Charlton Marshall protesters hope for third time lucky

4:00pm Thursday 3rd January 2013 in News

THE RESIDENTS of a North Dorset village are fighting plans to build 35 homes – with two previous applications for the same site already rejected.

The Charlton Marshall Action Group hope they will be lucky for the third time after planning permission was sought for Church Lane.

But the owners of the land, who are related to some of the village’s oldest families, say they want to leave a legacy behind for future generations.

Village resident Ruth Berry, who is part of the Action Group, said: “We’ve been through this twice before, and we are still hoping for a big fat no.

“There are lots of people working behind the scenes to make people aware of what’s going on. We hope that once again it won’t go through.”

The owners of the land are Mary and Jane, the nieces of Eleanor Walker, who died in 2000.

Mary’s husband Robert Lawton, who owns a farm near Marlborough in Wiltshire, said some of the villagers were taking a “NIMBY” approach to the application. The land was designated for building long before it came to us,” he said.

He said the chief planning officer, John Hammond, had always supported the development, despite the eventual refusal, adding that only the design of the homes were eventually rejected.

The family have now employed a new architect, Paul Harrington of Morgan Carey Architects, to complete the designs.

Mr Lawton said: “Many of my wife’s family are buried in the village churchyard.

“We want to do a good job to leave a legacy to the village in the name of Walker.”

Comments(9)

sturman says...
10:32pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Acceptable site, good architect, what exactly are the 'action group'(?) complaining about, or is this a case of just another NIMBY seeking personal publicity?
There is a serious shortage of housing in this country, particularly locally, these opportunities should be welcomed.

Report this post »

Char70 says...
11:13am Fri 4 Jan 13

And another green space concreted over. Legacy? Philanthropy? Personal gain?. I know what I think.

Report this post »

pete woodley says...
10:21am Sat 5 Jan 13

Char70,the word is NEEDED.

Report this post »

pete woodley says...
10:22am Sat 5 Jan 13

Char70,the word is NEEDED.

Report this post »

Char70 says...
6:45pm Sat 5 Jan 13

How about some in your back yard then Mr Woodley, or are you a NIMBY as well?. According to NDDC own web site there are over 100 empty properties in north dorset,so perhaps they can be NEEDED too.

Report this post »

CMAG Supporter says...
4:15pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Mr Lawton is after the cash that comes with a piece of land that has planning permission for 35 houses. That's all that family cares about, effing MONEY, MONEY, MONEY! If they want to leave a legacy for the village they should have donated the field to the community just like Mrs Eleanor Walker wanted, but like most people who forget to write a will, she did not leave the right instructions that no development should have ever been granted. She wanted the village to inherit the field!
Now, there is no need for an additional 35 houses in a village that has no facilities, nor the ability to be self-sufficient through lack of amenities. FACT. Other fact is that NDDC knows that in total there are about 80 houses still to be built all across North Dorset (about 150 have already received planning permission to meet the growing number of residents). Now you all tell me: is Charlton the dumping ground for half of the houses the whole North Dorset area needs??? Of course not. Why should we be hey? If you read this I am sure you can agree with these views which are the villagers' angry views at this development....

Report this post »

charperson says...
4:20pm Tue 8 Jan 13

The first comment from Sturman appears to me to be from someone who is likely to gain financially from this development.

The New Plan soon to be in existence ACTUALLY says NO HOUSES ARE NEEDED in unsustainable rural villages, which includes Charlton Marshall!

If Mr Lawton and his family want to “Do a good job to leave a legacy to the village in the name of Walker”, perhaps they should consider giving this field as a small part of this fortune/inheritance that ‘came to them’ to the Parish for perhaps a village green, out of thanks, respect and honour of their late aunt who shared a love of this countryside? A much more village friendly legacy than a housing estate?

Report this post »

CMAG Supporter says...
4:25pm Tue 8 Jan 13

chaperson I am so totally with you on this one....

The Lawtons just want money as I said in my previous post. They even have the straight face to call it "leaving a legacy". I'd call that "leaving a lot of ****-off local residents with properties devalued by my own GREED"...now there's something to think about!

Report this post »

CMAG Supporter says...
5:03pm Tue 8 Jan 13

another point here: affordable housing. Do we have so many people with relations in the village who can demonstrate a link with the village and claim their right to such houses? NO.
What happened in a village near Gillingham last year is that they build some affordable homes, but QUITE RIGHTLY SO, the caveats were that unless you could demonstrate a close family link with existing villagers and the village itself you would not be considered for these houses. Those young families who had links have been homed there which is perfectly acceptable and keeps the village to people who have history there. Absolutely the right approach and cannot commend the parish council there enough for having the balls to put such a clause in. Now, is that the case of this development? Of course not. We will end up with the "crème de la crème" of low-life rejects from unrelated places who will turn this peaceful rural village into a nightmare....you bet that's the risk we have here

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree