Clerk: Phil Sanders
21 Linnet Close
Tel: 01606 86174801606 861748
Ms C Coombs
Cheshire West and Chester Council
Development Management – Planning Service
1 March 2014
Dear Ms Coombs,
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990
PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE: 14/04999/OUT
PROPOSAL: Residential development for up to 70 dwellings and associated works.
LOCATION: Land off Jack Lane, Moulton
Your letter dated 12 February 2014 refers.
The Parish Council acknowledges the quality of the Application and feels that, in isolation, it has much to commend it.
However, we strongly feel that the Application needs to be considered in conjunction with 12/05668/OUT (148 homes off Barnside Way, Moulton) which was recently approved following Appeal.
Moulton is a cul-de-sac village with little in the way of amenities and an internal road system that dates back to post WW2 traffic volumes.
At present Moulton has c.1,050 homes and a population of ca 2,300. The addition of up to 218 more houses will increase the housing stock by 20% and the population likewise. Given the acknowledged lack of current amenities/services we feel that this is unsustainable.
We wish to draw attention to the following specific issues:-
Notwithstanding the comments of the Planning Appeal Inspector (re 12/05668/OUT), Moulton School is at capacity and, other than building upwards, there is no scope to extend the School on the present site. It is our understanding that other Primary Schools within 2/3 miles of the village are also at capacity. Where are these additional Children to be schooled?
Health Care Provision
Neither Moulton nor Davenham currently has a Surgery or Dental Practice – the nearest provision is in either Northwich or Winsford. We believe this to be unacceptable now, never mind following potential population increases of 20%.
We would also ask whether Hospital Bed Provision/Emergency Services are set to be enlarged to cope with the growing population in the Vale Royal area? The number of Planning Applications receiving approval in the locality makes this a very real issue, particularly with an aging population. The nearest main Hospital is 13 miles away.
Whilst Moulton has a Village Hall, it is dated and not suitable for a wide array of users. A new building of some sort is essential if Community Groups are to continue to flourish within the village. This is particularly so if the village population is set to increase dramatically in the coming years.
The Playing Fields in the centre of the village are restricted, by Covenant, to use by Children only. This results in there being no recreational facilities for Adults within the village. Again, with an increasing population this is not desirable. S.106 monies are only of use if there is land to use – currently there is not (see later comments).
Turning to Planning Related Issues we make the following comments:-
The fact that the proposed development is, in effect, a cul-de-sac probably mitigates against further problems within the village centre.
However, the mini-roundabout at the junction of Jack Lane and Main Road will undoubtedly require upgrade to handle increased volumes. Sight lines in particular will need addressing to assuage safety concerns.
Furthermore, the junction of Jack Lane and the A533 is an acknowledged danger area. The possibility of increased traffic volumes turning onto the A533 causes concern. Maybe traffic controls at peak times would be a prudent way forward?
The close proximity of the Salt Mine Entrance to the site – 200 yards to the south – should also be considered. HGVs regularly access the site from Jack Lane.
As with most parts of Moulton the land in question is regularly subject to flooding. Drainage on the site will therefore be key and we ask that the Environment Agency and United Utilities undertake a detailed overview (not desk-top) of the site at the earliest opportunity.
As with the site of Application 12/05668/OUT, this proposed development would be outside of the village core and would see the nuclear centre reach out towards neighbouring settlements. This is contrary to the Policies set out in the Moulton Village Design Statement (Adopted) and the Vale Royal Local Plan.
The Parish Council, and local Residents, has no wish to see Moulton become a part of a larger conurbation.
We are also concerned that approval for this site would set a precedent for further building in the vicinity. Given the above comments the Parish Council objects to the Application.
The Parish Council has met with Agents for the Applicant and outlined the above issues, which are acknowledged. The Applicant has indicated a desire to work with the Parish Council in the creation of recreational land for adult use (in lieu of s.106 funds). This move is much appreciated and would go some way to alleviating our concerns regarding recreational facilities.