Presentation to Sir Robert a highlight of special day in Kent

John Wotton, CPRE Kent chair with Sir Robert Worcester (and plaque)

Earlier this month (May 11-12), trustees and senior staff of CPRE’s national charity visited us in Kent.

Their visit started with a tour of Ebbsfleet, followed by strategy discussions and a networking reception and dinner in the evening. The patron of CPRE Kent, Sir Robert Worcester, kindly made his home, Allington Castle, available for the evening. This was a magnificent venue for a gathering of representatives of national CPRE, CPRE Kent, several neighbouring CPRE branches and many other organisations concerned with protecting or promoting the Kent countryside.

Sir Robert, Simon Murray (chair of national CPRE), John Wotton (chair of CPRE Kent) and Sarah Barker (chair of the Kent Association of Local Authorities) all spoke before the dinner.

As a gesture of thanks to Sir Robert for his generosity and stalwart support for CPRE Kent over many years, he was presented with a plaque from CPRE Kent’s Historic Buildings Committee.

The plaque recognises Allington Castle’s quality and importance as a historic building. It is a moated, fortified, medieval manor house built on the site of a Norman castle and has been lovingly restored by Sir Robert after a long period of neglect. It was a truly magnificent venue for the evening.

Thursday, May 26, 2022

Proposed changes to the country’s planning system: CPRE Kent chairman’s statement

John Wotton, CPRE Kent chairman, has given a statement regarding the government’s proposed – and highly contentious – changes to the country’s planning system.  
Mr Wotton said: “The policies in the Planning for the Future White Paper published in August, combined with the measures in a separate consultation paper, Changes to the Current Planning System, are wide-ranging and, in my view, potentially disastrous for the countryside, especially in Kent and other parts of the South East, where the pressure for unsustainable development is already intense.
“Increased housing targets will be set by central government, under a complex formula, with a view to building at least 300,000 homes per year and will be binding on local planning authorities, whose ability to review and refuse planning will be reduced.
“A new system of zoning will designate all land as either growth, renewal or so-called ‘protected’ zones. The opportunities for the public to participate in the plan-making and place-making processes will be curtailed.
“I believe that opposing these changes is a fundamental necessity for protecting the Kent countryside, which we all love.”

Monday, November 2, 2020

‘Landmark’ planning reforms: will they really benefit the Kent countryside?

CPRE Kent, the countryside charity, has given a cool response to “once-in-a-generation reforms” to the country’s planning system proposed by the government today (Thursday, August 6).
Described as “landmark reforms to speed up and modernise the planning system and get the country building”, the changes proposed in the Planning for the Future White Paper are unlikely to benefit our countryside, John Wotton, chairman of CPRE Kent, said. 
Mr Wotton was responding to a statement from the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government and Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick saying “an overhaul of the country’s outdated planning system that will deliver the high-quality, sustainable homes communities need will be at the heart of the most significant reforms to housing policy in decades”.
According to the statement, core reforms will mean:

  • Local communities will be consulted from the very beginning of the planning process. By harnessing the latest technology through online maps and data, the whole system will be made more accessible
  • Valued green spaces will be protected for future generations by allowing for more building on brownfield land and all new streets to be tree-lined
  • Much-needed homes will be built quicker by ensuring local housing plans are developed and agreed in 30 months – down from the current seven years
  • Every area is to have a Local Plan in place – currently only 50 per cent of local areas have a plan to build more homes
  • The planning process is to be overhauled and replaced with a clearer, rules-based system. Currently around a third of planning cases that go to appeal are overturned at appeal
  • A new simpler national levy to replace the current system of developer contributions, which often causes delay
  • The creation of a fast-track system for beautiful buildings and establishing local design guidance for developers to build and preserve beautiful communities
  • All new homes are to be ‘zero carbon ready’, with no new homes delivered under the new system needed to be retrofitted as we achieve our commitment to net zero carbon emissions by 2050

One of the more contentious aspects of the proposals is the concept of zonal planning, with land designated in one of three categories: growth, renewal or protection.
It is also stated that “valued green spaces and Green Belt will continue to be protected for future generations, with the reforms allowing for more building on brownfield land”, while “local community agreement will be at the centre of the proposals”.
However, Mr Wotton said: “We find hard to see how the planning reform proposals, unveiled by the government this morning, will benefit the Kent countryside.
“The policy driving the proposals, of building more homes, more quickly, appears to override the safeguards in the present system ensuring that local communities’ needs are taken into account and that harm to the environment and landscape from building new homes is prevented.
“If local authorities are to lose their ability to approve the details of new developments, by what means can the views of local communities continue to have real force?
“We support the efficient provision of sufficient sustainable, affordable homes in Kent, in the places where they are most needed and where they will not harm the countryside, especially our much-valued Green Belt and two Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and we support, as a general principle, the use of brownfield sites first.
“We are concerned that a standard infrastructure levy for housing developments, in place of Section 106 Agreements, will hand over the responsibility for the provision of both the additional infrastructure required as a result of new development and the provision of affordable housing from developers to local authorities, who may not have the resources to make these things happen.
“We will be studying these proposals in detail, in conjunction with the wider CPRE network and will participate actively in the coming public debate.”
Echoing Mr Wotton’s concerns, Tom Fyans, CPRE’s deputy chief executive, said: “The key acid test for the planning reforms is community involvement and on first reading, it’s still not clear how this will work under a zoning system.
“Although we welcome the government’s commitment to all areas having a Local Plan in place, we also need robust legal guarantees that the public are consulted regarding new development.
“Red lines on a map are not going to build trust in the planning system. As things stand, the government seems to have conflated digitalising planning with democratic planning – they’re not the same thing. 
“The government’s aim to deliver carbon-neutral new homes by 2050 is pitiful and represents 34 lost years given that the Code for Sustainable Homes aimed to achieve the same thing by 2016 and was dropped by government.
“If this government is serious about tackling the climate emergency, it needs to be much, much more ambitious on new-build. 
“On affordable homes, our concern is how this approach might play out in the countryside. In many rural areas, house prices are often more than 10 times average earnings, and so the 30 per cent discount won’t cut it. Local authorities should be able to provide the sorts of homes needed in their area – homes that local people can afford. 
“We have long advocated for a genuinely brownfield-first approach and on this aspect, the government seems to have listened. But if a brownfield-first approach is to work, local authorities need to be able to prioritise the building of those sites and reject unnecessary losses of greenfield land.” 

  • Read Planning for the Future here
  • You can also read the document and learn more about the consultation here 
  • Read the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government press statement here
  • Read more on planning reform here and here

Thursday, August 6, 2020

The legal eagle has landed… meet John Wotton, the new chairman of CPRE Kent

John Wotton: clear vision for CPRE Kent

John Wotton, the new chairman of CPRE Kent, talks to David Mairs about how he thinks this organisation should develop and shares (some of) his background as a lawyer in the City

“Where I am now is that I’m not a lawyer any longer!”
John Wotton, new chairman of CPRE Kent, was cheerily setting the record straight during a discussion in which he set out his ambitions for this organisation.
It would be remiss to introduce John without referring to his life in the legal profession, during which he worked for more than 30 years as a City lawyer with an international corporate law firm.
Suffice to say, a stellar career included such roles as president of the Law Society of England & Wales and chairman of the Law Society’s EU Committee and has been winding down with the chairing of Competition and Markets Authority inquiries for the past five years.
Now “spreading his wings” and focusing on a range of very different interests that include, of course, his role at CPRE Kent, he is strengthening his involvement with charities, notably in the world of wildlife conservation, and in education.
Born in Hounslow and brought up in Sunbury-on-Thames, he was able to call this county home when he moved to Marden in 1983 just as he and wife Linde were starting a family. ‘Children’ Ruth, Tom and Sophie are now all in their 30s.
“We moved into what one of the rich farmers in Marden referred to as a gentry house – we had the smaller, older half of it. It was tucked away, set well back from the main road, but had a relatively small garden.
“All around were orchards and hop gardens, half of which have now been built on. I was told there were once 80 working oasts in Marden parish and there were still five when we moved there. Now there’s not a hop grown in Marden.”
Despite the changes and so much loss of what many regard as the county’s heritage, it was in Marden that John got “a feel for Kent”. He moved to nearby Cranbrook in 1992.
Although fresh in his chairman’s role, John is of course no stranger to CPRE Kent, having chaired the Historic Buildings Committee for the past three years. Initially a joint operation between the Kent Archaeological Society and CPRE Kent, it is now run solely by the latter.
How did that particular interest develop?
“I’ve always been attracted to older buildings. A university friend – he’s still a good friend – went straight from his architecture degree to conservation and showed us around his patch in Suffolk. I found that interesting.
“Thinking about it, my interest may even date back to university. Jesus College Cambridge, where I studied, retains the medieval chapel and cloisters of the nunnery formerly on the site, now surrounded by fine buildings from every century since the foundation of the college in 1496. I fell in love with the place the moment I first set eyes on it.”
Historic buildings do not necessarily come to mind as falling under the CPRE remit – indeed Kent is the only branch to have such a committee – so how does John view their place in the wider scheme of things?
“Historic buildings can be overlooked in the work of CPRE branches. A lot of what we do is protection of the countryside, but the built environment is hugely important. The character of most settlements depends on historic architecture and protecting the fabric of old buildings and historic monuments is terribly important.
“The National Planning Policy Framework also protects the setting of heritage assets, so there’s often a very good ground for opposing or seeking to change an undesirable planning application, even where the historic structures themselves are unharmed. Protecting them in this way is highly congruent with the aims of CPRE, to protect the countryside.”
John acknowledges the challenge of following in the footsteps of predecessor Christine Drury, who worked tirelessly to make CPRE Kent such an effective organisation during her five-year term. What changes might we expect under his chairmanship?
“My main concern is my comparative lack of detailed planning knowledge. Even though I was a lawyer, my practice didn’t involve planning law.
“Externally, what concerns me most is our limited resource in combating undesirable applications and providing critical review. Local councils are subject to huge and conflicting pressures where planning is concerned and are hugely overstretched, which combine to increase the risk of bad developments being approved.
“I think we have to work very hard to bring in more people with the time and skills to intervene effectively.
“Even though we have some endowment, from a very generous benefactor, which provides us some financial security, we don’t have a big annual budget.
“We need more professional planners and more volunteers with the time and skills to intervene effectively in the planning process.
“I would like to instil a giving culture among our supporter base, one in which more of our members and other supporters make regular donations and leave legacies to CPRE Kent. It’s what other charities do and we don’t need to be reticent about it.
“We have to explain why one large windfall some years ago doesn’t enable us to do everything we need to do. But, of course, we can only expect people to support us financially if they see the value of what we do and believe their contribution will make a difference.”
Even bearing in mind the relative health of the Kent branch, it is no secret that CPRE needs to attract more members. There is no silver bullet, but how does the new man at the helm see us tackling things?
“Many other membership organisations are in the same position and unfortunately people generally seem less willing to get involved. I’m hoping that the work being done nationally on the CPRE brand and image will help us at branch level. But for the sterling efforts of the Charing team and volunteers in promoting CPRE Kent at events around the county, we’d be a good deal worse off than we are.
“Successful campaigns are key. A high-profile campaign is what attracts people and makes them think we’re worth supporting.
“We sometimes get new people at meetings but often don’t see them again, so we have to ask if we’re projecting the right message. The existing supporter base have signed up to and accept what we are, but most of us also see why we might need to attract a wider audience.”
That national work should help CPRE clarify what it’s about and a rumoured greater focus on green issues chimes with the new Kent chairman.
“CPRE as a conservation body should be concerned with protection of biodiversity in the countryside, as well as cultural, aesthetic and social considerations.
“We understand the environmental impact of planning, as well as the importance of green spaces and biodiversity to the health and well-being of people.”
John’s agreement to take the chairman’s seat can only be welcomed, but is there a danger of CPRE being viewed more widely as an organisation catering largely for high-end achievers?
“The greater danger is more, I think, that we are seen as a crowd of people with substantial houses and substantial gardens telling people that they must live in high-density housing to protect the countryside.
“We can only tackle that by explaining how the countryside and access to it are of benefit to people’s well-being.”
Which brings us to the issue of how much CPRE can influence housing policy.
“Housebuilding doesn’t make housing affordable,” says John. “I don’t see how we can meet the need for rural affordable housing without significant funding and other incentives being provided for social housing – genuinely affordable housing that will remain so, in the places where the need is greatest.
“Housing ceases to be a problem when there’s an adequate supply of low-cost housing for people without substantial means, and that includes housing in the private rental market. When I was young, it was very difficult to get anywhere to rent.
“I do believe we need a mixed housing market, with three primary types – social housing, private rental and home ownership – but government is only promoting one of them.”
Difficult times, unquestionably, but for John Wotton retirement does not entail the surrender of all other responsibilities.
Trustee of the Cranbrook School Trust and Great Dixter, council member of Fauna & Flora International and, of course, front man for our own cherished organisation… before you even consider the maintenance of his garden, orchard and mini-arboretum, opened regularly for charity, it is apparent the demands on his time will be rich and varied.
You can but sympathise when he says that, after three years chairing the Historic Buildings Committee, he wants to step aside from that particular task “but didn’t manage it in the meeting we just held”.
So there you are, dear reader: a new challenge could be yours. Who know where you might end up?

Monday, May 13, 2019