Comment

Representation ID: 38

Received: 07/06/2007

Respondent: Ms G Yeadell

4.15.7 It is unsurprising that respondents are sceptical about Council's compulsory purchase powers. Formerly these related to acquisition for public schemes, though the Etheldore plotlands matter above seemed an abuse of power. Government paper Household Growth: Where shall we live? Nov. 1996 first proposed LAs use CPOs to sell 'back to back' to private developers.

The earlier Core Strategy paper at 4.14 said compulsory purchase should set a framework to ensure residential enhancement could be fulfilled. Planning policy office were then unable to assure existing homes would be exempt. Newer version cites 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act that CPOs would be for economic, social and environment reasons, which is still open to interpretation that homes would be at risk.

Re more traditional public infrastructure need, at 2.6 and 2.25 LPA presumably looks to Planning Obligations - presumably Section 106 Agreements with developers to achieve road improvements. There are 2 problems:

. Developers use these to buy adverse planning consents
. Road works they are required to provide they don't carry out when asked and the public winds up paying.

To summarise, considering the character of S E Essex, the Government cannot enforce compliance with housing quotas.