Swindon AdvertiserPlans for homes flout council policy, claim (From Swindon Advertiser)

Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text SWINDON NEWS to 80360 or email us

Plans for homes flout council policy, claim

Swindon Advertiser: South Swindon MP Robert Buckland South Swindon MP Robert Buckland

SOUTH Swindon MP Robert Buckland is opposed to plans to build 62 new homes in Old Town as he believes it goes against Swindon Council’s housing policy.

Developer Taylor Wimpey has applied to the council for permission to construct the estate, which would be based in Croft Road, near Ambrose Road.

Mr Buckland believes the submission goes against housing boundary policy agreed after the Wichelstowe estate received planning permission.

He said: “The application is unwelcome and inappropriate.

“When Wichelstowe was proposed, it was agreed that there should be a green buffer between it and existing developments in Croft.

“This application rides roughshod over these considerations.

“It relates to land that falls outside the boundary of development in Swindon’s existing and local plans.”

Mr Buckland said he and coun Brian Mattock, who represents Old Town, had spoken to many residents who were opposed to the plans.

Coun Mattock said: “This is outside of the housing policy boundary and I will not be supporting the development.

“I’ve spoken to a number of concerned residents who would not welcome this development.”

The plans are currently out for public consultation and anyone wishing to comment has until June 20.

Anyone who wants to see the proposal can visit www.swindon.gov.uk and search for the application which is numbered S/OUT/14/0859.

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:31am Thu 12 Jun 14

A.Baron-Cohen says...

Very smart way to push up prices in Old Town, keeps the young and labour voters at bay........
Very smart way to push up prices in Old Town, keeps the young and labour voters at bay........ A.Baron-Cohen
  • Score: 2

8:32am Thu 12 Jun 14

Davethered says...

MP's and councillors opposing plans for new housing , there must be an election coming up rather soon , I think.
MP's and councillors opposing plans for new housing , there must be an election coming up rather soon , I think. Davethered
  • Score: 0

8:35am Thu 12 Jun 14

Al Smith says...

They could at least finish building Wichelstowe first couldn't they?
They could at least finish building Wichelstowe first couldn't they? Al Smith
  • Score: 0

9:37am Thu 12 Jun 14

Davey Gravey says...

Funny how building elsewhere and on green belt sites goes unchallenged.
Funny how building elsewhere and on green belt sites goes unchallenged. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -5

9:41am Thu 12 Jun 14

Wildwestener says...

Yet the 700 houses on Ridgeway Farm go-ahead with impunity following Conservative minister Eric Pickles' decision that his own party's localism policy is horse manure.
Yet the 700 houses on Ridgeway Farm go-ahead with impunity following Conservative minister Eric Pickles' decision that his own party's localism policy is horse manure. Wildwestener
  • Score: 1

9:56am Thu 12 Jun 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

That's what happens when you allow/encourage Swindon to be a whore to developers.
Sooner or later cr4p's on uour own doorstep 😜
That's what happens when you allow/encourage Swindon to be a whore to developers. Sooner or later cr4p's on uour own doorstep 😜 Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -7

10:49am Thu 12 Jun 14

Former Kingsdownman says...

Given that the land in question was outside the area that was protected as a park as part of the Wichelstowe development, it was always likely to be a target for developers.
Is it really all that bad to use some unused grass field for some houses in a popular part of town? The houses will be served by a fresh road onto Croft Road so will not go through existing roads off Croft Road. They will also have a nice view over the parkland once it is completed so will be rather nice.
A couple of other thoughts though, the hypocrisy of allowing massive developments in non Old Town areas but getting upset about some in Old Town rather grates. Also, the houses will provide plenty of extra pupils to fill Croft School that Old Town residents get so upset about it not being needed.
Let the brickbats start flying.
Given that the land in question was outside the area that was protected as a park as part of the Wichelstowe development, it was always likely to be a target for developers. Is it really all that bad to use some unused grass field for some houses in a popular part of town? The houses will be served by a fresh road onto Croft Road so will not go through existing roads off Croft Road. They will also have a nice view over the parkland once it is completed so will be rather nice. A couple of other thoughts though, the hypocrisy of allowing massive developments in non Old Town areas but getting upset about some in Old Town rather grates. Also, the houses will provide plenty of extra pupils to fill Croft School that Old Town residents get so upset about it not being needed. Let the brickbats start flying. Former Kingsdownman
  • Score: 1

10:58am Thu 12 Jun 14

ChannelX says...

It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development.

If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with.

Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself.

Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming.

But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky?

Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.
It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development. If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with. Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself. Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming. But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky? Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while. ChannelX
  • Score: 6

12:51pm Thu 12 Jun 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

ChannelX wrote:
It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development.

If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with.

Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself.

Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming.

But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky?

Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.
Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point.
I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless.
Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development. If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with. Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself. Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming. But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky? Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.[/p][/quote]Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point. I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless. Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽 Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: 1

3:19pm Thu 12 Jun 14

Al Smith says...

ChannelX wrote:
It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development.

If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with.

Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself.

Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming.

But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky?

Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.
Under the old system Swindon had the 10,000 home Northern Sector Development dumped upon it by the Conservative Environment Secretary despite it being largely unwanted.

The present Conservative government has made substantial changes to the planning system, they could easily have changed the appeal system designed by Labour. The fact they didn't leaves one conclusion - they support it. Therefore it is only reasonable to lay the blame squarely at the foot of the current government.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development. If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with. Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself. Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming. But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky? Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.[/p][/quote]Under the old system Swindon had the 10,000 home Northern Sector Development dumped upon it by the Conservative Environment Secretary despite it being largely unwanted. The present Conservative government has made substantial changes to the planning system, they could easily have changed the appeal system designed by Labour. The fact they didn't leaves one conclusion - they support it. Therefore it is only reasonable to lay the blame squarely at the foot of the current government. Al Smith
  • Score: -2

3:35pm Thu 12 Jun 14

ChannelX says...

Ollie Dognacky wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development.

If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with.

Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself.

Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming.

But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky?

Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.
Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point.
I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless.
Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽
I realise you avoided my question, but did you also not read what Mr Lyus posted on another thread earlier today?

Your baiting antics and continual attempts to goad through inane posts is soon to come to an end. Maybe your Ollie Dognacky login will be banned, just like several of your other nasty little alter-egos have been.

I've asked you, politely, several times to cease your pathological abuse and hounding, but you just can't help yourself, can you? You did it to RobFM and you've tried (but failed) to do it to me.

Time you gave it a rest.
[quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development. If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with. Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself. Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming. But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky? Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.[/p][/quote]Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point. I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless. Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽[/p][/quote]I realise you avoided my question, but did you also not read what Mr Lyus posted on another thread earlier today? Your baiting antics and continual attempts to goad through inane posts is soon to come to an end. Maybe your Ollie Dognacky login will be banned, just like several of your other nasty little alter-egos have been. I've asked you, politely, several times to cease your pathological abuse and hounding, but you just can't help yourself, can you? You did it to RobFM and you've tried (but failed) to do it to me. Time you gave it a rest. ChannelX
  • Score: 2

5:01pm Thu 12 Jun 14

OldTown90 says...

Former Kingsdownman wrote:
Given that the land in question was outside the area that was protected as a park as part of the Wichelstowe development, it was always likely to be a target for developers.
Is it really all that bad to use some unused grass field for some houses in a popular part of town? The houses will be served by a fresh road onto Croft Road so will not go through existing roads off Croft Road. They will also have a nice view over the parkland once it is completed so will be rather nice.
A couple of other thoughts though, the hypocrisy of allowing massive developments in non Old Town areas but getting upset about some in Old Town rather grates. Also, the houses will provide plenty of extra pupils to fill Croft School that Old Town residents get so upset about it not being needed.
Let the brickbats start flying.
The nearest school to these houses will be East Wichel - which like the Croft is barely half full
[quote][p][bold]Former Kingsdownman[/bold] wrote: Given that the land in question was outside the area that was protected as a park as part of the Wichelstowe development, it was always likely to be a target for developers. Is it really all that bad to use some unused grass field for some houses in a popular part of town? The houses will be served by a fresh road onto Croft Road so will not go through existing roads off Croft Road. They will also have a nice view over the parkland once it is completed so will be rather nice. A couple of other thoughts though, the hypocrisy of allowing massive developments in non Old Town areas but getting upset about some in Old Town rather grates. Also, the houses will provide plenty of extra pupils to fill Croft School that Old Town residents get so upset about it not being needed. Let the brickbats start flying.[/p][/quote]The nearest school to these houses will be East Wichel - which like the Croft is barely half full OldTown90
  • Score: -1

5:39pm Thu 12 Jun 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

ChannelX wrote:
Ollie Dognacky wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development.

If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with.

Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself.

Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming.

But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky?

Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.
Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point.
I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless.
Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽
I realise you avoided my question, but did you also not read what Mr Lyus posted on another thread earlier today?

Your baiting antics and continual attempts to goad through inane posts is soon to come to an end. Maybe your Ollie Dognacky login will be banned, just like several of your other nasty little alter-egos have been.

I've asked you, politely, several times to cease your pathological abuse and hounding, but you just can't help yourself, can you? You did it to RobFM and you've tried (but failed) to do it to me.

Time you gave it a rest.
So you're still trying to goad me off these threads then.
You really should get a different hobby.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development. If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with. Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself. Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming. But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky? Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.[/p][/quote]Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point. I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless. Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽[/p][/quote]I realise you avoided my question, but did you also not read what Mr Lyus posted on another thread earlier today? Your baiting antics and continual attempts to goad through inane posts is soon to come to an end. Maybe your Ollie Dognacky login will be banned, just like several of your other nasty little alter-egos have been. I've asked you, politely, several times to cease your pathological abuse and hounding, but you just can't help yourself, can you? You did it to RobFM and you've tried (but failed) to do it to me. Time you gave it a rest.[/p][/quote]So you're still trying to goad me off these threads then. You really should get a different hobby. Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -1

8:27pm Thu 12 Jun 14

ChannelX says...

Ollie Dognacky wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
Ollie Dognacky wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development.

If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with.

Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself.

Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming.

But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky?

Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.
Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point.
I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless.
Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽
I realise you avoided my question, but did you also not read what Mr Lyus posted on another thread earlier today?

Your baiting antics and continual attempts to goad through inane posts is soon to come to an end. Maybe your Ollie Dognacky login will be banned, just like several of your other nasty little alter-egos have been.

I've asked you, politely, several times to cease your pathological abuse and hounding, but you just can't help yourself, can you? You did it to RobFM and you've tried (but failed) to do it to me.

Time you gave it a rest.
So you're still trying to goad me off these threads then.
You really should get a different hobby.
As I said above, give it a rest.
[quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: It's actually rather pointless the council having a 'policy' on housing development. If developers purchase land and submit building plans that conform to the current legislation, there's absolutely nothing the council can do to prevent them from going ahead with their developments... regardless of any 'policy' they've come up with. Some people don't appear to like the way developers are able to behave in this matter, unhindered by anyone or anything other than the law itself. Strangely, those individuals then erroneously blame the council for what they term 'sprawl'. When, in fact, it's Labour and John Prescott they should actually be blaming. But you don't do you I Too / Ollie Dognacky? Has your I Too login been banned? Haven't see you use if for a while.[/p][/quote]Haven't seen "Tim Newroman" log in for a while either so what's your point. I do agree with you though. SBC are pretty useless. Maybe if certain councillors stopped pretending they are in Westminster they could concentrate better on things that matter for Swindon 👽[/p][/quote]I realise you avoided my question, but did you also not read what Mr Lyus posted on another thread earlier today? Your baiting antics and continual attempts to goad through inane posts is soon to come to an end. Maybe your Ollie Dognacky login will be banned, just like several of your other nasty little alter-egos have been. I've asked you, politely, several times to cease your pathological abuse and hounding, but you just can't help yourself, can you? You did it to RobFM and you've tried (but failed) to do it to me. Time you gave it a rest.[/p][/quote]So you're still trying to goad me off these threads then. You really should get a different hobby.[/p][/quote]As I said above, give it a rest. ChannelX
  • Score: 3

11:52pm Thu 12 Jun 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

Give what a rest??

You have a thread dedicated to yo on Talk Swindon Org. Entitled " Adver Comments Who Is Bobby Wright "

It catalogues your numerous logins and antics.

Even without that, I'm sure everyone sees through you like a window.

I will not be intimidated by you so kindly grow up
Give what a rest?? You have a thread dedicated to yo on Talk Swindon Org. Entitled " Adver Comments Who Is Bobby Wright " It catalogues your numerous logins and antics. Even without that, I'm sure everyone sees through you like a window. I will not be intimidated by you so kindly grow up Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -1

12:40pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Davey Gravey says...

@ Ollie.
I suggest you follow Craig Lyus's advice. Ignore the goading and report the offending post.
@ Ollie. I suggest you follow Craig Lyus's advice. Ignore the goading and report the offending post. Davey Gravey
  • Score: 0

12:43pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

Advice taken

Thanks Davey

Ps what topic was he referring too?
Advice taken Thanks Davey Ps what topic was he referring too? Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -1

1:05pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Davey Gravey says...

http://www.swindonad
vertiser.co.uk/news/
11268682.Cats_die_in
_terrible_pain_after
_poisoning/
http://www.swindonad vertiser.co.uk/news/ 11268682.Cats_die_in _terrible_pain_after _poisoning/ Davey Gravey
  • Score: 0

3:59pm Fri 13 Jun 14

ChannelX says...

Ollie Dognacky wrote:
Give what a rest??

You have a thread dedicated to yo on Talk Swindon Org. Entitled " Adver Comments Who Is Bobby Wright "

It catalogues your numerous logins and antics.

Even without that, I'm sure everyone sees through you like a window.

I will not be intimidated by you so kindly grow up
I've asked you nicely, several times, give it a rest. For the sake of other readers and also your own mental health.

Just stop being so obsessed.
[quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: Give what a rest?? You have a thread dedicated to yo on Talk Swindon Org. Entitled " Adver Comments Who Is Bobby Wright " It catalogues your numerous logins and antics. Even without that, I'm sure everyone sees through you like a window. I will not be intimidated by you so kindly grow up[/p][/quote]I've asked you nicely, several times, give it a rest. For the sake of other readers and also your own mental health. Just stop being so obsessed. ChannelX
  • Score: 0

7:22pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

Thanks Davey Gravey 👍

Good news, long overdue.
Thanks Davey Gravey 👍 Good news, long overdue. Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -1

10:43am Sat 14 Jun 14

ChannelX says...

Ollie Dognacky wrote:
Thanks Davey Gravey 👍

Good news, long overdue.
Yes, hopefully the Adver will restrict you to just one account - rather than the four or five you've openly admitted to using.
[quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: Thanks Davey Gravey 👍 Good news, long overdue.[/p][/quote]Yes, hopefully the Adver will restrict you to just one account - rather than the four or five you've openly admitted to using. ChannelX
  • Score: 0

11:58pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

ChannelX wrote:
Ollie Dognacky wrote:
Thanks Davey Gravey 👍

Good news, long overdue.
Yes, hopefully the Adver will restrict you to just one account - rather than the four or five you've openly admitted to using.
I've admitted no such thing
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: Thanks Davey Gravey 👍 Good news, long overdue.[/p][/quote]Yes, hopefully the Adver will restrict you to just one account - rather than the four or five you've openly admitted to using.[/p][/quote]I've admitted no such thing Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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