Wednesday 30th July 2014
Warminster Town Councillors support residents’ opposition to Gypsy Lane development, Warminster.
Councillors at Warminster Town Council’s Planning Advisory Committee Meeting on Monday 28th July 2014 were unanimous in supporting the 70 residents who had attended to voice their vehement opposition to Selwood Housing’s development plans for Fairview House in Gypsy Lane, Warminster. They did not understand why the house needed to be demolished, and felt the developers could have considered keeping the existing building for apartments. The major concerns raised were that the volume of development proposed was too great for the site, and would cause serious highway problems.
Because Fairview House had been used to provide accommodation for adults with learning disabilities, it was only staff and delivery people who had accessed the building by vehicles in the past. With a proposed development of 14 homes including 1 and 2-bedroom flats there would be parking for 28 vehicles, which would create an unacceptable increase in traffic in the lane, and cause a danger for children and the elderly. This was a lane, not a road, and there appeared to be no possibility of providing a pavement. The Order of St. John’s new building which has replaced the Beckford Centre is due to open in September 2014 and has already caused a great disruption to local residents. This building is higher than originally proposed, so the 21 two-storey apartments Selwood Housing have planned would add to the overdevelopment in this area.
Warminster Town Councillor Paul Macdonald said: “While the Town Council is not opposed to the development of this site per se, the level of development proposed is more suitable for a brownfield city site. Housing Associations used to provide plenty of green space, such as at Queensway and Princess Gardens, but now they seem to be developing greenfield sites such as that at Epping Close.”
Warminster Town Councillor Jamie Cullen agreed that the type of housing being put forward was not appropriate for the area, which consists mainly of bungalows. “Two-bedroom flats are pointless for families if they have no garden for the children to play in, and parents have to carry pushchairs upstairs”, he said. “A better use of this site would be to provide smaller-scale homes for those more vulnerable residents and elderly people wishing to downsize.”
Unitarian Councillor Andrew Davis said: “Don’t shoot the messenger from Selwood Housing – they are a fine organisation doing good work across the county. However, this application is wrong for this site.” He advised that he had already called the plans in to be heard at the Western Area Planning Committee of Wiltshire Council, and he personally would like to see something done to the existing building rather than demolishing it. Voting was unanimous in favour of recommending refusal of the application on the grounds of overdevelopment and highways dangers. Wiltshire Council will now decide.