Bushwood - still alive with a very weak pulse

It is interesting to note that the grandiosely titled "Luton & Central Beds Economic Development Partnership" have finally got around to filing their Sep-15 accounts at Companies House (originally due 30-Jun-16, finally submitted 30-Sep-16).

Recent activity includes changing the company name, changing it again and then changing it once more back to what it was at the beginning.  Productive endeavours indeed.

What is interesting reading is the value of stock (or work-in-progress) on the balance sheet at over a million pounds; the accounting rationale here is that costs incurred thus far in exploring, developing and promoting the site are not so much 'spent' as 'invested' against a future sale at a profit.  The associated accounting policies also include the telling phrase "provision is made for any foreseeable losses where appropriate"; this is fairly normal accounting practise but underlines the point that if the sole remaining director accepted that Bushwood was a dead duck, then he wouldn't still be representing over a million pounds in spend as an investment that will be sold on at a profit in future.  Implicitly, he stands by that declaration not just at 30 September 2015 which the accounts reflect but also at 19 September 2016 when the accounts were legally signed.  I shall leave it to you to decide whether Mr Boyle knows something we don't or is simply delusional.

The Bushwood proposals were inappropriate and unsustainable when first introduced and they remain inappropriate and unsustainable now.

The more eagle-eyed may also notice that the valuation of stock has risen by only £6,450 during the year from Oct-14 to Sep-15, and the deficit on reserves rose by a meagre £721 in the same period.  Those that suspect this company is no longer the primary vehicle for Bushwood (although they stand by their £1M+ stock valuation) might wish to keep an eye on Abbey Land Developments Ltd [08853726], due to file their 31-Jan-16 accounts no later than the end of this month.

We will have to wait a while for the 2016/17 results to be made public but they will also be fun reading.  Common consensus is that Peter Village QC, currently arguing to convince an inspector of the merits of tacking the Bushwood proposals onto Luton's local plan, does not come cheap.

North Herts DC consults on local plan

North Hertfordshire District Council is currently consulting on their local plan which will cover up until 2031 (details here).  NHDC, like Central Bedfordshire, borders Luton Borough and has a duty to co-operate in attempting to mitigate Luton's unmet housing need.  In recognition of that, the draft plan includes allocation of a potential 2100 homes on the eastern border of Luton but within the NHDC area.

Herald & Post 15-Jan-2015

It is a little surprising therefore that an NHDC Councillor is actively encouraging people to lodge objections against his own authority's draft plan, as evidenced by his recent e-mails sent and a piece in last week's Herald & Post.  A plan that he has already voted in favour of in Council!

I sympathise with local opposition but the further argument that North Herts should be relieved of any obligation to provide homes whilst demanding that West of Luton be developed is self-serving nonsense that does not stand up to scrutiny.  Crawley Green Road and Eaton Green Road may be congested (although "gridlocked" is fanciful hyperbole) but Farley Hill, which would bear the brunt of extra traffic from Bushwood style proposals (and is already being loaded more if the Newlands Road development goes ahead) is no better and similarly constrained in terms of no room for expansion.  It should also be noted that Central Bedfordshire's own emerging local plan provides several thousand homes for Luton without allocating land to the west; North Herts can not expect to provide nothing.

Cllr Barnard encourages people to object to the North Herts plan in writing and promote west of Luton instead.  Readers are, of course, also entitled to comment on the North Herts plan in writing in support of it if they feel that removing North Herts contribution in favour of resurrecting Bushwood is not a fair alternative.

Given that Cllr Barnard also chairs the planning control committee, I will be interested if and when planning applications relating to this proposed land allocation go before that committee.  I presume that he will be declaring a prejudicial interest based upon his public campaigning and take no part in the debate?