If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Mangapps under threat - request for support

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by Sidmouth, Dec 3, 2022.

  1. Sidmouth

    Sidmouth Resident of Nat Pres Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    9,603
    Likes Received:
    8,222
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alderan !
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Posted by John Jolly in the Mangapps facebook group

    Mangapps under threat.
    Remember the slogan on our brochures- "Recreating the Country Railway"? Well, there's a serious danger that it may no longer be appropriate. A planning application has been lodged with Maldon District Council to build over 250 dwellings on the land north of our railway, between Southminster Road and the copse opposite the occupation crossing. This is in addition to the large housing development which has recently been given permission to the west of our line, all the way to Tinker's Hole. Worse still, if the developers get this permission, they will undoubtedly seek to build right down the northern and eastern side of our line, behind and beyond Old Heath Station. Thus, Instead of being a railway surrounded by attractive, unspoiled countryside, we shall be almost surrounded by a rash of ugly little boxes.
    We know how much our passengers/visitors enjoy the quiet environment of our railway and the varied population of animals and birds that live here- well, they're in danger of losing all that. That will undoubtedly reduce the attraction of our railway to visitors. Moreover, we know from the experience of other heritage railways that having housing so close to our line will cause problems of trespass, vandalism/criminal damage and theft and complaints about noise, smoke, etc.- unavoidable products of a heritage railway- which will threaten our freedom to operate.
    There are aspects of the proposed development which will allow us to challenge the application for legal reasons and we have the strong support of neighbours which may well strangle the application at birth, but in case the application goes further, we hope that we can count on the support of the Friends of Mangapps
    Please send objections to dc.planning@maldon.gov.uk Include the reference number, OUTM/MAL/22/01024 and your name and full postal address. You can include the reasons for your interest in Mangapps Railway and any of the issues I've outlined above, plus any others you can think of. Closing date for objections is 22/12/22.
    Please don't forget or leave it too late, let's get this stopped.
     
    3ABescot, Dan Hill, Paul42 and 4 others like this.
  2. brennan

    brennan Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2016
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    280
    Location:
    Gloucester
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I rather think this will be a losing battle. There is a housing crisis in this country but nobody wants a new housing estate next door. Out-of-area objections carry no weight in planning matters and if the development is a part of the local development plan then it's a fait accompli . Even if it's kicked out this time, the developers will be back when planning restrictions are eased . A glance at google maps shows a lot of space around the site that is ripe for development. Being hemmed in by housing will be an increasing problem for many heritage railways and will very likely result in some having to reduce their activities or, in the worst case, close altogether.
     
    Hando, Sheff, nickt and 2 others like this.
  3. Johnb

    Johnb Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Messages:
    14,165
    Likes Received:
    16,219
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired, best job I've ever had
    Location:
    Buckinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    There’s nothing to be lost by trying. Locally we have fought off a couple of intrusive developments. Mangapps is unique and worth saving, the small relics museum has a collection that York would die for.
     
    Hando, ady, 3ABescot and 1 other person like this.
  4. Ploughman

    Ploughman Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    5,793
    Likes Received:
    2,640
    Occupation:
    Ex a lot of things.
    Location:
    Near where the 3 Ridings meet
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    If the development goes ahead. Which I hope it doesn't.
    How long before the first noise complaint against the railway?
    It wont matter who was there first.
     
    Hando likes this.
  5. D1002

    D1002 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    8,617
    Likes Received:
    6,365
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Enfield
    It certainly benefits from the wide open spaces as can be seen in this video I shot just over a year ago:
    Mangapps Railway Museum, 13th October 2021.

     
    3ABescot likes this.
  6. Johnb

    Johnb Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Messages:
    14,165
    Likes Received:
    16,219
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired, best job I've ever had
    Location:
    Buckinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    This is one rural scene that will be lost. The station building is from Laxfield the terminus of the Mid Suffolk Light Railway

    A79152B8-BA6B-4A60-B8AA-191EF8618DBD.jpeg
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2022
  7. D1039

    D1039 Guest

    I'd ban building on undeveloped land. Maldon though has/had a central government imposed target of - I think - 623 new homes a year for 20 years. I know the area only a little (my boss lived there) but if you are building, then building near a NR railway is better than away from it. Hopefully it would have a high % of affordable/social housing (it won't)

    No it won't, that's English law
     
    Hando and 3ABescot like this.
  8. Robin

    Robin Well-Known Member Friend

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,389
    Likes Received:
    1,744
    Location:
    Stourbridge
    The actual wording of the application is 250 dwellings and 54 Units of Keyworker/NHS Accommodation.
     
    huochemi and D1039 like this.
  9. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    What would you suggest as a viable alternative? The UK already has some of the least generously proportioned newbuilds in the developed world. Perhaps demolish semi-detached suburbia in favour of three, four of five storey buildings?

    We've rural locations everywhere that many born into families which are more a part of the local scenery than the roads network who have no work and no prospect of anywhere affordable. Are they somehow disposable, whilst gentrification procedes apace, with incomers often economically inactive and playing little part in local life, beyond opposing any and all new development.
     
    The Green Howards likes this.
  10. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    25,986
    Likes Received:
    56,894
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    We've got town centres that are dying on their arses with boarded up retail units, which are surrounded by soulless estates two miles out of town with no facilities and which only work by continued reliance on cars. (Salisbury, look at me when I am talking to you ...) So I'd suggest a start could be made by sensitive redevelopment in town centres, with a shift of land use away from retail and back towards mixed use residential and leisure.

    Tom
     
    PaulB, brmp201, 5944 and 22 others like this.
  11. garth manor

    garth manor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,674
    Likes Received:
    435
    Mangapps itself could be attractive to developers ?
     
  12. D1039

    D1039 Guest

    The thought had occurred to me

    Around 15%. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) said at least 10% should be affordable, subject to some exceptions. It used to be higher, 30%?

    I'd be more sympathetic if rural new build was going to (and staying) with locals.

    I'd have a penal tax on Air BnB and the like.

    Three, four of five storey buildings doesn't faze me, nor does increasing density in low density areas. We tend to have new developments of shoe box semi-detached and large numbers of 'executive' detacheds. Looking around Bath (other Georgian cities are available) shows next to none of these, you got 3 and 4 storey terraced town houses.

    I'd up the % on affordables. 30% +. Maldon has 1000 on the waiting list, this development with 50 won't dent it.

    I'd extend the bands upwards for council tax too.

    I don't think 2* these 300 house developments a year on greenfield in Maldon to meet targets are sustainable.

    The real benefit would be more people living outside the SE, reducing pressure.

    Declaring an interest, I live in a 1999 detached house.
     
    Mrcow, 3ABescot, Bluenosejohn and 3 others like this.
  13. The Green Howards

    The Green Howards Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2016
    Messages:
    14,078
    Likes Received:
    7,588
    Occupation:
    Layabout
    Location:
    Lurking
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Unfortunately, "affordable" seems to translate to "add to BTL/AirBnB portfolio". And there are firms of lawyers out there whose sole function is to find loopholes to exploit so that the affordable housing doesn't get built.
     
    Hando, 3ABescot and johnofwessex like this.
  14. WesternRegionHampshireman

    WesternRegionHampshireman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2021
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    198
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hampshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Oh well, another one bites the dust.
    You don't think they'll let the MHR keep 47-579 "James Nightall GC" and have 80078 do you?

    They are lacking in engines ATM.
     
  15. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    There's a lot to unpack there Tom. You're perfectly correct about town (and city) centres. The shift to an online economy effectively leaves precious little which can't be done from in front of a screen and clearly some serious rethink is needed. There are only so many small batch coffee roasters and nail bars needed per 100,000 of population.

    It's a challenge and not one I'm aware is being met yet, here and across Europe/US. There might be some pointers with regard to planning considerations in several completely new developments in the UAE, but those will only point to how systems might be managed and emphatically aren't any proforma for how existing UK town centres ought to be handled .... for which, we need a serious conversation of a sort I'm unaware of anywhere.

    What that doesn't address however is the issue, of villages effectively dying for want of basic facilities, or the wider problem in rural areas, of pricing local people out of their home communities ... unless we're just happy to say "tough biccies, that's the economy", in which case the inevitable backlash against selfish gentrification will be throughly well deserved.

    I have a concern in the context of the discussion on our forum that whilst it's (naturally) biased towards heritage rail. I seem to be detecting some double standards here. The same folk justifying a zero development stance might want to revisit their own posts concerning facilities developments on our lines, lest we run the risk of "one rule for us, another for everyone else". That way lies NIMBYism. It's a tightrope we walk with everyone else.

    Could I suggest if we're to continue chewing the fat on this one, we don't bury Mangapps but start a new thread in General Chat, to keep (all bar one of ) our moderators happy?
     
    Hando and Christopher125 like this.
  16. H Cloutt

    H Cloutt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2018
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    1,314
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Battle
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Could I just ask what the local plan says? If these site are designated in the local plan for housing - then the plans will be passed. If they are not in the plan then it is likely that the application will be turned down.

    The time to object to sites being designated for housing is when the local plan is being developed not when the application is msde.
     
    hyboy likes this.
  17. The Green Howards

    The Green Howards Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2016
    Messages:
    14,078
    Likes Received:
    7,588
    Occupation:
    Layabout
    Location:
    Lurking
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Maldon's Local Development Plans are here.
     
  18. guycarr360

    guycarr360 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,414
    Likes Received:
    2,729
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chester le Street County Durham
    We are going through the housing development scenario at a business i help run, disposing of over 30 acres of land, under an enabling development case.
    Couple of points, affordable housing is a number that can be negotiated with the local authority, we have it down to 5%, and hope to reduce it further, same as any section 106.
    Why, it increases the top line of every other house, or, we build the affordable proportion away from the main estate, or buy out local landlords, and hand the housing to the local council.
    The value of an "affordable house", is very close to £500,000, every house on our estate is below that value, up to 5 bedroom detached units.
    The perceived value by central government of a "affordable house", is based on a home counties scenario, we benefit hugely from that.
    Time for the locals, and supporters to get going, we have cast iron safety issues, that prevent another developer alongside us trying, those are the issues planners take notice of.

    And first hand from the local MD of the national builder we are using, they expect the housing recession to end in February, and are on an aggressive land Aquisition trail, building their land banks up again, at low land values. Every house they build, they sell, and are open to other builder acquisitions as well. Housing market is extremely buoyant in his words.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2022
  19. Matt37401

    Matt37401 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    15,181
    Likes Received:
    11,491
    Occupation:
    Nosy aren’t you?
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Those thoughts are maybe for another thread? Kicking someone whilst they’re down springs to mind.
     
    60017 likes this.
  20. ruddingtonrsh56

    ruddingtonrsh56 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    Likes Received:
    1,461
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nottinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The dust hasn't even been created to be bitten yet - the railway isn't closing. There's a possibility that in a few years houses may be built close by that will chamnge the backdrop of the railway and potentially bring in some difficult neighbours. Not nothing, but certainly not the end of the railway yet.

    Also, 80078 seems to mainly be based at the Mid Norfolk Railway which are even shorter on steam power than the Mid Hants (both operational and out of service) - why would the privately owned loco move to a completely different railway that is further from its owners base where it was overhauled?
     
    3ABescot, ykin01, mgl and 6 others like this.

Share This Page