Tuesday 7 April 2009

Eco-towns cannot go ahead without support of local community say townhalls

Eco-towns could be illegal because of a failure to consult properly, according to legal advice given to town halls.

The Department for Communities and Local Government want to build up to 10 of the towns, each containing thousands of new environmentally-friendly homes, across England.

However, the Local Government Association said the towns should be reconsidered in areas where there is strong local opposition. Furthermore in new legal advice, commissioned by the LGA, it was argued that it could be illegal to go ahead without local consultation.

John Steel QC said the government's plans are "unfair, illogical and unreasonable" because they circumvent the normal planning process. He said the plans would be susceptible to judicial review with a strong likelihood of being declared unlawful.

His view adds to the opinion of John Hobson QC, who also said the Government could find itself open to legal challenges by allowing developers to avoid well-established local development plans.

Eco-towns have proved unpopular in many areas because of the threat to the countryside with celebrity protesters including Judi Dench and Ben Fogle.

Cllr Margaret Eaton, Chairman of the Local Government Association, said the government should reconsider developments where there is strong local authority opposition.

"It is not the concept of eco towns that other local authorities object to – it is the way the government is going about deciding where they will be built. Eco-town schemes should be led locally and not imposed on people by central government," she said.

A judicial review of the planning process around eco-towns was rejected by the High Court earlier this year.

The DCLG insisted the process is legal.

A spokesman said: "We have made it absolutely clear throughout that the eco-town promoters whose locations make our final shortlist [later this year] will have to submit planning applications and these will have to be considered in the same way as any other major development proposal."

Source - The Telegraph

No comments: