megilleland Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 Gladman Developments has revised its proposal for a housing scheme in Hereford. DEVELOPERS seeking to build a large-scale housing complex in Hereford have revised their scheme. Gladman Developments had initially wanted to site 120 homes on land off Hampton Dene Road. But, as reported by the Hereford Times, the application only came before Herefordshire Council's planning committee in April, resulting in Gladman making an appeal on non-determination grounds. The appeal will be heard at a planning inquiry in September. In the meantime, the firm has re-submitted an application in order to alleviate concerns raised by some councillors in relation to the effect the scheme would have on the local landscape. The proposal has been scaled back to 110 homes, while a Section 106 agreement will be provided for the playing fields. A "dense landscape buffer" will also be on the northern edge of the site and the drainage strategy updated. Planning Application here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise Lloyd Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 Bloor Homes plan for 460 homes between Roman Road and the A49. Gladmans a 120 development planned in Pencombe Lane Bromyard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise Lloyd Posted July 16, 2014 Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 PA for 110 homes at Hampton Dene Road was approved today at the Planning Committee. The Tesco PA at Ross was refused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted July 16, 2014 Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 PA for 110 homes at Hampton Dene Road was approved today at the Planning Committee. Saw that. Obvious implications for the nearest schools and doctors surgery ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.Butt Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 Never understand why some people are so against new houses being built... we need new houses! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 Never understand why some people are so against new houses being built... we need new houses! Selfish reasons I would guess, More houses = your house is worth less. See theory of supply and demand. Also others are just scared of change for no good or rational reason. Also, Finally, in some cases people don't like their view being spoilt, What they fail to realise is that they have absolutly no right to a view of anything that they do not own. You are foolish to pay extra for a house with a view unless there is a legallly binding guarentee of the view to preserved for your enjoyment. HateNIMBYS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragwert Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 So did they approve the removal of those bloody lights in Ledbury Road as part of the planning app?I'm sure Jim Kenyon put a comment in with the planning app. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twowheelsgood Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 That junction at present is at something like 95% capacity, the proposal would push it to 105%. Their highways consultant spun it every which way in their report - by changing the timing of the lights to allow pedestrians to cross every third change - like schoolkids are going to wait THAT long - they maintained there would be no change. On that basis, the council's highway officer said it'll be all absolutely fine and dandy. I know Jim was on the case for the previous application, so lets hope his common sense can get these damned things changed/removed with planning obligation monies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragwert Posted July 18, 2014 Report Share Posted July 18, 2014 That junction at present is at something like 95% capacity, the proposal would push it to 105%. Their highways consultant spun it every which way in their report - by changing the timing of the lights to allow pedestrians to cross every third change - like schoolkids are going to wait THAT long - they maintained there would be no change. On that basis, the council's highway officer said it'll be all absolutely fine and dandy. I know Jim was on the case for the previous application, so lets hope his common sense can get these damned things changed/removed with planning obligation mo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragwert Posted July 18, 2014 Report Share Posted July 18, 2014 That junction at present is at something like 95% capacity, the proposal would push it to 105%. Their highways consultant spun it every which way in their report - by changing the timing of the lights to allow pedestrians to cross every third change - like schoolkids are going to wait THAT long - they maintained there would be no change. On that basis, the council's highway officer said it'll be all absolutely fine and dandy. I know Jim was on the case for the previous application, so lets hope his common sense can get these damned things changed/removed with planning obligation monies. I bet this Highways consultant is not like me one of the motorists that have to put up with these lights.I can also honestly say that I have never seen pedestrians adults or children and quite often parents with children wait for the green man . The Ledbury Road/Hampton Dean junction needs a roundabout but whats the betting they install traffic lights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Kenyon Posted July 18, 2014 Report Share Posted July 18, 2014 Hi guys it was a great result that this application was approved we have managed to get £277,000 contributions to the locals schools £250,000 towards roads £68,000 towards off site recreation that will be shared between the quarry and Aylestone park all that was in danger if it had gone to appeal, we could have ended up with nothing the road scheme on Hampton dene Road and Ledbury road will be looked at I'm not sure if we have got enough to get rid of the lights but I'm going to have a good go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bambi Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 This junction is like the rest of the road system in Hereford, a prime example of what an Urban Road Planning Consultant can do, when he's pi**ed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenknight Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 No sign of this development starting as yet. How long does GD get before the planning application times out? As they are pitching for a number of planning applications I wonder if they are still looking for a building company to sell onto? Help anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenknight Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 With regard to the lights I can see why people get frustrated but the big problem here apart from pedestrians wanting to cross is that the exit point out of Church Road is blind. It might be possible however to make this one way in favour of the opposite direction. Traffic that would have originally travelled down Church Road would go either down Quarry Lane or right at the butchers down Winchester Avenue. You could then secure a mini roundabout and do away with the lights completely. ...go on I've come in late and someone has already thought of this!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenda Powell Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Generally once a planning application is approved 3 years,, but developers generally start straight away then if they fall behind it is a mad rush to catch up. If it is a normal application again 3 years but if time runs out they have to go through the process again and pay again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twowheelsgood Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 The application was in outline form, so they still need to deal with approval of reserved matters ie the detail design and the conditions. I doubt you'll see anything happen within a year, even if they are keen to start. As for the traffic lights at the Foley Lane junction, something has to be done about these - the traffic consultants report that accompanied the application was farcical - the junction will be 105% overloaded (as I said in post no 8 above) and the only way they could explain it away was to encourage rat running! Jim - its much cheaper to take things away than to install them we are told - who can forget the infamous traffic reversal experiment - £250k to install yet only £68k to remove! These lights were never asked for, residents were not consulted, their views after the event, including those of the MP, were disregarded and the whole saga was left 'under review', ie forgotten about. Plain sense can see it doesn't work, the stats say it doesn't work. You'll only get one shot at it, and I would venture that money spent on this is more beneficial than on the two parks, essential as they are, as they will always be able to attract further monies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenknight Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Thanks for the responses...very much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragwert Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 The application was in outline form, so they still need to deal with approval of reserved matters ie the detail design and the conditions. I doubt you'll see anything happen within a year, even if they are keen to start. As for the traffic lights at the Foley Lane junction, something has to be done about these - the traffic consultants report that accompanied the application was farcical - the junction will be 105% overloaded (as I said in post no 8 above) and the only way they could explain it away was to encourage rat running! Jim - its much cheaper to take things away than to install them we are told - who can forget the infamous traffic reversal experiment - £250k to install yet only £68k to remove! These lights were never asked for, residents were not consulted, their views after the event, including those of the MP, were disregarded and the whole saga was left 'under review', ie forgotten about. Plain sense can see it doesn't work, the stats say it doesn't work. You'll only get one shot at it, and I would venture that money spent on this is more beneficial than on the two parks, essential as they are, as they will always be able to attract further monies. Sounds like every other decision regarding our road infrastructure,no communication with those that will be affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts