The Derbyhaven 'Trojan House'

Residents of the beautiful hamlet of Derbyhaven are up in arms over a proposal to build seventeen houses and four apartments on the adjoining golf course.  If it goes ahead, it would increase the number of dwellings in the village by a third.  Planning approval in principle (05/02044/A) has already been granted but is now to be subject to review.

Derbyhaven residents were out in force to join in condemnation of the plan.  At the meeting, attended by a large proportion of the village households, they vowed to fight it all the way.  “We don’t want another Mount Murray” was a frequent comment.

Amazement was expressed that planning approval was granted despite scores of pages of objections and reasoned argument against, from government as well as local residents.  These included the complete unsuitability of the land, which is subject to frequent flooding, the height of the water table making it impossible to comply with planning conditions and current legislation.

Derbyhaven is arguably the most beautiful location on the Island, which can be testified by its many visitors.  It is felt that this development would seriously damage the visual amenity and change the character of the village forever.  Other objections included damage to the delicate local ecosystem and the wildlife that depends on it.

At the meeting, residents commented on the apparent inconsistency in the treatment of planning applications.  A number of planning applications have been refused in Derbyhaven recently, some only involving minor alterations to buildings that would cause minimal adverse impact.  However, when a large scheme involving millions of pounds comes along, it seems to go through virtually ‘on the nod’, despite its horrendous impact.

The issue that caused the most outrage was the manner in which the planning application was handled by the applicant and the planning department.  A previous application on the site for a single large dwelling was approved in principle with little opposition because the applicant had promised residents that he would enter into an agreement that would prevent any further building on the land in the future.  He gave a similar undertaking to the planners, statutory bodies and the public at large.  He confirmed that he was willing to have such an agreement as a condition of the consent.  Unfortunately, the planners, for reasons only known to them, omitted to make it a condition of the consent and failed to notify all interested and affected parties of this fact.  They still didn’t do so when they agreed a two-year extension of the consent without allowing residents the opportunity to object.  This then became the Trojan horse (Trojan house in this case), apparently used as a precedent to push through the current plan for twenty-one dwellings!

The residents feel that they have been duped by the applicant and seriously let down by the planners and are entitled to know why the undertaking promised by the applicant was not taken up by the planners. They would urge anybody that agrees with them to go public using any appropriate medium.