*********************************************************************************************************

At a meeting of the Cheshire East Council Strategic Planning Board meeting held at Macclesfield Town Hall on Wednesday, 20th January 2010, plans under both the applications P08/1258 and 09/1480N were unimously granted full planning approval.

The Council has now set a precedent for all construction on the site and it will be more of the same: warehouses.  Deaf to all arguments but dogma, the Board made a few changes to the applications, but these were essentially cosmetic.

Basford West is effectively lost.  All BEBWAG can do is challenge further applications as they arise, but, for the time being, a bland shed the size of 5½ premier-league football piches will be constructed, probably well within the next two years.

The Section 106 agreement, to which both the Council and the developer have subscribed, stipulates that no building on the site can be occupied until infrastructure road works are complete: the spine road linking the Shavington roundabout on the A500 (RB3) to Gresty Road to the north; a contribution sufficient to ensure construction of the second phase of the Crewe Green Link Road; and, the full construction and implementation of an eastbound link to the M6 only.

The first two of these conditions can be achieved in almost the same time as building the shed, but the M6 link will takes years longer to achieve, considering the planning, the land acquisition, the construction and, finally, the commissioning of the road.  During this time, the guaranteed 400-job site will remain empty (!)

There is no rhyme or reason for this development, especially as ProLogis have a warehouse of similar, albeit slightly less proportions, sitting empty on Weston Road in Crewe.

This Basford West now ...

Will this be Basford West soon?

*********************************************************************************************************

YOUR COMMENTS AND OBJECTIONS ARE NEEDED SUPPORT THE CAMPAIGN TO PREVENT THE INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT OF BASFORD WEST AS A LIGHT-INDUSTRY AND DISTRIBUTION PARK

What you see here is only an artist’s impression of how things will appear as you approach the roundabout at Shavington to join the A500. Within months, this could
be a reality ... if the developers get their way!

Friends and Neighbours,

The giant Australian property developer, the Goodman Group (formerly Macquarie Goodman), through their subsidiaries here in the UK and Jersey, are intending to build a huge warehouse just north of the A500 roundabout at Shavington. It will have a total floor area of 40,598sq.m (437,000 sq.ft approx.), which is 5½ times the size of Manchester United’s football pitch, and will stand 18 metres (59 feet) high to the apex of the roof. Facing Shavington roundabout will be a blank and featureless wall 120 metres (394
feet) in length, 14 metres (46 feet) longer than Manchester United’s football pitch.
Today, we have green space and open skies, a pleasing sight to the eye from all directions. Soon, we could have a painted steel shed, and whatever the colour, a shed is still a shed ...

Shout long and loud: “NO” to warehouses on Basford West. You have until NOON on the 15th July to have your say!

Turn over to discover more ...

___________________________________________________________________________

Along with a previous application for Basford West (P08/1258), the new Cheshire East Council will shortly give to consideration to the following planning application:

09/1480N Erection of a Building for use within Class B8, use Class B2 with Ancillary offices, Security Gatehouse and Associated Car Parking and Landscaping: BASFORD WEST DEVELOPMENT SITE, CREWE ROAD, SHAVINGTON-CUM-GRESTY, CREWE, CHESHIRE.

Since 1989, the former County and Borough Councils designated the area between south Crewe and the villages of Gresty, Shavington and Basford, now known as Basford West, as “employment” land, with particular emphasis being given to B2 (light industrial) and B8 (warehouse) “developments”. It has been included in all regional and local plans since then. The Councils even fought tooth-and-nail, in a public enquiry in 1992, to ensure that the route of the then proposed Shavington-Basford-Hough “bypass” would follow the path it now takes in order to isolate Basford West for this particular purpose.

Basford West was said to be worth £65,000,000 when Taylor-Woodrow first displayed its plans for the site in October 2003, but it is far more valuable than that: it is priceless. It is an irreplaceable green buffer separating suburban and industrial Crewe from its neighbouring villages, giving the feel of “countryside” to all who live and work in the area. If this application is granted, then it is goodbye to the site for ever. The first development on the site will set the precedent for all further developments. So, if we get this wrong ...

The case against:

Employment: The continuing need for this development is not proven: the employment argument was lost years ago when technological developments turned the stated “thousands of jobs” into just a few hundred, most of which would be low-paid imported labour, working on short-term contracts;

Transport: Pollution:The Atkins report on traffic flows in and around Crewe, published in 2008, specifically stated that “the scale and mix of development ... is unsustainable from a transportation perspective”. This development will add substantially to the congestion in and around Crewe during both construction and operation.  Furthermore, a recent government report stated that theA500 Shavington-Hough-Basford bypass had failed in its (alleged) primary purpose of reducing congestion in south Cheshire;

The Development Brief: While the development brief is meant to be a guide to how the allowed development on the site is to be managed and delivered, this particular proposal specifically ignores the agreed “Development Brief” for the site, especially in Paragraph 1.5 relating to zoning and layout and Paragraph 4.16
onwards, with regard to gateway structures, the location of building types, heights, the order of construction and the stipulations for rail access;

Flooding: The proposals for rain-water run-off ponds is not proven, since flooding often occurs at Gresty Brook during heavy rain. While the application argues the once-in-a-hundred-years scenario for excess flooding at Gresty Brook, experience tells us differently, as, even now, without any construction, unprecedented levels of flooding and surface water are being experienced by local residents;

Pollution: Apart from the obvious noise, light and atmospheric pollution, it would be naïve to assume that all the proposed filtering and controls suggested in the plans will prevent the inevitable contamination of spillage of oil and fuel from so many vehicles visiting the site;

Screening: This structure will be massive, but efforts to screen them from view will comprise 3m bunding (mounds) with planting and the spread of 15 tree species planted across the site, 13 of which are deciduous: meaning that, for six months of the year, the trees will be devoid of leaf cover and their effectiveness as a screen will be minimal;

Use: It has been asserted that there is a customer for a new structure on Basford West, but detail in the Section 106 agreement suggests that no occupation can take place until all the infrastructure works are complete, including the construction of an east-bound, motorway-only link to the M6. If that is the case, then they need not wait for this development: have had a building lying fallow for nearly a year on Weston Road, Crewe.

For further information, visit http://www.bebwag.org.uk and to see the plans, visit http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk quoting the planning references 09/1480N and P08/1258.

IN 2003, WITH THE SIGNATURES OF THOUSANDS OF RESIDENTS ACROSS THE AREA, WE WERE ABLE TO DELAY THE DEVELOPMENT. WITH HELP, WE CAN DO IT AGAIN!

SEND YOUR COMMENTS AND OBJECTIONS TO:

Development Management, Town Hall, MACCLESFIELD. SK10 1DP
or by email to planning@cheshireeast.gov.uk

Published by BEBWAG, c/o 51 Park Estate, Shavington, CREWE, CW2 5AW

*********************************************************************************************************

This leaflet campaign was designed printed and is being distributed to all villages south of Crewe, where the effects of the latest planning application for Basford West are most likely to be felt:

Gresty; Shavington; Basford; Hough; Wychwood Park and Chorlton; Weston; Wychwood Village  and Engelsea Brook 

YOUR COMMENTS AND OBJECTIONS ARE NEEDED SUPPORT THE CAMPAIGN TO PREVENT THE INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT OF BASFORD WEST AS A LIGHT-INDUSTRY AND DISTRIBUTION PARK

The Leaflet:

This is the
Shavington
Interchange
roundabout
on the A500
as it is today
...

. . . and this
is the same
roundabout
as it could
be in a few
m o n t h s ’
time ...

Friends and Neighbours,

The choice is YOURS ... and you have until

NOON on the 14th May to have your say!

Turn over to discover more ...

___________________________________________________________________________

The new Cheshire East Council is shortly due to consider the following planning
application:

P08/1258 Reserved Matters for Ground Works for Spine Road, Drainage,
Balancing Ponds, Plot Formation, Structural Landscaping, Public Art,
(with ecological assessments, lighting strategy, construction management plan, flood risk assessment) on Land off Crewe Road, Basford West Crewe, CW2 5AF

Since 1989, the former County and Borough Councils designated the area between south Crewe and the villages of Gresty, Shavington and Basford, now known as Basford West , as "employment” land, with particular emphasis being given to B2 (light industrial) and B8 (warehouse) “developments”. It has been included in all regional and local plans since then. The Councils even fought tooth-and-nail, in a public enquiry in 1992, to ensure that the route of the then proposed Shavington-Basford-Hough “bypass” would follow the path it now takes in order to isolate Basford  West for this particular purpose.

Basford West was said to be worth £65,000,000 when Taylor-Woodrow first displayed its plans for the site in October 2003, but it is far more valuable than that: it is priceless.  It is an irreplaceable green buffer separating suburban and industrial Crewe from its neighbouring villages, giving the feel of “countryside” to all who live and work in the area.

If this application is granted, then it is goodbye to the site for ever. The first development on the site will set the precedent for all further developments. So, if we get this wrong ...

The case against:

The continuing need for this development is not proven: the employment argument was lost years ago when technological developments turned the “thousands of jobs” into just a few hundred;

The development proposal specifically ignores the agreed “Development Brief” for the site, especially with regard to locations, building heights and the order of construction and the stipulations for rail access;

The proposals for rain-water run-off ponds is not proven, since flooding often occurs at Gresty Brook during heavy rain. Even now, without any construction, unprecedented levels of flooding and surface water are being experienced by local residents;

The alleged customer for a new structure on Basford West need not wait for this development - ProLogis have had a building lying fallow for nearly a year on Weston Road, Crewe;

The Atkins report on traffic flows in and around Crewe specifically stated that “the scale and mix of development ... is unsustainable from a transportation perspective”. This development will add substantially to the congestion in and around Crewe during both construction and operation.

For further information, visit http://www.bebwag.org.uk and to see the plans, visit http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk quoting the planning reference P08/1258.

WE STOPPED THEM ONCE BEFORE WITH A MASSIVE RESPONSE FROM THE RESIDENTS OF GRESTY, SHAVINGTON AND BASFORD.  WITH YOUR HELP WE CAN DO IT AGAIN!

SEND YOUR COMMENTS AND OBJECTIONS TO:

The Planning Office, Municipal Buildings, Earle Street, Crewe. CW1 2BJ

or by email to planning@cheshireeast.gov.uk

Published by BEBWAG, c/o 51 Park Estate, Shavington, CREWE, CW2 5AW

___________________________________________________________________________

BASFORD is a tiny hamlet to the south of Crewe in Cheshire that lies in a conspicuous belt of open green space between the suburban and industrial Crewe and the

In 1989, when the plans for the so-called A500 Shavington-Hough-Basford Bypass were published, the favoured RED route cut through the green gap between suburban and industrial Crewe and the southern villages of Shavington-cum-Gresty, Hough and Weston, isolating two plots of land on either side of the West Coast Main Line.  Within a week of publication, the now defunct Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council announced that it had earmarked those two sites as "employment" land, with particular reference to B1 (Offices), B2 (Light Industry) and (B8 Warehousing and Distribution) as the favoured building types.  The majority construction would be B8, as, at the time, it was alleged to be kind of operation which would employ the most people.  Given the area of the land allocated, it was estimated that the development could sustain something in the order of 12000 jobs.  Indeed, the former local M.P., the late Hon. Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody, openly admitted that,, for some 20 years, she had actively campaigned for these sites to be used to boost local employment.

In 1992, the plans for the bypass went to public enquiry and, despite fierce local opposition and a quite definite better alternative route (PURPLE), the Inspector found in favour of the RED route and the door to development was opened.

Following years of government delays and cancellations of road schemes, the A500 Shavington-Hough-Basford Bypass was finally approved and construction commenced.  The road was opened by the late Hon. Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody in May, 2003.

Because the two sites allocated for development lie oppose the southern hamlet of Basford, they became known as Basford West and Basford East

See Background & History for further information.

___________________________________________________________________________

(ONGOING UPDATES UNTIL THURSDAY A.M. MAY 14TH 2009)

Last year, the  Development Control Committee of the now defunct Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council, hard-faced and truly uninterested in any sound argument from the Group and a number of concerned councillors from the area, and granted outline planning permission on the site specifically for warehouse development, as if to accomplish some out-dated target set 20 years ago, when warehouses were largely low-bay and could employ large numbers of people.  Since then, technology has shifted, and what was done using fork-lift trucks then, is now done using computerized robots and pallet-handling equipment.  Whereas once there would be a need for heating and lighting, today's robots can operate cold and blind.

BEBWAG has argued from the start that warehouses are no longer an appropriate development: they are big, ugly, monotonous and have little architectural merit.  For a town wishing to be classed as a university town, for being the gateway to the North-West, acres and acres of featureless grey sheds (the industry term) are hardly welcoming.  Far better to consider science or business parks, in keeping with the aspirations for a better future for the town.

The "ownership" (stewardship?) of Basford West has changed hands: first Taylor-Woodrow owned the land, which was later transferred to Rosemound Developments.  In 2007, Rosemound ceased trading and was taken over by Macquarie Goodman, an Australian development conglomerate, who, like their American counterpart, ProLogis, is a property speculator with assets in excess of A$21 billion.

IF YOU CARE FOR OUR COUNTRYSIDE, ALBEIT MOSTLY TREES HEDGEROWS AND FIELDS FOR GRAZING ANIMALS, THEN OBJECT TO THESE PLANS BY NOON ON THURSDAY, 14th MAY.

MACQUARIE GOODMAN DO NOT GIVE TWO HOOTS ABOUT THE LAND BEYOND WHAT RETURN THEY CAN GET FOR THEIR SHAREHOLDERS.  THEY WILL NOT HAVE TO LOOK OUT OF THEIR WINDOWS TO SEE ONLY GREY, UGLY SHEDS; THEY WILL SPOIL OUR VIEWS TO ENHANCE THEIRS - SOMEWHERE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PLANET!

NOTE: From a purely legal point of view, the planning application P08/1258, the subject of this leaflet and against BEBWAG is to make objection, conforms in all respects to planning requirements.  However, these plans are based on perceptions and agreements, which have been held by successive County and Borough Councils over the years, and perpetuated in the Regional and Local-Area Plans, published every 5 years or so.  No allowance has been made for changes in technology, the economy or the demography of the area.

• Warehouses are an inappropriate development for the reasons stated here and elsewhere on this website.  The continuing need for this development is not proven, since the employment argument was lost years ago when technological developments turned the “thousands of jobs” into just a few hundred.

Both Basford sites were given Development Briefs, which, with amendment, specified the types of construction allowed, building heights, access roads, drainage ,etc.  With particularly regard to Basford West, it was stipulated that any development would be staged beginning with the tallest buildings at the northern end of the site, reducing across the site, so that structures close to the A500 would be unobtrusive (6 to 12m in height (maximum).  Additionally, provision must be made to allow a rail link onto the site.

• This application is for reserved matters (i.e. infrastructure construction) to create the footprint for a massive warehouse, between 360,000 and 400,000 sq.ft., to stand at the southern-most tip of the site adjacent to the A500).  With such a floor area, it is inevitable that this structure will exceed 12 metres in height, making it highly visible to the entire surrounding area.  This development proposal specifically ignores the agreed “Development Brief” for the site, especially with regard to locations, building heights and the order of construction, including the stipulations for rail access.

Part of the planning proposals for Basford West includes a series of storage ponds, specifically to hold run-off rainwater from the new building.  A series of these connected ponds across the site will ensure that during periods of heavy rain, the site does not become flooded and water is released in a controlled manner into the Gresty Brook.  Additionally, "scrubbing" filters will ensure that no oil or fuel entering the drains will be allowed to reach the brook.

• The proposals for rain-water run-off ponds is not proven, since flooding often occurs at Gresty Brook during heavy rain.  Even now, without any construction, unprecedented levels of flooding and surface water are being experienced by local residents.

Early last year, BEBWAG and members of Shavington and Weston Parish Councils were invited to an informal planning meeting at the Municipal Buildings in Crewe, in which draft proposals for Basford West were introduced.  The plans included a large warehouse of the dimensions given for which, it was alleged, the developer had a customer who was seeking to employ 300 people.  In May 2008, ProLogis completed a 360,000 sq.ft. warehouse on Weston Road, Crewe, with a declared employee quota of 300 staff.

• The alleged customer for the first structure on Basford West need not wait for this development - ProLogis have had a building of the size needed lying fallow for nearly a year on Weston Road, Crewe.

Since the UK is officially in recession, both large and small companies are reviewing their financial strategies, "downsizing" being one of the options under consideration.  This means that they: stop recruiting or actively shed staff; they reduce or cease investment in new premises, perhaps preferring to renovate rather than relocate; and some are having to declare bankruptcy.

Warehouses do not employ large numbers of people.  Apart from a core of technical staff, many workers are minimum-wage, temporary contract staff, whose contribution to the economy is necessarily minimal.  With 15,000 lorry drivers reported to be out of work, there is clearly a slump in the movement of goods, thereby reducing the need for warehouse capacity.

• It makes absolutely no sense to plan or build more warehouses, as they will surely stand empty until it is possible to see the end of what is a major recession.

Concern by the former Cheshire County Council that any developments on either Basford site would grievously impair traffic movement across the whole area led to the Council commissioning W.S, Atkins plc to investigate and report on the issue.  It took them well over 12 months to carry out their assessment, but eventually they produced their long-awaited report: "Transport Planning Delivery Strategy for Comprehensive Development". 

• The published Atkins report, in its "Summary of Findings" (Section 11.1), specifically stated that “the scale and mix of development ... is unsustainable from a transportation perspective”.  From bitter experience, local resident are only too aware that this development will only add substantially to the congestion in and around Crewe during both construction and operation.
• The report also states that the A500 Barthomley Link is operating at about capacity and would have to be dualled to remove delays caused by slow-moving vehicles from the site, which, it records would cost too much (estimated over £40 million) for any one developer to achieve, and which, under present public-funding limitations, could not happen for at least the next 10 years.
• The Atkins report offers limited development (maximum 25%), for which traffic-flow impact would be within acceptable limits, provided the developer made significant contributions to the enhancement of the road infrastructure:

• £6 million towards completion of the Crewe Green Link Road;
• Establishment of travel plans;
• New footpaths and cycle links in Gresty and Shavington (Crewe Road);
• Vehicle reduction measures to keep within travel-plan targets;
• At least £6 miilion towards construction of dualling for the A500. 

The above stipulations have been taken on board by the developers and have been included in the Section-106 agreements following the granting of outline planning permission, including a promise by the developers that they will construct an east-bound feeder road parallel to the A500 Barthomley Link, specifically for motorway-bound traffic.  Part of the agreement with the former borough council is that there would be no occupation of any buildings on the site (Basford West) until all the infrastructure modifications had been made, including the Basford West Spine Road, the Crewe Green Link Road and the dualling (in whatever form) of the A500 Barthomley link.

• Given that the construction of a "shed" takes about a year, including all ground works and drains, and given the estimate from the Atkins report that A500 improvements, including Junction 16 of the M6, will not happen for at least ten years, then, at best, all structures on Basford West will stand empty for at least 9 years, because the Agreement prevents occupation until completion of all dependent infrastructure works.

Town and Country Planning Act 1990:

Section 97 of this Act gives local councils the ...

97 Power to revoke or modify planning permission

(1) If it appears to the local planning authority that it is expedient to revoke or modify any permission to develop land granted on an application made under this Part, the authority may by order revoke or modify the permission to such extent as they consider expedient.

(2) In exercising their functions under subsection (1) the authority shall have regard to the development plan and to any other material considerations.

(3) The power conferred by this section may be exercised—

(a) where the permission relates to the carrying out of building or other operations, at any time before those operations have been completed;

(b) where the permission relates to a change of the use of any land, at any time before the change has taken place.

(4) The revocation or modification of permission for the carrying out of building or other operations shall not affect so much of those operations as has been previously carried out.

(5) References in this section to the local planning authority are to be construed in relation to development consisting of the winning and working of minerals as references to the mineral planning authority, and Part II of Schedule 5 shall have effect for the purpose of making special provision with respect to the conditions which may be imposed by an order under this section revoking or modifying permission for such development.

• The Cheshire East Council has it within its power to stop this planning application in its tracks by invoking Section 97 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.  They can reverse previous grants of permission and, by so doing, an opportunity can then arise to reassess the uses to which the land could be put.  After all, Crewe wants to be a high-profile university town - acres and acres of warehouses (unoccupied and unused) will not create the desired impression to any outsiders.  Technology and science parks may have quite a different effect. 

Area Map

Aerial Photo

********************************************************************************************************

********************************************************************************************************