Residents in Wroughton win battle against housing development

Coun Vera Tomlinson supported residents concerns at the meeting last night

Coun Vera Tomlinson supported residents concerns at the meeting last night

First published in News
Last updated

WROUGHTON residents have won the first battle against a major new housing development on the outskirts of their village.

At the planning committee last night, members voted to reject the plans for 103 homes to be built by developers Hannick Homes to the east of Marlborough Road by 13 to 2.

More than 300 objections to the plans had been lodged during the consultation period, revolving around traffic congestion, the protection of greenfield land, and the fact the plans fell outside the settlement boundaries in the emerging local plan.

Councillors speaking at the meeting claimed the traffic issues encountered by the plan were inherent.

Coun Wayne Crabbe (Con, Wroughton and Wichelstowe), said: “The road issues contained within this site are unsolvable.

“We have got a housing allocation of 150 houses to built by 2026, and without any difficulty I have sat down and identified at least six sites, most brownfield, which could contribute to that quota. This site would fill several years of housing supply in one fell swoop.”

Coun Brian Ford (Con, Wroughton and Wichelstowe), said: “Five or six years ago there was a movement by the residents to try to make this road a one way traffic light system because the road down that hill is just too narrow. This is an accident waiting to happen.

“We have had an increase in housing over the last 25 years of about 25 to 30 per cent. Where are the extra facilities for these new houses going to come from? This will put a huge strain on the existing services and facilities we already have.”

Steve Harcourt, a member working on the neighbourhood local plan for Wroughton, said: “The Wroughton community understands the need for some housing growth. We also want to have our say in what size and form that should take, and to that end we are undertaking a neighbourhood plan. “Developments to the east of the village are particularly disliked. This application is premature before the neighbourhood plan is complete.”

Resident John McEwan was given the opportunity to address the committee.
“Over 300 objections helps to demonstrate that many people in Wroughton are concerned,” he said. “We are not against development per se. But these proposals are inappropriate, ill-considered and unsustainable.

“We are alarmed that the proposed access is at the road’s narrowest point. It is one of two main roads in and out of the village and frequently used by the emergency services. The road is simply too narrow to accommodate two large vehicles.”

Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents.
“I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.”
Resident David Martyn, speaking after the meeting, said: “There have been a number of robust reasons put together by residents in support of refusal. We are very pleased with the outcome. Now we have to wait and see if the developer will appeal, but nevertheless this is a significant land mark in our progress."

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:08am Wed 11 Jun 14

BCDR99 says...

Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents.
“I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.”

Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused?
Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents. “I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.” Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused? BCDR99
  • Score: 13

9:16am Wed 11 Jun 14

Scouse Red says...

BCDR99 wrote:
Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents.
“I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.”

Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused?
whats it got to do with her anyway?
[quote][p][bold]BCDR99[/bold] wrote: Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents. “I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.” Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused?[/p][/quote]whats it got to do with her anyway? Scouse Red
  • Score: 5

10:18am Wed 11 Jun 14

StillPav says...

"major new housing development"

"103 homes"

Get a grip. 103 homes is a medium sized residential close, not a major development.

"...road down that hill is just too narrow. This is an accident waiting to happen."

The reason it is narrow is because residents park their cars in the road, blocking one of the carrigeways. Stop them doing this and the road would be perfectly suitable for this development.
"major new housing development" "103 homes" Get a grip. 103 homes is a medium sized residential close, not a major development. "...road down that hill is just too narrow. This is an accident waiting to happen." The reason it is narrow is because residents park their cars in the road, blocking one of the carrigeways. Stop them doing this and the road would be perfectly suitable for this development. StillPav
  • Score: 1

10:26am Wed 11 Jun 14

adsinibiza says...

StillPav wrote:
"major new housing development"

"103 homes"

Get a grip. 103 homes is a medium sized residential close, not a major development.

"...road down that hill is just too narrow. This is an accident waiting to happen."

The reason it is narrow is because residents park their cars in the road, blocking one of the carrigeways. Stop them doing this and the road would be perfectly suitable for this development.
Pav you are wrong when you say stop the residents parking on the road and it would be suitable - the road at that point is extremely narrow and needs passing with care at all times - irrelevant of the parking situation. An additional 150-200 cars trying to go through this area on a regular basis from the new development would make an already bad situation considerably worse.

Furthermore you are also wrong when you say 103 homes is not a major development - it might not be for Swindon but it is for somewhere the size of Wroughton.

Yes more (affordable) housing desperately needs to be built but this is not the right place to do so for all sorts of reasons
[quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: "major new housing development" "103 homes" Get a grip. 103 homes is a medium sized residential close, not a major development. "...road down that hill is just too narrow. This is an accident waiting to happen." The reason it is narrow is because residents park their cars in the road, blocking one of the carrigeways. Stop them doing this and the road would be perfectly suitable for this development.[/p][/quote]Pav you are wrong when you say stop the residents parking on the road and it would be suitable - the road at that point is extremely narrow and needs passing with care at all times - irrelevant of the parking situation. An additional 150-200 cars trying to go through this area on a regular basis from the new development would make an already bad situation considerably worse. Furthermore you are also wrong when you say 103 homes is not a major development - it might not be for Swindon but it is for somewhere the size of Wroughton. Yes more (affordable) housing desperately needs to be built but this is not the right place to do so for all sorts of reasons adsinibiza
  • Score: 3

11:06am Wed 11 Jun 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

BCDR99 wrote:
Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents.
“I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.”

Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused?
Yep, one and the same, although she wasn't the only one. I for one will be remembering that come the next election. She won't be getting my vote again, that's for sure.

There is absolutely no legal reason to reject this development so it will just go through on appeal.
[quote][p][bold]BCDR99[/bold] wrote: Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents. “I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.” Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused?[/p][/quote]Yep, one and the same, although she wasn't the only one. I for one will be remembering that come the next election. She won't be getting my vote again, that's for sure. There is absolutely no legal reason to reject this development so it will just go through on appeal. The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: 6

12:18pm Wed 11 Jun 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

BCDR99 wrote:
Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents.
“I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.”

Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused?
Pretty hypocritical of her isn't it.....!

Shame she couldn't back the same arguments for much of development around Swindon which has massively outgrown the infrastructure to support it.
[quote][p][bold]BCDR99[/bold] wrote: Coun Vera Tomlinson (Con, St Andrews), threw her weight behind the residents. “I always believe people who live in amn area know that area best and what is best for it,” she said. “This application should not only be rejected, it should be thrown out completely.” Is that the same Vera Tomlinson who said no to the Tadpole Farm development and actually got elected on the back of opposition to it, but then voted for it along party lines? Or am I confused?[/p][/quote]Pretty hypocritical of her isn't it.....! Shame she couldn't back the same arguments for much of development around Swindon which has massively outgrown the infrastructure to support it. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree