Land grab powers could be used for Long Stratton bypass

South Norfolk Council could use legal powers to snap up land they say is needed to get the long-awaited Long Statton bypass. South Norfolk Council could use legal powers to snap up land they say is needed to get the long-awaited Long Statton bypass.

Tuesday, May 6, 2014
8:11 AM

Council bosses could wield legal powers to force owners to sell up land they say is crucial to getting the long-awaited Long Stratton bypass built.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

A development-funded relief road has been touted as the only realistic way of addressing the long-running congestion problems on the A140 between Diss and Norwich.

In March, South Norfolk Council leader John Fuller said the road was “closer than it has ever been”.

With the village earmarked for 1,800 homes under a blueprint for growth known as the joint core strategy, Mr Fuller said those homes could provide the funding, through the community infrastructure levy, to pay for the bypass.

He also said the Greater Norwich City Deal scheme, which offers loans to kick-start development, could also have a key role to play in getting those homes built.

But today, South Norfolk Council’s controlling Conservative cabinet will be asked by officers to consider using another weapon to try to get the bypass off the ground - using its powers of compulsory purchase to buy land.

The council has been drawing up an area action plan to look at how and where the 1,800 homes would be allocated in and around Long Stratton and negotiations with landowners and developers are “well advanced”.

However, officers say it is worth exploring the possibility of the council using compulsory purchase orders to smooth the process.

Compulsory purchase orders allow councils to force land owners to sell up if their property obstructs a regeneration project or it is for the “greater public good”.

The council would have to demonstrate that it would be in the public interest for the order to be granted, while the land owners would be paid the market value of the land, along with possible extra payments.

In the report which councillors will discuss today, planning policy manager Adam Nicholls said: “Officers are of the initial view that there would appear to be a good case that a compulsory purchase order application to secure land to deliver the strategic aims of the area action plan (including the bypass, 1,800 homes, employment land and other elements) would be granted by the secretary of state.

“As land is within a number of separate ownerships, a compulsory purchase order would also minimise the risk of any ransom situations arising between the different landowners.”

If the cabinet agrees to the principle of using compulsory purchase orders, then officers would investigate further, including what it would cost.

Officers would then return next month with a recommendation as to whether the authority should go down the compulsory purchase order route.

Last year, the council’s cabinet outlined options on where the homes should be – including whether there should be 1,200 homes to the east of the village, and 600 homes to the north west or whether the full 1,800 homes should be built on the eastern site within the bypass.

Two other options – one for about 1,000 new homes to the east, 600 to the north-west and 200 to the south-west and another for 1,800 new homes to the east of Long Stratton and 600 to the north-west – have also been consulted on.

John Fuller, leader of South Norfolk Council, said: “The A140 is a key economic artery within East Anglia and for too long residents of Long Stratton have had to endure constant traffic, air pollution, noise and accidents whilst they wait for a bypass.

“South Norfolk is committed to ensuring that the land for the bypass as well as for new homes and space for business is secured. “With the introduction of CIL, an infrastructure investment fund from the City Deal, the essential funding elements are now in place to deliver the road, which will transform the village for the better.

“Compulsory purchase should be considered a last resort but it’s important that the council has this important lever available to ensure that, if it is not possible to gain the agreement of all interested parties to make all the land required available, then no one person can hold the village to ransom.”

• What’s your view? Write, giving full contact details, to Letters Editor, Prospect House, Rouen Road, Norwich NR1 1RE

9 comments

  • Is this the same John Fuller, who wrote to Caroline Spelman off his own back, pledging SNDC’s support for the incinerator to gain the PFI credits? Why is he still Leader after a move like that? Pollution, constant traffic and noise, what a hypoc.rite, just like Cllr Thomas not wanting lorries going through Long Stratton carting waste to Blakenham.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Honest John

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • Thanks for the information, ol hand and Andy T, but what you are saying is that nobody can refuse to the doubling of this village, or the number of housing, because the decision on the route and sale of housing to developers has been decided, its to go ahead. Now those developers will want their usual grand profit margin, they will add the CIF on to house prices. Been stuck there many times, but always respected local traffic and gave way.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • In England, compulsory purchase is not "confiscation at the minimum price". The price is set by an independent valuer at proper market value and there is a right of appeal to a specialist valuation panel. And, as others have said, this is a step in a process began years if not decades ago. However, in fairness the dramatic headline reference to "Land grab powers" has little relation to the detailed story.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Old Hand

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • Ingo - this is not the start of the process. It's been going on for decades! Recent consultation on house numbers up to 1800 were consulted on and various displays held. However the 1800 + 600 = 2400 is a new one!That number will virtually double the size of Long Stratton! That, combined with the Cygnet House development and others not being included in the numbers, would beg the question as to when will they start counting the new houses that will count against the proposed 1800.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Andy T

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • Making a CPO is a good move. It introduces an outside influence [the Inspector at a public inquiry] to ensure that SNDC is acting reasonably and, as the report says, prevents any one landowner from highway robbery of the public purse. Moreover, it does not prevent sales by negotiation before the Order has been granted, usually at a better value in recognition of the avoidance of statutory procedures and the reduction in potential objectors. Obviously, so long as a single party holds out against selling their land, the process wil have to take its course and could take a very long time if it goes to appeal or the Council's case is rejected by the Inspector

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    JCW

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • Using the powers of last resort, the confiscation at the minimum price, at the beginning of a planning process, when all landowners should have been in agreement with developers, makes one wonder whether cllrs. were at fault as to what allocation of housing to choose in this long winded process. No doubt the real story behind bypassing Long Strattons businesses will soon come out.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • I can see several court cases coming up which will cost millions. Perhaps they should talk to land owners to start with and seek their views.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • Just so long as they pay the full price per acre of development land and pay compensation for fracturing of farms, messing up financial planning , inheritance planning etc. Otherwise it is robbing one group of people to make another lot, the developers, rich. John should know this-and that not every scrap of land is owned in large acreages.Whenever road building goes on there can be small family farms , homes, gardens, pony paddocks etc. affected and lives disrupted. Pretending this is for the greater good -how communist era Russia that sounds.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

  • I don't think I will hold my breath.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Old Long Balls

    Tuesday, May 6, 2014

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

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Homes24
Jobs24
Drive24
MyDate24
MyPhotos24
FamilyNotices24
Weddingsite

loading...

Classifieds, browse or search them online now

The Canary magazine
Order your copy of The Canary magazine

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT