Foxhill residents in Bath have begun raising funds for a legal challenge against B&NES Council, following its decision to grant outline planning permission to Curo Places Ltd in November last year. Curo plan to redevelop and potentially demolish the whole Foxhill estate, of up to 700 homes, with a predicted loss, by the social housing landlord, of up to 99 socially rented homes. As well as the stress, uncertainty and upheaval, there are fears that those who have no choice but to move, will be unable to afford to stay in the city.

Around 60% of Foxhill is currently social housing, and on its website, Curo calls it ‘a pocket of deprivation in an otherwise affluent ward’. It also says that a lack of Government funding for new, affordable housing, means that it now has to build homes for sale and use this income to pay for new, affordable homes.

Whilst it maintains it has considered looking at refurbishing existing homes, Curo says installing new windows, central heating or insulation would not deliver real value for money or lasting, positive change to the area.

Curo wants to use the profits generated by the Mulberry Park development, on the former MOD site that it bought in March 2013 and began work on in 2016, to regenerate next door Foxhill, and denies it will make any profit from work to the Foxhill estate. They say: ‘We believe this is the right use of funds, to provide a long-term, sustainable future for Foxhill, addressing the area’s physical and social challenges and integrating Foxhill with Mulberry Park, Combe Down and the City of Bath for the benefit of current and future generations.

‘That is why Curo bought the MOD site that is now Mulberry Park; to ensure that any new development did not ‘turn its back’ on the estate, but instead reached across the road to ensure that the scheme would bring benefits for the whole area.’

Nothing can yet happen to the site whilst Curo prepares a Reserved Matters planning application, which will need detailed plans for each area of the estate in phases. Some Curo residents are reporting that they did not know their homes were earmarked for demolition, and had not been notified before a public exhibition.

Foxhill homeowners are being offered the market value of their home, plus 10% (7% for investment owners), as well as moving and legal costs. For those who wish to stay, they are being offered a lifetime interest free equity loan to buy a brand new home in Mulberry Park or the redeveloped Foxhill, with the equity repayable should the home be sold or transferred to someone else.

At the time of writing, the Foxhill Residents’ Association had managed to raise its initial amount of £3,000; upping this now to £8,000 should they need to sustain any long-term legal battle. They say that they have been advised by London-based lawyers that they have an unusually strong case to succeed with a judicial review, and that ‘this case is about protecting social housing and about planning a sustainable future for Bath, which takes account of all its residents, regardless of their background.’

One of the Foxhill residents who has been in touch with The Journal told us that some of the homes are beautifully and proudly maintained and that the plans were causing huge amounts of anxiety, particularly for elderly residents. She said: “I purchased my home in Foxhill in 2006. I love the beautiful location, my well-maintained home and garden, and the strong, peaceful, community spirit.

“I live alone and would not be able to afford a home elsewhere in Bath. My home represents a safe space, and as most people will appreciate, a home is one of the very basic things we need as human beings. On the day of the public exhibition in 2014, my peace of mind was taken away, and I have been living in fear of losing it ever since.

“Whilst I am aware that it is not illegal for a developer to ask for permission to demolish privately-owned homes, I would like to include a human angle, whether any laws have been breached or not.

“I often wonder how those who decide to grant permission to destroy people’s homes would decide if it was their own home affected? To be put through years of uncertainty, of not knowing how to care for and invest in their homes?

The constant worry eats its way into every area of my life. I walk into my own home and am gripped by anxiety.”

Both B&NES and Curo have acknowledged the latest development, with B&NES receiving a pre-action protocal letter recently. Leader of the Council, Tim Warren, was reported in the local press as saying he would not sanction any mass compulsory purchase orders for the site, whilst Bath MP, Wera Hobhouse, has been lobbying the Government for extra funding to increase the number of affordable and social homes planned. She also asked the Government to call-in B&NES’ decision, only to be told in November that the application would be up to the local authority to determine, and that it would not interfere. Knightstone, a fellow social housing organisation, reportedly refused to swap thirteen properties on the site, once it was made aware of Curo’s plans.

Readers may recall this is not the first time that Curo has had plans of this nature, rehoming elderly tenants and homeowners on a smaller scale at St Chad’s Green, in Midsomer Norton, to make way for sixteen brand new affordable homes. It has also bought from a developer the controversial site at Greenland’s Road, Peasedown St John, which it intends to build on. This week, it launched its Clutton site, Highbury Fields, a development of 36 new homes, with 33% affordable housing for rent and shared ownership.