A helpful document posted by Robin Shellard here. He also makes the useful point that those who want no development at all and those who just want to make it better can use the same argument. The Mendip Plan highlights the need for a safe pedestrian route to the village core. If the developers fail to provide one it is a strong argument for refusing their plans. If they provide one (and its their job to work out how) we get a much needed improvement
I have been asked where objections to the proposed development should be sent. This is a three part answer.
1. For the pre-planning consultation (ie what is on the table now) letters or emails should be sent to Lichfields at the addresses below
Email your comments to bristol@lichfields.uk or
Post your comments to WSM Consultation, Lichfields, The Quorom, Bond Street, BS1 3AE.
2. For the formal outline planning application (which will appear around the end of February) comments will need to be sent to Mendip DC . Advice on how will be circulated as soon as an application is made and it has a reference number.
3. You can, of course , write to anyone else you think might influence the church commissioners eg the Archbishop of Canterbury, our local MP or whoever..
At the meeting on Sunday night I was asked to give some ideas on writing letters of objection to the proposed development at Roughmoor Lane. Two key points came out that night
1. If lots of people send in a standard letter it will be ignored. To have an effect it is best to use your own words
2. At every stage it is more powerful if you can show how the developers are failing to meet the policies set out in the Mendip Plan. This is particularly the case when it comes tpo the formal application stage.
This note therefore sets out the specific policies set out by Mendip alongside the allocation of land at Roughmoor Lane (and an embedded link to the document should you wish to see it all) Alongside each policy there are suggestions as to which of our concerns are relevant. You may well think of others. As an example you might write something like.
The plan says “The site should be designed to safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residential properties” Putting a community facility at the NW corner of the development will increase traffic and parking problems to the detriment of all those living along the lane.”
Following the Zoom meeting with the Church Commissioners and Lichfields on Thursday 20th January 2022 and requests for copies of the recording, please email the Clerk on clerk@westburysubmendip-pc.gov.uk and the file will be sent via WeTransfer.
This paper by Sue Isherwood is a reminder of the process for commenting on planning applications and a summary of the main issues that people in the village have raised about the Roughmoor Lane proposals. You may find it useful background when submitting your own response.
Please see comments from Chris and Ann Langdon. Remember all comments on this proposal on the website can be viewed by going to News and selecting the category Roughmoor Lane Living.
Also if you want to join the discussion on WhatsApp let me have your name and mobile phone number. mick@mickfletcher.org.uk
Dear sir,
Although I am a resident of Westbury Sub Mendip I would like you to record that I have yet to receive any correspondence from the consultants who are advising the church commissioners regarding this proposed development. Fortunately I have learned about the proposal from other sources.
My comments are as follows:
1. The developer must ensure that this development fulfils the requirements of the Net Zero Carbon Toolkit July 2021 – endorsed by Mendip District Council 10th January 2022.
2. Linked with this Zero Carbon Toolkit is the requirement of the developer to provide Sustainability Statements on submission of planning applications for 10 or more dwellings, development sites of 1 hectare or more. This means that a Sustainability Statement will be required for this proposed development.
This toolkit includes the following requirements:-
A. New gas or oil boilers should not be installed in new homes.
B. All new buildings should be built with a low carbon heating system and must not be connected to the gas network.
C. Heat pumps are considered the most efficient low carbon heat source.
D. For new homes solar photovoltaic panels should be placed on the roofs to enable energy generation is equal to the energy use of the building.
E. All new homes should have electric vehicle charging points
F. All new homes should have triple glazed windows.
3. All properties on the site should be for people wanting to live in the area. Buyers of second homes, for personal use or for renting out, should not be allowed to purchase. Priority should be given to local people.
4. Mendip has an increasingly old population with a high proportion of single individuals living alone. The authorities should encourage the development of smaller properties within this development specifically built for one person occupation. I certainly do not agree with 2.5/3 storey buildings being built.
5. I do not agree with the suggested change of road layout. Roughmoor Lane should be left as it is with the development site having its own separate entrance/exit onto Stoke Road.
6. Social housing, providing affordable housing for important members of our society such as teachers, nurses, carers should occupy at least 50%
7. Street lamps should not be installed. We are a dark sky village and Roughmoor Lane is an established location of a substantial nationally recognised glow worm population.
8. The 0.1 ha that has been allocated for a community facility could be better located. I think more thought should be put into determining where and that the developer should pay for any buildings that are built on it for the use of villagers.
9. I would like to see less new building in the village and propose that a maximum of 40 properties be built on this site.
