Notice Board

 

Sat Nov 18 2017


FOR SOUTHWICK RESIDENTS INFORMATION

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL AND GLADMAN

RELATING TO THE PROPOSED PLANNING APPLICATION ON LAND OFF WYNSOME STREET

From: Ryan Wilkie
Sent: 08 March 2017 14:10
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk


Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon Ms Noble

As chairman of Southwick Parish Council, we would be obliged if you could circulate to your Councillor’s the attached letter the electronic copy of Consultation Leaflet which is due to be distributed shortly.

We would like to draw your attention to the request for a private meeting between ourselves and a number of representatives from the Parish Council and will look forward to hearing from you to arrange the said meeting.

Kind regards,

Ryan Wilkie

++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Kath Noble
Sent: 08 March 2017 19:02
To: Ryan Wilkie
Subject: RE: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Southwick Parish Council does not hold private meetings.  You may attend

our monthly meeting, the next one is Tuesday 21st March at 7.30pm.  If you

wish to attend please let me know.

Regards Kath Noble

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Robert Black
Sent: 15 March 2017 16:41
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk

c.c. Kevin Waters; Ryan Wilkie
Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon

Further to you email to my colleague, Mr. Wilkie, last week I would like to take this opportunity to respond as follows:

We appreciate the invitation to the Parish Council Meeting next Tuesday (21st March) and we note that you do not hold private meetings. We have found that a private meeting with members of the Parish Council is a more productive environment for us to put across the details of the proposed scheme and for the Parish Council to provide feedback rather than in an open forum and to that end we will not be taking up your offer.

That being said we would still be very interested in any comments that the Parish Council may have in respect of the proposed scheme.

Kind regards

R. Black

Project Manager

++++++++++++++++++++++

SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL

ELECTION OF COUNCILLORS – VOTING DAY - 4 MAY 2017

Do you have the initiative, commitment, dedication and some free time to become a Parish Councillor in order to support and carry out the wishes of the majority of Southwick parishioners? If you have, now is the time to apply and submit your nomination as a candidate before the nomination closing date of 4 April 2017.

There are 11 Parish Councillor seats to be contested. Full details may be found on the Wiltshire Council web site at:

http://elections.wiltshire.gov.uk/Home/Division/2653

Nomination forms may be obtained from the Electoral Services Team, Wiltshire Council, County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, Wiltshire, BA14 8JN from the Returning Officer who will, at the request of an elector for any electoral area prepare a nomination paper for signature.

Nomination papers must be delivered by hand to the ‘Electoral Services Nomination Desk’ at any of the following designated Wiltshire Council Offices:

County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, BA14 8JN

Monkton Park, Chippenham, SN15 1ER

Crossmolina Buildings, Snuff Street, Devizes SN10 1FG

Fiver Rivers Health & Wellbeing Centre, Hulse Road, Salisbury SP1 3NR

Delivery of Nomination papers can take place on any day between the hours of 10am and 4pm Monday to Friday but no later than 4pm on Tuesday, 4th April 2017.

If the election is contested, because there are more than 11 nominations for the 11 seats, then the poll will take place on Thursday, 4th May 2017.

Good Luck!


Southwick Parish Council's response to Wiltshire Council regarding the Redrow Homes Outline Planning Planning Application 16/12279/OUT 

  1. SUMMARY

This document expresses the concern of Southwick Parish Council and many of its Parishioners to the proposed large housing development of residential homes applied for by Redrow Homes on the Land to the South of Blind Lane.

This application specifically requires SPC to comment only on the content of this application which covers up to 100 new homes. However, SPC urges WC to take account of the possibility that this application is only the first phase of further applications which are likely to follow, either from Redrow Homes, or other developers, if this application proceeds to the next stage of approval.

  1. MAJOR REASONS FOR OBJECTION
  1. This extract was taken from Wiltshire Core Strategy Adopted January 2015:

“It is recognised that the villages surrounding Trowbridge, particularly Hilperton, Southwick, North Bradley and West Ashton, have separate and distinct identities as villages. Open countryside should be maintained to protect the character and identity of these villages as separate communities.”

  1. This extract was taken from Appendix 6 of Housing Land Supply Statement base date April 2016:

Housing already provided for

Area

Indicative requirement 2006-2026

Completions 2006-2016

 

Developable commitments 2016-2026

Indicative remaining requirement

Trowbridge

6,810

2,776

2,017

2,017

Trowbridge CA remainder

165

242

29

0

  1. Recently, WC has rejected applications for the following reason/s:

“Having regard to all the submissions and relevant policies, including the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole, and mindful of the nominal 5-year housing land supply shortfall, this application is considered to be an inappropriate, unsustainable form of development which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and highway impacts cumulatively would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefit of providing additional dwellings in an open countryside location and the provision of employment created through construction processes. As such the proposal is not considered to represent sustainable development being contrary to CP1, CP2, CP51, CP57, CP60, and CP61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015 and the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole.”

  1. For these three reasons stated above, WC should reject this application. Southwick should not be the focus of large scale housing developments like this one which is wholly out of scale and a disproportionate addition to the existing village.
  1. SPC considers that the planning process used by WC does not take account of warning prospective developers, at the earliest opportunity, that they are wasting time and effort in pursuing an application which clearly will not succeed. However, this is outside the scope of this response, and SPC will write to WC separately on this subject.
  1. INCORRECT/MISLEADING STATEMENTS

The application includes a number of statements which either contain incorrect facts, or appear misleading.

  1. Post Office. There is no post office in Southwick. A postal facility is available for one day a week for two hours in the village hall.
  2. Railway. There is no rail station in Southwick. One has to drive into Trowbridge.
  3. Healthcare. There are no doctors’ surgeries or dentist or healthcare in Southwick. The nearest are in Trowbridge.
  4. Public House.  There is only one public house in Southwick.
  5. The applicant states that no houses have been built in Southwick in the last decade; in fact over a hundred houses have been built on suitable sites. This includes the 55 homes which have been built on the old Mowlem factory site.
  6. The application quotes ”local convenience store and newsagents and other local retail”; there is one shop (which also sells newspapers) and two takeaways.  There is no other local retail.
  1. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO ITEMS IN THE APPLICATION
  1. Redrow Homes Village Consultation

The application stated that Redrow Homes will carry out a full consultation with all village residents. To SPC’s knowledge this has not happened. A post drop with some information was made just prior to Christmas 2016 to around 400 homes in the near vicinity of Blind Lane. But there are some 850-900 homes in Southwick and they all need to be consulted on this application.

  1. School Places.

The primary school capacity is believed to be around 202 students with spare capacity around 5 or 6 places. This has only been achieved with the installation of external cabins. The addition of children from another 100 or more homes will undoubtedly more than fill this one school and lead to very high pupil/teacher ratio unless additional capacity is provided. But where?

  1. Work Opportunities

There are very few work opportunities in Southwick. Developers should build in a large town which has both work opportunities and supporting infrastructure already in place to support such a large housing development.

  1. Bus Service.

In the application Public Transport is identified as being “good or sufficient to support amongst other things commuting to and from work”. However, in reality Southwick has a very poor bus service which hardly covers normal daytime employment, let alone shift pattern working, unusual work hours or Saturday/Sunday working. No buses run on a Sunday.

  1. Flooding.

A main concern of SPC and Parishioners is the risk of flooding, not only on the proposed site but consequential flooding, i.e. if measures are put into place to minimise flooding on this development site, there could be an adverse impact on neighbouring areas. (See Appendix 1 taken from the Environmental Agency’s web site which shows high risk flooding areas near to this site). SPC strongly suggests that an Escrow type fund is put into place so that any flooding or consequential flooding due to the development will compensate villagers experiencing damage from such flooding, also taking into account that heavy vehicles using Blind Lane or Wesley Lane as access to the site could cause underground damage to drains and guttering.

  1. Drainage and Sewage

It is understood that the drains and sewers of Southwick are old and when installed were designed for a village. Hence WC must ensure that additional/replacement pipework will readily cater for this application and more, taking into account the uncertainty that other applications are highly likely to follow this one if it is approved. It would also ensure that  disruption to Parishioners in the area would only occur once.

  1. Electricity and Gas

SPC has not studied the provision of additional electricity (sub-station) and gas (pipework) resources needed for this application, and futures ones, but obviously this does need to be considered and taken into account at an early stage.

  1. Traffic Recording on Blind Lane

SPC believes that the traffic counting exercise carried out on Blind Lane was inadequate and did not capture all access points for traffic using Hollisway, Blind Lane, Southfields, Wesley Lane, Lamberts March, etc. SPC requests that WC review the traffic counting measures used for this application and ensures that they are repeated to capture all traffic, especially when the Primary School is open, so that a full picture is established.

  1. Heavy Traffic through the Village.

SPC is already concerned about the constant flow of heavy vehicles travelling through Southwick, bearing in mind that Wynsome Street (C234) is a ‘C’ road and not an ‘A’ road’.

If this application is approved, it can only exacerbate the number of heavy lorries which would be travelling through Southwick to access the development site.

  1. Site Access.

There are already severe traffic issues on the narrow Blind Lane due to residents parking and school run drop-offs and pickups and the fact that Blind Lane is often used as a ‘short cut’ between Wynsome Street and Frome Road as well as between Frome road and Bradley road, especially when the traffic is heavy on the main roads or there is  accident/roadwork delays on the main road. Construction traffic should not be allowed along Blind Lane from Wynsome Street to service the development site. SPC considers that there should be NO access points to the development site on Blind Lane but that one or two access points should be on Wesley Lane. There are various alternative options, including the possibility of a Southwick bypass going from Dunkirk Business Park to Bradley. SPC considers that, if the application is approved, the best way to resolve this is to hold tri-party discussion between WC, SPC and Redrow Homes.

  1. CONCLUSION.

Southwick, defined by WC as a Category C small town/village, wants to remain Category C. SPC and Parishioners do not object to, and have supported, appropriate, sustainable, developments such as infill houses within the village boundaries. SPC would also support the provision of appropriate additional facilities such the building of another school, some extra small shops, a dentist or a doctor’s surgery. But SPC does not support this application.

The Clerk

Southwick Parish Council

For and on behalf of Southwick Parish Council

Approved by its Chairman Cllr. K. Noble

Signed by the Chairman: …………Mrs. K. Noble………………………………….

Dated: ……………21/2/2017…………………………………

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >>

Powered by CuteNews

FOR SOUTHWICK RESIDENTS INFORMATION

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL AND GLADMAN

RELATING TO THE PROPOSED PLANNING APPLICATION ON LAND OFF WYNSOME STREET

From: Ryan Wilkie
Sent: 08 March 2017 14:10
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk


Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon Ms Noble

As chairman of Southwick Parish Council, we would be obliged if you could circulate to your Councillor’s the attached letter the electronic copy of Consultation Leaflet which is due to be distributed shortly.

We would like to draw your attention to the request for a private meeting between ourselves and a number of representatives from the Parish Council and will look forward to hearing from you to arrange the said meeting.

Kind regards,

Ryan Wilkie

++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Kath Noble
Sent: 08 March 2017 19:02
To: Ryan Wilkie
Subject: RE: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Southwick Parish Council does not hold private meetings.  You may attend

our monthly meeting, the next one is Tuesday 21st March at 7.30pm.  If you

wish to attend please let me know.

Regards Kath Noble

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Robert Black
Sent: 15 March 2017 16:41
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk

c.c. Kevin Waters; Ryan Wilkie
Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon

Further to you email to my colleague, Mr. Wilkie, last week I would like to take this opportunity to respond as follows:

We appreciate the invitation to the Parish Council Meeting next Tuesday (21st March) and we note that you do not hold private meetings. We have found that a private meeting with members of the Parish Council is a more productive environment for us to put across the details of the proposed scheme and for the Parish Council to provide feedback rather than in an open forum and to that end we will not be taking up your offer.

That being said we would still be very interested in any comments that the Parish Council may have in respect of the proposed scheme.

Kind regards

R. Black

Project Manager

++++++++++++++++++++++

SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL

ELECTION OF COUNCILLORS – VOTING DAY - 4 MAY 2017

Do you have the initiative, commitment, dedication and some free time to become a Parish Councillor in order to support and carry out the wishes of the majority of Southwick parishioners? If you have, now is the time to apply and submit your nomination as a candidate before the nomination closing date of 4 April 2017.

There are 11 Parish Councillor seats to be contested. Full details may be found on the Wiltshire Council web site at:

http://elections.wiltshire.gov.uk/Home/Division/2653

Nomination forms may be obtained from the Electoral Services Team, Wiltshire Council, County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, Wiltshire, BA14 8JN from the Returning Officer who will, at the request of an elector for any electoral area prepare a nomination paper for signature.

Nomination papers must be delivered by hand to the ‘Electoral Services Nomination Desk’ at any of the following designated Wiltshire Council Offices:

County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, BA14 8JN

Monkton Park, Chippenham, SN15 1ER

Crossmolina Buildings, Snuff Street, Devizes SN10 1FG

Fiver Rivers Health & Wellbeing Centre, Hulse Road, Salisbury SP1 3NR

Delivery of Nomination papers can take place on any day between the hours of 10am and 4pm Monday to Friday but no later than 4pm on Tuesday, 4th April 2017.

If the election is contested, because there are more than 11 nominations for the 11 seats, then the poll will take place on Thursday, 4th May 2017.

Good Luck!


Southwick Parish Council's response to Wiltshire Council regarding the Redrow Homes Outline Planning Planning Application 16/12279/OUT 

  1. SUMMARY

This document expresses the concern of Southwick Parish Council and many of its Parishioners to the proposed large housing development of residential homes applied for by Redrow Homes on the Land to the South of Blind Lane.

This application specifically requires SPC to comment only on the content of this application which covers up to 100 new homes. However, SPC urges WC to take account of the possibility that this application is only the first phase of further applications which are likely to follow, either from Redrow Homes, or other developers, if this application proceeds to the next stage of approval.

  1. MAJOR REASONS FOR OBJECTION
  1. This extract was taken from Wiltshire Core Strategy Adopted January 2015:

“It is recognised that the villages surrounding Trowbridge, particularly Hilperton, Southwick, North Bradley and West Ashton, have separate and distinct identities as villages. Open countryside should be maintained to protect the character and identity of these villages as separate communities.”

  1. This extract was taken from Appendix 6 of Housing Land Supply Statement base date April 2016:

Housing already provided for

Area

Indicative requirement 2006-2026

Completions 2006-2016

 

Developable commitments 2016-2026

Indicative remaining requirement

Trowbridge

6,810

2,776

2,017

2,017

Trowbridge CA remainder

165

242

29

0

  1. Recently, WC has rejected applications for the following reason/s:

“Having regard to all the submissions and relevant policies, including the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole, and mindful of the nominal 5-year housing land supply shortfall, this application is considered to be an inappropriate, unsustainable form of development which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and highway impacts cumulatively would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefit of providing additional dwellings in an open countryside location and the provision of employment created through construction processes. As such the proposal is not considered to represent sustainable development being contrary to CP1, CP2, CP51, CP57, CP60, and CP61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015 and the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole.”

  1. For these three reasons stated above, WC should reject this application. Southwick should not be the focus of large scale housing developments like this one which is wholly out of scale and a disproportionate addition to the existing village.
  1. SPC considers that the planning process used by WC does not take account of warning prospective developers, at the earliest opportunity, that they are wasting time and effort in pursuing an application which clearly will not succeed. However, this is outside the scope of this response, and SPC will write to WC separately on this subject.
  1. INCORRECT/MISLEADING STATEMENTS

The application includes a number of statements which either contain incorrect facts, or appear misleading.

  1. Post Office. There is no post office in Southwick. A postal facility is available for one day a week for two hours in the village hall.
  2. Railway. There is no rail station in Southwick. One has to drive into Trowbridge.
  3. Healthcare. There are no doctors’ surgeries or dentist or healthcare in Southwick. The nearest are in Trowbridge.
  4. Public House.  There is only one public house in Southwick.
  5. The applicant states that no houses have been built in Southwick in the last decade; in fact over a hundred houses have been built on suitable sites. This includes the 55 homes which have been built on the old Mowlem factory site.
  6. The application quotes ”local convenience store and newsagents and other local retail”; there is one shop (which also sells newspapers) and two takeaways.  There is no other local retail.
  1. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO ITEMS IN THE APPLICATION
  1. Redrow Homes Village Consultation

The application stated that Redrow Homes will carry out a full consultation with all village residents. To SPC’s knowledge this has not happened. A post drop with some information was made just prior to Christmas 2016 to around 400 homes in the near vicinity of Blind Lane. But there are some 850-900 homes in Southwick and they all need to be consulted on this application.

  1. School Places.

The primary school capacity is believed to be around 202 students with spare capacity around 5 or 6 places. This has only been achieved with the installation of external cabins. The addition of children from another 100 or more homes will undoubtedly more than fill this one school and lead to very high pupil/teacher ratio unless additional capacity is provided. But where?

  1. Work Opportunities

There are very few work opportunities in Southwick. Developers should build in a large town which has both work opportunities and supporting infrastructure already in place to support such a large housing development.

  1. Bus Service.

In the application Public Transport is identified as being “good or sufficient to support amongst other things commuting to and from work”. However, in reality Southwick has a very poor bus service which hardly covers normal daytime employment, let alone shift pattern working, unusual work hours or Saturday/Sunday working. No buses run on a Sunday.

  1. Flooding.

A main concern of SPC and Parishioners is the risk of flooding, not only on the proposed site but consequential flooding, i.e. if measures are put into place to minimise flooding on this development site, there could be an adverse impact on neighbouring areas. (See Appendix 1 taken from the Environmental Agency’s web site which shows high risk flooding areas near to this site). SPC strongly suggests that an Escrow type fund is put into place so that any flooding or consequential flooding due to the development will compensate villagers experiencing damage from such flooding, also taking into account that heavy vehicles using Blind Lane or Wesley Lane as access to the site could cause underground damage to drains and guttering.

  1. Drainage and Sewage

It is understood that the drains and sewers of Southwick are old and when installed were designed for a village. Hence WC must ensure that additional/replacement pipework will readily cater for this application and more, taking into account the uncertainty that other applications are highly likely to follow this one if it is approved. It would also ensure that  disruption to Parishioners in the area would only occur once.

  1. Electricity and Gas

SPC has not studied the provision of additional electricity (sub-station) and gas (pipework) resources needed for this application, and futures ones, but obviously this does need to be considered and taken into account at an early stage.

  1. Traffic Recording on Blind Lane

SPC believes that the traffic counting exercise carried out on Blind Lane was inadequate and did not capture all access points for traffic using Hollisway, Blind Lane, Southfields, Wesley Lane, Lamberts March, etc. SPC requests that WC review the traffic counting measures used for this application and ensures that they are repeated to capture all traffic, especially when the Primary School is open, so that a full picture is established.

  1. Heavy Traffic through the Village.

SPC is already concerned about the constant flow of heavy vehicles travelling through Southwick, bearing in mind that Wynsome Street (C234) is a ‘C’ road and not an ‘A’ road’.

If this application is approved, it can only exacerbate the number of heavy lorries which would be travelling through Southwick to access the development site.

  1. Site Access.

There are already severe traffic issues on the narrow Blind Lane due to residents parking and school run drop-offs and pickups and the fact that Blind Lane is often used as a ‘short cut’ between Wynsome Street and Frome Road as well as between Frome road and Bradley road, especially when the traffic is heavy on the main roads or there is  accident/roadwork delays on the main road. Construction traffic should not be allowed along Blind Lane from Wynsome Street to service the development site. SPC considers that there should be NO access points to the development site on Blind Lane but that one or two access points should be on Wesley Lane. There are various alternative options, including the possibility of a Southwick bypass going from Dunkirk Business Park to Bradley. SPC considers that, if the application is approved, the best way to resolve this is to hold tri-party discussion between WC, SPC and Redrow Homes.

  1. CONCLUSION.

Southwick, defined by WC as a Category C small town/village, wants to remain Category C. SPC and Parishioners do not object to, and have supported, appropriate, sustainable, developments such as infill houses within the village boundaries. SPC would also support the provision of appropriate additional facilities such the building of another school, some extra small shops, a dentist or a doctor’s surgery. But SPC does not support this application.

The Clerk

Southwick Parish Council

For and on behalf of Southwick Parish Council

Approved by its Chairman Cllr. K. Noble

Signed by the Chairman: …………Mrs. K. Noble………………………………….

Dated: ……………21/2/2017…………………………………

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >>

Powered by CuteNews

News and Articles


FOR SOUTHWICK RESIDENTS INFORMATION

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL AND GLADMAN

RELATING TO THE PROPOSED PLANNING APPLICATION ON LAND OFF WYNSOME STREET

From: Ryan Wilkie
Sent: 08 March 2017 14:10
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk


Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon Ms Noble

As chairman of Southwick Parish Council, we would be obliged if you could circulate to your Councillor’s the attached letter the electronic copy of Consultation Leaflet which is due to be distributed shortly.

We would like to draw your attention to the request for a private meeting between ourselves and a number of representatives from the Parish Council and will look forward to hearing from you to arrange the said meeting.

Kind regards,

Ryan Wilkie

++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Kath Noble
Sent: 08 March 2017 19:02
To: Ryan Wilkie
Subject: RE: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Southwick Parish Council does not hold private meetings.  You may attend

our monthly meeting, the next one is Tuesday 21st March at 7.30pm.  If you

wish to attend please let me know.

Regards Kath Noble

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Robert Black
Sent: 15 March 2017 16:41
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk

c.c. Kevin Waters; Ryan Wilkie
Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon

Further to you email to my colleague, Mr. Wilkie, last week I would like to take this opportunity to respond as follows:

We appreciate the invitation to the Parish Council Meeting next Tuesday (21st March) and we note that you do not hold private meetings. We have found that a private meeting with members of the Parish Council is a more productive environment for us to put across the details of the proposed scheme and for the Parish Council to provide feedback rather than in an open forum and to that end we will not be taking up your offer.

That being said we would still be very interested in any comments that the Parish Council may have in respect of the proposed scheme.

Kind regards

R. Black

Project Manager

++++++++++++++++++++++

SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL

ELECTION OF COUNCILLORS – VOTING DAY - 4 MAY 2017

Do you have the initiative, commitment, dedication and some free time to become a Parish Councillor in order to support and carry out the wishes of the majority of Southwick parishioners? If you have, now is the time to apply and submit your nomination as a candidate before the nomination closing date of 4 April 2017.

There are 11 Parish Councillor seats to be contested. Full details may be found on the Wiltshire Council web site at:

http://elections.wiltshire.gov.uk/Home/Division/2653

Nomination forms may be obtained from the Electoral Services Team, Wiltshire Council, County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, Wiltshire, BA14 8JN from the Returning Officer who will, at the request of an elector for any electoral area prepare a nomination paper for signature.

Nomination papers must be delivered by hand to the ‘Electoral Services Nomination Desk’ at any of the following designated Wiltshire Council Offices:

County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, BA14 8JN

Monkton Park, Chippenham, SN15 1ER

Crossmolina Buildings, Snuff Street, Devizes SN10 1FG

Fiver Rivers Health & Wellbeing Centre, Hulse Road, Salisbury SP1 3NR

Delivery of Nomination papers can take place on any day between the hours of 10am and 4pm Monday to Friday but no later than 4pm on Tuesday, 4th April 2017.

If the election is contested, because there are more than 11 nominations for the 11 seats, then the poll will take place on Thursday, 4th May 2017.

Good Luck!


Southwick Parish Council's response to Wiltshire Council regarding the Redrow Homes Outline Planning Planning Application 16/12279/OUT 

  1. SUMMARY

This document expresses the concern of Southwick Parish Council and many of its Parishioners to the proposed large housing development of residential homes applied for by Redrow Homes on the Land to the South of Blind Lane.

This application specifically requires SPC to comment only on the content of this application which covers up to 100 new homes. However, SPC urges WC to take account of the possibility that this application is only the first phase of further applications which are likely to follow, either from Redrow Homes, or other developers, if this application proceeds to the next stage of approval.

  1. MAJOR REASONS FOR OBJECTION
  1. This extract was taken from Wiltshire Core Strategy Adopted January 2015:

“It is recognised that the villages surrounding Trowbridge, particularly Hilperton, Southwick, North Bradley and West Ashton, have separate and distinct identities as villages. Open countryside should be maintained to protect the character and identity of these villages as separate communities.”

  1. This extract was taken from Appendix 6 of Housing Land Supply Statement base date April 2016:

Housing already provided for

Area

Indicative requirement 2006-2026

Completions 2006-2016

 

Developable commitments 2016-2026

Indicative remaining requirement

Trowbridge

6,810

2,776

2,017

2,017

Trowbridge CA remainder

165

242

29

0

  1. Recently, WC has rejected applications for the following reason/s:

“Having regard to all the submissions and relevant policies, including the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole, and mindful of the nominal 5-year housing land supply shortfall, this application is considered to be an inappropriate, unsustainable form of development which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and highway impacts cumulatively would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefit of providing additional dwellings in an open countryside location and the provision of employment created through construction processes. As such the proposal is not considered to represent sustainable development being contrary to CP1, CP2, CP51, CP57, CP60, and CP61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015 and the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole.”

  1. For these three reasons stated above, WC should reject this application. Southwick should not be the focus of large scale housing developments like this one which is wholly out of scale and a disproportionate addition to the existing village.
  1. SPC considers that the planning process used by WC does not take account of warning prospective developers, at the earliest opportunity, that they are wasting time and effort in pursuing an application which clearly will not succeed. However, this is outside the scope of this response, and SPC will write to WC separately on this subject.
  1. INCORRECT/MISLEADING STATEMENTS

The application includes a number of statements which either contain incorrect facts, or appear misleading.

  1. Post Office. There is no post office in Southwick. A postal facility is available for one day a week for two hours in the village hall.
  2. Railway. There is no rail station in Southwick. One has to drive into Trowbridge.
  3. Healthcare. There are no doctors’ surgeries or dentist or healthcare in Southwick. The nearest are in Trowbridge.
  4. Public House.  There is only one public house in Southwick.
  5. The applicant states that no houses have been built in Southwick in the last decade; in fact over a hundred houses have been built on suitable sites. This includes the 55 homes which have been built on the old Mowlem factory site.
  6. The application quotes ”local convenience store and newsagents and other local retail”; there is one shop (which also sells newspapers) and two takeaways.  There is no other local retail.
  1. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO ITEMS IN THE APPLICATION
  1. Redrow Homes Village Consultation

The application stated that Redrow Homes will carry out a full consultation with all village residents. To SPC’s knowledge this has not happened. A post drop with some information was made just prior to Christmas 2016 to around 400 homes in the near vicinity of Blind Lane. But there are some 850-900 homes in Southwick and they all need to be consulted on this application.

  1. School Places.

The primary school capacity is believed to be around 202 students with spare capacity around 5 or 6 places. This has only been achieved with the installation of external cabins. The addition of children from another 100 or more homes will undoubtedly more than fill this one school and lead to very high pupil/teacher ratio unless additional capacity is provided. But where?

  1. Work Opportunities

There are very few work opportunities in Southwick. Developers should build in a large town which has both work opportunities and supporting infrastructure already in place to support such a large housing development.

  1. Bus Service.

In the application Public Transport is identified as being “good or sufficient to support amongst other things commuting to and from work”. However, in reality Southwick has a very poor bus service which hardly covers normal daytime employment, let alone shift pattern working, unusual work hours or Saturday/Sunday working. No buses run on a Sunday.

  1. Flooding.

A main concern of SPC and Parishioners is the risk of flooding, not only on the proposed site but consequential flooding, i.e. if measures are put into place to minimise flooding on this development site, there could be an adverse impact on neighbouring areas. (See Appendix 1 taken from the Environmental Agency’s web site which shows high risk flooding areas near to this site). SPC strongly suggests that an Escrow type fund is put into place so that any flooding or consequential flooding due to the development will compensate villagers experiencing damage from such flooding, also taking into account that heavy vehicles using Blind Lane or Wesley Lane as access to the site could cause underground damage to drains and guttering.

  1. Drainage and Sewage

It is understood that the drains and sewers of Southwick are old and when installed were designed for a village. Hence WC must ensure that additional/replacement pipework will readily cater for this application and more, taking into account the uncertainty that other applications are highly likely to follow this one if it is approved. It would also ensure that  disruption to Parishioners in the area would only occur once.

  1. Electricity and Gas

SPC has not studied the provision of additional electricity (sub-station) and gas (pipework) resources needed for this application, and futures ones, but obviously this does need to be considered and taken into account at an early stage.

  1. Traffic Recording on Blind Lane

SPC believes that the traffic counting exercise carried out on Blind Lane was inadequate and did not capture all access points for traffic using Hollisway, Blind Lane, Southfields, Wesley Lane, Lamberts March, etc. SPC requests that WC review the traffic counting measures used for this application and ensures that they are repeated to capture all traffic, especially when the Primary School is open, so that a full picture is established.

  1. Heavy Traffic through the Village.

SPC is already concerned about the constant flow of heavy vehicles travelling through Southwick, bearing in mind that Wynsome Street (C234) is a ‘C’ road and not an ‘A’ road’.

If this application is approved, it can only exacerbate the number of heavy lorries which would be travelling through Southwick to access the development site.

  1. Site Access.

There are already severe traffic issues on the narrow Blind Lane due to residents parking and school run drop-offs and pickups and the fact that Blind Lane is often used as a ‘short cut’ between Wynsome Street and Frome Road as well as between Frome road and Bradley road, especially when the traffic is heavy on the main roads or there is  accident/roadwork delays on the main road. Construction traffic should not be allowed along Blind Lane from Wynsome Street to service the development site. SPC considers that there should be NO access points to the development site on Blind Lane but that one or two access points should be on Wesley Lane. There are various alternative options, including the possibility of a Southwick bypass going from Dunkirk Business Park to Bradley. SPC considers that, if the application is approved, the best way to resolve this is to hold tri-party discussion between WC, SPC and Redrow Homes.

  1. CONCLUSION.

Southwick, defined by WC as a Category C small town/village, wants to remain Category C. SPC and Parishioners do not object to, and have supported, appropriate, sustainable, developments such as infill houses within the village boundaries. SPC would also support the provision of appropriate additional facilities such the building of another school, some extra small shops, a dentist or a doctor’s surgery. But SPC does not support this application.

The Clerk

Southwick Parish Council

For and on behalf of Southwick Parish Council

Approved by its Chairman Cllr. K. Noble

Signed by the Chairman: …………Mrs. K. Noble………………………………….

Dated: ……………21/2/2017…………………………………

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >>

Powered by CuteNews

FOR SOUTHWICK RESIDENTS INFORMATION

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL AND GLADMAN

RELATING TO THE PROPOSED PLANNING APPLICATION ON LAND OFF WYNSOME STREET

From: Ryan Wilkie
Sent: 08 March 2017 14:10
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk


Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon Ms Noble

As chairman of Southwick Parish Council, we would be obliged if you could circulate to your Councillor’s the attached letter the electronic copy of Consultation Leaflet which is due to be distributed shortly.

We would like to draw your attention to the request for a private meeting between ourselves and a number of representatives from the Parish Council and will look forward to hearing from you to arrange the said meeting.

Kind regards,

Ryan Wilkie

++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Kath Noble
Sent: 08 March 2017 19:02
To: Ryan Wilkie
Subject: RE: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Southwick Parish Council does not hold private meetings.  You may attend

our monthly meeting, the next one is Tuesday 21st March at 7.30pm.  If you

wish to attend please let me know.

Regards Kath Noble

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Robert Black
Sent: 15 March 2017 16:41
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk

c.c. Kevin Waters; Ryan Wilkie
Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon

Further to you email to my colleague, Mr. Wilkie, last week I would like to take this opportunity to respond as follows:

We appreciate the invitation to the Parish Council Meeting next Tuesday (21st March) and we note that you do not hold private meetings. We have found that a private meeting with members of the Parish Council is a more productive environment for us to put across the details of the proposed scheme and for the Parish Council to provide feedback rather than in an open forum and to that end we will not be taking up your offer.

That being said we would still be very interested in any comments that the Parish Council may have in respect of the proposed scheme.

Kind regards

R. Black

Project Manager

++++++++++++++++++++++

SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL

ELECTION OF COUNCILLORS – VOTING DAY - 4 MAY 2017

Do you have the initiative, commitment, dedication and some free time to become a Parish Councillor in order to support and carry out the wishes of the majority of Southwick parishioners? If you have, now is the time to apply and submit your nomination as a candidate before the nomination closing date of 4 April 2017.

There are 11 Parish Councillor seats to be contested. Full details may be found on the Wiltshire Council web site at:

http://elections.wiltshire.gov.uk/Home/Division/2653

Nomination forms may be obtained from the Electoral Services Team, Wiltshire Council, County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, Wiltshire, BA14 8JN from the Returning Officer who will, at the request of an elector for any electoral area prepare a nomination paper for signature.

Nomination papers must be delivered by hand to the ‘Electoral Services Nomination Desk’ at any of the following designated Wiltshire Council Offices:

County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, BA14 8JN

Monkton Park, Chippenham, SN15 1ER

Crossmolina Buildings, Snuff Street, Devizes SN10 1FG

Fiver Rivers Health & Wellbeing Centre, Hulse Road, Salisbury SP1 3NR

Delivery of Nomination papers can take place on any day between the hours of 10am and 4pm Monday to Friday but no later than 4pm on Tuesday, 4th April 2017.

If the election is contested, because there are more than 11 nominations for the 11 seats, then the poll will take place on Thursday, 4th May 2017.

Good Luck!


Southwick Parish Council's response to Wiltshire Council regarding the Redrow Homes Outline Planning Planning Application 16/12279/OUT 

  1. SUMMARY

This document expresses the concern of Southwick Parish Council and many of its Parishioners to the proposed large housing development of residential homes applied for by Redrow Homes on the Land to the South of Blind Lane.

This application specifically requires SPC to comment only on the content of this application which covers up to 100 new homes. However, SPC urges WC to take account of the possibility that this application is only the first phase of further applications which are likely to follow, either from Redrow Homes, or other developers, if this application proceeds to the next stage of approval.

  1. MAJOR REASONS FOR OBJECTION
  1. This extract was taken from Wiltshire Core Strategy Adopted January 2015:

“It is recognised that the villages surrounding Trowbridge, particularly Hilperton, Southwick, North Bradley and West Ashton, have separate and distinct identities as villages. Open countryside should be maintained to protect the character and identity of these villages as separate communities.”

  1. This extract was taken from Appendix 6 of Housing Land Supply Statement base date April 2016:

Housing already provided for

Area

Indicative requirement 2006-2026

Completions 2006-2016

 

Developable commitments 2016-2026

Indicative remaining requirement

Trowbridge

6,810

2,776

2,017

2,017

Trowbridge CA remainder

165

242

29

0

  1. Recently, WC has rejected applications for the following reason/s:

“Having regard to all the submissions and relevant policies, including the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole, and mindful of the nominal 5-year housing land supply shortfall, this application is considered to be an inappropriate, unsustainable form of development which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and highway impacts cumulatively would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefit of providing additional dwellings in an open countryside location and the provision of employment created through construction processes. As such the proposal is not considered to represent sustainable development being contrary to CP1, CP2, CP51, CP57, CP60, and CP61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015 and the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole.”

  1. For these three reasons stated above, WC should reject this application. Southwick should not be the focus of large scale housing developments like this one which is wholly out of scale and a disproportionate addition to the existing village.
  1. SPC considers that the planning process used by WC does not take account of warning prospective developers, at the earliest opportunity, that they are wasting time and effort in pursuing an application which clearly will not succeed. However, this is outside the scope of this response, and SPC will write to WC separately on this subject.
  1. INCORRECT/MISLEADING STATEMENTS

The application includes a number of statements which either contain incorrect facts, or appear misleading.

  1. Post Office. There is no post office in Southwick. A postal facility is available for one day a week for two hours in the village hall.
  2. Railway. There is no rail station in Southwick. One has to drive into Trowbridge.
  3. Healthcare. There are no doctors’ surgeries or dentist or healthcare in Southwick. The nearest are in Trowbridge.
  4. Public House.  There is only one public house in Southwick.
  5. The applicant states that no houses have been built in Southwick in the last decade; in fact over a hundred houses have been built on suitable sites. This includes the 55 homes which have been built on the old Mowlem factory site.
  6. The application quotes ”local convenience store and newsagents and other local retail”; there is one shop (which also sells newspapers) and two takeaways.  There is no other local retail.
  1. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO ITEMS IN THE APPLICATION
  1. Redrow Homes Village Consultation

The application stated that Redrow Homes will carry out a full consultation with all village residents. To SPC’s knowledge this has not happened. A post drop with some information was made just prior to Christmas 2016 to around 400 homes in the near vicinity of Blind Lane. But there are some 850-900 homes in Southwick and they all need to be consulted on this application.

  1. School Places.

The primary school capacity is believed to be around 202 students with spare capacity around 5 or 6 places. This has only been achieved with the installation of external cabins. The addition of children from another 100 or more homes will undoubtedly more than fill this one school and lead to very high pupil/teacher ratio unless additional capacity is provided. But where?

  1. Work Opportunities

There are very few work opportunities in Southwick. Developers should build in a large town which has both work opportunities and supporting infrastructure already in place to support such a large housing development.

  1. Bus Service.

In the application Public Transport is identified as being “good or sufficient to support amongst other things commuting to and from work”. However, in reality Southwick has a very poor bus service which hardly covers normal daytime employment, let alone shift pattern working, unusual work hours or Saturday/Sunday working. No buses run on a Sunday.

  1. Flooding.

A main concern of SPC and Parishioners is the risk of flooding, not only on the proposed site but consequential flooding, i.e. if measures are put into place to minimise flooding on this development site, there could be an adverse impact on neighbouring areas. (See Appendix 1 taken from the Environmental Agency’s web site which shows high risk flooding areas near to this site). SPC strongly suggests that an Escrow type fund is put into place so that any flooding or consequential flooding due to the development will compensate villagers experiencing damage from such flooding, also taking into account that heavy vehicles using Blind Lane or Wesley Lane as access to the site could cause underground damage to drains and guttering.

  1. Drainage and Sewage

It is understood that the drains and sewers of Southwick are old and when installed were designed for a village. Hence WC must ensure that additional/replacement pipework will readily cater for this application and more, taking into account the uncertainty that other applications are highly likely to follow this one if it is approved. It would also ensure that  disruption to Parishioners in the area would only occur once.

  1. Electricity and Gas

SPC has not studied the provision of additional electricity (sub-station) and gas (pipework) resources needed for this application, and futures ones, but obviously this does need to be considered and taken into account at an early stage.

  1. Traffic Recording on Blind Lane

SPC believes that the traffic counting exercise carried out on Blind Lane was inadequate and did not capture all access points for traffic using Hollisway, Blind Lane, Southfields, Wesley Lane, Lamberts March, etc. SPC requests that WC review the traffic counting measures used for this application and ensures that they are repeated to capture all traffic, especially when the Primary School is open, so that a full picture is established.

  1. Heavy Traffic through the Village.

SPC is already concerned about the constant flow of heavy vehicles travelling through Southwick, bearing in mind that Wynsome Street (C234) is a ‘C’ road and not an ‘A’ road’.

If this application is approved, it can only exacerbate the number of heavy lorries which would be travelling through Southwick to access the development site.

  1. Site Access.

There are already severe traffic issues on the narrow Blind Lane due to residents parking and school run drop-offs and pickups and the fact that Blind Lane is often used as a ‘short cut’ between Wynsome Street and Frome Road as well as between Frome road and Bradley road, especially when the traffic is heavy on the main roads or there is  accident/roadwork delays on the main road. Construction traffic should not be allowed along Blind Lane from Wynsome Street to service the development site. SPC considers that there should be NO access points to the development site on Blind Lane but that one or two access points should be on Wesley Lane. There are various alternative options, including the possibility of a Southwick bypass going from Dunkirk Business Park to Bradley. SPC considers that, if the application is approved, the best way to resolve this is to hold tri-party discussion between WC, SPC and Redrow Homes.

  1. CONCLUSION.

Southwick, defined by WC as a Category C small town/village, wants to remain Category C. SPC and Parishioners do not object to, and have supported, appropriate, sustainable, developments such as infill houses within the village boundaries. SPC would also support the provision of appropriate additional facilities such the building of another school, some extra small shops, a dentist or a doctor’s surgery. But SPC does not support this application.

The Clerk

Southwick Parish Council

For and on behalf of Southwick Parish Council

Approved by its Chairman Cllr. K. Noble

Signed by the Chairman: …………Mrs. K. Noble………………………………….

Dated: ……………21/2/2017…………………………………

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >>

Powered by CuteNews

Southwick


FOR SOUTHWICK RESIDENTS INFORMATION

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL AND GLADMAN

RELATING TO THE PROPOSED PLANNING APPLICATION ON LAND OFF WYNSOME STREET

From: Ryan Wilkie
Sent: 08 March 2017 14:10
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk


Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon Ms Noble

As chairman of Southwick Parish Council, we would be obliged if you could circulate to your Councillor’s the attached letter the electronic copy of Consultation Leaflet which is due to be distributed shortly.

We would like to draw your attention to the request for a private meeting between ourselves and a number of representatives from the Parish Council and will look forward to hearing from you to arrange the said meeting.

Kind regards,

Ryan Wilkie

++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Kath Noble
Sent: 08 March 2017 19:02
To: Ryan Wilkie
Subject: RE: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Southwick Parish Council does not hold private meetings.  You may attend

our monthly meeting, the next one is Tuesday 21st March at 7.30pm.  If you

wish to attend please let me know.

Regards Kath Noble

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Robert Black
Sent: 15 March 2017 16:41
To: kathnoble45@live.co.uk

c.c. Kevin Waters; Ryan Wilkie
Subject: Proposed Planning Application on land off Wynsome Street, Southwick

Good afternoon

Further to you email to my colleague, Mr. Wilkie, last week I would like to take this opportunity to respond as follows:

We appreciate the invitation to the Parish Council Meeting next Tuesday (21st March) and we note that you do not hold private meetings. We have found that a private meeting with members of the Parish Council is a more productive environment for us to put across the details of the proposed scheme and for the Parish Council to provide feedback rather than in an open forum and to that end we will not be taking up your offer.

That being said we would still be very interested in any comments that the Parish Council may have in respect of the proposed scheme.

Kind regards

R. Black

Project Manager

++++++++++++++++++++++

SOUTHWICK PARISH COUNCIL

ELECTION OF COUNCILLORS – VOTING DAY - 4 MAY 2017

Do you have the initiative, commitment, dedication and some free time to become a Parish Councillor in order to support and carry out the wishes of the majority of Southwick parishioners? If you have, now is the time to apply and submit your nomination as a candidate before the nomination closing date of 4 April 2017.

There are 11 Parish Councillor seats to be contested. Full details may be found on the Wiltshire Council web site at:

http://elections.wiltshire.gov.uk/Home/Division/2653

Nomination forms may be obtained from the Electoral Services Team, Wiltshire Council, County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, Wiltshire, BA14 8JN from the Returning Officer who will, at the request of an elector for any electoral area prepare a nomination paper for signature.

Nomination papers must be delivered by hand to the ‘Electoral Services Nomination Desk’ at any of the following designated Wiltshire Council Offices:

County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge, BA14 8JN

Monkton Park, Chippenham, SN15 1ER

Crossmolina Buildings, Snuff Street, Devizes SN10 1FG

Fiver Rivers Health & Wellbeing Centre, Hulse Road, Salisbury SP1 3NR

Delivery of Nomination papers can take place on any day between the hours of 10am and 4pm Monday to Friday but no later than 4pm on Tuesday, 4th April 2017.

If the election is contested, because there are more than 11 nominations for the 11 seats, then the poll will take place on Thursday, 4th May 2017.

Good Luck!


Southwick Parish Council's response to Wiltshire Council regarding the Redrow Homes Outline Planning Planning Application 16/12279/OUT 

  1. SUMMARY

This document expresses the concern of Southwick Parish Council and many of its Parishioners to the proposed large housing development of residential homes applied for by Redrow Homes on the Land to the South of Blind Lane.

This application specifically requires SPC to comment only on the content of this application which covers up to 100 new homes. However, SPC urges WC to take account of the possibility that this application is only the first phase of further applications which are likely to follow, either from Redrow Homes, or other developers, if this application proceeds to the next stage of approval.

  1. MAJOR REASONS FOR OBJECTION
  1. This extract was taken from Wiltshire Core Strategy Adopted January 2015:

“It is recognised that the villages surrounding Trowbridge, particularly Hilperton, Southwick, North Bradley and West Ashton, have separate and distinct identities as villages. Open countryside should be maintained to protect the character and identity of these villages as separate communities.”

  1. This extract was taken from Appendix 6 of Housing Land Supply Statement base date April 2016:

Housing already provided for

Area

Indicative requirement 2006-2026

Completions 2006-2016

 

Developable commitments 2016-2026

Indicative remaining requirement

Trowbridge

6,810

2,776

2,017

2,017

Trowbridge CA remainder

165

242

29

0

  1. Recently, WC has rejected applications for the following reason/s:

“Having regard to all the submissions and relevant policies, including the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole, and mindful of the nominal 5-year housing land supply shortfall, this application is considered to be an inappropriate, unsustainable form of development which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and highway impacts cumulatively would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefit of providing additional dwellings in an open countryside location and the provision of employment created through construction processes. As such the proposal is not considered to represent sustainable development being contrary to CP1, CP2, CP51, CP57, CP60, and CP61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015 and the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole.”

  1. For these three reasons stated above, WC should reject this application. Southwick should not be the focus of large scale housing developments like this one which is wholly out of scale and a disproportionate addition to the existing village.
  1. SPC considers that the planning process used by WC does not take account of warning prospective developers, at the earliest opportunity, that they are wasting time and effort in pursuing an application which clearly will not succeed. However, this is outside the scope of this response, and SPC will write to WC separately on this subject.
  1. INCORRECT/MISLEADING STATEMENTS

The application includes a number of statements which either contain incorrect facts, or appear misleading.

  1. Post Office. There is no post office in Southwick. A postal facility is available for one day a week for two hours in the village hall.
  2. Railway. There is no rail station in Southwick. One has to drive into Trowbridge.
  3. Healthcare. There are no doctors’ surgeries or dentist or healthcare in Southwick. The nearest are in Trowbridge.
  4. Public House.  There is only one public house in Southwick.
  5. The applicant states that no houses have been built in Southwick in the last decade; in fact over a hundred houses have been built on suitable sites. This includes the 55 homes which have been built on the old Mowlem factory site.
  6. The application quotes ”local convenience store and newsagents and other local retail”; there is one shop (which also sells newspapers) and two takeaways.  There is no other local retail.
  1. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO ITEMS IN THE APPLICATION
  1. Redrow Homes Village Consultation

The application stated that Redrow Homes will carry out a full consultation with all village residents. To SPC’s knowledge this has not happened. A post drop with some information was made just prior to Christmas 2016 to around 400 homes in the near vicinity of Blind Lane. But there are some 850-900 homes in Southwick and they all need to be consulted on this application.

  1. School Places.

The primary school capacity is believed to be around 202 students with spare capacity around 5 or 6 places. This has only been achieved with the installation of external cabins. The addition of children from another 100 or more homes will undoubtedly more than fill this one school and lead to very high pupil/teacher ratio unless additional capacity is provided. But where?

  1. Work Opportunities

There are very few work opportunities in Southwick. Developers should build in a large town which has both work opportunities and supporting infrastructure already in place to support such a large housing development.

  1. Bus Service.

In the application Public Transport is identified as being “good or sufficient to support amongst other things commuting to and from work”. However, in reality Southwick has a very poor bus service which hardly covers normal daytime employment, let alone shift pattern working, unusual work hours or Saturday/Sunday working. No buses run on a Sunday.

  1. Flooding.

A main concern of SPC and Parishioners is the risk of flooding, not only on the proposed site but consequential flooding, i.e. if measures are put into place to minimise flooding on this development site, there could be an adverse impact on neighbouring areas. (See Appendix 1 taken from the Environmental Agency’s web site which shows high risk flooding areas near to this site). SPC strongly suggests that an Escrow type fund is put into place so that any flooding or consequential flooding due to the development will compensate villagers experiencing damage from such flooding, also taking into account that heavy vehicles using Blind Lane or Wesley Lane as access to the site could cause underground damage to drains and guttering.

  1. Drainage and Sewage

It is understood that the drains and sewers of Southwick are old and when installed were designed for a village. Hence WC must ensure that additional/replacement pipework will readily cater for this application and more, taking into account the uncertainty that other applications are highly likely to follow this one if it is approved. It would also ensure that  disruption to Parishioners in the area would only occur once.

  1. Electricity and Gas

SPC has not studied the provision of additional electricity (sub-station) and gas (pipework) resources needed for this application, and futures ones, but obviously this does need to be considered and taken into account at an early stage.

  1. Traffic Recording on Blind Lane

SPC believes that the traffic counting exercise carried out on Blind Lane was inadequate and did not capture all access points for traffic using Hollisway, Blind Lane, Southfields, Wesley Lane, Lamberts March, etc. SPC requests that WC review the traffic counting measures used for this application and ensures that they are repeated to capture all traffic, especially when the Primary School is open, so that a full picture is established.

  1. Heavy Traffic through the Village.

SPC is already concerned about the constant flow of heavy vehicles travelling through Southwick, bearing in mind that Wynsome Street (C234) is a ‘C’ road and not an ‘A’ road’.

If this application is approved, it can only exacerbate the number of heavy lorries which would be travelling through Southwick to access the development site.

  1. Site Access.

There are already severe traffic issues on the narrow Blind Lane due to residents parking and school run drop-offs and pickups and the fact that Blind Lane is often used as a ‘short cut’ between Wynsome Street and Frome Road as well as between Frome road and Bradley road, especially when the traffic is heavy on the main roads or there is  accident/roadwork delays on the main road. Construction traffic should not be allowed along Blind Lane from Wynsome Street to service the development site. SPC considers that there should be NO access points to the development site on Blind Lane but that one or two access points should be on Wesley Lane. There are various alternative options, including the possibility of a Southwick bypass going from Dunkirk Business Park to Bradley. SPC considers that, if the application is approved, the best way to resolve this is to hold tri-party discussion between WC, SPC and Redrow Homes.

  1. CONCLUSION.

Southwick, defined by WC as a Category C small town/village, wants to remain Category C. SPC and Parishioners do not object to, and have supported, appropriate, sustainable, developments such as infill houses within the village boundaries. SPC would also support the provision of appropriate additional facilities such the building of another school, some extra small shops, a dentist or a doctor’s surgery. But SPC does not support this application.

The Clerk

Southwick Parish Council

For and on behalf of Southwick Parish Council

Approved by its Chairman Cllr. K. Noble

Signed by the Chairman: …………Mrs. K. Noble………………………………….

Dated: ……………21/2/2017…………………………………

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >>

Powered by CuteNews

Local travel news


The link below is to a Wiltshire Times webpage which has a map centred on Trowbridge but extends to Bath, Chippenham, Frome, Shepton Mallet and Warminster. There is a list of Latest Incidents.

Live traffic and travel news