7 Owen Drive
Royston
Herts
SG8 5US
Tel: 01763 242995
07595 301565
17th May 2013
Case ref: 13/00409/1
Dear Sir or Madam:
We write in reference to the above planning application and would like to highlight
some of the issues we have with the development.
We wrote to you in opposition to previous plans for the same site back in 2012 and
2009 (applications 12/01036/1 and 09/01573/1 respectively). It seems we are back
where we started with the same original application – with the addition of the
emergency access road from the bypass.
We are pleased that it was sensibly decided that the access road via the Tesco
roundabout was not suitable. We hope too that you will be able to visit the ends of both
Burns Road and Betjeman Road to see that the proposed access to a further 124 homes
is equally as unsuitable.
Our main issues with the proposals are as follows:
1. We still have concerns regarding the
access of so many cars onto the site
via Burns Road. At school drop off and
pick up times, the section of road past
the school already is very busy.
Similarly, between 5pm and 6.30pm,
the Tesco roundabout is a very busy
place as many leave the town and
Johnson Matthey via this route. This
can be seen from the photo below
showing the Tesco roundabout at
about 5:20pm on the 24th April 2013.
Missing is the photo showing the
tailback behind us stretching up as far as I could see (to the Railway station at least).
2. 124 homes must lead to somewhere in the region of 200 additional cars, which will
require access. The end of Burns Road is very hard to get to even now, with cars
parked on the road. Buses, larger vehicles (including Fire Engines, Ambulances,
Refuse/Delivery Trucks etc.) already struggle to reach Yeats Close. Additional traffic
flow down this road is just not acceptable.
3. We have huge concerns that if such a development were to take place that the
entrance at the end of Betjeman Rd/Thomas Way may end up being used to ease
congestion and to shorten the very lengthy route currently suggested via Burns
Road. This would have a devastating effect on what is now a very quiet and safe
estate and turn it into a rat run. An area which is currently safe for children to enjoy
would be spoilt if this turns out to be the case.
4. We are pleased that as far as we can
tell from the current plans, what was
designated a 2.5 storey building in the
original plan (09-01573-1), seems
now to be a more standard 2 storey
building. However we are still unclear
at what height it will begin as the land
to be built on rises up behind our
house. We do not wish to be
overlooked. This is clear from the
image on the right, taken on the 24th
April 2013, showing what we assume
is the developer carrying out some
early groundwork.
5. When speaking to the developer at a previous consultation held in the Coombes
Community Centre (June 2011), we discussed the possibility of houses being angled
at 45 degrees to ours so that we would not be looking directly into the house behind
us. As houses tend not to have windows on the side, this would mean we would be
less overlooked. This does not seem to have been taken into account and the houses
behind us are square on to ours.
6. The development would be very close to
the back of the properties on Owen Drive.
The noise and disruption from the
building work so close to our homes is not
something our neighbours or we would
welcome. Access to this site is not easy,
all site traffic would have to pass the
schools of Roman Way and Roysia during
times when Burns Road is already at a
standstill due to the school pickup and
drop off times. This site is just not suited
to this development in our opinion.
7. We mentioned in our previous letters the public pathway alongside our house,
which sees very little use. We are still concerned about the potential increase in
footfall and anti-social behavior that linking up such a path to a large new estate
could bring.
8. I am still worried, as a Royston resident of over 30 years, that there have been little
or no improvements to emergency services, schools, doctors, in town car-parking,
shops etc. in the town (in fact the reverse in most cases). An increase in population is
nonsensical until proper consideration is given to improving the town services
rather than just increasing numbers of residents.
9. Since the last applications there has been a rise in the number of children attending
the closest of the Royton primary schools, Roman Way. There is now very little room
left at the school, certainly not enough to cope with an additional 124 homes on
what is already a very densely populated part of Royston.
10. This latest plan makes no mention of the additional site linked to plan 12/01036/1
on the field adjacent to this one. If permission were given, we would worry that this
field would be next. The roads are already not suited to coping with the 124 homes
on this plan. Let alone an additional set on this adjacent field. And it’s already been
proved that access from the Tesco roundabout is not suitable either.
These are just some of the many reasons we think there are issues with the plan for this
site.
But there is one bigger overarching issue, which we think, bothers us more than any
other. It is one we’ve tried to outline before, but one, which continues to grind away at
our instincts more than any other.
We still firmly believe it would be a shame to box the town in so heavily up against one
of our major trunk routes. For Royston to be hemmed in like this on this northern side
without some kind of natural buffer would detract from the market-town feel that we
believe it should be aiming to preserve.
Just drive around the bypass from Melbourn Road and witness the new housing
Fairview have built in the tiny gap between the Coombes estate and the railway line. Or
approach Royston from the A10 from Cambridge. It looks terribly imposing. The first
impression is of a town bulging against its boundaries.
Although we are a town, one of the key features for us is just how close to the
surrounding countryside we are. Banishing the countryside beyond the boundary of the
A505 would be a huge step backwards. Access to open spaces is greatly needed. And we
mean open, not just a small corner of a housing development given over to a small
climbing frame.
We pointed in a previous letter to the paddling pool and play area in Letchworth. We
think this really stands out as a great example of how it’s possible to drive a town
forward in providing facilities, which aid the feeling of community. While this piece of
land may not be suitable for this purpose, we believe there are many things that could
be done within the town to rejuvenate that community spirit, growth and value of the
area. Adding new homes, without those things in place, will do the opposite.
Somewhere for the children north of Burns Road to go and to play would be fantastic. At
present, there are very few places where we can let them out to enjoy being children
without getting in the car first.
We have the chance for Royston to lead by example. Please do look at the National
Trust’s Outdoor Nation campaign (http://outdoornation.org.uk/). Or take a look at
David Bond’s film on ‘Nature Deficit Disorder’ – Project Wild Thing:
http://youtu.be/sPp32Lzzuss
Imagine if we used this space for children to discover the fun of being outdoors. To give
them the space, free from the worry we have currently when crossing Burns Road just to
get to the nearest park.
Please do visit the town prior to making any decision. A landmark nature project might
be beyond the current vision, but it is crying out for some new facilities and services.
The cycle routes and the underpass have helped to connect the parts of the town north
of the railway to the rest, in particular the leisure centre. Let’s have some more of this at
least please!
If you wished to view the land behind our house at any point from our garden or
adjacent properties (with homeowners permission of course), please do not hesitate to
get in touch. I would be more than happy to show you around our neighbourhood and to
discuss any of these ideas with you further.
Finally, it may well be too late for these plans to be reconsidered quite in this way. We
just wanted to have it on record somewhere that someone, did care, did have ideas, and
did want things to be better for all residents.
Once you build on it. It’s gone.
Yours faithfully
Ben & Clare Marsden
[larger photos from this document are available on request and also attached to the
email]