Undercliff Defence Committee

                                                                                                                         17^th February, 2005

FORMAL COMPLAINT OVER APPARENT PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITIES IN RELATION TO THE UNDERCLIFF DRIVE STABILISATION SCHEME: APPLICATION TCP/26467/A - P/01467/04 & TCP/26467/ - P/01465/04:

Text extract from UDC complaint to Isle of Wight Council:

"I write on behalf of the Undercliff Defence Committee* to formally complain over what we consider to be a number of procedural irregularities relating to consideration of the controversial A3055 stabilisation scheme.

Some of these irregularities may even have influenced the vote by the Development Control Committee on Tuesday 15^th February in favour of the scheme.

In particular, we point out that it was incorrectly stated during the debate by both councillors and the Chair that Niton and Whitwell Parish Council had supported the scheme. In fact, they supported maintaining a road link, as does the UDC, but strongly opposed the woodland clearance and other key aspects of the current scheme, including impacts on stability. Corrections following earlier complaints on this crucial point by the UDC and other residents did not find themselves into the debate until pointed out on the floor of the chamber by ourselves, and finally confirmed by an officer of the Council. Even then, the Chair insisted she was 'half right', which is still far from correct. 

The Chair praised the scheme even before members had debated it, and members complained that the scheme had been under consideration for a long time, pressurising others to "get on with it". In fact, the revised Environmental Statement had only been available to the public from January this year, with the consultation period ending on February 4^th, hardly an excessive length of time for such a complicated and voluminous document. Previous information had not been of sufficient standard to merit serious consideration until revised.  

Very serious problems with the hydrological assumptions of High-Point Rendel as stated in the Environmental Assessment that were known before the meeting, and indeed referred to in our submission, were not properly acknowledged. In particular, the HPR report failed to reveal the change from siphon to deeper compression drainage, and did not draw attention to the full impact of the drainage on water supplies and on potential settlement of buildings.  

In the debate, Council officers stated that negotiations with landowners involved were going smoothly, when it was already known that at least one case is going to compulsory purchase, making a local inquiry look inevitable.

The UDC is also concerned that many objections may not have been counted and given due consideration, and concerned that only one voter per household had been counted in some cases. Several that were sent in before the deadline were counted as 'late entries'.

Given the limited time to present our case in person on a complex issue, we requested a list of members on the DCC, so that they could see the full submission in time for the meeting. We now learn that several DCC members may not have received representations from the environmental consultant speaking on our behalf, Dr Paul K Hatchwell, prior to the meeting as they were given an incorrect contact list of its members.

The vote also took place in spite of several key unresolved issues, not least on concerns over water supplies and settlement threat from pumping, which may prevent granting of a water abstraction permit, and investigations by the Government Office of the South East which may yet result in a public inquiry.  

It seemed very clear that all but one member had long made up their minds to vote in favour of the scheme, almost uncritically, and this was reflected in the lack of a serious debate. An earlier debate on a garage development raised far more debate, and resulted in a deferred decision, even though far more clear-cut given brownfield policy."   

*The Undercliff Defence Committee was formed by residents of the Undercliff, Niton, St Lawrence and Ventnor to protect the landscape, nature and water resources of the Undercliff, and to protect properties from loss of amenity, excessive traffic noise and settlement damage through excessive drainage. It believes in a sustainable approach to transport recognising both the instability of the area and its environmental sensitivity, and advocates continual reinstatement of the existing road with traffic restrictions for as long as practicable given rapid cliff recession, backed up by use of the Whitwell Road.

  Home     Contact UDC: +44(0)1983 730455;  +44(0)1983 856688   Email: post@undercliff.org