ALLOW people to enjoy the Humpty Dumps as they have done for generations, Cirencester residents pleaded at an inquiry which would decide whether developers can build on the much-loved land.
The hearing, expected to close today (July 28), was made after London-based Baylight Properties appealed the rejection of their application to build up to 69 homes on the site near Berry Hill Crescent.
The application for the land designated a Special Landscape Area (SLA) was rejected last November by Cotswold District Council (CDC) due to its “visual sensitivity” and the “limited information submitted”.
Leading the inquiry, inspectorate Jonathan Cook yesterday heard Cirencester Town Council mayor Mark Harris and residents Philip Cook and Richard Gunner speak in favour of rejecting the appeal.
Evidence was also given by the appellant.
Cllr Harris (pictured above) said on behalf of the town council: “Older residents remember playing there in the 60s and 70s and it is demonstrably special to the community because of its beauty, historical significance and recreational purpose.
“There is a general argument that if the land is not built on, the AONB will be at peril. This is a false argument.
“The Local Plan relies on the proposed 2,350 houses, even if it is reduced to 1,500, it will represent a 20 per cent increase of properties in Cirencester.
“Cirencester already has, what some would argue, too much housing.”
He said that there were an extra 400 houses proposed on Kingshill South, and 88 in Siddington, both of which were not AONB or SLA areas.
He concluded: “The Humpty Dumps has continued to be greatly valued by the community. In my view, the benefits of the development do not outweigh the harmful effects.”
Representing the appellant, Anthony Crean said that the 2,350 houses that the Local Plan relied on had “no permission, no allocation, but a great deal of objection”.
He added that the 88 houses in Siddington and the 400 in Kingshill South also had no permission.
With regards to Cllr Harris’ claim that the asbestos found at the site would be tolerable as long as it was not disturbed by development, Mr Crean asked: “Am I right in saying that the area that has asbestos is used regularly by children for playing?”
(Residents and councillors opposed to the possible housing development on the Humpty Dumps in Cirencester near Bowling Green Road in September 2015)
Speaking next was Mr Cook, of Berry Hill Road, who said: “I am sure those here understand the effect the development would have on the landscape. It would alter its character.
“My son has enjoyed a multitude of activities on the site. And there are many people, young and old, who feel attachment to the Humpty Dumps.
“So if there is contamination, the best policy is not to disturb it and allow people to enjoy the Humpty Dump as they have done for many generations.”
In response, Mr Crean said: “This is not a registered village green. Preventing us from building houses on the land will not necessarily keep the land open for public use, will it?
He continued to point out that the development plans would include a recreational area open for public access.
Mr Cook, however, said: “People just do not want building of any kind on that land. I think that the greater benefit is having access to the full field rather than a small part.”
Local resident Mr Gunner presented photos of the site’s landscape to show the detriment the development would have to the area.
He said: “Tourism is a major part of the industry here. Walkers are a big part of that and the Humpty Dumps would certainly attract that.”
Nigel Ebers, director of Peter Brett Associates, who gave evidence on behalf of the appellant, said: “It is my opinion that the proposal is appropriate to the site. Improvements to the site will be made.
“None of the effects will be severe on the Special Landscape Area.”
On being questioned by George Mackenzie, representing CDC, whether the SLA land was a valued landscape, he said “No, because it is designated. It could not be valued because it is designated.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel