rugbyunion
Latest News:
We are The Warriors! The Mighty Worcester Warriors!

This message board is for all things Warriors' and Rugby.
When posting please be aware that posts may be read by youngsters and respect other posters.
Click Here for the Message Board Rules


MESSAGES->author
SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Abberley (IP Logged)
25 November, 2018 11:21
There has been a flurry of publicity in the local media recently requesting comments on the current review of the South Worcestershire Development Plan.

I have only had chance so far to skim the Executive Summary but a couple of things immediately caught my eye:

Quote:
Land Making an Overall Limited Contribution to Green Belt Purposes

19. There is only one parcel, to the north of Worcester, where the extent and type of development is judged to be such that Green Belt purposes are not being met.

Whilst this land nominally has sport and recreation uses, these are of a scale which severely limits any openness, either visual of physical, with no connection in terms of role to the wider Green Belt.

Quote:
Recommendations for Insetting of Major Developed Sites

Sixways - Inset as a self-contained site of contiguous built form

Quote:
Conclusions

21. The Green Belt is judged to be performing its strategic function overall...
...Only one parcel (S15, site of the Sixways Stadium), which is strongly bounded and largely developed, has been identified as making a Limited Contribution to Green Belt purposes...

In discussions about the possible motives of potential bidders for Warriors it has often been stated that the site has little development value because of its Green Belt status.

Could our resdient experts comment on whether this review might alter their opinion?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 25/11/2018 11:57 by Abberley.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
25 November, 2018 11:34
Probably explains why we have 4 land and property developers on the board.

Plus a huge benefit to WRFC as their land will become incredibly valuable.

Another WRFC land sale and build of even better facilities than they have now - champioship team maybe??

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review
Drutz (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 11:32
Quote:
Faithful_City
Probably explains why we have 4 land and property developers on the board.
Plus a huge benefit to WRFC as their land will become incredibly valuable.

Another WRFC land sale and build of even better facilities than they have now - champioship team maybe??

JP


Errr no.



Pulling the boots on for one more year

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 12:58
Money talks Drutz as it did when we moved from Bevere

The land would be worth a fortune

JP

 
gmem
Re: SWDP Review
Garym (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 13:48
On the plus side, the bit of green belt I live on, should stay as it is! Mind you they are building 1000 houses on the opposite side of the lane.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review
Drutz (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 15:52
Quote:
Faithful_City
Money talks Drutz as it did when we moved from Bevere
The land would be worth a fortune

JP

And where would we go JP in Worcester with the acreage we have the parking we have and the ease of access for coaches etc to travel to and from matches?

All I can say there is no appetite to move currently, plus Weston's is listed as agricultural land not green belt, so big difference.



Pulling the boots on for one more year

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 16:25
Idont know Drutz.

Just mulling around what might happen if the area around Sixways changes under the latest SWDP, which I believe is under consideration at the moment.

If Westons field becomes worth several £millions, selling and moving has to be taken serioiusly. Remember over the last 150years we have played in several locations in Worcester


JP

 
gmem
Re: SWDP Review
Garym (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 16:39
I have now read the report and while it doesnít have a specific date on it, it is generally dated as October 2018 and itís main recommendation is take six ways out of the green belt. The land is not currently in the swdp for development, but I presume that is because it is currently green belt. If the report is accepted not sure how long it would take for its status to be renewed and then it becomes fair game for the developers to appeal against the current swdp recommendation. Over to the property experts

 
Brummagem Bertie
Re: SWDP Review
Brummagem Bertie (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 17:50
Quote:
Faithful_City
Probably explains why we have 4 land and property developers on the board.
Plus a huge benefit to WRFC as their land will become incredibly valuable.

Another WRFC land sale and build of even better facilities than they have now - champioship team maybe??

JP

The WRFC land isn't included in the Sixways site for the report's purposes and the report recommends that the WRFC site retains its designation as part of the greenbelt.

So you can put your hares back in their box, JP.



Whatever you do, do it safely!

 
Brummagem Bertie
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Brummagem Bertie (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 18:09
I've also now read the report and my take on it is as follows:

1. The Sixways site is defined as the parcel of land between Hindlip Lane, the A449 and the cut, including the Highways Depot between the South Stand and J6.

2. The report recommends removing the Sixways site from the green belt, with its subsequent protections, because it does not contribute to the purposes for which green belt was established or have much of the characteristics of green belt land.

3. The Sixways site does not fulfil the function or form of greenbelt land because of its existing development, not because of any proposed development.

4. Whilst removing green belt status from the Sixways site would open the site up to development, the report does not contain any recommendations as to what type of development, as that is outwith the parameters of the report.

5. If the report recommendation to remove the Sixways site from the greenbelt is adopted, it will then be subject to further consultation, as part of the wider SWDP Review, as to what sort of development should be permitted.

6. The report currently notes that the Highways Depot is currently class B1 and B8, which is offices and storage and distribution. Residential is in class C whilst sporting use is class D.

7. Whilst the report does not make any mention of what development uses might follow any removal of the site's green belt designation, the report suggests that any future development proposals will have to be scrutinised and assessed for their effect on the adjacent green belt land, including WRFC and the land the other side of the cut.

8. Even if the recommendation in the report is adopted, it seems that this only then becomes part of the proposed review of the SWDP, so will not be effective until 2021? So we seem as though we are still a long way off any possible development of the site that doesn't have to be determined under current rules.



Whatever you do, do it safely!

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
TeflonTed (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 19:22
BB, just for total clarity, re. the designated parcel, can I presume the NE boundary to be Pershore Lane?

 
Brummagem Bertie
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Brummagem Bertie (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 19:47
Yes Ted, you can.



Whatever you do, do it safely!

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
26 November, 2018 22:20
@#$%&!!!

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
TeflonTed (IP Logged)
27 November, 2018 08:46
Quote:
Faithful_City
@#$%&!!!

Bug ger.

Who?

Why?

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Abberley (IP Logged)
27 November, 2018 08:49
WRFC might still benefit from any future redesignation of the Sixways site - provided a relevant overage clause was included in the recent buy-out?

If the recommendation that Sixways be "Inset as a self-contained site of contiguous built form" were to be adopted, presumably that would have to take place on the areas currently used for the car parks? How many more cars could squeezed onto Westons?

 
gmem
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Garym (IP Logged)
27 November, 2018 10:39
Quote:
TeflonTed
Quote:
Faithful_City
@#$%&!!!

Bug ger.

Who?

Why?

because it is in a different package to the Sixways site and is never mentioned as a possible change. The report was very useful for us as we live in the green belt (thank you Abberley)

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
West Brom Warrior (IP Logged)
27 November, 2018 10:42
Bertie is spot on with his analysis, these are really cosmetic changes to the status of the land it certainly doesn't increase the chances of land being developed by more than 1% or so.

However some on here (maybe just 1) do like to moan that the ground is in the middle of nowhere, perhaps they would be happier if the land around the ground was developed on significantly

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
TeflonTed (IP Logged)
27 November, 2018 13:35
Quote:
West Brom Warrior
Bertie is spot on with his analysis, these are really cosmetic changes to the status of the land it certainly doesn't increase the chances of land being developed by more than 1% or so.
However some on here (maybe just 1) do like to moan that the ground is in the middle of nowhere, perhaps they would be happier if the land around the ground was developed on significantly

No, itís not just you.

Talk to Saucie!

 
centrethere
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
centrethere (IP Logged)
27 November, 2018 15:19
If you put six ways into google maps in satellite form you can really see the limited value of the site for the environment and nature etc . One rugby pitch as a carbon sink and for the worms and blackbirds . That is it!

 
Redditch Crowd
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Redditch Crowd (IP Logged)
27 November, 2018 16:30
The Ringway and HA sites to the east and west of Pershore Lane will be developed for leisure or more profitable commercial uses and the incumbent operations relocated - for the foreseeable future, the remainder of the locale between the motorway and Offerton lane (and north thereof) will remain untouched....

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
West Brom Warrior (IP Logged)
28 November, 2018 08:57
Quote:
TeflonTed
Quote:
West Brom Warrior
Bertie is spot on with his analysis, these are really cosmetic changes to the status of the land it certainly doesn't increase the chances of land being developed by more than 1% or so.
However some on here (maybe just 1) do like to moan that the ground is in the middle of nowhere, perhaps they would be happier if the land around the ground was developed on significantly

No, itís not just you.

Talk to Saucie!

Ted that was who I was talking about, personally not living near Worcester I find the ground in a most convenient location just off the motorway as it means I can drive to games and get away fairly easily.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: SWDP Review - Greenbelt Status
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
28 November, 2018 09:14
If we can grow, be successful and expand the stadium(when ready)including parking facilities, it is in exactly the right place. Especially id we can promote it for national interest games and regional finals/fixtures. Rugby and Football, or any other sport.

Straight off the M5

JP


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?