tuffley matters letter to developmental control

8/18/2019 Tuffley Matters Letter to Developmental Control

1/24

30th March 2016

Dear Mr Baker & Hallam Land Management,

Application 16/00165/OUT Tufey Farm/Grange Road site - 50 !or more"

d#elling application $y %allam &and 'anagement !%&'" - (de)eloper(

As you are aware, we are a u!ey commun"ty #ased act"on grou$, w"th almost %00 mem#ers

and a l"e change'org $et"t"on w"th 62( s"gnatures and comments, as at today)s date' he

res$onse has #een oerwhelm"ng and clearly shows the *eel"ng o* many local res"dents' +ou w"ll also #e aware o* the numerous comments that you hae on the a#oe $lann"ng

a$$l"cat"on'

e w"sh to o#-ect to th"s a$$l"cat"on on the #as"s that the local "n*rastructure, "s not ca$a#le o*

su$$ort"ng a $oss"#le e.tra /00 eh"cles and $otent"ally u$ to another 6/ $ersons "n the area,

#ased on the m". o* hous"ng and w"ll coer th"s o#-ect"on and *urther o#-ect"ons #elow'

Many res"dents are st"ll concerned w"th the r"sk o* ood"ng, ha"ng $re"ously e.$er"enced the

eents o* 200% and 2012'

e l"st our comments and ra"se uer"es #elow and will highlight questions *or 44 and HLM

throughout th"s document' And will also raise queries with the content of the developers plans.

e cannot understand why the land des"gnat"on *or th"s 1 5eld has #een changed and that the

other 2 5elds south o* the $ro$osed s"te are Landsca$e 4onserat"on Areas, wh"lst all 3 are

w"th"n the loucester 4"ty #oundar"es "thout th"s change, there would #e 78 a$$l"cat"on9

Roads*

range :oad ;o$$os"te the $ro$osed s"te< "s essent"ally a country lane on the edge o* loucester,

w"th only a s"ngle $aement and no cycle $ath and no #us ser"ce #ecause o* the ra"lway #r"dge'

he road "s used as a short cut #etween =troud :d and 4ole A, then Br"stol :d'

here "s con*us"on on turn"ng r"ght at -unct"on on range :d>=troud :d ? more tra@c, greater

r"sk, longer ueues ;des$"te tra@c counts' so say done on (>>1/<

range :d automat"c tra@c count and s$eed analys"s on (>>1/ *or % days #y 2 ca#les to r"ght o*

s"te entrance'

How is this accurate as 1 cable broke within 2 days? (presumably both cables are needed to

provide data?!

Have highways been out to monitor tra"c at peak times including #t $eter%s start and &nish?

'an H) prove that actual tra"c counts were done on *+,+1- at range /oad+#troud /oad

0unction?

he local trans$ort system "s already stretched at $eak t"mes, "n $art"cular =t Barna#as

rounda#out'


2/24


3/24

here will e7tra cars and visitors parking?

ill it spill out onto range /oad causing further congestion and di"culty in passing?

4o$eland ark "s an .am$le o* the 1 car $ark s$ace rule, as "s J"ngsway the result "s o#"ous

to see, w"th cars $arked along ker#s and erges' eo$le are us"ng the"r cars, "nstead o* the #us

ser"ce, read"ly aa"la#le, on s"te'

Local roads suFer *rom $otholes ? heay construct"on tra@c w"ll worsen these roads and edges'

'' have marked numerous pot holes on #troud /oad but there are no current plans to repairthese? 4hese potholes make it unsafe for cyclists and cars swerve to avoid them too?

'an H)+Highways e7plain how new residents would - home occupancy has taken place.

How is this sustainable with no bus route and no cycle path in range /oad?

How will this discourage car use?

Have Highways+H) completed a risk assessment on the restricted railway bridge access taking

e7tra pedestrian cycle and vehicle movements into account?

How will range /oad and #troud /oad deal with the damage to the already pot@holed surface

and waste mud and debris that the construction would create?

4here are plans to build 12 homes at #troud /oad+range /oad 0unction and a convenience

store in the car park at the o7 and Blms pub C if these are built at the same time as the

proposed development how will the council manage so as to avoid tra"c problems?

How would construction vehicles enter+e7it the site as they cannot pass under the railway

bridge? 4hey will cause e7tra problems with tra"c and congestion entering from #troud /oad

end and cause further concern for the safety of our pedestrians?

4ounc"l seem unconcerned a#out tra@c congest"on see"ng "t as reduc"ng s$eed and lessen"ng

acc"dents howeer slow or ueue"ng tra@c results "n h"gher $ollut"on em"ss"ons9


4/24

Tra+c ,rom t .arna$as up troud Road at 50am $ac2ed up to Grange Road 3 Tufey &ane

$loc2ed

Grange Road leading to 4pney Road leading to ole A)enue $loc2ed in all directions

at 50pm


5/24

All entry e7it points o, t .arna$as rounda$out $oc2ed at 855pm 9 t:is is only t:e

lead up to rus: :our;


6/24

.uses*

7o regular #us ser"ce on range :oad due to ra"lway #r"dge'

7earest #us ser"ce to loucester ;7o'< "s m"nutes) walk and loucester>4heltenham ;7o'10<

10 m"nutes) walk other s"de o* #r"dge' Also loucester>=troud ;7o'63< m"nutes) walk'


7/24


8/24

here "s only 1 Doctors surgery "n u!ey, wh"ch "s a small #ungalow "n arw"ck Ae Pt "s oer

ca$ac"ty and many u!ey res"dents hae to trael, #y car to surger"es *urther a5eld'

here "s no surgery "n u!ey Lane, "t closed "n 201/, mean"ng %00 $at"ents hae already #een

try"ng to 5nd a new $ract"ce'

Tra)el >lan*

Quote @ 6reducing the dependence on private car usage6 @ the s"te "s wrongly $os"t"oned to

ach"ee th"s9Travel Survey will occur on 75% occupancy of all the housing!

=rainage and Flood Ris2*

eology o* s"te ;and area< "s charmouth mudstone and #lue l"as w"th a to$so"l o* 0'2 ? 0'3 m'

Fuote from developer%s documents @ 6the mudstone deposits are unlikely to have su"cient

permeability for surface water disposal6.

Heay or cont"nual ra"n results "n water lay"ng on to$ o* 5eld sur*ace dra"n"ng towards range :d

and ra"lway corner, due to the cam#er o* the road'

here are 2 Brooks "n area ? Dan"els & haddon ? #oth ow to :"er =eern'

haddon Brook "s $art"cularly releant to range :d dra"nage'

Are #avills correct in saying that the site is not within 28 metres of a watercourse. (4heir words!

h"s "s "ncorrect as there "s a concrete watercourse "n the north?east corner o* s"te, *ed *rom a

gully se$arat"ng the 5elds9

Are #avills correct in saying that this site and ad0oining land are not aected by Gooding? (4heir

words!

Are H) aware of the Good history within the area?

Are H) aware of the works completed and works still in progress to reduce Good risk to the

area of proposed development?

Are H) aware that local residents are unable to negotiate buildings insurance without a higher

Good risk premium?

9o house insurers take Good mapping data from the B.A?

8n Land :eg"stry s"te, look"ng at :ttp*//#atermapsen)ironment-agencygo)u2 ' h"s

clearly shows haddon Brook and land =outh o* #rook as h"ghest r"sk o* ood"ng *rom sur*ace

water' 4herefore according to B.A. How can this be Good one 1?

4here is a common theme of Good risk from the insurers and risk assessors (when purchasing

property in the area! as homes in the range /oad and ad0acent roads have been Gooded

previously?

ill H) re@consider their assertion that this is not a Good risk area taking into account the

photographic and historical evidence the impact on insurance on local homes and the Good

alleviation work carried out to date and still in progress?

Have '' made a recent assessment of the capacity of haddon :rook to take increased water

Gow based on recent rainfall running o the &eld over range /oad? Iot 188 year events not

E8 year events C this happens all the time after short bursts of rain C suggesting a high water

table?

?ust #ee2s ago troud Road @ooded t:e soa2a#ays in t:e proposed elds ,or

de)elopment o)er@o#ed and poured out o)er Grange Road and


9/24

="te *alls *rom south to north>range :d ;30m A8D south 2/m A8D north


10/24

00B F&OO= 9 .y$roo2 Road and


11/24


12/24

'any :omes #ere @ooded causing so muc: upset and CCCDs o, insurance claims

00B %ar#ell lose )ie# ,rom Grange Road opposite proposed site


13/24

Grange Road leading a#ay ,rom proposed site to#ards troud Road

01 F&OO= 9 A,ter some @ood pre)ention measures are in place 9 >roposed

site;


14/24

%ar#ell lose 9 opposite eld

01 9 Running oE %&'Ds proposed plot


15/24

.y$roo2 Road and


16/24

'AR% 016 9 A,ter 1 nig:t o, rain - t:is :as :appened many times o)er t:e years since @ood

de,ences #ere $uilt

%&'Ds proposed site 9 ort:/4ast corner


17/24

016 47iting $unds in t:e elds are ,ull o)er@o#ing onto t:e roads and #ater is

$ac2ing up onto t:e eld


18/24

10>1/ years) t"me

ho will take on the maintenance contract for the ponds C now and forever?

Deelo$er ho$es and assumes the 4ounc"l w"ll ado$t the s"tes roads and dra"ns and that =eern

rent ater;=< w"ll ado$t sewerage>*oul water'

However will the 'ouncil adopt the 2 $onds?

ill the developer assume the associated costs?

And if not will #4 still adopt drainage and sewerage?

ill H) compensate e7isting home owners should their #u9# scheme and other relief drainage

fail in the future?

'an you absolutely con&rm that an approved #u9# scheme will prevent any Gooding on range

/oad and surrounding houses and that haddon :rook can take the e7tra Gow at the set release

rate of the ponds?

ill the ponds have enough capacity in 1- years and beyond with the e7pected eect of urban

creep and climate change eects?

=s there any evidence that these ponds will work on a sloping site with impermeable ground

further degraded by urban creep?

Ur$an reep/=ensity o, %ousing*

Cor $ro5t the deelo$er reu"res e"ther h"gh dens"ty #u"ld, h"gher alue $er un"t>less un"ts or a

m".K the dwell"ng dens"ty d$h ;dwell"ng $er hectare< "s h"gh at E0, #ut that "s #ased on 2/0

homes, "* there are 300 homes ;as uoted "n some o* the"r documents< the dens"ty w"ll "ncrease9


19/24

he 4ounc"l Hous"ng are demand"ng E0R aForda#le hous"ng ? th"s w"ll "ne"ta#ly "ncrease the

E0d$h'

hat percentage for social housing will be insisted on by the city and accepted by the

developers?

How will H) comply with the requirement of J8 aordable housing or even a lesser after

negotiating with ''?

How will noise level controls (re railway! eect the housing layout and density of housing?

he greater leel o* ground coerage w"ll reduce the ground $ermea#"l"ty and $ro#a#ly "ncrease

sur*ace water runoF'

A*ter #u"ld"ng com$let"on the $ermea#le dr"eways and $aths w"ll gradually #ecome less

$ermea#le and also, home owners w"ll $at"o, tarmac and concrete ground *urther reduc"ng

$ermea#"l"ty'

r#an 4ree$ =tud"es show that oer 1/ years the "n"t"al #u"ld ground coers o* //R o* the s"te

;seems low com$ared to th"s a$$l"cat"on< and th"s then "ncreases to coer (/R o* the ground'

here*ore, the 2 $onds may not hae su@c"ent ca$ac"ty *or dra"nage or sur*ace water and

ood"ng could occur to range :d and ad-acent homes'

ill the ponds be large enough for future volume capacity after Krban 'reep reaches *- over

a period of time?

47perts*

Sn$recedentedS ra"n*all, or 1 "n a 100 years) eents, are terms we hae heard "n relat"on to

ood"ng "n =omerset, +ork, 4um#r"a, etc' he theme "s that the so called e.$erts and

oernments De$ts' hae #een "ncorrect ;or not *unded


20/24

hy are there no pictures of what the houses would look like on H)%s landscape documents?

House density will be greater ne7t to the railway therefore the inhabitants will probably create a

short cut to the bridge with poor visibility to the road thus negating the designated entry

points?

ill E storey houses be permitted on the Iorth and est boundaries in view of the landscape

issues?

he 5elds act as a #uFer #etween ur#an and green #elt and $ro"de a good nature ha#"tat, a

ne"gh#our has ke$t a log o* the local w"ldl"*e s"ght"ngs'

he area "s classed as Irural) accord"ng to Clood :"sk Assessment and Dra"nage =trategy 2'('

HLM state that the *arm #u"ld"ng on the s"te "s d"sused Pt has had recent roo* re$a"rs and o*ten

"s used #y l"estock' here are also re$orts o* #ats occu$y"ng the #arn

hy does the developer think that this site holds no particular interest in relation to wildlife and

hedgerows?

he 2 $onds w"ll $ro#a#ly attract w"ldl"*eK howeer, the concern "s whether "t w"ll also attract

erm"n and "nsects'

Are H) aware why the remaining land on the site within the 'ity boundary was not included in

the planning application? :ecause it is a andscape 'onservation Area?

Why is this area classed as a L.C.A. and not the rest of the eldsite"

Why did #CC change the land designation for the proposed eld for develop$ent ut

not the other & elds' enaling this application"

=s there a need for housing in this area when there are so many other areas that could be built

on &rst? Ksing the little green land left in our community should be a last resort?

he 5eld conta"ns a *armhouse dat"ng to 1% and we #el"ee that the whole s"te could hae

archaeolog"cal "nterest'

here "s a huge sadness that we w"ll lose the agr"cultural land and the "m$act on the landsca$e'

here 5elds a$$rec"ated #y many, to take "n the outstand"ng "ews'

Ht H an area o, Outstanding atural .eauty;

OUTTA=HG ATURA& .4AUTI A= H4


21/24


22/24

&ocal ity >lans and ?*


23/24

he T4= has not #een 5nal"sed #y the Pns$ector and th"s has delayed the loucester lan th"s

should not #e an e.cuse to $ass th"s SsmallS Sunder /00S deelo$ment' =troud D4 hae the"r a /?

year $lan "n $lace'

Pn 200/, the s"te was not carr"ed *orward "nto the $re*erred o$t"ons document ow"ng to the

s"gn"5cant leel o* res$onses rece"ed relat"ng toK loss o* green5eld s"te, "m$act on local

ser"ces, "n*rastructure, access"#"l"ty, tra@c generat"on, the lack o* need *or new hous"ng and

"m$act on "ews to and *rom :o#"nswood H"ll'

:eect"e o* th"s, the deelo$ment o* the 5elds surround"ng haddon "s not "n =troud D4)s 201/?2031 Local lan'

4he site was not approved as a preferred site in 288- C what has changed?

loucester 4"ty =trateg"c Assessment o* Land Aa"la#"l"ty & =''8' ealuat"on "n 2012 "dent"5ed

the same "ssues "n u!ey & range ards'

he real concern "s $ass"ng th"s a$$l"cat"on w"ll allow the larger 8r"g"n3 *rom range :d to the

M/ and =troud :oad to the ra"lway' 2/0G homes may #e the $relude to w"der deelo$ment o* the

surround"ng 5elds on =troud D4 land'

e are st"ll awa"t"ng *ull eFect o* Huntsgroe>J"ngsd"tch cont"nued #u"ld"ng, wh"ch "s the other

s"de o* the ra"lway, tra@c uses Hares5eld Lane'

Has the M'# or '' identi&ed this site as one of the JN sites suitable for development within the

city?

9oes '' recognise the concept of reen :elt :uer land and is this one such site?

=s the content and timing of the completion of the M'# inGuential on this application?

'an the city without its - Oear ocal $lan in place refuse the application on the basis that there

is brown&eld land available or wait until the ocal $lan is in place?

e do not know the '' house building requirement verses e7isting developments N agreed planning sites. 4herefore how do we know that these 2-8N houses are required?

Although th"s $ro$osal "s w"th"n loucester 4"ty 4ounc"l)s l"m"ts, "ts e.$ans"on w"ll "ntrude "nto

=troud D4)s'

4his raises a question of fairness C would it be right for #troud 9' collect 'ouncil 4a7 when ''

would have to face the problems should further development lead on form this application?

3ingsway and Huntsgrove are #troud developments but in reality they house loucester

residents?

Bu"ld"ng 2/0G e.tra homes would euate to a$$ro."mately an (R "ncrease "n u!ey hous"ng

stock and a *urther 10R "ncrease "n u!ey $o$ulat"on'ection 106*

Any money *rom deelo$ers w"ll #e "nadeuate *or the loss o* th"s I#uFerS'

Any =ect"on 106 money usually goes "nto the county $ot and "s rarely s$ent at the $o"nt o* need9

hat #ection 18D implications are likely to be imposed on the developers?

hat guarantee would we have of the money being put back into 4u5ey to develop roads from

a safety aspect pot hole and other road repairs leisure areas and parks local facilities including

doctors and dentists community centres leisure facilities shops cafes C we have nothing here?

=$eak"ng to our local 4ounty 4ounsellor *or u!ey, she had no "dea o* any $ro-ects "n $lace *or

the regenerat"on o* u!ey, $oor roads, schools, doctors and lack o* other *ac"l"t"es and knew

noth"ng o* these $lans, unt"l our $hone call9 =he does not know o* any money currently $ut

as"de *or u!ey and could not con5rm a#out the deelo$er)s contr"#ut"ons9


24/24

HP 'AI AI#B/ 4HB#B FKB#4=PI# 4HBI C HA4 HP$B HAQB B P4 =I /BBIB/A4=PI P

PK/ A/BA9O

tuffley matters letter to developmental control

Documents