DOCSLIB.ORG

The Role of the UK Development Industry in Brownfield Regeneration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Role of the UK Development Industry in Brownfield Regeneration The Role of the UK Development Industry in Brownfield Regeneration Research funded by EPSRC as part of the SUBR:IM Programme (Sustainable Urban Brownfield Regeneration: Integrated Management) (Grant No: GR/S148809/01). Stage 2 Report Volume 1 (of 3): Literature Review, National Developer Interviews, Planning Permission Analysis and NLUD Analysis September 2005 Authors: Dr Tim Dixon, Director of Research Yasmin Pocock, Research Officer Mike Waters, Research Assistant Funded by: No part of this report may be quoted without the permission of the lead author. With support from The RICS Research Foundation Published September 2005 by the College of Estate Management, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AW No responsibility for any loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any material included in this publication can be accepted by the authors or the publishers. ISBN 1-904388-47-7 © College of Estate Management 2005 (except NLUD data which is Crown Copyright and reproduced with permission) The role of the UK development industry in brownfield regeneration: Stage 2, Volume 1 Executive Summary Overview This part of the report (which is Volume 1 of a three-volume, Stage 2 report) presents the literature review and conceptual framework for the research. The report also examines the results from the national UK developer interviews (carried out in 2004-2005); National Land Use Database (NLUD) analysis (1998-2003); and residential planning permission analysis for Salford/Manchester and Barking & Dagenham (2000-2004) using Estates Gazette Interactive (EGi) data and published information. Why is the research important? Government policy currently places a strong emphasis on the reuse of brownfield land as part of the sustainable development agenda. Stage 1 of this research highlighted the fact that the UK developer industry was coming to terms with brownfield development, although legislative tensions (at a national and EU level) could pose problems for the future. Stage 2 of the research investigates developer attitudes in more detail towards the barriers to brownfield redevelopment, and towards sustainability in brownfield development. The research also examines NLUD data to determine the key trends emerging nationally and sub- regionally (in Thames Gateway and Greater Manchester) as a prelude to more detailed case study work in these two areas (see Volume 2). Finally, using residential planning permission data, the research in the current volume also examines some of the key characteristics of the development industry in Thames Gateway and Greater Manchester, and at a local authority level in Salford/Manchester and Barking & Dagenham. 1 The role of the UK development industry in brownfield regeneration: Stage 2, Volume 1 Main findings from analysis (Volume 1) National developer interviews Delivering more homes. There is a readiness to support the recommendations from the Barker Review in relation to innovation in the construction process, the streamlining of planning procedures, and delivering homes ‘in tune’ with market preference. Drivers and barriers. The economic and financial framework is a powerful driver for the development of contaminated brownfield land. Developers are frequently dissuaded from developing on contaminated brownfield sites when the degree of uncertainty exceeds what is deemed viable and ‘risk-tolerable’. This can include complying with regulators and technical difficulties. The recent EU Landfill Directive is an additional risk. Sustainability. Although the development industry is playing an influential role in the ‘sustainability’ agenda, there is a degree of scepticism over an agreed, industry-wide definition, and this may hinder its implementation. Developers seem to be adopting a proactive approach to defining sustainability on their own terms. Simplifying and integrating policy. For developers the future of brownfield regeneration seems to rest heavily upon the simplification of government policy, such as the Building Regulations, as well as developers responding to bespoke brownfield legislation, namely the EU Landfill Directive and the Waste Acceptance Criteria. NLUD analysis (1998-2003) Total supply. In 2003 there were some 65,750 hectares of Previously Developed Land (PDL) in England that was available for development. Of this, almost one-third of the total stock is identified as ‘vacant’. Hardcore sites. About one-third of PDL in England is not yet allocated for any specific use. Factors such as poor site conditions, site locations in deprived areas, and market perceptions, may contribute to this. Sub-regional PDL and dereliction. In 2003, there were some 3,600 hectares of PDL stock in Thames Gateway (TG), and 2,625 hectares in Greater Manchester (GM). A significantly higher amount of PDL in GM is derelict/vacant (73%), compared with TG (41%). This is mainly in private ownership, and dereliction is characterised by larger sites in TG (4.8ha) than GM (3.0ha). Sub-regional housing allocation. The current stock of brownfield land in the case study areas (as at 2003) is suitable to provide an additional 81,346 homes in TG, over half coming from vacant and derelict PDL, and an additional 39,002 homes in GM, over two-thirds coming from vacant and derelict PDL. Residential planning permission analysis (2000-2004) Top 100 housebuilders. This group has been important in residential development in both Salford/Manchester (SM) and Barking & Dagenham (BD) from 2000-2004. Key players in SM have included Gleeson, Countryside Properties, George Wimpey and Bellway Homes, and, more recently, Urban Splash; and in BD, Bellway, Persimmon, Higgins Homes and Abbey Developments. Smaller housebuilders. This group (including Antler and Clarke Lyon) has been especially important in SM and this may be partly due to the nature and size of available land holdings. Other developers. Locally-based companies have been important players in both areas (for example Ician Development and Ask Properties in Manchester, and Urban Catalyst in Barking and Dagenham), and housing associations have played a more important role in BD than SM. The successful public-private ventures seen in BD may also be gaining in popularity in SM. Size of permissions. For the period 2000-2004 the average size of permission was larger in SM (85 units) than in BD (61 units). 2 The role of the UK development industry in brownfield regeneration: Stage 2, Volume 1 Conceptual framework Reviewing the literature in Stage 1 enabled us to provide an overview of a variety of approaches to ‘conceptualising’ the brownfield regeneration process. It is valuable to structure the research being formulated as a ‘conceptual framework’ that describes in narrative, or visual format, the key factors, constructs and variables under study. It is also the aim of the research to test the validity of the relationships outlined. Figure 1: Conceptual framework (adapted from POST, 1998, and Shephard and Dixon, 2004) Market Impacts (‘Economic’) Policy Push Developers Opportunity (Responses and Pull Cultures) Stakeholder Technology Engagement Adoption (‘Social’) (‘Environmental’) Therefore, as shown in Figure 1, the three components of our research in Stage 2 focus on three themes, or facets, of sustainable development (or sustainability): 1 Market impacts (the ‘economic’ pillar) For example: • How is risk defined, assessed and communicated in the development process? • How is the economic viability of a scheme measured? • What is the nature of existing market dysfunction or failure in the immediate development locality and how will the development benefit the area? • What causes such dysfunction/failure in brownfield areas? • Is stigma an issue and how can it be measured? 3 The role of the UK development industry in brownfield regeneration: Stage 2, Volume 1 2 Stakeholder engagement (the ‘social’ pillar) For example: • How do developers engage with other stakeholders (including national, local and regional government, agencies, remediation consultants, the public) during the brownfield regeneration process? • What are the drivers, tensions, or frictions which may arise during the brownfield development process? • What are the developers’ responses and cultures to brownfield regeneration1? 3 Technology adoption (the ‘environmental pillar’) For example: • What determines the type of remediation technology used? • How does the development industry view new, innovative clean-up technologies? • What is the perception of other stakeholders towards such technologies? • What determines technology ‘lock-in’ and adoption? • What is the international experience in remediation? It should be emphasised that our approach is to analyse the perceptions, attitudes and practice of the development industry in relation to sustainable development on brownfield sites. Therefore the project is not measuring sustainable development as such; rather it is examining to what extent developers are engaging with the sustainable development agenda, and what that agenda comprises for them. We are also interested in the ‘tensions’ that can arise between these three facets of sustainability in the presence of ‘push’ factors (for example policy and contamination issues) and ‘pull’ factors (for example, profitability issues)2. Finally in our framework, we do not make any assumptions about the inter- relationships between the ‘pillars’. Instead we seek to explore how developers and other stakeholders are engaging with the three components of sustainable development. 1 We are therefore
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Development of Robust Details for Sound Insulation in New Build Attached Dwellings
    The development of robust details for sound insulation in new build attached dwellings Received: 30th September, 2005 Sean Smith BSc, PhD, MIOA is RC UK Research Fellow and Principal Research Fellow at the Building Performance Centre, School of the Built Environment, Napier University, External Technical Advisor to Robust Details Ltd and joint project manager of the RSD project. He is also Senior Acoustic Consultant with the Robin Mackenzie Partnership. Dave Baker MRICS, MCIOB, MBEng is CEO of Robust Details Ltd and former Technical Director of the RSD project and House Builders Federation. Richard Mackenzie BSc, MIOA, MInstSCE is Lead Acoustic Consultant with the Robin Mackenzie Partnership and joint project manager of the RSD project. John B. Wood BSc, DA is Lecturer in Architectural Technology at the School of the Built Environment, Napier University and designer of the RSD project submission. Philip Dunbavin MSc, FIOA, MSEE, MIOSH, MInstSCE is Managing Director and Principal Acoustic Consultant with the PDA Group and Chairman of the RD Inspectors. David Panter BSc, MIQA is Operations Manager with Robust Details Ltd. Abstract This paper outlines the background, process and system approach towards the development of robust details (RD) for sound insulation for new build dwellings in England and Wales. Part 1 outlines the initial Robust Standard Details project and its framework, Part 2 describes the structure and operation of the RD scheme for Building Regulation E1 and Part 3 provides feedback on the first operating year of the scheme. In addition, comparisons are made between previous performance levels and constructions used for Part E (1992) relative to the RD approach using recent data feedback from random site inspections and testing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Housing Forum December 2017
    A REPORT FROM THE HOUSING FORUM DECEMBER 2017 Building Homes Better The quality challenge SUPPORTED BY: AMCM GROUP LTD | BLP INSURANCE | HUNTERS Working with NHBC About this report Over the course of 2017, a cross-sector group Report sponsors of members of The Housing Forum formed a working group chaired by Rory Bergin, HTA Design, to investigate how building better quality homes can be delivered to improve the experience of those buying and renting them. We decided to limit our remit to the quality of individual homes while fully acknowledging that good place making and appropriate and sustainable infrastructure are essential to the creation of good living environments. We have looked into the points of interaction between customers and the housing industry and found systemic failures to provide quality outcomes, either in terms of design quality or customer satisfaction. This report is intended to highlight where those problems occur, and what we think can be done about them to achieve a positive change for quality. Contents Foreword Rory Bergin Working Group Chair 3 Executive summary 4 PART ONE: POLICY AND PRACTICE 6 PART TWO: NEW IDEAS AND CASE STUDIES 16 Fostering a quality culture 6 Selecting products to improve the experience 16 of residents Improving the experience of tenants and buyers 8 Case study: London Borough of Newham 18 Pre-planning, regulation and design quality 10 Case study: Cumbrian Homes 20 Procurement and construction 12 How a smart regulatory framework enabled a high 22 performing industry friendly solution Harnessing
    [Show full text]
  • Management of the Firm
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Central Archive at the University of Reading NEW GOVERNANCE APPROACHES TO ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION: AN EXAMPLE OF THE CODE FOR SUSTAINABLE HOMES (CHS) Shu-Ling Lu1 and Martin G. Sexton School of Construction Management and Engineering, University of Reading, Reading, UK. Environmental policy in the United Kingdom (UK) is witnessing a shift from command-and-control approaches towards more innovation-orientated environmental governance arrangements. These governance approaches are required which create institutions which support actors within a domain for learning not only about policy options, but also about their own interests and preferences. The need for construction actors to understand, engage and influence this process is critical to establishing policies which support innovation that satisfies each constituent’s needs. This capacity is particularly salient in an era where the expanding raft of environmental regulation is ushering in system-wide innovation in the construction sector. In this paper, the Code for Sustainable Homes (the Code) in the UK is used to demonstrate the emergence and operation of these new governance arrangements. The Code sets out a significant innovation challenge for the house-building sector with, for example, a requirement that all new houses must be zero-carbon by 2016. Drawing upon boundary organisation theory, the journey from the Code as a government aspiration, to the Code as a catalyst for the formation of the Zero Carbon Hub, a new institution, is traced and discussed. The case study reveals that the ZCH has demonstrated boundary organisation properties in its ability to be flexible to the needs and constraints of its constituent actors, yet robust enough to maintain and promote a common identity across regulation and industry boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Planning Conditions for the Code for Sustainable Homes and Breeam 14
    1 Contents ONE Introduction 1 BACKGROUND 1 WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION? 2 CLIMATE CHANGE SPD 2 PURPOSE OF GUIDANCE NOTE 1: SUSTAINABLE BUILDING STANDARDS 2 CONTENTS 2 TWO Policy Context 3 NATIONAL CONTEXT 3 LONDON CONTEXT 3 BOROUGH CONTEXT 4 THREE Code for Sustainable Homes 5 BACKGROUND 5 PLANNING POLICY REQUIREMENTS 5 PLANNING GUIDELINES 5 Guideline SB1: Pre- Assessment Report (Code for Sustainable Homes) 6 Guideline SB2: Design Stage Assessment (Code for Sustainable Homes) 7 Guideline SB3: Post Construction Stage Assessment (Code for Sustainable Homes) 8 FOUR ‘BREEAM’ Sustainability Ratings (Non-Residential Developments) 9 BACKGROUND 9 PLANNING POLICY REQUIREMENTS 9 PLANNING GUIDELINES 10 Guideline SB4: Pre- Assessment Report (BREEAM) 10 Guideline SB5: Design Stage Assessment (BREEAM) 10 Guideline SB6: Post Construction Stage Assessment (BREEAM) 11 FIVE Sustainable Design and Construction Statements 12 BACKGROUND 12 PLANNING POLICY REQUIREMENTS 12 PLANNING GUIDELINE 12 Guideline SB7: Sustainable Design and Construction Statements 12 SIX Model Planning Conditions 13 BACKGROUND 13 PLANNING GUIDELINE 13 Guideline SB8: Use of Planning Conditions (CSH/ BREEAM) 13 MODEL PLANNING CONDITIONS FOR THE CODE FOR SUSTAINABLE HOMES AND BREEAM 14 SEVEN Development Management Flowchart: Code for Sustainable Homes 15 and BREEAM 2 ONE Introduction Background 1.1 In 2009, Sutton became the first Council in the UK to commit to being a ‘One Planet Living' (OPL) Borough. This seeks to reduce our environmental footprint to acceptable levels based on the recognition that if everyone in the world lived as we do in Sutton, we would need almost three planets’ worth of resources to maintain our current levels of consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmentally Sustainable Development
    EASTLEIGH BOROUGH COUNCIL LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK Environmentally Sustainable Development SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT ADOPTED 5 MARCH 2009 APPENDIX 1: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Technical Guidance CONTENTS Definitions 1. General Sustainable Development 2. Water 3. Energy/CO2 4. Materials and Waste 5. Green Infrastructure 6. Health and Wellbeing 7. Sustainable Management 8. Major Developments DEFINITIONS [The Code for Sustainable Homes This is for for ‘Residential development’ (all new houses and flats but not extensions and conversions nor institutional accommodation). The Code is an environmental assessment method for new homes based upon the BREEAM ‘Ecohomes’ which it replaced (in England) in April 2007. Each development to be assessed against the Code needs to be registered with the BRE by a BRE-licensed Assessor, who is employed by the developer. The development is assessed by the Assessor who awards credits when sufficient documentary proof has been supplied to satisfy each credit requirement. The Code covers 9 areas of environmentally sustainable development, namely: • Energy/CO2 • Water • Materials • Surface Water Runoff • Waste • Pollution • Health and Wellbeing • Management • Ecology There are minimum mandatory standards for Energy/Co2, Water Consumption, Waste, Surface Water Run-off and Materials at Level 1. There are further minimum mandatory standards for Water Consumption at levels 3 and 5. Energy/CO2 has mandatory APPENDIX 1: GUIDANCE: CODE FOR SUSTAINABLE HOMES minimum standards at each of the levels culminating in level 6 which requires “carbon neutral” development. Lifetime Homes compliance is mandatory at level 6 The BRE audits the assessments and awards a certificate according to the final point score. Seven levels are possible (see table 1): RATING Minimum Score Required (%) FAIL < 36 Level 2 36 Level 2 48 Level 3 57 Level 4 68 Level 5 84 Level 6 90 Table 1: Code FSH Ratings Certification is compulsory at both the design stage (interim certificate) and at the post construction review stage (final certificate).
    [Show full text]
  • Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide
    Code for Sustainable Homes Technical Guide www.communities.gov.uk community, opportunity, prosperity Code for Sustainable Homes Technical Guide March 2007 Department for Communities and Local Government: London Acknowledgements This Technical Guide has been drafted by the BREEAM Centre at the Building Research Establishment under contract to Communites and Local Government Department for Communities and Local Government Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Telephone: 020 7944 4400 Website: www.communities.gov.uk © Crown Copyright 2007 Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown Copyright and the title of the publication specified. Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply for a Click-Use Licence for core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp or by writing to the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or email: HMSOlicensing@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk. If you require this publication in an alternative format please email [email protected] Communities and Local Government Publications PO Box 236 Wetherby West Yorkshire LS23 7NB Tel: 0870 1226 236 Fax: 0870 1226 237 Textphone: 0870 1207 405 Email: [email protected] or online via the Communities and Local Government website: www.communities.gov.uk March 2007 Product Code 06BD04486 Foreword We must act on climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Extra
    Technical Extra February 2015 | Issue 17 In this issue: NHBC STANDARDS Minimum foundation depths in clay soils page 3 Ironmongery for windows and doors page 4 REGULATION AND COMPLIANCE Update on air-tightness testing page 6 Ensuring adequate ventilation to naturally-ventilated dwellings page 8 NHBC updated guidance in respect of guarding to openable windows with low cill heights page 10 Design and use of autoclaved aerated concrete masonry units page 14 CE marking for steelwork fabrications page 16 GUIDANCE AND GOOD PRACTICE Pre-start meetings and risk guides page 18 Provision of fire protection to proprietary dummy chimneys over party walls page 19 robustdetails® animated training videos page 20 NHBC Foundation page 22 Provision of weep holes and weep vents in masonry walls page 24 INFORMATION AND SUPPORT Technical news Page 25 Information and support page 26 Foreword Welcome to Technical Extra 17 Pre-start meetings between site teams and NHBC building inspectors provide an opportunity to identify and consider specific issues and risks associated with the site and build. Whilst not uncommon in the past, we’ve developed a more robust framework for these discussions – read the article in Guidance and good practice for more details on the benefits of these meetings. Readers might be surprised to learn that 15% of the defect-related contacts NHBC receives relate to windows and doors. Ironmongery dominates, with issues relating to handles, locks and hinges accounting for almost half. Comments recorded on customer satisfaction surveys also highlight similar issues; the article ‘Ironmongery for windows and doors’ provides more information. As methods of making homes more airtight have been designed, and construction practices have improved, the level of airtightness you can hope to achieve has also progressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Rebuttal to Lpa's Proof of Evidence
    TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 SECTION 78 APPEAL BY THE WELLINGTON PUB COMPANY PLC PROOF OF EVIDENCE – PLANNING REBUTTAL TO LPA’S PROOF OF EVIDENCE MARK BATCHELOR BSc (Hons), MSc, MRTPI THE WHITE HART, 184 NEW CROSS ROAD, LONDON, SE14 5AA PINS REF: APP/C5690/W/19/324119 LPA REF: DC/18/106613 3 MARCH 2020 1 Rebuttal of LPA’s Planning Evidence | The White Hart, 184 New Cross Road, SE14 5AA Report Control Project: The White Hart Client: The Wellington Pub Company Reference: 17.5061 File Origin: J:\17.5061\4 Boyer Planning\4.02 Reports\Appeal Primary Author DT Checked By: MB Issue Date Status Checked By 1 03/03/2020 Final MB 1. PLANNING REBUTTAL TO LPA’S PROOF OF EVIDENCE 1.1 This rebuttal statement should be read in accordance with my initial proof of evidence dated 18 February 2020 and submitted to PINS on the same date. It seeks to address and clarify the statements made in the Council’s Planning Proof of Evidence (PoE). It will primarily comment on the Agent of Change principle, where the Council, in paragraph 10.4 of their PoE, consider this to be relevant in this instance by virtue of the necessity for conditions to be imposed on the public house to prevent adverse noise and disturbance to future residents. Intend to Publish London Plan policy D13 (Agent of Change), in line with NPPF paragraph 182, states that development should be designed to ensure that established noise and other nuisance-generating uses can continue to operate or grow without having unreasonable restrictions placed on them.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining a Fabric Energy Efficiency Standard for Zero Carbon Homes
    DEFINING A FABRIC ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARD FOR ZERO CARBON HOMES Executive Summary of Task Group Recommendations November 2009 FACILITATING THE MAINSTREAM DELIVERY OF LOW AND ZERO CARBON HOMES Zero Carbon Hub Acknowledgements The full report ‘Defining a Fabric Energy The Zero Carbon Hub is very grateful to the Efficiency Standard for Zero Carbon Homes’ is following organisations for their involvement available as a PDF download from and contributions in developing these www.zerocarbonhub.org recommendations. Association for Environment Conscious Building (AECB) Aecom Anser Project Managers London Office Barratt Developments PLC 62-68 Rosebery Avenue British Electrotechnical and Allied Manufacturers' London EC1R 4RR Association (BEAMA) Building Research Establishment (BRE) Milton Keynes Office Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC) NHBC House, Davy Avenue Construction Products Association (CPA) Milton Keynes MK5 8FP Countryside Properties PLC Crest Nicholson PLC T 0845 888 7620 Davis Langdon F 0871 813 0569 Energy Saving Trust (EST) [email protected] Fairview New Homes Ltd. Federation of Environmental Trade Associations www.zerocarbonhub.org (FETA) November 2009 Federation of Master Builders (FMB) Reprinted January 2010 Fulcrum Consulting Reprinted with minor changes March 2010 Good Homes Alliance (GHA) Heating and Hotwater Industry Council (HHIC) Heatrae Sadia Home Builders Federation (HBF) nd Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) All costs based on 2 quarter 2009 information and do not take account of: Hot Water Association
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Consultation on Changes to the Building Regulations in Wales Part L (Conservation of Fuel and Power)
    2012 Consultation on Changes to the Building Regulations in Wales Part L (Conservation of fuel and power) Consultation – summary of responses Part 4 #03 Ian Whittaker - UK Registered Architect #17 Gordon Russell - GR Architect #26 Robust Details Limited #34 RTPI Cymru #52 Friends of the Earth Cymru #72 Community Housing Cymru Group #79 Institute of Historic Building Conservation #81 Llanmoor Development Co Limited #84 CBI Wales #90 EAMA The UK zero carbon house myth. What is the definition of a zero-carbon home? 'A home that produces zero or even negative CO2 emissions by maximising the use of energy efficiency and renewable energy.' Guardian 2009 'A zero carbon home is one that generates as much power as it uses over the course of a year and therefore has net zero carbon dioxide emissions.' Tree hugger 2009 A building can be considered fully ‘zero carbon’ when there is no net emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) arising from the energy use within the building. This includes space heating, water heating, lighting, appliances and so on. www.idea.gov.uk The government has set the following targets for zero-carbon buildings: All new-build homes in England and Wales to be ‘zero carbon’ by 2016 . All new schools to be zero carbon by 2010 . All new public sector buildings to be zero carbon by 2018 . All new non- domestic buildings to be zero carbon from 2019. (Local Government Improvement and Development 2011) What is wrong with the current definition of a zero carbon home ? The definitions all neglect to allow for :- The energy used in extracting the materials for the home.
    [Show full text]
  • Council Meeting
    COUNCIL MEETING Date: 19 July 2010 Venue: East Northamptonshire House, Cedar Drive, Thrapston Time: 7.30 pm Present: Councillors:- Sue Homer (Chairman) Andy Mercer (Leader of the Council) David Bateman Steven North David Brackenbury Brian Northall Pauline Bradberry JP Sarah Peacock Albert Campbell Ron Pinnock Richard Gell Roger Powell Roger Glithero JP Rupert Reichhold Glenvil Greenwood-Smith John Richardson MBE Philip Hardcastle Anna Sauntson Glenn Harwood MBE Ron Silver Marian Hollomon Robin Underwood Sean Lever Pam Whiting Richard Lewis Clive Wood Peter MacGovern Also Present: Graham Blagden (Chairman of the Standards Board) Father Grant Brockhouse, St. Marys Church, Higham Ferrers 100. PRAYERS Before the commencement of business, at the invitation of the Chairman, prayers were conducted by Father Grant Brockhouse of St. Mary’s Church, Higham Ferrers. 101. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Councillors Peter Bedford, Tony Boto, Sylvia and Dudley Hughes, Barbara Jenney, Eloise Lucille Gill Mercer, Phillip Stearn and Colin Wright sent their apologies. 102. MINUTES The minutes of the Annual Meeting held on 12 May 2010 were approved and signed by the Chairman. 103. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor Roger Powell declared a personal interest in item 11(b) (Manor Park, Rushden) as a resident of Rushden. The following Members declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the items indicated and were not present during the discussion and voting on these items:- Council Meeting – 19 July 2010 Page 109 Members/Co-opted Members Item Nature of Interest Mr Graham Blagden 10(b) Person the subject of the appointment Councillors Marian Hollomon, 11(b) Members of Rushden Town Council Richard Lewis, Andy Mercer, Steven North, Sarah Peacock, Ron Pinnock, Robin Underwood and Clive Wood 104.
    [Show full text]
  • RD110 ROBUST DETAILS CERTIFICATION SCHEME PLOT REGISTRATION APPLICATION FORM for New Build Attached Dwellings in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland
    Robust Details Limited, Block E, Bletchley Park Science and Innovation Centre, Milton Keynes, MK3 6EB Tel: 03300 882 141 Fax: 01908 363433 www.robustdetails.com RD110 ROBUST DETAILS CERTIFICATION SCHEME PLOT REGISTRATION APPLICATION FORM For new build attached dwellings in England, wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. To be completed by the Developer and submitted before work starts on the dwellings. MAIN CONTACT DETAILS (developer or duly appointed representative and to whom all plot registration documents will be sent by email) Name Company Address Postcode Telephone No Email Please indicate your role: Builder Developer only Designer Other (please specify) BUILDER CONTACT DETAILS (details of the builder responsible for the construction of the robust details) Builder Contact Builder Company Builder Address Postcode SITE DETAILS (details of the site where the robust details are to be constructed) Site Name Site Address Postcode BUILDING CONTROL BODy (NAME) NAME OF NEw HOME wARRANTy PROvIDER IMPORTANT INFORMATION - MUST BE COMPLETED DEvELOPER OF THE SITE (the person named on the building control application) Name Company Name Address Postcode Date By signing this form, you confirm that you have read, understood and agree to the current version of Robust Details Limited’s terms and conditions for plot registrations which can be found in the Support/Downloads area of our web site at www.robustdetails.com CODE FOR SUSTAINABLE HOMES (Do you yES DEvELOPER’S SIGNATURE intend to use Robust Details to gain credits NO IMPORTANT INFORMATION - MUST
    [Show full text]