actually wants plus parking and the council and developers can work together with the community efficiently.

Report this post »

neil53 says...
3:10pm Thu 6 Dec 12

The environmental concerns have NOT been met at all.

Noise pollution has not been looked at and is one reason why houses are difficult to sell in certain parts of Hagley.

Worcester County council and Bromsgrove District Council never even looked at that.

Why would residents trust Cala Homes measurements alone? Would anybody?

The air pollution action plan has not even got off the ground yet with Worceste Regs not even done ANY regular air quality measurements since the AQMA was started by BDC three years ago>

Report this post »

neil53 says...
3:16pm Thu 6 Dec 12

Ozpat. We have said this before. You do not qualify, living Down Under to make comments about a village you have not seen, from your last admission, for years.

Clearly, you have not read the barrister's letter to Bromsgrove District Planners which, not being a Hagley, resident, is not available to you.

The letter sets out clearly why trained legal brains feel the entire housing estate proposal.has been illegal from the very start and has therefore cost the taxpayer ( not counting Lord Cobham and Cala Homes) thousands of pounds.

Write to our parishcouncil. They might email a copy to " aconcerned Aussie"!

Report this post »

neil53 says...
3:17pm Thu 6 Dec 12

The environmental concerns have NOT been met at all.

Noise pollution has not been looked at and is one reason why houses are difficult to sell in certain parts of Hagley.

Worcester County council and Bromsgrove District Council never even looked at that.

Why would residents trust Cala Homes measurements alone? Would anybody?

The air pollution action plan has not even got off the ground yet with Worceste Regs not even done ANY regular air quality measurements since the AQMA was started by BDC three years ago>

Report this post »

neil53 says...
3:19pm Thu 6 Dec 12

Dudley Old Boy is also talking through his hat.

Read the barrister's letter. You might be better informed.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
9:14pm Thu 6 Dec 12

neil53,

As you so obviously point out , no I do not live in Hagley, but regardless where I live I have the freedom of speech, my interest is investment for my family still living there, so yes I do have the right to comment! secondly this is clearly spurious and clear demonstration of assumptive ignorance at work:
"Ozpat. We have said this before. You do not qualify, living Down Under to make comments about a village you have not seen, from your last admission, for years." strange as I was there in June, and do have the right to spend and invest in exactly what I like when I like, one thing has certainly not changed though the "Oh I live in Hagley" arrogance. I have access to the letter Neil53 but I am surprised you do not already know that as you seem to know everything about me! as for trained legal brains ( if you possess anything close to a brain) you would realise these people will argue for who ever has the money for them to do so! hardly a positive is it! From a concerned UK \ Australian citizen - thought you would have known that as well! ignorance bless em eh!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
9:25pm Thu 6 Dec 12

Dudley old boy,

Yes they could build a young offenders centre or create a site for traveller communities. Given the protestors mentality they accept that! The government could build an immigration processing centre or perhaps a prison, rehabilitation centre for pedophiles and rapists. Lets hope some enterprising individual has the opportunity for such facilities should housing be refused, after all services are being overstretched and need to dealt with somewhere. Care in the community I believe it is called.

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
5:07am Fri 7 Dec 12

Inverted snobbery from people who make false assumptions about Hagley people! Those ignorant comments are as predicatble as the equally ludicrous NIMBY accusations!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
5:30am Fri 7 Dec 12

Now I now you you don't really mean that David1875!!! so come on and go back to your NIMBY ranting and let those of us with common sense and social conscious about our business eh, you just stick to unproven fact - less ranting and do as your cronies say ignore me and anyone like me.... theres a good chap! back in your box now!

Report this post »

Voices Of Reason says...
10:06am Fri 7 Dec 12

I would like to thank the parish councils and the campaigners for the work they have done in making our voices heard. I am one of the >4,000 local people who have signed the petition, and one of the >1,200 who complained to Bromsgrove DC. I do not think there would be any value in merely stalling the decision, so I remain hopeful there are points raised that will call a halt to it. I understand they had very little time to read and take advice on the report so I suggest it was merely lack of time. If it was a tactical move I still congratulate them – the cards are stacked against us, so if any fall in the benefit of local voices then great.

The fact remains that this is an unsuitably large development with no infrastructure. It is not just those in Hagley who will suffer, but anyone who commutes in or out of the Black Country or Birmingham via the A456

Report this post »

ozpat says...
11:11am Fri 7 Dec 12

A big hint "Voices of reason"
Get a voice of your own and listen to reason. Stop following the NIMBY, easily influenced masses and join the voice of reason, and see the bigger picture, all your points will be improved and proposals to improve the ares given, join the ignorant and do without, improve your situation and prosper the choice is yours. Just look beyond the rhetoric and village ideal and you will see reality.

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
2:37pm Fri 7 Dec 12

The arrogance of someone who tells Voices Of Reason to get a voice of their own shows his ignorance too! Voices of Reason has a voice of his own and is eloquently expressing the local view of thousands of villagers! Arrogant posters have no right to tell others how to think and what to say!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
10:06pm Fri 7 Dec 12

Still there then David 1875, the hypocrisy of you have just written belies belief! well done! point proven!

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
11:24am Sat 8 Dec 12

It is Ozpat who is the hypocrite, not living within thousands of miles of the site of the planning application yet pathetically and predictably crying NIMBYs at all objectors, who are over 90% of local villagers! It is Ozpat who is unable to grasp the local feeling of opposition, which is what localism is all about - local people influencing what happens in the local community! Ozpat ridicules himself without even realising it! Let's focus on the real issues here which have been repeatedly brought up by objectors and were superbly summarised in the barrister's letter which caused total panic at BDC!

Report this post »

The Mayor says...
11:32am Sat 8 Dec 12

I wonder how many of those objecting to the new homes actually live in "old small village Hagley" and how many of them live in the hundreds of modern houses that are part of "new just a suburb of Stourbridge Hagley"? Perhaps we should demolish all houses built in Hagley after say 1945 and relocate the population elsewhere?

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
1:27pm Sat 8 Dec 12

The Mayor, are you suggesting that objectors are hypocrites for objecting to a 175 homes and offices development, cited on one of the most congested areas of traffic in the whole county, on green fields, next to an air quality management area that still does not have an air quality plan, cut off from the rest of the settlement despite pathetic attempts to join up with the settlement by way of unsuitable footpaths and pedestrian crossings, without regular public bus links, to add hundreds more cars to a high street shopping centre that is already gridlocked by illegal parking.............
.....just because they have bought a house since 1945 in Hagley?

Report this post »

ozpat says...
1:40am Sun 9 Dec 12

The Mayor,
What have you done! David 1875 is having a full meltdown!
May I suggest that any attempt to garner reason from the unreasonable is as pointless as the objector themselves. They* consistently fail to see what will benefit them, and would accept their poor current infrastructure over positive benefit at all costs. Regardless of the facts and evidence before them they will only ever accept what their fantasy tells them is correct, yet conversely are the first to moan that they don't have better services, how can anyone reason with that? I can see your point, though the average objector would not as they are living in "their Village" and as you may have observed, as I do not, the mentality and predictable attitude directed towards me on so many occasions is "the outsider" has no right to comment let alone invest financially in "their Village" They are so self obsessed with elitism that that they unable to see past their own selfish pomposity for the needs of others. As for parking and traffic issues as mentioned above, I have said it before and I shall say it again, it has only now surfaced as a " problem" how coincidental eh!, you will find that these "problems" have always been there but no one has until now done anything about them or drawn attention to them? so really how much of a "problem are they then?"
* by "They" I am of course referring to the demonstrable NIMBY behaviours and attitudes so clearly displayed here.

Report this post »

viktoria says...
7:36am Sun 9 Dec 12

Are Cala Homes also going to build a new school in Hagley? I thought the existing ones are already completely full, and that children are being bussed out of Hagley to neighbouring areas because there is no space for them in the Halgey schools.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
8:04am Sun 9 Dec 12

You could build everything from schools to doctors surgeries but not housing and they would still object about something or other, this is the very nature of the whining passive aggressive objector, you could never satisfy them. The need for housing and public policy does not apply to Hagley, of course, despite there being space to accommodate it, some may say that is therefore selfish behavior, but they don't live in Hagley now do they so what does their opinion matter anyway! It's a case of I'm alright Jack and bugger everyone else (traditional Hagley mentality at work).

Report this post »

carolynw1946 says...
1:40pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Ozpat

How many more times!!!!
No money for new infrastructure!!!
No more Homes!!!
Simple!!!

How simple does it have to be for you to understand!!!

Report this post »

Lil77 says...
5:56pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Oh dear ozpat is on the troll again.

It is Hagley residents have a say, it is Hagley residents who have to live with the final decision.

If you don't live in Hagley then it's none of your business! Do you contribute any taxes to the area? Do you volunteer/ attend any clubs in Hagley? Do your childran/ grandchildren attend school in Hagley, do you own a business or property in Hagley? If the answers no then I suggest you worry about the politics where you DO live.
I don't live in Hagley & wouldn't dream of tellin them how to run their own village.

Your mentality reminds me of Tony Blair 'I have my opinion and no one else can change my mind because I'm right' but that's not how life works sweetheart to be a grown up you have to learn to value others opinions whether they are right or wrong (it's also called respect) I would suggest you learn how to relate to people! You never know you might make friends!!!!!

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
6:31pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Once again Ozpat is wrong- parking and traffic problems have not only just surfaced as a problem that villagers have brought up. For years villagers have complained to Hagley Police to enforce illegal parking - police have FAILED to take action! BDC were told of traffic congestion during the public consultation on the core strategy - BDC FAILED to listen! Lil77 is again quite right, it is the local people who contribute to the local community and are part of it who should be listened to - that is what the prime minister has told us the localism act is all about!

Report this post »

Lil77 says...
6:57pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and to set their own values (be it right or wrong) but in matters like this I cannot see how anyone who does not live/ contribute in anyway to Your village have a viable opinion!

It's the same in voting, you don't vote, don't moan.

I would not pick a side for this argument as I live in a different village a few miles away & quite frankly it's not of my business. If Hagley residents don't want this new housing estate then that's your business, you know what's best for you, just as we know what's best for our village. If you say no to Cala then I totally respect your opinion as a grown up should.

Stick to your guns Hagley & be proud to know your fighting for what's right for you!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
9:57pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Lil77, well put!

I have paid and continue to pay taxes, I am considering investment business and residential property and my family do contribute as I did when I lived in the UK, is this not enough right for you? so whats your point exactly? I have the right to my opinion and NIMBYISM needs to outed, hiding behind localism is not justification for selfishness. I object to the trolling comment, as it is you that has come out to attack my opinion so go check the troll definition before applying to others. David 1875, that was exactly my point, localism eh, the traffic issues have been there for some years yet it has not been taken to the fore the same way as the Cala issue and it is easy enough to blame BDC or police than push the issue to resolution, this is the example of exactly what I have been saying all along, moan about an issue, do nothing to resolve it then blame everyone else for the problem, I take it you don't drive and contribute to the problem then! That issue aside can you tell me why investors should be interested in Hagley if this is the pervading attitude.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
11:10pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Carolyn 1946,

Quotes:

Ozpat

How many more times!!!!
No money for new infrastructure!!!
No more Homes!!!
Simple!!!

How simple does it have to be for you to understand!!!

well my friend the contribution that is proposed is going to be majority funded from the private sector isn't it! CALA (try to stay on track now)- Simple enough for even you to understand so I had thought! you claim lack of of funding and someone walks along and offers the money to assist and improve the infrastructure and you decry it, if thats not simplicity itself then your understanding is clearly downright stupidity! is that simple enough for you?

Report this post »

Lil77 says...
11:29am Mon 10 Dec 12

Ozpat you don't live in Hagley now, you don't live in Britain now and have not paid taxes or contributed to our society in a while. Therefore your opinion is invalid!

You are not a Valid member of Our society therefore irrevelant. Your opinion albeit your own is still invalid as you do not live here, I would only take an interest in your opinion if you lived in Hagley Now and contribute to their society in person not from thousands of miles away over a computer. Like I said before spend time taking concern for the area you live in now.

I will not be answering anymore of your comments as you are argumentitive and thrive on attention, the best way to deal with people like is to ignore and ignore I shall! When you have moved to UK and have paid relevent taxes please feel free to let me know and we will thrash out this argument again over a debating table face to face. Until then I shall leave this page and not indulge you by even reading your retort, as young sir I am sure you feel the need to. I wish you luck in the future hope you find a path in life that makes you a productive member of your own society.

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
4:47pm Mon 10 Dec 12

I am sure knowledgeable local people will fully endorse Lil77's comments.

Report this post »

ozpat says...
8:12pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Well done for that. A point made and ignored it shall be, your inability to accept fact places you well with your counterparts such as David 1875. Again another example petulance when this is all you have to reply to a single person with a differing opinion. A face to face debate would be as useless as discussing it over the internet, as you have a complete inability to process basic facts and operate from an assumptive perspective. Thank you for not indulging me any further for that I am truly grateful. Now I shall await the 7th of January outcome.

Report this post »

DAVID1875 says...
5:30am Tue 11 Dec 12

Ozpat denegrates objectors for shouting down his opinions because it differs from theirs, then he criticises anyone who does not share his opinion! Hypocrisy again!

Report this post »

The Villan says...
6:49pm Tue 11 Dec 12

I am forced to past comment on these posts and all other posts regarding this development be it by letter or a news article.

It is obvious to all readers that there is no love lost between David and Ozpat who continually use this forum to put their points of view across, be it vehemently at times.

Therefore, bearing in mind it is suppose to be the season of goodwill, would you please both agree to disagree and move on. Or at the very least call a ceasefire until January 7th 2013 and then communicate directly with each other rather than on this platform!

Merry Christmas!

Report this post »

ozpat says...
5:29am Wed 12 Dec 12

Thanx villain,

But I think you will find I have already concluded on that point anyway.

Merry Xmas

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree