Hambe Close

APRIL 1992 PLANNING CONSENT PASSED FOR A NEW CUL DE SAC ROAD. Research by Joan West

APRIL 1986. COMMENT IN HALLMARK. - PALMER AND HARVEY TO CLOSE

We had no idea that Palmer & Harvey were to close, last time when we featured the history of the premises.   It’s only a rumour, but if planning application is submitted for houses on the site, it will be a sad end to the old tennis court.  It’s not a pretty building, but very much part of old Lacey Green and an accepted building doing a very useful job in supplying jobs for village people.   So if anyone asked us what is best for the community – 20 new houses or 20 local jobs – we should have no hesitation in saying the latter

DECEMBER 1990.   Report in Hallmark by Councillor Dennis Claydon

Palmer and Harvey are currently considering the future development of their site in Church Lane.   One suggestion proposes the erection of twenty-four, two and three bedroom houses.   Twenty of these would be for sale on the open market whilst four would be retained under a Trust, administered by the Parish Council, for first time buyers.  The Company however are prepared to listen to local opinion and are anxious that the village should be consulted.  It is hoped to arrange a public meeting in the near future when positive contributions will receive due consideration

PLANNING PERMISSION

1991 Palmer and Harvey applied for planning permission to demolish the old indoor tennis court, now a wholesale sweet distribution centre, and the adjoining canteen building built by the engineering company Austin Hoy.  The application was to then build private houses

LETTER to HALLMARK   February 1991   from Laurence Rostron

Dear Editor,

  I believe that most residents in the area now know that Palmer and Harvey appear to be preparing a planning application for high density housing i.e. 20+ houses, on this site.

  Adjacent land/ gardens have previously been offered for sale or subject to separate planning applications.

  I have been advised that if planning permission for high density housing is approved for the Palmer and Harveysite then it is virtually certain that high density development approval will be given to the other site i.e., the domino effect, possibly leading to the building of 50 or 60 houses.

  I have visited most residents living in Church Lane and the vast majority are against the high density project.

  Can I ask you to publish my letter so that any resident who has an interest in this development and who would lijke to help fight what is , in my opinion, a totally inappropriate planning application can contact me for further details.

Laurence Rostron, Grace Cottage, Church Lane.

FEBRUARY 1991 HALLMARK EDITORIAL

Palmer and Harvey site

  Every so often a section of the village becomes all steamed up about a planning application or, as at this site in Church Lane. the possibility of such an application for, to date, only a consultative draft plan for 24 very mixed development has been circulated.   The protesters in this Church end of the village are suggesting only 4 houses and are afraid that other land will be drawn into the site.

  The District Councillor is right pointing out that this site is redevelopment that can’t be stopped but any extra land would be new development subject to planning constraint promised for this area.

  We have looked again at the Village Plan and the Residents Association Village Appraisal and this draft seems to us to have got it just about right.   What worries us I that the protesters may go too far and the developers could say ‘to hell with it’ let’s re–let it with original users, right of warehouse and factory space for which they would need no planning permission and could be the worst of both worlds.

FEBRUARY 1991 HALLMARK by COUNCILLOR JEAN GABBITAS

  I am still awaiting with interest the full application plans for the re-development of the P&H site in Church Lane.   I hope that many village people will try to see them and write in, both to myself and the Planning Department of High Wycombe when the time comes.

  The plan shown at a consultation meeting with your Parish Council, County Councillor, and myself showed groups of or clusters of tiny cottages, four of which might be handled by a Trust for local people, and grassy areas one of which might be handed over to the parish for a seat or swing.   No extra roads cut into the site and the footpath retained.  Therefore we thought the ideas worthy of further consideration.   We made our suggestions about improvements to parking and requested fewer than their original suggestion and I understand that considerable amendments have been made.

  The final plans will have to enhance this ‘Conservation Area’ if they hope to gain approval.   However, if this should happen, it will not automatically follow that surrounding gardens and fields can be developed.   Re-development and change of use of an existing industrial site is quite different.

  My wish for the site was always for sheltered accommodation for the elderly – it would have answered a need and generated little traffic.   But I must admit that what is being proposed might attract young and old, singles and couples.

  I shall give the plans careful consideration and then decide.   Please take part in the process and do the same.

LETTER TO HALLMARK   April 1991  from David Chalkley,

Dear Ted,

     In the last edition of Hallmark both you and Councillor Gabbitas commented on the proposed redevelopment of the Palmer and Harvey site.

  Significantly, neither of you mentions the main reason why so many people in the village are concerned about the high density development of 20 – 24 houses proposed, i.e. the extra traffic that would be generated.

    The Residents Association Village Appraisal highlighted road safety as the main concern of the vast majority of those who responded to the questionnaire.   It also showed that the average number of cars per household in Lacey Green was already approaching 2 in 1989.   There is no reason to expect a different number in Church Lane, and so a development of 20 new houses could result in 40 additional cars using the Lane and exiting onto the Main Road.

     Many people from the village use Church Lane for walking with their children and dogs in a pleasant and relatively safe environment.   We should take great care that we do not permanently destroy a valuable village asset, to say nothing about increasing danger on the roads, by allowing the development to go ahead in its present form.

    Yours sincerely,

    David Chalkley, Well Cottage, Church Lane.

LETTER TO HALLMARK August 1991   from Andrew D Stone

    I am writing on behalf of residents of Lacey Green and Loosley Row who were disappointed to see the failure of the application for smaller houses on the Palmer and Harvey site.   I wish to highlight some relevant community issues.

    Both villages have a majority of larger (and consequently, more expensive) house.  This means that even with the current lower house prices there are fewer younger residents in the village.   Over the past five or so years this has contributed to a reduction in the number of children attending St. John’s School by a complete class.   Taking children from outside the catchment area has cushioned the effect of reduction of school age children living in the village, but if this trend continues it could have a detrimental effect on our local school and the community.

    The provision of smaller houses would not only give our children the prospect of remaining in the village but there are also a number of local residents living in large houses who would welcome the chance to move to a smaller house without leaving the village;   this would place more larger houses on the market

     In Lacey Green, there is only one site where there is the possibility that smaller houses would be permitted – the Palmer and Harvey site – because there is considerable environmental gain in replacing a huge industrial building with houses.   As a comparison the ground floor area of the existing buildings on the site extends to about 23,000 square feet, the proposed development (houses and garages) would have covered 10,000 square feet, giving a considerable reduction in building mass.

   I do not believe that this lost opportunity was a “Threat to our village”.    It was a unique chance to give Lacey Green a true village centre very characteristic of many conservation areas and to contribute to a more balanced community providing continued support for local facilities.

    Hopefully Palmer and Harvey will reapply with a similar density scheme but will include the changes that will be necessary to make the proposal, acceptable to Wycombe District Council.   From experience neither Wycombe District Council nor Bucks. County Council are effective at enforcing restrictions on industrial activities and the reinstatement of industrial use of Palmer and Harvey could have unfortunate consequences for both residents and the community, particularly with lorry traffic on local roads.

   Yours sincerely

                             Andrew  D. Stone, Hillview, Little Lane, Loosley Row.

LETTER IN HALLMARK October 1991 from Laurence Rostron

LETTER IN HALLMARK December 1991 from Andrew Stone

RESEARCHER’S NOTE.   The contents of the two letters above have not been printed, simply because they continue to repeat the conflicting reports regarding the support or not being given in each opinion.   I do give you the following note added by The Editor of Hallmark : -

EDITOR’S NOTE  “ NO MORE LETTERS”

Your letters on this topic has gone on throughout the whole of 1991, so we will not continue it in 1992, let’s leave it to the Appeal Panel in April, but as Andrew Stone rightly says, if you have an opinion one way or the other write to your District Councillor, or straight to Wycombe Council Office, so that the Appeal gets a balanced picture of village thinking.

LETTER IN HALLMARK April 1992 from Laurence Rostron

Dear Editor,

    On February 26^th I attended the Wycombe & District Planning Application Panel Meeting and I was delighted to hear planning approval given to Palmer & Harvey for 9 houses on their site in Church Lane.   Whilst I would have preferred one or two fewer houses, I believe that the end result meets 90% of the wishes of most residents living around the site

    It was without doubt, a victory for democracy and common sense and a defeat for those who support high density development with little interest in the impact on our environment.

     However, the success of the evening was ‘blighted’ by Mrs Gabbitas who both publicly and petulantly described those of us who had dared to object to her own views as NIMBY’S (not in my back yard).   I find this charge offensive and I deeply resent it.

    Our objection to the original application was most certainly NOT about back yards (we all wanted this site to be re-developed).   Our concern was to ensure that the environment of this beautiful old rural lane, recognised as such in the Village Plan, was not destroyed by inappropriate development.

    The views expressed in the planning meeting documents by both Mrs Gabbitas and the Parish Council demonstrate that they are totally ‘out of touch’ with majority village opinion and I suggest it would benefit us all if they spent less time listening to themselves and more time listening to a broader cross section of village residents.

    Finally I would like to thank those residents, from all parts of the village, who have supported our campaign both verbally and in writing.   At times I have been almost overwhelmed by the level of this support and it is most gratifying that the original environmentally insensitive plan and its supporters have been defeated – not by NIMBY’s but by residents and on this occasion a sensible District Council

    Laurence Rostron, Grace Cottage, Church Lane.

REPORT IN HALLMARK February 1993 from Councillor Jean Gabbitas

FROM TENNIS COURT TO N. I, M, B. Y. Court?

ANOTHER APPLICATION

The saga of the Palmer and Harvey site reached the Planning Application Panel yet again when a local P. R. firm submitted an amendment to the application approved last year for nine houses.   At first they attempted to get even larger houses but finally settled for nine four-bedroomed properties.

REDEEMING FEATURES

The plan however has retained some of the features I requested at the start:   that the single access to the site be retained, that the footpath leading to the church be incorporated as a permanent feature, that no further house be squeezed in near Crown Cottages, and that the trees and hedges be covered by a preservation order where appropriate and that the materials now should be traditional and in keeping with the Conservation Order (not ‘nice neo-Georgian’ as originally suggested.

WARM WELCOME

I’m sure that when these houses are finally built and purchased the new-comers will receive the warm welcome typical of this village and that they will soon be caught up in our many activities.

LETTER IN HALLMARK February 1994 from Stuart King

The naming of Hambe Close continues to rumble on in your pages.   I have to confess that, mea culpa, it was originally my idea which was taken up by the Twinning Committee.   All the Europhobes can therefore address their hate mail to me!

OTHERS APPROVE

It is, of course, impossible to please everyone on such an issue but as the naming of a street has to go through various levels of parish and district approval, there must be others out there who think it a good idea.

NATIVES ARE QUITE FRIENDLY

Despite all the adverse comments the natives are really quite friendly and just think that after the last most recently named and in my view, unimaginatively baptised street in the village (Violet Close) you might have been stuck with Buttercup End or Poppy Way.

Stuart King, Holly Tree Cottage, Kiln Lane.

Researcher’s Note.   In March 2021 I asked Ronnie and Liz Lewin to give an update on life in Hambe Close.  Liz sent the following reply.

2021.   LETTER FROM HAMBE CLOSE from Liz Lewin

Hambe Close is a joyful place in which to live.   The nine houses are carefully placed so that they offer as much privacy as possible. We are particularly lucky to live in the corner which gives us the advantage of a garden that goes round the house on three sides.

The houses were built in 1993.  Only one of the houses is owned by the original residents – no.2 Anne and Steve Wilkinson.  We moved here from Beaconsfield in 2003.

At the moment there are two houses with school age children and one with a son at university.

During our time here there has always been at least one family with school age children.

Ronnie and I are the oldest (in age) residents and we feel particularly well supported by all our neighbours.   If I needed help I wouldn’t hesitate to knock on any door.

It is a sociable community and we have an annual Christmas get – together and a summer BBQ.  We definitely feel a part of a larger community but that is mainly because we are involved with some village organisations.

Please let us know if we can give you any more information

All good wishes,             Ronnie and Liz

Hambe Close
Map Source
Village	Lacey Green
Road To	Cul de Sac
Road To	Cul de Sac