Dear Friend of Winchcombe,

This time it is a consultation, not an application!  But expect a formal application soon.

As you may be aware, a Bromford consultation, prior to them submitting a planning application is underway.  The plan is to build 110 houses on AONB land behind Delavale Road and Mercia Road in Winchcombe.

We totally understand that you may have misgivings about submitting your thoughts to a pre-planning consultation and indeed there are pros and cons to this.
If, however you feel that it’s in the best interest of Winchcombe to offer your thoughts, we have put together a number of responses to each of Bromford’s questions for your consideration.
We would request that you DON’T just replicate what we’ve suggested, but add you own words to some of the bullet point answers for each question.
If you decide to offer your comments on this, the deadline given by Bromford is Friday 5th March 2021.
You may email your comments to them at:      feedback@delavaleroad.co.uk
 
Best wishes and thank you for your continued support.

Rupert Chislett (Chair)


The questions presented are set out below with some options of responses we feel are appropriate:

Q1:   Are you in favour of new housing in Winchcombe? 

• I’m only in favour of new housing in Winchcombe on brownfield and infill sites.
  • No house building on AONB land.
  • Only build houses to meet identified local needs.
  • No houses to be built to satisfy further requirements of the wider Tewkesbury Borough.
  • If larger scale Winchcombe development is deemed necessary by Tewkesbury Borough it should not be in the AONB. 
  • Brownfield sites should be considered first.

Q2:    What types of homes would you like to see as part of the proposed development on Land West of Delavale Road, Winchcombe? 

• None!
  • The examination of the Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan is still in progress.
  • This land and these houses are not in the Adopted Winchcombe Neighbourhood Plan.
  • Only local need housing should be considered within the AONB and this should be based on up-to-date housing needs evidence.
  • House building within the AONB should not meet the wider needs of Tewkesbury Borough.

Q3:   What are your thoughts on the Illustrative Masterplan? 

• The plan is too urban for this location.
  • It proposes 110 houses on a site with a draft allocation of maximum 80 houses.
  • The housing density is far too high especially for AONB.
  • The plan is not sustainable with the only exit for vehicles and pedestrians being at the north end of the site.
  • All development in the AONB should enhance and improve the setting of the AONB; this does not.

 Q4:   Please provide any other comments you have on our proposals. 

• (say what you want here, your opportunity to let them know how you feel) 
  • e.g.   I strongly object to these proposals.

​You may be aware that the Tewkesbury Borough Plan (2011-2031) is approaching its final stage of consultation.
Members of the public have until 5pm on Tuesday 18 November 2019 to register their comments before submission of the Plan to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government who will appoint a Planning Inspector for independent examination.
The Friends of Winchcombe Committee are totally opposed to that part of the Plan proposing the building of at least 80 houses in our precious AONB on land behind Delavale Road and Orchard Road.
We believe that the only valid objections at this stage are precise technical objections and we have prepared our summary case on the attached document for you.

You may use this as the basis for any comments you wish to make to Tewkesbury Borough Council and this will be your FINAL OPPORTUNITY to make your feelings known.

We urge you all to respond and suggest that your comments are made by email to:
localplanconsultation@tewkesbury.gov.uk
Your comments will all be sent to the Planning Inspector for consideration.

The deadline for submitting comments is 5pm on 18 November 2019

If you would like to review the full documentation it is available at 
https://www.tewkesbury.gov.uk/tewkesbury-borough-plan

or review the map of the planned development location by choosing 'housing allocations & settlement boundaries'


We do suggest that you, as individual members, make your submissions to the plan consultation using the content supplied in the attached letter / email as it has specific technical comment.  Please sign off making it clear that you object to the Plan on the points raised. 

Thank you for your continued support.
Yours sincerely

Rupert Chislett
Chair
FOW


Template letter contents below:

• The housing site allocation WIN1 land off Delavale Road lies entirely within the Cotswold AONB and the NPPF paragraph 172 states that "planning permission should be refused for major development other than in exceptional circumstances."
• The site lies wholly within the AONB which has the highest level of landscape protection and where great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty. It would be a development of significance which would have an adverse impact on the AONB, by replacing the current open agricultural land with built development. The AONB designation is of long standing and though it is not unalterable, it is readily understood by the public as conferring a particular status on and value on land included within the designation as well as being a matter of great weight of the National Planning Policy Framework.
• Site allocation WIN1 includes land which at its northern end is higher than almost all existing housing within the town and its development will have a detrimental effect on the environment and landscape.
• The proposed site allocation in Winchcombe has overlooked the scope for development on the settlements northern boundary and within Greet where the land is far less prominent in terms of visibility from its surroundings and does not lie within the AONB.
• The allocation of site WIN1 is in conflict with the objectives of the adopted Cotswolds AONB management plan 2018-2023.
• The Tewkesbury Borough Plan is required to identify housing development land to meet the requirements of the entire borough area and there are many other site opportunities which on previous appraisal were identified as being available, suitable and achievable during the course of the next five years. It is submitted that development within the AONB on the northern boundary of Winchcombe is far less suitable than the alternatives across the borough.
• In the dismissal of the planning appeal made against the refusal for consent for the development of 35 dwellings on land off Kyderminster Road Winchcombe   (16/00481/OUT) the Planning Inspector identified that the main issue for consideration in the appeal was the effect of the proposed development on the AONB. In that case the subject land was identified as agricultural fields on the northern edge of Winchcombe, comprising gently rising ground, adjacent to but outside the residential development boundary of Winchcombe. The inspector noted that "... the development would represent an intrusion of built development into the AONB and would occupy an area of characteristic agricultural land which forms part of the setting of Langley Hill". The inspector went on to state that the proposed development "amounts to actual harm to the AONB which would be in conflict with policies SD8 of the emerging JCS and 1.1 of the NP". Development of the AONB at WIN1 would be even more harmful to Winchcombe in general and the setting of Langley Hill.
• Whilst Winchcombe is identified as a Rural Service Centre and clearly has a good range of community support facilities, material further growth of the local population will create burdens on in particular the local road network, the local medical centre and the local primary school. The ability of the local health services and primary school to accommodate additional patients/pupils is in doubt.

Name:                                                      
Address:

My Name is Stuart Maughan, I am a councillor on Winchcombe Town Council, however on this occasion I am here as a committee member of Friends of Winchcombe, (FOW) an association of 535 members. It is the collective view of FOW that I am representing here today.
 
Following the submission of this application, Friends of Winchcombe held two public meetings when more than 100 people present at each one overwhelmingly voted against any level of support for this application.

Of the 26 letters of “so called” support listed against this application, 16 of them are photocopied letters with handwritten names and addresses added and many are either employees or tenants of Sudeley Castle!
 
While it’s customary for me now to list the planning reasons why this application should be rejected, three minutes is not sufficient, so perhaps instead I would prefer you to consider the long list of objectors to the application starting with the Consultees:
 
Conservation Officer - object
Landscape Officer - object
Urban Design Officer - object
Housing Enabling Officer - object
Historic England – object
County Highways Officer - object
CPRE – object
Moving on to other objectors:
Winchcombe Medical Centre
Lawrence Robertson MP
And FOW with whom I represent - Object!
 
As the FOW planning objections are all covered so eloquently by these professional bodies, I would respectfully ask this Committee to review these and refuse this application.
 
Thank you.

In the supporting template letter ref Almsbury Farm planning application the final statement is

"I believe this application is overwhelmingly supported in the town".

do you agree - simple yes or no survey?

www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/PGBRNSF

Friends of Winchcombe – Action Letter – February 2017

You need to ACT NOW to object to the Beechcroft proposed development for Almsbury Farm.
You may think initially that this is not of immediate concern to you BUT there is a very strong likelihood that this is one of several applications from developers relating to development of AONB sites in Winchcombe.  The closing date to object is 2nd March 2017.
Advice on objecting to planning applications.

INVALID OBJECTION REASONS

  Perceived loss of property value.

  Loss of a view.

  Impact of construction work.

  Restrictive covenants.

  Fence lines etc.

  Personal matters or views about the applicant.

  I don’t like the application.


VALID OBJECTION REASONS

  Loss of light or overshadowing.

  Overlooking / loss of privacy.

  Landscape impact.

  Visual amenity (but NOT loss of private view).

  Traffic generation (including cumulative effect)

  Excessive bulk or scale.

  Road access and inadequate road system in surrounding area.

  Better alternative sites available.

  Local, strategic, regional and national planning policies.

  Previous planning decisions (incl. appeal decisions)

  Nature conservation; harm to rare plants or animals.

  Impact on a listed building.

  Impact on the setting of a listed building.

 

 
GENERAL ADVICE

• Note carefully the closing date for representations.
• The main objective is to avoid decisions being made by council employees and to put the decision in the hands of Tewkesbury's elected representatives; evidence says that we stand more chance with the planning committee. This is achieved by getting at least 10 letters of objection in by the deadline submission date. Therefore we urgently need a minimum of 10 households to object.
• An objection can be as simple as "I object to this planning application" but clearly it is far better to provide VALID reasons. You don’t need to use all of the objections in our sample letter, just choose those that you are most comfortable with and vary your words to make your letter personal.

• If the number of objections is large, it is possible (though unlikely) that the applicant may withdraw the application.
• On submission of an application, involve your BOROUGH councillors - this is what you elected them for. Send them a copy of your objection and ask for their support.
• One golden rule - however emotional you feel about a planning application, objective hard facts are what counts.

Please DON’T amend the NPPF Section  if you include it in your letter.
 
 
 
Your address – Winchcombe – Cheltenham – Glos. – GL54 XXX
 
Miss Lisa Dixon,
Tewkesbury Borough Council Planning Dept.,
Council Offices,
Gloucester Road,
Tewkesbury, Glos., GL20 5TT                                                                                                   Date
 
Planning Applications Ref. Nos. 16/01453/FUL   and   16/01454/LBC
Dear Miss Dixon,
I write in connection with the above planning applications. I have examined the plans and I know the site well. I wish to object strongly to the development of the care home and assisted living units in this location for the following reasons
Conservation Area and AONB

• The proposed site of the development is particularly ill-considered. It is in the Winchcombe Conservation Area and the AONB and building here would diminish the striking views from many public footpaths above the town. The development would also cause harm to the setting and significance of the conservation area, and cause harm to the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB.
  • The site borders the parkland of a Grade II listed historic house and forms part of the historic and rural approach to Sudeley Castle.
  • The site contains a Grade II listed Cotswold Barn and 7.9 acres of Greenfield land
  • The site is outside the existing built up southern limit of Winchcombe and on the south side of the river Isbourne that creates a natural boundary.
• There are many other locations throughout Tewkesbury Borough that are not in the AONB where this type of development would be far better located. Planners should consider developing in the wider region before considering building in our very precious AONB.
• It is important to protect the attractiveness of the AONB viewed from the town and elsewhere.

 
Light Pollution
 

• Development of the AONB on this scale and with buildings of the proposed height would undoubtedly result in unacceptable light pollution from the onsite roadways, car parks and residences. This would result in materially altering the light levels outside the development and adversely affect the use and enjoyment of nearby residential housing and open spaces.

 
  NPPF
·         Paragraph 116 of the National Planning Policy Framework requires applications for major development within an AONB to be refused unless there are exceptional circumstances (“exceptional” in this context connotes rarity and relates to the development itself and not any benefits to the future occupiers). This application cannot be considered as an exceptional circumstance and in the context of Winchcombe, this application is for a “major” development.
 
 
Traffic

• Traffic is already very bad (sometimes intolerably so) in Winchcombe, and the cumulative effect of more development on this scale would add a substantial extra burden on our town.
• Vehicular access to and from the site is via Vineyard Street and over a narrow bridge. The applicant has endeavoured to dismiss traffic concerns on the back of highly flawed traffic surveys that were conducted between 28 November 2016 and 4 December 2016. This period is not representative of traffic flows during at least 8 months of the year when Sudeley Castle is open for visitors and walkers in the area are abundant. Also during this survey period, some roads in Winchcombe were closed to all traffic due to Severn Trent Water works resulting in far less traffic through the town than normal.
• The applicant also dismisses traffic pressure by claiming that Vineyard Street is a non-through route. In actual fact, Vineyard Street is indeed a through route for 8 months of every year. The addition of this development would cause enormous traffic problems for Vineyard Street and especially at its junction with the B4632 Gloucester Street.
• Additional to increased traffic created by the residents of 53 assisted living units, the care home itself would require a considerable number of visits by service vehicles carrying laundry, food supplies, general and clinical waste, medical supplies etc. Many of these vehicles would be 3.5 ton and some would be 7.5 ton with the resultant risk of compromising the integrity of the bridge and causing noise, environmental and vibration pollution in Vineyard Street. These vehicle movements would cause great traffic pressure on the junction of Vineyard Street and Gloucester Street.
• There is firm evidence that an average of 17-27 staff would be employed daily, not 5 as suggested in the planning application, adding further traffic problems for Vineyard Street and again at its junction with Gloucester Street. Additionally there would be traffic movement from visiting Physiotherapists, Occupational Therapists, Doctors, Community nurses etc. and on training days, there may be considerably larger numbers present and at shift changeover time there would be increased traffic.

Pedestrian and Mobility Access

• Pedestrian access to and from the site via both Vineyard Street and Castle Street would be via very narrow and inadequate pavements entirely unsuitable for use by elderly and infirm people.  Castle Street has only one pavement and it is far too narrow for use by mobility scooters / wheelchairs. Vineyard Street has only one useable pavement for mobility scooters / wheelchairs and most journeys would then entail having to cross Vineyard Street at both its southern and northern ends.
• I contend that the steep gradients of both Vineyard Street and Castle Street are unsafe for the use of mobility scooters / wheelchairs that would likely be used by many residents. The average gradients of these roads are 9.7% and 16.7% respectively. Expert advice puts the Average Maximum Safe Gradient as 6-8%. The safe negotiation of the junctions at the top of both Vineyard Street and Castle Street is also very difficult for mobility scooters / wheelchairs.

Medical Resources

• The age demographic and residency criteria of residents in both the assisted living and nursing units would inevitably cause a strain on the local medical infrastructure as this work would be additional to that already arising from within the community served by Winchcombe Medical Centre.

 
General

• Winchcombe’s infrastructure and services already struggle to cope with the current housing numbers; adding more pressure to these would be overwhelming.

 
Yours sincerely etc.
You may send your letter by post to Lisa Dixon at the address on the heading of this letter or alternatively email it to her at:  
lisa.dixon@tewkesbury.gov.uk
 
 
It would also be useful to copy your letters to your 3 Borough Councillors at:
councillor.mason@tewkesbury.gov.uk
councillor.allen@tewkesbury.gov.uk
councillor.day@tewkesbury.gov.uk

Development at Almsbury Farm
Applications:   16/0153/FUL and 16/01454/LBC
 
Formal Proposition:-
 
Winchcombe Town Council supports the principle of developing a scheme of specialist housing for the elderly and the construction of a Care Home, including the restoration of the historic barns, to a scale and extent no larger than that proposed in these applications, and subject to the following observations:-
 
a.     the County Archaeologist being satisfied that no issues of archaeological interest would be adversely affected.
 
b.   this Council believes that the Traffic Survey is fundamentally flawed in that the survey was undertaken at times and dates in the off-peak season when the Castle was closed to visitors and should be repeated at a time when the Castle is open to the public.
 
c.       the applicants giving a binding undertaking to ensure that the proposed Assisted Living Units would remain as such in perpetuity.
 
d.      negotiations are undertaken to increase the number of smaller units intended to satisfy identified local housing need to 12 in total.
 
e.       the applicants be asked to consider the introduction of a mini-bus service for the use of residents in accessing local and regional facilities.
 
f.         the applicants should liaise with the Highway Authority to rationalise the car parking arrangements and provision for pedestrians and mobility scooters on Vineyard Street.  The architectural character of this historic street in the Winchcombe Conservation Area should be paramount.  It should also reduce or remove the suggested car-park in front of the Listed Barns, and that, if necessary, the site layout be adjusted accordingly.
 
g.       the roofing material to be used throughout the scheme should be limited to Cotswold tiles.
 
h.      the applicants be requested to provide facilities to enable the replacement of some of the services lost by the closure of Winchcombe Hospital.
 
i.      the applicants should demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in the foul drainage system to accommodate the anticipated flows from the development.
 
i.        the applicants entering into a S.106 Agreement containing the following provisions:
(i)      appropriate financial contributions being made towards the new Cemetery off Mount View Drive, Winchcombe Park and the local Health facilities.
(ii)     the provision of a dedicated footpath/cycleway between Vineyard Street and Castle Street either through the site or elsewhere through the Sudeley Estate.
(iii)       the provision of at least 12 residential units to satisfy identified local need.
(iv)      the provision of a scheme to ease the flow of water under the bridge at Castle Street to reduce the risk of flooding.
 

We are holding a Friends of Winchcombe meeting at 7:00pm on Friday, 17th Feb. at the Abbey Fields Community Centre to discuss the Planning Application to build a 52 bed care home and 53 assisted living units at Almsbury Farm.

Please note that this is additional to the Town Council meeting and is specifically so FOW can respond to the outcomes of the Town Council meeting and to understand FOW members feeling and requirements.
  
Please do join us, feedback and let us have your views.?

 
FACT: This Planning Application is another proposal to develop on Winchcombe’s AONB.

This is a photograph of the actual greenfield area of the site. 

​

CLARIFICATION: The assisted living housing will not be sold without restrictions. Residents “will need to undertake an independent care needs assessment” (plus age restriction). The units will be sold on lease “with restrictions that none can be sold on, or let, without signing a deed of covenant regarding the terms of their occupation”.
AND: Care packages will have to be paid for by ALL residents. (Including personal care, laundry, meals & housekeeping).

ARGUABLE: The application claims that Vineyard Street currently has a “very low traffic base”.
BECAUSE: The traffic surveys undertaken to justify this were carried out during a 7 day period, from Monday 28th November to Sunday 4th December 2016, during a seasonally very low traffic period.
BECAUSE:  Sudeley Castle was CLOSED during this period and there were very few walkers. Traffic would have been considerably lighter than for the previous 7+ months and annually.

ARGUABLE: The application claims that “Vineyard Street is a non-through route”.
BECAUSE: It is a through route for 7+ months, every year, when Sudeley Castle is open.

ARGUABLE: A claim is made that “it is generally considered that around 2 kilometres (1.24 miles) is an acceptable distance for pedestrians to walk to nearby facilities & amenities”.
The application quotes the following distances and times to support the development location:

• Co op food store      650m,         8 minutes.
• Library                    750m,          9 minutes.        
• GP Surgery           1300m,        16 minutes.

BECAUSE: The review seems to underestimate the possible immobility of those using the proposed development. A care home and assisted living accommodation is for people requiring care and with some form of impediment. Is it reasonable to expect residents to walk those distances or in those times?

INCONSISTENCY: The application supporting information acknowledges that one of the concerns expressed at the September 2015 exhibition events was the proposed car park [on the opposite  side of Vineyard St.]. They also claim that “this was removed as part of the scheme presented at the July 2016 events, and was seen as an improvement by respondents”.
BUT: In a site plan reproduced in several of the 63 application documents, ”the location of potential addition car parking” is indicated in a very similar position.

 
Please do come along to the Friends of Winchcombe meeting on Friday17th Feb at 7:00pm, Abbey Fields Community Centre; hear the discussion on this proposal and give us your views.

The public will have an opportunity to speak before the debate so please attend?
It has been decided that an Extraordinary Council Meeting will be held on Wednesday 15 February (after Planning) at approximately 7.30 p.m. to discuss the above application.  
​Location Winchcombe Abbey Fields Community Centre, Back Lane, Winchcombe.
LBC application ref 16/01454/LBC
If you would like to speak before the meeting, please familiarise yourself with the documents (there are 63 of them) on the website.  This can be accessed by the link in the attachment to this email.

http://publicaccess.tewkesbury.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OIMM77QDLU500.

The Planning Application for the Almsbury Farm site is live on TBC website and responses need to made before March 3rd 2017.

The Proposal is for construction of a 52 bed care home and 53 assisted living units and includes the conversion of Almsbury Barns.
There is a parking area proposed on the other side of Vineyard Street which is also on ANOB.
The reference is 16/01453/FUL

Follow this link for more detailed information:

http://publicaccess.tewkesbury.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OIMM77QDLU500


​More to follow soon.