Rectory Farm - CALA Homes trying to wriggle out of their commitments to conditions agreed at the public inquiry
The KL&DRA has been working jointly with Sunnyside Rural Trust and the Kings Langley Parish Council to hold CALA Homes to account and ensure they do not dilute their commitment to conditions that are valuable to our village community. The following is our joint statement:
Within days of starting work on the development of 135 properties on Rectory Farm, CALA Homes are already back tracking on their section 106a commitments and community benefits. CALA are seeking to make changes to reduce the community spaces in order to “allow for a more efficient, cost-effective and sustainable management of the area.” They have submitted 2 planning applications to Dacorum Borough Council and we are asking people to take action to challenge them.
The Parish Council, Kings Langley & District Residents Association and much of the wider community opposed this development on Green Belt land. However, following an appeal in Autumn 2024, planning was granted but the special case CALA presented, was built on the creation of a wonderful green space for residents. The appeal conditions included a clause that stated once built, the open space should be passed to local charity, Sunnyside Rural Trust to be owned and managed for the benefit of the wider community and to employ vulnerable people within the local community.
Sunnyside Rural Trust is a thriving charity and social enterprise offering training and work for over 170 vulnerable people. They train people with learning differences to acquire skills in a number of rural activities including beekeeping, growing plants and produce, landscaping and garden maintenance.
The Rectory Farm scheme was carefully laid out in the planning application within the MacGregor Smith community space specification and is written specifically into the legally binding section 106a agreement and named in the appeal document. The key features include rich biodiversity, mature tree planting, a community orchard, playground, cycle ways, accessible footpaths, a community building including a café, shop, repair shed, cycle hub and food growing facilities.
In taking ownership and receiving funds via the section 106a and residents’ contribution; Sunnyside would operate the community open space as a social enterprise. No profit would leave the site and it would be sustainable for the future. CALA Homes are not only trying to reduce the offering but sell the site to a management company who would take the profit out of the site potentially increasing the cost to the new homeowners.
CALA Homes are trying to justify the reduction in community benefit because they are paying £100k every month in interest, to service the loan they took out to buy the site; that was a business decision taken in the light of the agreed plans and not something our community should pay for. They stand to make millions in profit and the section 106a commitments are the very least the community should expect in return for the loss of 16 acres of green belt and all the negative aspects of having 135 homes within a small village.
The changes CALA are trying to push through include:
Removing the bridges on the site;
Planting very young whips (un-branched tree seedlings) instead of semi mature trees as agreed.
Reducing the amount of open space;
Reducing the area of the swale (a shallow channel to reduce the risk of flooding); and
Removal of fishing and viewing platforms along the canal.
Not offering Sunnyside the contract to operate the open space.
Sunnyside has not been consulted and has serious concerns about what is being proposed and the manner in which CALA are going about this. The serious concern is that the proposals will have a significant impact on the accessibility of the site and amenities for residents and the public, which was a major selling point for this Green Belt development.
Reducing the area of the swale is particularly concerning given the site is in a flood zone.
It is not simply the nature of the changes that is a concern both now and in the future, it is the way CALA Homes have unilaterally sought to make changes to plans and proposals that they spent years developing with the landowner prior to submitting the planning application. There have been many attempts to communicate and collaborate with CALA Homes, but they have ignored Sunnyside and the wider community.
All of this is after CALA attempted to:
Remove Sunnyside Rural Trust’s responsibility for landscaping;
Sell the open space to a management company to run (and charge the residents); and
Remove the high detail in the residential properties to reduce Biodiversity Net Gain (which enhance the biodiversity of housing developments).
It is extremely disappointing that CALA Homes failed to consult on what was being proposed given the emphasis placed on the community benefits that ostensibly would be forthcoming with this development. They have also not provided residents with a point of contact which they were required to do.
Local plans and central government’s ambitious house building targets make our communities vulnerable if we do not insist that section 106a agreements are upheld. We need communities to thrive and these investments are vital.
We call upon CALA Homes to commit to building this development as agreed at the Planning Inspectorate.
Local residents can submit comments on this application via the DBC planning portal. At the time of writing, no closing date has been published, but do comment as soon as possible.
Details can be seen in the CALA Homes letter on the Dacorum Planning Portal by clicking here .
The planning application (ref: 25/00904/NMA), can be viewed here.
Work has started at Rectory Farm (April 2025)