Partly Cloudy

Partly Cloudy

max temp: 8°C

min temp: 4°C

Search

Martlesham Heath: Legal challenge against council’s blueprint for 2,000 homes near BT’s Adastral Park

15:35 17 January 2014

Suffolk Coastal District Council

Suffolk Coastal District Council

Archant

A district council failed to properly investigate the impact on the River Deben of 2,000 proposed new homes near BT’s Adastral Park, a High Court hearing has been told.

The campaign group opposed to the plans began its legal challenge yesterday against Suffolk Coastal District Council’s blueprint for growth in the area.

No Adastral New Town (NANT) says the council failed in its legal obligations to consider the effect on the Deben estuary, when it approved the site at nearby Martlesham Heath for the extensive development.

NANT – which maintains the development will have an “irretrievable negative impact” on the area – is asking Mrs Justice Patterson 
to quash the allocation for 2,000 homes.

Any such decision would force the council to go back to the drawing board on its future housing plans for the district – set out in the Core Strategy of its Local Development Framework.

Opening the case on behalf of NANT, a leading environmental lawyer, Richard Buxton, said that it was a “rather complex story” and that the proceedings involved a huge amount of evidence.

He said: “The problem we have here stems from the fact of the proximity of the Deben Estuary not being investigated at an early stage. That is what has caused us to be in court today.

“It is about the council not 
investigating what it should have done when it should. It ignored an essential piece of background to its plan when it should have thought about its implications from day one.”

He argued that the council did not have the “good grace” to accept that it made “a number of highly regrettable errors”, which he said included the “serious error not to consider the highly protected status of the Deben Estuary when it started out in 2006”.

He alleged that this was a failure to meet the council’s obligations under the European Habitats Directive and that, in additional breach of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive, it went down the route of its preferred option without making a “sustainability appraisal”.

He continued: “Crucially, in the mean-time, it reached a final decision in July 2008 without consideration of the Devon Special Protection Area (SPA).”

That July 2008 decision, he said was “vitiated for various reasons”, including the failure to take into account the special status of the internationally recognised SPA.

He claimed that the council compounded the situation in September 2008 by increasing the allocation of houses from 1,050 to 2,000 “without any consideration of the alternatives for the extra 950 houses” and without explaining it in a lawful way to the public.

Lawyers representing the council are vigorously defending the Core Strategy at the two day hearing. The judge is likely to reserve her decision in the complex action, and to give a written ruling later this year.

The hearing continues.

6 comments

  • NIMBY's! This country desperately need new housing and it has got to go somehwere, but no-one wants it near them.

    Report this comment

    N M

    Friday, January 17, 2014

  • Perhaps we should know where the money is coming from to fund this case? Could it be other land owners who fear their schemes for development will fail if the most sensible development proposal for the area proceeds.

    Report this comment

    amsterdam81

    Friday, January 17, 2014

  • Cmon, don't be selfish, we need an increase catchment area (northern fringe, adastral park area) to increase shoppers to Ipswich town centre!

    Report this comment

    Ipswich Entrepreneur

    Friday, January 17, 2014

  • "Devon knows" ?

    Report this comment

    freedomf

    Friday, January 17, 2014

  • I quote “Crucially, in the mean-time, it reached a final decision in July 2008 without consideration of the Devon Special Protection Area (SPA).” I'm guessing you mean Deben SPA ?

    Report this comment

    Sir Casm

    Friday, January 17, 2014

  • How much is all this going to cost the tax payer ? Glad I do not live in the South Suffolk DC area as it must mean higher council tax bills to cover it.

    Report this comment

    The original Victor Meldrew

    Friday, January 17, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

An Ipswich musician is this month ditching the razor in tribute to his sister who bravely overcame bowel cancer.

A young man was killed during a crash between a car and a lorry in Essex this morning.

“We won’t let this happen without making a lot of noise”.

A diving club has marked its 60th anniversary by renaming two boats after founding members.

A coroner looking into the death of an 85-year-old man whose body was washed up in Orford Ness says we might never know what happened to him.

Members of Suffolk County Council are expected to call for Network Rail to invest heavily in the region’s railways following the start of the new Greater Anglia franchise.

The train lines from London to Ipswich have now reopened after a man was hit and killed by a train between Colchester and Manningtree earlier today.

Through our iwitness24 site, readers are able to share their photos of Suffolk’s top beauty spots, of landmarks and of some of our amazing wildlife in action.

Our judging panel put Christmas food from the supermarkets to the test.

An Ipswich Burger King franchisee must pay out nearly £180,000 for health and safety breaches before and after a worker was scalded with hot oil.

Most read

Most commented

HOT JOBS

Show Job Lists

Topic pages

Streetlife

Newsletter Sign Up

MyDate24 MyPhotos24