Today’s article is by Andrew Heaton, the second respondent to our recent request for contributions to the Journal. (You are welcome to be the third!). He highlights a threat to a section of Offa’s Dyke. It’s not far from Oswestry Hill Fort (enough said!) You may also recall that another section of the Dyke suffered criminal damage recently. This time though the threat is legal.
[Please note that all articles by Guest Bloggers express their own views and perceptions which may or may not correspond with our own.]
_______________________________________________________________
Turmoil in Trefonen
by Andrew Heaton
There’s turmoil in Trefonen ! Under the guise of the ‘emerging SAMdev plan’, a property developer has applied for permission to build 12 homes in a field in Trefonen – a field that contains a section of nationally important and internationally renowned Offa’s Dyke. The planned development is within the setting of the Scheduled Ancient Monument and the plans show the nearest proposed house being only about 90 metres from the scheduled area and a mere 20 metres from the closest extant length. Large lengths of Offa’s Dyke were scheduled a long time ago before the importance of the less dramatic lengths was recognised and therefore this proposed housing development may be adjacent to nationally important archaeology which is not protected simply because it has not been assessed.
Clwyd & Powys Archaeological Trust (CPAT) have displayed on their website,‘Conservation Statement Offa’s Dyke ‘Conservation Statement Offa’s Dyke’’; it refers to this section of the Dyke as it heads North from Trefonen as “the monument becomes more impressive and continuous”! Not impressive enough for English Heritage it would seem !

Conceptual plan of the development – .note the close proximity of the Dyke – the closest section is just 20 metres away.
In the past, English Heritage have stated that the likelihood of finds in this field to be high. The proposed development site contains a number of potentially important archaeological features and remains, including earthworks of different dates and an ancient stone hedge. To the best of my knowledge there have been no exploratory investigations and currently, no heritage impact assessment report is available. It is clearly essential that such work should be conducted before a planning decision is taken otherwise really important archaeology could be destroyed.
The ‘emerging SAMdev plan’, enables developers to put in applications for building, on hitherto protected pieces of land. As a result of the lack of a five-year supply, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) “presumption in favour of sustainable development” is now the main planning policy consideration in determining the application. The Planning, design & access Statement may be seen here.
The ‘advice’ from English Heritage with regard to this site is as follows :
‘The application area is within about 100 metres of a well preserved upstanding and scheduled section of Offa’s Dyke, national monument no 1006262. I made a pre-application site visit to the site, accompanied by the applicant’s agent on 16th January 2014 and subsequently confirm that English Heritage does not object to this application in principle. Following numerous objection comments made to the local authority and forwarded to English Heritage, we made a further site visit on 10th March and this has not resulted in changes to our view”.
I’m astounded that English Heritage should take this stance. Planning Policy Statement 5 (Development Management page 8) Policy HE9 Additional Policy principles Guiding the Consideration of Applications for Consent relating to designated Heritage Assets states that :
“There should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets, the more significant the asset, the greater the presumption in favour of its conservation should be. Once lost, heritage assets cannot be replaced and their loss has a cultural, environmental, economic and social impact. ‘Significance’ can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting”. When substantial harm to or loss of significance is a corollary of development, the policy states “local planning authorities should refuse consent”.
_______________________________________________________________
Developments within Trefonen during the past 15 years or so have already impacted not only upon the Scheduled Monument (Offa’s Dyke) itself, but also the Offa’s Dyke footpath which has effectively been corralled into a corridor between houses. The monument is of national importance, and the attitude that has been taken by landowners/developers and the lack of control exercised on the development impacts by the Local Planning Authority are both outrageous.
Although the Dyke eventually flattens out in this field, its ditch will survive well and probably contains important and unique archaeological information together with invaluable environmental data. The physical essential form also continues down the length of Chapel Lane, where it has been built on by properties. But these sit at a raised level and allow the line and form of the Dyke to be visualised as a continuation of the linear feature when viewed from both the Offa’s Dyke Trail to the West and the main Oswestry road to the East. Originally, the Dyke ran behind Church View & Meadowlea, where the proposal has new houses and garages.
English Heritage cited the importance of this linear visual attribute, when considering recent (November 2013) Planning Application for a single dwelling just 500m from the nearby application site Ref. 13/01025/FUL, which was refused permission to be built. The proposed development is for 12 dwellings and in a more prominent position than the one refused – directly between Offa’s Dyke & Offa’s Dyke Trail Path. Yet this time, there are no objections from English Heritage. Where’s the consistency ? How may 12 dwellings have less of an impact than one ?
The proposed development is on a site of historical interest. Apart from containing a significant section of Offa’s Dyke, the field was certainly used as an enclosure for sheep and cattle, that drovers brought down from North Wales & Anglesey – yet it certainly pre-dates the Enclosure Act of 1845. The animals would be kept overnight in Trefonen and when leaving, would be taken in a south-easterly direction and thence to London.
The access point through Whitridge Way, is where there is an historic stone hedge. The Applicant implies that the existing straight boundary is associated with the previous estate development – but this is not the case ! The hedge-line is on old Tithe maps from as far back as 1838! The stone hedge has been estimated to be over 400 years old. One section of the stone hedge, has some clearly ancient and worn stone steps and a stile, which was the means by which the drovers could easily leave the field without releasing any of the animals.
Shropshire Council has a responsibility to protect our heritage; the stone hedge contributes a great deal to the local character of the area and its loss would be detrimental – all should be done to protect it. To gain access to the development, would necessitate the partial removal of this stone hedge – this is simply unacceptable!
The Conceptual plan of the development (see top pic) shows a new footpath link to Offa’s Dyke Trail Path, with possible walkers’ parking indicated. This is ridiculous ! How will visitors be expected to find it, tucked away at the end of an estate cul-de-sac ? Is it appropriate, to send more traffic up an estate cul-de-sac, searching for 5 possible parking spaces which are likely to be full when they find them ? This is just a token gesture item. Offa’s Dyke would lose its significance if a new development is built – ‘significance’ being not just the physical presence of the Dyke, but also the setting in which it exists. In the field of the proposed development, there is a stretch of very visible Dyke, which is over 100 metres long; to build houses in the near vicinity would ruin the context of this section of the Dyke.

View of site as now (looking North). Offa’s Dyke indicated by red line. Walkers on the Dyke path have virtually the same view… at present, but 12 houses built within the yellow box would of course destroy it.

A view from on the Dyke (looking South). New houses would be just 75 metres from it (by the yellow line).
.

The view from the proposed site of a new dwelling – looking North, back at the Dyke (red line), just 75 metres away; but note, that the nearest section is just 20 metres away.
Paragraph 123 of the NPPF states that planning policies and decisions should aim to: “identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason. “This area is currently a particularly tranquil part of the village, located alongside the Offa’s Dyke monument and is bordered by the narrow Chapel Lane to the East and the Offa’s Dyke long distance footpath to the West. Both are well used for quiet, passive recreation by villagers and visitors alike whilst taking in the local views and natural environmental features.
Some readers of this article may feel that I’ve been ‘unfair’ to English Heritage. In a sense, that may be true; after all, when we consider such aspects as ‘importance’, ‘context’ and ‘setting’, these are very much subjective opinions. The view from English Heritage, is that building 12 houses within 20m of the Dyke is ‘acceptable’; my view differs, but who is right? There are, however, a considerable number of material objections that may also be made, by referring to tangible & quantifiable facts. Since these are beyond the scope of this article, I’ll provide just one brief example.
Shropshire County Council Highways Specification for Residential/Industrial Estate Roads Feb 2000 Section 2.3.5 Access Road (4.8m wide) states that“A standard access road is a short cul-de-sac giving direct access to no more than 50 dwellings. The normal maximum length permitted is 100 metres, if not a loop”. At 130m long, the current estate cul-de-sac is already well over the 100m maximum length. The extension will add on a further 80m, making an extended total of 210m ! (It cannot be made a loop). At over twice the normal maximum length, will the cul-de-sac be built ? Will Shropshire Council take any notice of their own Highways specifications ? I’d be willing to bet good money, that they’ll ignore their own ruling.
The ‘need’ to build more houses, is the over-riding priority. The willingness of Shropshire Council, to ignore facts – even their own, typifies the kind of thing that we are fighting against; not just the villagers in Trefonen, but in many other towns and villages across the nation. I’m convinced that this will (deservedly) ‘hurt’ the government at the next election.
Should developers be allowed to put 12 dwellings so close to the Dyke ? Should the field be ‘Open to Offa’s?’ If anyone can help us to fight this case or tell us more about the significance (if any) of stone hedges, please contact me – pubrunner2000@yahoo.com
19 comments
Comments feed for this article
31/03/2014 at 09:03
georgenash
Dear Heritage Journal, I am reading the plight of Offa’s Dyke from Israel and my comment is that the Inspectors of EH are not doing their job; they are not considering their own guidance. I think that with Offa’s Dyke and Old Oswestry Hillfort, we should be complaining bitterly to their line-managers in order to get a fair and satisfactory outcome for both monuments, which incidentally are internationally important. I have no idea of the rationale behind the decisions that are being made. They are clearly suiting the needs of the developer rather than the general will of the communities involved. George Nash
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
31/03/2014 at 09:27
Diana Baur
Campaign HOOOH hands off old oswestry Hillfort know to the millithought and feeling exactly how you feel. Something is more than very wrong when the only way to, apparently kick start the economy, is to cover this beautiful land and our cultural heritage with ticky tacky (affordable? -I don’t so) houses. English Heritage are fast becoming “English Inheritance for some” and the goal posts are being moved so rapidly and the playing fields are now being “tilted” (Osbourne’s most recent word ) that the groundswell of objection will reach the ballot box. Keep fighting and good luck!
31/03/2014 at 11:30
calmgrove
??!#***¡¿@%
Words fail me. I can only splutter.
31/03/2014 at 13:03
lanceleuven
It’s astonishing that they would even be contemplating something so clearly destructive.
31/03/2014 at 13:18
Tish Farrell
The fact remains that once you let one development breach the development boundary, it allows developers to cite it as precedent for the next development. This is not simply about 12 houses. If a prime site has been nibbled into, it is only the start. English Heritage seems to have lost the plot all ends up.
31/03/2014 at 13:25
Tish Farrell
One thing everyone could do. We need to pressurize MPs to get planning laws changed. We cannot keep having developers dictate terms – either by sitting on massive land banks that they wish to develop in their own sweet time, or by their ability to threaten local authorities with judicial reviews. If they want to go to judicial review then they should pay all sides’ costs so the public is neither footing the bill, nor their public servants being bullied on cost grounds by the threat of review, and thereby making the wrong decisions to save public money.
31/03/2014 at 13:52
Diana Baur
Brilliantly said Trish – trouble is when your
MP cites badgers as the ones who are moving goalposts you are on a losing streak to start with
31/03/2014 at 16:01
Andrew Heaton
It should be noted, that there is also another development being considered for Trefonen. This is for 20+ houses on a field inbetween Chapel Lane and the main road to/from Oswestry.
The site is entirely unsuitable, but that won’t concern Shropshire Council.The conceptual plan shows that the backs of houses will be facing the main road . . . nice view ! And all this, on a field which is prone to flooding. Better still, Trefonen has no Post Office or village shop and has just three buses a day.
The site would be on the other side of Offa’s Dyke and the linearity, context and setting of the moment would be spoiled for ever.
A 1,200 year old monument v a 5 year housing plan; I wonder which is the most important – surely, as a monument ages, it becomes more important ? (Unlike the 5 year plan).
31/03/2014 at 16:27
Diana Baur
Developers rule.
It seems this whole area is grist for Shropshire Council’s “buildings-up-as fast-as-you-can-get-them” mill. Pipers and tunes spring to mind. Cultural awareness? Flood plains? Dwindling local bus services? Insufficient schools, hospitals and other services? Planning? What Planning? Responsibility? What responsibility? Obligations? What obligations?
31/03/2014 at 17:22
heritageaction
A good recent case at Upton, Worcs with lots of relevance to both Offa’s and Oswestry, http://ow.ly/d/22eE
The newts and the trees didn’t win the day for the objectors, but the landscape and the bats did!
The harm that would be caused to those would “significantly and demonstrably outweigh all the benefits which the development would produce.”
31/03/2014 at 20:12
Andrew Heaton
As mentioned by Trish & Diana, the government clearly has some thinking to do. We shouldn’t be in this position -one in which we need to put the MPs under pressure.
All governments make mistakes, some governments even make colossal ‘blunders’; but having blundered, the government shouldn’t keep repeating the same mistakes. In my opinion, these planning laws will be the cause of some considerable hurt to the government, come the time of the next election.
Governments do ‘have’ to do some unpopular things; most fair-minded persons realise that the country is in a difficult financial position, if the price of petrol goes up, we just grit our teeth and get on with it – it’s a kind of short-term pain and we adjust accordingly.
For those on the receiving end of some very dubious planning decisions, the ‘pain’ will always be there. An Englishman’s home is supposed to be his castle . . . if we permanently change the area in which we live, we are left with that outcome forever – and there will always be a constant reminder of our anger- provided by these new developments. People are not going to forget such issues; in a couple of years, there will be another election – I believe that people will remember this planning fiasco and vote accordingly.
02/04/2014 at 17:15
juliacbuss
I am writing from USA to say please don’t build a development so close to the dyke. Once this place is developed it will be irrevocably changed forever.
02/04/2014 at 18:45
Diana Baur
Thank you for your support Julia – wish that some of our councillors would realise how much of a global issue and concern all these things are – the support from across the world has been very heartening. Just let’s hope it has some effect.
04/04/2014 at 07:55
Mary Sadtler
The building of houses adjacent to Offa’s Dyke should not take place. The Dyke wanders through a countryside of outstanding beauty. Keep this part of England and Wales an area of outstanding beauty and do not destroy its amazing heritage
04/04/2014 at 16:16
David Millett
To build on such a landmark and historically valuable area is an example of the worst human behavior. Our job must be to preserve and promote the use of areas like the Offa’s Dyke, not to build on over it. Please save the Offa’s Dyke.
David Millett
Walked the Offa’s Dyke in 2008-2009
California, USA
04/04/2014 at 17:47
Ric M
The proposed development is in the ward of Councillor Keith Barrow, who is the Conservative leader of Shropshire Council.
04/04/2014 at 20:20
Diana Baur
Councillor Keith Barrow, Leader of Shropshire Council has made it abundantly clear, along with others of his ilk like Owen Paterson, that he cannot (dare not?) express his opinion as this might “unfairly” affect the “democratic process” (what democratic process?) and may have repercussions in connection with planning, development etc etc.(developers, builders?) In other words he is a leader with no brief other than to be a figure head.
What he can and has said is that he remembers and very much liked playing on the hillfort as a boy. I do not know what he feels about Trefonen where he now lives.
Any real expressions of opinion or interest from him will not be forthcoming and might be seen to be favouring one side or another (?)- indeed as he was quoted to have said quite profoundly in respect of the Hillfort, in a recent copy of the Shropshire Star – “there will be some who will be for it and some who will be against it.”
One can but “stand in awe” at the lukewarm, banal nature of such a platitude in respect of the loss of crucially important heritage sites and settings such as Offas Dyke and the Hillfort.
19/04/2014 at 11:43
Pete Buckley
There are surely plenty of so called “brownfield” sites where new housing can be provided without the wanton destruction of our natural and ancient heritage. Places such as Offa’s Dyke are a national asset and should be treated accordingly. Once destroyed they are gone forever.
19/04/2014 at 12:10
heritageaction
Yes but developers (who helped the Government write the policy) prefer to build large expensive houses on nice, clean sites…