DOCSLIB.ORG

This Email Is Sent on Behalf of the Tytherton Lucas Residents Association

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
This Email Is Sent on Behalf of the Tytherton Lucas Residents Association Sent: 04 March 2016 11:41 To: Staincliffe, Mark; Pearson, Mathew Subject: Rawlings Farm and East of Chippenham This email is sent on behalf of the Tytherton Lucas Residents Association. It is sent to OPPOSE the following applications: Planning Application 15/12363/OUT Chippenham Riverside. Objection. Mathew Pearson Planning Application15/12351/OUT. Rawlings Green. Objection. Mark Staincliffe 1. Premature This opportunistic application has been presented to bypass the inspectors hearing later this year. The developers hope that by applying for planning permission now they will be able to avoid having to justify their evidence to the inspector. This application should be rejected and the decision should be left to the inspector when he has received a new list of appropriate sites from the council together with the new evidence that he has requested. In the light of the views expressed by the inspector it would appear that the sites at Rawlings Green and East of Chippenham should be treated as unsound and should not be considered prior to his decision later this year. Given the fact that there is no adopted or emerging sound policy that can justify these two proposals, limited weight should be given to the CSAP until the inspector makes his decision. Each site must be treated seperately with no assumption that the other site will be built. 2. The case for the ELR has not been adequately justified The evidence provided to the inspector relied on out of date evidence and heavily biased scenarios. It also failed to consider a SLR which would link with the A350 which is the key road identified by the council as the economic artery of Wiltshire. The council was asked to obtain new evidence. The inspector also stated that he wished to retain, at the council's cost, his own traffic expert. The Inspector was concerned that it would affectively act as a bypass and encourage out- commuting which is contrary to the adopted core strategy. The council has not included in its policy a need for either an ELR or a SLR. The case for the ELR, according to the developers, is that it will reduce traffic in the town centre. In which case it raises the legal question, which the inspector raised, of how can CIL payments be used to fund improvements not in the site the subject of the application. 3. Is the ELR deliverable? This depends on Rawlings farm developers building the ELR to the boundary of the East of Chippenham site, Which requires a bridge over the railway. Then it requires C2020 to continue the road down to Abbeyfields School having built a bridge over the Avon for the road and a bridge for the cycle track. As the inspector said it only needed one link in the chain to break and the whole road was not capable of delivery. There is no guarantee that the developers will continue building after the minimum amount required as the next additional house would cost millions and millions of pounds. This also appears that the link road has a different purpose between the different sites. In the case of Rawlings farm it goes through the houses whereas in the case of east of Chippenham it is the outer boundary. Will the residents of Rawlings green want a bypass running through their houses? The proposal is not a sustainable development since it fails to address the phasing and delivery of the other developers (it needs East of Chippenham, Rawlings Green and North Chippenham Consortium), especially the link road therein, which is necessary for the development to avoid an unacceptable impact on surrounding road junctions and traffic movements across Chippenham as a whole. Such impact would be contrary to CP3, CP10, CP61 and CP62 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015. Finally it is not clear from the plans that the end of the road in the Rawlings Green development joins the road at the beginning of the East of Chippenham development. As the plans are final in respect of transport if they do not join then both schemes fail. 4. Number of houses The inspector was concerned at the number of houses proposed. These 2 sites alone provide 2200 homes. To this must be added any brownfield sites and probably the Crest/ Redcliffe site of 1000 homes as this was the council's first choice. This would result in nearly 4000 houses being built while Chippenham needs to provide 1935. A massive over supply. C2020 wish in due course to build upto 2600 homes on their site. As c2020 wish to apply for almost twice as many houses as listed in the CSAP, this casts doubt on the soundness of the CSAP as a whole. 5. Landscape We have obtained an independent landscape report from WHLandscape Consultancy Ltd which has already been forwarded to you. This report should be given at least equal weight to the report obtained by the developers. Our instructions to the author were not to give us the report we wanted, but to look at it independently and provide his own views. He has made it clear that no development should extend north of the cycle route. We strongly dispute the evidence provided by C2020 that there will be no noise or light pollution. Also that our views are in effect not disturbed. A letter signed by over the residents has been sent to the council objecting to those statements and making it clear that they object to this proposal. The proposal would have an unacceptable impact upon the tranquil nature of this part of the countryside, from the setting of listed buildings at Tytherton Lucas as well as its relationship to the nearby village of Tytherton Lucas. This proposal is therefore contrary to the provisions of CP 10, CP 51, CP 52 and CP 58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015, the NPPF as well as section 16(2) and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990. 6. Air pollution No tests were carried out in Calne where the NOX levels exceed EU levels. The ELR would exacerbate the levels. We understand the council will be looking at this. 7. Connection to J17 of M4 We understand the council gave its reasons as to why it would have rejected the additional houses at Barrow Farm if an application had been made on the basis of Highways England view that no new houses should be built until the junction had been sorted. If a development for 500 homes was rejected on that basis certainly applications for 2200 homes should be rejected. The application fails to set out a scheme that would ensure the delivery, at the appropriate time, of the necessary improvements to J 17 of the M4 so as to render the strategic road network safe. As such, the application would not meet the requirements of CP10, CP62 and CP66 of the the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015. 8. Self containment of Chippenham Out commuters will be attracted to live near to the ELR with access to the M4 and railway station. This is contrary to the core strategy. The proposal fails to provide a suitable bus strategy so as to demonstrate sustainable connections to Chippenham town, thereby failing to meet fully requirements of policy CP61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015. 9. Flooding The assumptions about mitigation of run-off are unrealistic. This is particularly important in the light of revisions to flood risk assessment assumptions currently being undertaken by the environment agency. As development is up stream of Chippenham any error could result in Chippenham being flooded. 29/12/15. David Rooke, deputy chief exec of EA told BBC: "we are moving from known extremes to unknown extremes. We will need to have a complete rethink." We need to let the EA re-assess its models as otherwise we could find the SuDs were insufficient. Current EA advise may be updated later this year and thus prove not to be robust. Raising the banks of the Avon as suggested by C2020 could cause huge damage upstream and flood farm land in Tytherton Lucas. This must not be allowed to occur. 10. Bremhill and Calne The site east of Chippenham is mainly in the parish of Bremhill. Bremhill in the neighbourhood plan have made it clear that they do not wish to have any substantial development. Their views should be followed. In addition as the development is in Calne CP8 applies, and the number of houses required under CP8 have been exceeded. At present, there is no Chippenham Site Allocations Plan (CSAP) adopted within the Wiltshire Core Strategy. Therefore this application site lies outside of the limits of development for Chippenham, as defined by Policy CP1 and CP10 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy. While the CSAP DPD can provide input into the application, surely the application has to be judged against only adopted policies and spatial strategies. Therefore this application should be considered within the only existing policy and Spatial Strategy for this development land, Core Policy 8 Spatial Strategy: Calne Community Area. 1) Plan CP8 calls for 165 homes in the area outside Calne itself. This application is for some 1500 homes, far in excess of the number required in the plan period. 2) This application is not “protecting and enhancing the important ecological value and landscape character of the River Marden corridor” as stipulated in bullet 3 of paragraph 5.41 of the Issues and Considerations of CP8. 3) The application does not identify “an appropriate solution to reducing impact on traffic from the waste facilities located on the edge of Calne” as stipulated in bullet 4 of paragraph 5.41 of the Issues and Considerations of CP8.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Introduction
    03 Atkins Transport modeling note Technical Note Project: Chippenham Urban Expansion HIF Subject: M4 Junction 17 Author: Reg 13(1) Reviewed by: Reg 13(1) Date: 12/02/2019 Approved by: Reg 13(1) Version: 1.0 Introduction 1.1. Introduction Wiltshire Council are preparing a funding bid to be submitted to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) through the Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF). The bid seeks to fund a distributor road to the east of Chippenham, from Lackham roundabout of the A350 south west of the town to the A4 London Road, and from the A4 London Road to Parsonage Way in the north. The objective of the distributor road is to aid the delivery of the homes and employment proposals of the Chippenham Urban Expansion. Without the distributor road, the level of development would cause unacceptable levels of delay through Chippenham town centre. However, the proposed growth will also lead to increases in congestion and delay at other points on the highway network, and to resolve these issues Wiltshire Council has proposed a number of mitigation schemes. The mitigation schemes are proposed to be funded by existing CIL and strategic funds where necessary in the short term (by 2024, the opening year of the distributor road) or through expected CIL returns from the proposed development where schemes are required in the longer term. A mitigation scheme was considered necessary at M4 J17, to the north of Chippenham as initial testing of traffic growth suggested that by 2041 the junction would operate significantly over capacity. A meeting between Wiltshire Council’s Chippenham Urban Expansion development team, Homes England and Highways England was held on the 30th January 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Bremhill Parish Neighbourhood Plan Strategic Environmental Assessment
    Bremhill Parish Neighbourhood Plan Strategic Environmental Assessment FINAL DRAFT - June 2016 PLANNING THE FUTURE OF THE PARISH 2016 - 2030 Wiltshire Council Strategic Environmental Assessment - Screening determination for the Bremhill Neighbourhood Plan December 2015 Contents 1. Introduction 2. Legislative requirements 3. The Bremhill Neighbourhood Plan 4. SEA Screening assessment 5. SEA Screening decision 2 1. Introduction 1.1. This document provides a screening determination of the need to carry out a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Bremhill Neighbourhood Plan. 1.2. Wiltshire Council, as the ‘Responsible Authority’1 under the SEA Regulations2, is responsible for undertaking this screening process of the Bremhill Neighbourhood Plan. It will determine if the plan is likely to have significant environmental effects, and hence whether SEA is required. 1.3. This process has been carried out in accordance with the requirements of European Directive 2001/42/EC3, often known as the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive, which has been transposed into English law by the SEA Regulations. 2. Legislative requirements 2.1. The Localism Act 2011 requires neighbourhood plans to comply with EU legislation. The screening procedure outlined in this report meets the requirements of the SEA Directive and Regulations, as introduced in Section 1 of this document. 2.2. Regulation 5 of the SEA Regulations requires an environmental assessment of plans which: 1. Are prepared for agriculture, forestry, fisheries, energy, industry, transport, waste management, water management, telecommunications, tourism, town and country planning or land use (Regulation 5, para. (2)(a), and which set the framework for future development consent of projects listed in Annex I or II to Council Directive 85/337/EEC (EIA Directive) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (Regulation 5, para.
    [Show full text]
  • Bremhill Draft (April 2021).Pdf
    [Draft text by Dr Louise Ryland-Epton, completed April 2021 apart from the first section and minor checking to be undertaken when restrictions are lifted] BREMHILL LANDSCAPE, SETTLEMENT AND BUILDINGS [not yet completed] LANDOWNERSHIP Before the Reformation the manors of Bremhill, Foxham and Spirthill were in possession of the monks of Malmesbury abbey. The adjacent manor of Stanley belonged to the Cistercian order of Stanley abbey. At the dissolution of the monasteries, these estates were acquired by Sir Edward Bayntun. From the 16th to the 20th century, they were primarily held by non- resident lords. In the 20th century, these estates were sold off as separate farms and small holdings. Bremhill Manor King Athelstan gifted an estate at Bremhill to Malmesbury abbey c.935.1 However, the authenticity of the charter has been questioned.2 A confirmation of the abbey’s land and privileges by Edward in 1065 is also disputed.3 In 1086 the manor of Bremhill was held by the monks of Malmesbury abbey. It paid geld for 38 hides.4 The estate was surrendered to the crown in 1539 and acquired by Sir Edward Bayntun of Bromham (will pr. 1545), vice- chamberlain to five wives of Henry VIII, the following year.5 Sir Edward Bayntun was succeeded by his son, Andrew (d.1564).6 Andrew briefly lost control of his estates, after which financial difficulties led him to entail them to his brother, Edward (d.1593). However, the financial mismanagement continued, and on Andrew’s death in 1564, his brother was involved in a court action to secure the inheritance.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Heritage
    Land East of Chippenham / Chippenham Riverside Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage 10 CULTURAL HERITAGE 10.1 Introduction 10.1.1 This chapter considers the local historic environment surrounding and including the Chippenham Riverside site [Figure 10.1]. It does not assess the below ground archaeological resource of the site - this has already been considered in Chapter 9. This chapter represents the culmination of a protracted and detailed set of specialist studies and surveys. 10.1.2 The primary objectives of the assessment are as follows: . To identify statutory and non-statutory historic environment and cultural heritage constraints (including planning constraints) within and in the wider environs of the site; . To gather information on the previously recorded heritage assets; and, . To bring together additional information from evaluation of the site and its environs. 10.1.3 These objectives provide an assessment of baseline conditions for the site. This data is then used to: . Assess the heritage value or significance of designated and non-designated heritage assets (to use NPPF terminology) in the locality; . Identify impacts resulting from the application proposals and to quantify their magnitude and significance; . Identify appropriate mitigation measures for any significant adverse effects on these heritage assets; and . Predict residual impacts of the proposed development on heritage assets in the locality of the site, taking into account proposed mitigation, and to assess the significance of the effects. MO.4579 Page 10 - 1 - December 2015 Land East of Chippenham / Chippenham Riverside Environmental Statement Cultural Heritage 10.2 Scope and Methodology 10.2.1 Built heritage within the local historic environment that may be influenced by the development proposals for the site includes: .
    [Show full text]
  • Tytherton Village Hall, Starting at 7Pm
    B r e m h i l l , Fo x h a m , t h e Ty t h e r t o n s a n d Su r r o u n d i n g Vi l l a g e s February 2017 The Newsletter 1 Dates for your Diary ● 24th Feb Auction Of Promises - Bremhill ● 25th Feb Race Night - Tytherton ● 25th Feb Soup and Puds - Bremhill ● 3rd March Thisbe - Rural Arts - Bremhill Village Hall ● 25th March Mothers' Day Tea, Bremhill ● 5th April Community Lunch - Tytherton ● 9th April Tytherton Fun Ride ● 28th April Quiz Night - Bremhill ● 3rd May Community Lunch - Tytherton ● 7th June Community Lunch - Tytherton THE FRIENDS OF SAINT MARTIN ANNUAL AUCTION OF PROMISES 24th Feb 2017 AT 7.30 pm - Bremhill Village Hall For many years we have been fortunate enough to be offered the use of rooms in the lovely homes of many good people in which to hold the auction and the buffet meal that goes with it. We are very grateful for this privilege and (beware!) will no doubt be hoping for such kindness again. However, for this year we thought we would make use of the facility that stands in the middle of the village - THE VILLAGE HALL. We do hope that people will feel that this is a good venue and support us as they have done in the past, bearing in mind that all profits go to local village charities. More details from myself or any member of the Friends Committee Rev Jim Scott CHAIRMAN Front Cover - see page 19 2 Editorial February was called the ‘mud month’ in Old English and in some Eastern European countries the month of ice or hard frost, while our modern name comes from the Latin ‘februum’ which means ‘purification’, possibly because the often cold weather kills off evil spirits! It is often considered the last month of winter, but at least it is the shortest month and at last we have the gradual lengthening of days to look forward to, as well as, of course, St.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF (Volume 2)
    Durham E-Theses Landscape, settlement and society: Wiltshire in the rst millennium AD Draper, Simon Andrew How to cite: Draper, Simon Andrew (2004) Landscape, settlement and society: Wiltshire in the rst millennium AD, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3064/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk Landscape, Settlement and Society: Wiltshire in the First Millennium AD VOLUME 2 (OF 2) By Simon Andrew Draper A copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Submitted in 2004 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Durham, following research conducted in the DepartA Archaeology ~ 2 1 JUN 2005 Table of Contents VOLUME2 Appendix 1 page 222 Appendix 2 242 Tables and Figures 310 222 AlPPlENIDRX 11 A GAZEITEER OF ROMANo-BRliTISH §EITLlEMENT SiTES TN WTLTSHm.lE This gazetteer is based primarily on information contained in the paper version of the Wiltshire Sites and Monuments Record, which can be found in Wiltshire County Council's Archaeology Office in Trowbridge.
    [Show full text]
  • The Quakers in East Tytherton
    The Quakers in East Tytherton by Nigel Pocock with Andrew Laurence & Terry Benton QuakersOPC 1. Who were the 'Quakers'? The Quakers, properly known as the 'Society of Friends', were founded in the 1640s by George Fox (1624- 1690-1). Fox was from the skilled artisan class, the son of a weaver. He grew up in Leicestershire during the turbulent years of Charles I and the English Republic. Having received a call from God to preach, he travelled all over the country, including Scotland, suffering many persecutions and imprisonments. It may well be that his ministry was a reaction to the poor spiritual state of the established church, for he pointed out many injustices that the church and its 'steeple-houses' were perpetuating through simply going along with them, such as the abuses of power invested in established hierarchies. In his Journals, Fox writes [1649] … when the Lord sent me forth into the world, He forbade me to put off my hat to any, high or low; and I was required to Thee and Thou all men and women, without any respect to rich and poor, great or small … neither might I bow or scrape with my leg to any one …1 This might seem a little strange to us today, but in George Fox's time a whole elaborate ritual had developed as regards how to bow in different sets of circumstances. The curtsey or 'sink', equally for women. The 'scrape' referred to the movement of a foot during the whole ritual, which, as Liza Picard observed, might well require the attentions of a dancing master.
    [Show full text]
  • On Line Comments Application No
    On Line Comments Application 15/12351/OUT No: Comments: I object to Application Number 15/12363/OUT for the following reasons: This application should be rejected as it is not deliverable. A major reason for the suspension of the Chippenham Site Allocations Plan on 11th November 2015 was the deliverability of identified development sites. This site is totally dependent on the delivery of a link road. Therefore the proposal is not sustainable development since it fails to address the phasing and delivery of the North Chippenham Consortium site, especially the link road therein. The ELR is necessary for the development to avoid an unacceptable impact upon surrounding road junctions and traffic movements across Chippenham as a whole. Such impacts would be contrary to policies CP3, CP10, CP61 and CP62 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy (2015). This application should be rejected as it has an unacceptable impact on the tranquil nature and landscape of this area. The proposal would have an unacceptable impact upon the tranquil nature of this part of the countryside, the setting of listed buildings at Langley Burrell and Tytherton Lucas as well as its relationship to the nearby villages of Langley Burrell and Tytherton Lucas. The proposal is therefore contrary to the provisions of policies CP10, CP51, CP52 and CP58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015, the NPPF as well as section 16(2) and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Area) Act 1990. The application should be rejected as it brings about coalescence between Chippenham and the surrounding villages, contrary to NPPF Policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Bremhill Parish Neighbourhood Plan Part 1: Policies, Evidence & Context
    Bremhill Parish Neighbourhood Plan Part 1: policies, evidence & context FINAL DRAFT - June 2016 PLANNING THE FUTURE OF THE PARISH 2016 - 2030 Reproduced from an Ordnance Survey map. © Crown Copyright 2014 DESIGNATED NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN AREA Approved by Wiltshire Council (April 2014) (Existing Parish Boundary) 1 FOREWORD The Bremhill Parish Neighbourhood Plan process was started in January 2013 by a team from the parish council and representatives from the local community. This document is the culmination of many meetings, parish questionnaires and public and statutory consultation on a draft Neighbourhood Plan since that time. Bremhill Parish is part of Calne Community Area and our Neighbourhood Plan reflects the development requirements for the Calne Rural parishes. To the east of the parish we are also adjacent to the town of Chippenham and our plan reflects our position as the rural buffer between these towns, providing countryside and recreational activities for Chippenham and Calne residents. This Neighbourhood Plan is based on the feedback from questionnaires sent to 394 homes in the parish. A strong response of some 180 returns (47%) informed the plan. Further feedback has been taken from the three consultation workshops, attended by 150 parishioners. Finally we received many responses to our Public Consultation, much of which has been incorporated into the final document. The Neighbourhood Plan takes note of two planning policy structures. Firstly the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which defines planning policy at national level, and secondly the Wiltshire Core Strategy, that sets out a planning framework at county level. Our Neighbourhood Plan draws on both NPPF and Core Strategy Policies, and these are referred to throughout the document in Green Text.
    [Show full text]
  • Field House Tytherton Lucas, Chippenham, Sn15 3Rj
    FIELD HOUSE TYTHERTON LUCAS, CHIPPENHAM, SN15 3RJ FIELD HOUSE TYTHERTON LUCAS, CHIPPENHAM, SN15 3RJ A BEAUTIFULLY PRESENTED 6 BEDROOM DETACHED GEORGIAN PROPERTY WITH A 2 STOREY OUTBUILDING IN A RURAL LOCATION. Library • Snug • Drawing Room • Cloakroom • Boot Room • Larder Kitchen/Dining Room • Master Bedroom with en suite Bathroom 5 additional Bedrooms • Family Bathroom • Family Shower Room Outbuilding – Garage • Carport • Wine Store • Offi ce • Cloakroom Bedroom/Music Room EPC Listing = F Description Field House is an attractive unlisted 6 bedroom detached Georgian property with 2,692 sq ft fl exible accommodation arranged over 3 storeys with an additional 2 storey outbuilding of approximately 1,164 sq ft. It is situated in a plot of just over 0.5 acres in a rural location surrounded by fi elds, yet is within 4 miles of Chippenham. Features include fi replaces, wooden fl oors and some exposed beams and the well-equipped kitchen dining room is a real feature of the property. With triple aspect windows overlooking the garden and a beamed double height ceiling there is a real sense of light and space. This is enhanced further by the direct access onto the terrace via two separate French doors, ideal for al fresco dining and entertaining. In addition to a walk in larder and a boot room there are three generous ground fl oor reception rooms, including a library and substantial drawing room, each with a fi replaces. On the fi rst fl oor is a master bedroom with a contemporary en suite bathroom, 3 further bedrooms and a family bathroom and there are two further bedrooms and a shower room on the second fl oor.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief Executive: M J BODEN TD, MBA, LLB(Hons)
    Wiltshire Council Planning Consultation Response LANDSCAPE Officer name: Mark Goodwin CMLI (Landscape Architect) Landscape & Design Team, Economic Development & Planning, WiltshireCouncil Date: 27.05.2016 Application No: 15/12351/OUT Proposal: Outline Permission for up to 700 Dwellings, Including 4.5ha Employment Space and Primary School. Up to 10ha New Public Open Space, Landscaping, Stormwater / Drainage Works, Substation and Associated Works. Access Using Parsonage Way, Darcy Close and from Cocklebury Lane (for Cycling and Pedestrian Only). Site Address: Land at Rawlings Farm, Cocklebury Lane, Chippenham, Wiltshire, SN15 3LR Case Officer: Mark Staincliffe Matters Considered: Landscape and Visual effects and impacts /Landscape Design Issues: Recommendation: No Comment Support Support subject to conditions (please set out below) x Object (for reasons set out below) No objections Summary A landscape objection is raised for this application due to the resulting harm generated from locating large scale mixed use urban development uses outside the existing settlement framework boundary on prominent farmland slopes overlooking the expansive River Avon valley floor / floodplain. This proposed development will adversely impact on the existing remote, tranquil, rural qualities of outlying village settlements and their countryside settings. The proposed new development will breach the heavily wooded disused railway line/cycleway which currently serves as an important and effective urban containment and screening transition with adjoining and exposed countryside along the town’s eastern and northern edges. The retention of existing field boundary hedgerows and proposed new supplementary tree planting within the development proposal is welcomed, but is unlikely to be able to fully mitigate the adverse resulting landscape and visual effects arising from development of this naturein the longer term.
    [Show full text]
  • Chippenham History Submitted up to January 2020, with a Note of the Headings of Those Sections Still to Be Written.]
    [This draft text includes all sections of Chippenham history submitted up to January 2020, with a note of the headings of those sections still to be written.] CHIPPENHAM CHIPPENHAM, in 2011 the third most populous town in Wiltshire,1 stands 8 km. west of Calne and 18 km. north-east of Bath (Som.) The early settlement, described in 853 as a royal residence (villa regia),2 lay in a meander of the (Bristol) Avon, encircled by the river on all but its southern side. The medieval town occupied this area, with a church, adjacent market place, and a principal street leading north-west to the river,3 which had been bridged before 1227,4 and beyond which a suburb had developed.5 Outside the town its large ancient parish (5,098 a. in 1847) extended some 12 km north-west and south-east, and included part of the former Chippenham or Pewsham forest. The town prospered by virtue of its position on a major thoroughfare between London and Bristol, as an administrative and marketing centre, and later from cloth manufacture and railway engineering. Chippenham grew modestly during the 19th century, encouraged by its early railway connection with London, Bath and Bristol, achieved in 1841; but much more rapidly after the M4 motorway was opened nearby in 1971. LANDSCAPE, SETTLEMENT AND BUILDINGS Boundaries and Parish Origins The parish of Chippenham, as it existed until boundaries were redrawn in 1884 and later, bordered 11 other ancient parishes.6 For two of these, Kington St Michael and Hardenhuish, charters of purportedly Anglo-Saxon date survive describing their boundaries, which appear to correspond (so far as they march with Chippenham) to those still prevailing into the 19th century.7 A portion of the eastern parish boundary, between Derry Hill and Horselepride Gate (by Sandy Lane), was defined c.
    [Show full text]