Well done to
all who have put a lot of time and effort into the Neighbourhood
Plan. My main comments are as follows:
Housing I was very disappointed to hear the Planning Inspectors decision on 18th March (be it
latter withdrawn owing to failures in authorisation) that he was upholding Gleeson appeal. This suggests total
distrust in a process that was meant to be a "front runner project" of
involving local communities in their development. I sincerely hope that the DCLG
will ensure they do the right thing by listening to a well considered and well
supported Neighbourhood proposal rather than signing a document for a developer
who has no interest in our community apart from financial
I support the proposed sites identified in the north west of the town but would very much
favour less development in the south east as I feel this area sits outside the
I also would like to see gradual housing development over the time frame to 2026. Malmesbury
has seen considerable growth with little development of schools, sports and
If we are to have a supermarket development my preference is that Co op give up one of their
existing sites in order that competition and choice are offered to the town.
Many people choose to live in Malmesbury because they do not want to make all
their retail purchases with the multi nationals this should be considered and
encouraged rather than sidelined. Also many people now use internet shopping so
having a major store within 5 miles is not essential
Even the big 4 food retailers recognise that major edge of town sites are
not the way forward and they are all pushing for high street presence. If for
example, Waitrose were to gain the Co-op site on the high street this would be a
major plus for local retailers by increasing footfall and it would provide
choice without detriment to other shops.It would also mean that the
controversial site at the Avon Mill would not have to go forward.
School and Infrastructure
I would like to see that any new housing developer or supermarket should provide support in
the sporting facilities of the town. Currently there is very little facility for
outdoor activities with floodlights. Cirencester and Chippenham both have a
number of Astro turfs and floodlit sports venues. Malmesbury has created or
upgraded 3 children's play parks but has not developed facilities for older
children or adults in recent
years. Malmesbury Secondary school would be an ideal location for an Astro turf
with floodlights this could be used as an extension of school and private clubs
e.g football, hockey, netball, basketball. If situated between the school and
Activity Zone it could use the facilities of the Activity Zone.
In addition to above the town would benefit from a
multi use outdoor sports area. Crudwell, Sutton Benger, Minety all have
hard surface multi fenced games areas, where basket ball, netball, tennis
etccan take place. We currently have a lovely play park at St Aldenhelm's Mead but
no facilities for older children and adults.
HighQuality, well designed…..urban Spaces
I support the proposal to design buildings with a positive and sympathetic character
(unlike the Activity Zone) we should ensure they blend with surroundings and I
would like to suggest that development should include positive development of
green spaces and planting of trees. So much of the development of Malmesbury has
been without the green element. Cars should be considered and accounted for in
off road parking for a minimum of 2 cars per property. Malmesbury lacks parking
and therefore there is no excuse why a developer can submit plans with limited
parking and include road parking.
Thank you for considering this feedback.
Malmesbury Neighbourhood Steering Group
What others are saying about our Draft Neighbourhood Plan Over 500 residents have already looked at the draft plan. These are the comments that they have made about it.
Our consultation runs from the 5th of March 2013 to April 26th 2013. These are the published comments received up to 08/03/13.
All comments below were submitted to this online feedback portal. We hold the identity and addresses for each submission and have decided not to publish them unless specifically requested by the person who submitted them.