The campaign group ‘Save Westridge Farm’ is considering a judicial review after the controversial decision was made earlier in the week to build on the green fields.
On Tuesday, the Isle of Wight Council’s planning committee gave the green light to the 473-home West Acre Park scheme.
Now, posting on its Facebook page, the campaign group, which tried to protect the farm and its tenant farmers the Holliday family, has hit out at acting chair of the planning committee Cllr Geoff Brodie for siding with 3 Conservative councillors and ‘selling out centuries of Island rural community’.
The group said:
“Together, the 4 forced the closure of Westridge Farm, the last dairy farm in [the] east Wight.
“In one foul act of Island betrayal, they join developers in stealing from current and future generations the ability to provide local food and experience caring for nature; of being responsible for the destruction of precious habitat; of endangered species; of killing generations of farming knowledge and caring stewardship of precious habitat.”
They said Cllr Brodie, a member of the ruling Alliance Group, ‘showed his true colours’.
However, speaking at the planning meeting earlier in the week, Cllr Brodie said it was one of the most difficult applications he had seen in his years on the committee.
He said:
“When you are on planning it is always making this balanced judgment … It is not something I take any pleasure in saying but sometimes on planning you have to do the right thing.”
As chair, Cllr Brodie said he was comfortable with any proposal that came forward to refuse the application but that it had to be sustainable and defensible, based on material planning conditions, and that he was not hearing anything extraordinary.
Following the decision, the group suggested it will seek a judicial review to try to overturn the judgement.
It said a judicial review should have already happened in 2017 after permission was granted to build 80 houses on part of the farm but were now thinking of going down that route.
Cllr Michael Lilley, local ward representative, has said he will help residents take the decision to a judicial review.
Cllr Lilley, having stepped down as chair and a member of the committee, for the meeting, said he was advised not to speak at the planning meeting but believed a concerted effort was made to stop him properly representing his ward.
The campaign group supported Cllr Lilley saying in their post he was prevented from speaking in person or via video link.
Responding to some of the backlash the council has faced since making the decision, Cllr Paul Fuller, the cabinet member for planning said the authority did not have adequate planning policies which meant there is a requirement for the council to follow the presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Cllr Fuller said the role of councillors is made very difficult when making planning decisions due to the failings to meet housing targets.
He said:
“During the debate about the West Acre decision, it was clear that councillors who were deeply concerned about the proposal did not feel they had the right tools to challenge proposals.”
Isle of Wight MP, Bob Seely who had previously voiced his objections to the major Ryde development said he disagrees with the decision but thanked councillors who tried to find the grounds to object.
Mr Seely said:
“It is clear that we need to prepare the Island Plan as urgently as possible because we need to have more power to block developers and their agents doing lasting damage to the Island, against the wishes of communities.
“We need housing, but in modest numbers, for Islanders, in towns and on brownfield sites. What we do not need is unsustainable, car-dependent, low density, urban sprawl around our towns, of which Westridge is a prime example, which does permanent and lasting harm to our environment.
“I will be talking to councillors and officers about potential next steps. We cannot normalise low-density greenfield development.”
It’s all about income , the council don’t care of the impact developments have on the people ,countryside ,wildlife etc etc .
GREED every time
Show us where to sign up to stop this dreadful development. Shame on you Brodie
Hardest decision he has ever made my arse…… Softened by a flurry of Brown envelopes made it easier one suspects… Put Brodie on that farce of a clapped out chain ferry tow it out in to The Solent and skuttle the pair of “nit fur for purpose articles”
Brown envelopes are old school , how many of the selected crew will have nice holidays this year. Who will get a good deal on a new house to rent out , maybe not this year or next but they will be rewarded for there so called surport. As usual it all stinks
And trust us we are “Islanders” from the ever so slippery Mr Pink will never install confidence, underneath that “sharp suit” is a bona fida”Flash Harry, a poacher pocket coat with pockets stuffed with “incentives for planning!
I’ll sign in a heartbeat. Stop this wanten destruction.
Yeah councillor Brodie and his blue team mates still trying to screw things up for the island, crocodile tears from him. It has been said that the Tory housing needs predictions are wildly incorrect, requiring far to many homes to be built. Why are the council allowing this to happen ? Once built there is no turning back. Of course there is a need for young islanders to have their own place to live. I have worked a lot with youngsters and they would be happy to have a nice place to rent at a reasonable cost. Sadly they think that house ownership is just a dream for them. Employment here is a bit of a fragile thing, and scares them.
the entire process needs to be investigated.
blaming the planning process is weak at best.
They should have allowed lilley to vote,which would have meant it was denied.
Then they should have stated that this development idea is not in keeping with the climate emergency and is not needed, as there are not 473 families sleeping rough in the islands shop doorways in need of homes.
These houses will be advertised across the country and are completely unnecessary for local need.
The negatives far outweigh the positives and the lame duck excuse of hands being tied, planning frameworks etc etc are pathetic excuses.
Come on, you must know who, or what, is behind it all. Wherever there is property development, there is a stench. As if there would ever come a time when it’s seen as having enough houses anyway. There will never be ‘enough; as there will always be more people. Didn’t they even try to enlarge the Island once, by reclaiming some of the beach at Appley and hoping to build more houses? Money. Secrets. Duplicity. Machinations. Deviousness. Determination. Unscrupulousness, Ruthlessness. All good words, All adequate descriptions.
Yes it most certainly needs addressing, here’s hoping. We ALL need to stand by the group, and give our whole hearted support
I think we need to sort out this council after all we pay the council tax and we must have a say about this .Is there a meeting to discuss this and put things right. We do not need more houses on the island when there is already to many second homes that only get lived in for 6 weeks of the year. There are lots of empty properties around for instance the old Blind home that has been shut for quite a while now .These places can be used for housing adjusted for that purpose and not a lot of money to be spent.
We will probably never beat the council on decision making as what they say goes ,wrongly so I know they are all a big group in it together soooo wrong
I’m sure in the National Planning Policy Framework 72 it states large developments must be supported by adequate infrastructure. To begin with, one only needs to be stuck in the traffic queues to the Ryde Macdonalds to know this is not the case.
Ball and Captiva had no right to apply for planning permission. Under the 1986 Agricultural Rent Act the Holidays have complete security of tenure for 3 generations. The Landlord can only terminate the tenancy if after 3 months of the death of the 1st generation, the next generation fails to give notice of their intention to continue the tenancy. It is clearly apparent the Holiday family wish to remain farming, and should do so without prejudice from their Landlord.
Then surely there would be a good legal challenge there? It should be publicised wider and get more attention drawn to what is going on.
I refer you to the Save Westridge Farm website, and read the Holiday family’s statement. Their tenancy has full protection by the law of this land, but Balls law says different!
I’m sure the group will be taking this into consideration
and again, the lack of an editing facility here now is a pain in the proverbial! My first reply to you, if it even gets allowed to be posted here, should of course have said: “elsewhere online”, and not “welsher online”. For goodness sake, IE, bring back the editing facility. Can think of no valid reason for why it’s been removed.
Cllr Brodie could have voted NO. What is so difficult? He obviously does not TRULY CARE about the island, it’s residents, our wild life and bulldozing this dairy farm and making the family homeless and redundant. Something stinks about this. Disgusting.
Probably just a dead fish, going with the flow to earn…???