Strategy approved after plea by Burton villagers dismissed (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Strategy approved after plea by Burton villagers dismissed
5:00pm Monday 4th March 2013 in News By Katie Clark
Buy this photo »
Burton residents led by Alison Ramsay, front, opposed to proposed building of homes on Burton Farm
THE Battle for Burton village was fought at Christchurch council as members approved the contentious Core Strategy.
A full council meeting at Christchurch saw the document, which details proposals for the local economy, environment, health, homes and community needs, passed to the Secretary of State.
But concerns have been raised about a new housing development at Burton, community facilities and allotment relocation among many other issues. At Tuesday night’s meeting, deputy council leader, Cllr Colin Jamieson, ward member for Burton, urged councillors to remove plans for 45 houses on greenbelt land at Burton, in an eleventh hour amendment.
He said: “There is no doubt that the interests of my constituents will be very much adversely affected if this policy is included. I have been inundated with communications from residents expressing their concerns regarding this proposal.”
Cllr Jamieson said the proposal was not included in earlier stages of the consultation, only appearing in the pre-submission document in 2012.
“I am convinced that if this policy had been included in the proper place at the proper time, it would have been rejected,” he added.
He suggested the houses could be included in the 950-home urban extension at Roeshot Hill without harming the land at Burton.
Cllr David Jones, county councillor for Burton and Grange seconded the amendment, saying there was no guarantee the proposed new homes would be occupied by local families living in Burton and likened the plans to railroads being built through US settlements.
Independent councillor Colin Bungey added: “I do feel like we are being put under pressure, almost railroaded into making a decision because it’s taken seven years to put together this document.
“The farm buildings are a big part of the community. We have got to look at this long-term.”
However, despite passionate debate from both sides on the issue, many councillors were fearful about delaying the process, worried about the threat they faced from developers should they have to go back out to consultation.
They also said it would make the village extremely vulnerable, with the possibility of more houses being built if the amendment was passed.
Cllr Ray Nottage said: “The parish council survey in 2006 showed there was a need for 24 affordable houses in Burton. That was in 2006 and those houses have never been developed. They have to be. If we do not do this, Burton is unprotected.”
Fifteen councillors voted in favour of passing the core strategy to the next stage with eight abstentions.
Comments(8)
joetheman
says...
6:37pm Mon 4 Mar 13
arti273
says...
10:39pm Mon 4 Mar 13
Loyal2AFCB wrote:Sorry, I'm confused:-
Yet again a tiny development of 45 houses in Burton is given prominence over a sprawling 950 residence London overspill cheek by jowl to the village. Why is there a wall silence from the town hall over this far more serious threat to the character of Christchurch? Quite frankly, I find the prospect of thousands of more Londoners moving into the town an absolutely appalling prospect. If this goes ahead it will probably be the final straw for me and I will seriously considering leaving the town which has rapidly become unrecognisable from the place where I was born and bred.
1) Why are all the people going to come from London - is Boris offering grants for people to leave the city?
2) Why are you fearing people based on the last place they lived, who you haven't met? It's not going to be some government project to ease the burden on Tower Hamlets social services. I'm assuming that the folks moving in will be reasonably like minded to us and coming because of the community already here and the location.
As for whether we need or can cope with another 950 homes that's not my point, I just wondered what's with the xenophobia.
Loyal2AFCB
says...
11:03pm Mon 4 Mar 13
Mike Oxbig
says...
6:45am Tue 5 Mar 13
Loyal2AFCB wrote:Yes.
Open your eyes, there has been a huge wave of inward migration into the region from the Greater London area over the last twenty years or so. As the overwhelming majority of the houses to be built on the greenbelt will be for sale on the open market i.e to satisfy outside demand rather than meet local need then Christchurch people are unlikely to be able to compete with people moving in from the wealthier south east part of the country. You are already more likely to hear a cockney accent in the high street than a local one. Is it xenophobic to want to preserve regional identity?
arti273
says...
10:39am Tue 5 Mar 13
It's not like we won't be able to get through the door of our local pub because too many people are performing Knees up Mother Brown.
Where did your loyalty to AFCB go during Harry Redkanpp's tenure? Jason Tindall (Mile End), Eddie Howie (Amersham) - maybe they should sell up and commute every day...
joetheman
says...
1:21pm Tue 5 Mar 13
arti273 wrote:Harry Redknapp,Jason Tindall.Eddie Howe, what have they got to do with the subject being discussed on here?,In fact they are adding money to the local economy unlike most of the outsiders who put nothing in and are a drain on local services{ nhs buses etc},
Regional identity is about a group of people living in a culture region and nothing to do with accents. It's a sense of belonging. When these feared ex-Londoners go on holiday and are asked where they come from, they will answer Christchurch.
It's not like we won't be able to get through the door of our local pub because too many people are performing Knees up Mother Brown.
Where did your loyalty to AFCB go during Harry Redkanpp's tenure? Jason Tindall (Mile End), Eddie Howie (Amersham) - maybe they should sell up and commute every day...
arti273
says...
10:18pm Wed 6 Mar 13
NHS funding is proportional to population, despite what you might read about postcode lotteries in the Daily Mail. Population increases, funding and resources increase.
Buses are all commercial businesses who struggle to fill some routes to make them viable. More people, more potential customers, more routes, more buses, more convenience.
Unless you actually meant NHS buses, in which case I have no diect knowledge of this facility, so I couldn't comment.
Loyal2AFCB says...
6:21pm Mon 4 Mar 13