Nimbys win bid to exclude locals from posh spa

Trusted article source icon
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

This is Gloucestershire

POSH second home owners have won their battle to stop local people using a luxury spa on a private lakeside estate near Cirencester.

Lodge owners at the exclusive Lower Mill Estate, in the Cotswold Water Park, made waves when it was suggested they share a £6.5 million state-of-the-art facility with locals.

The 13 residents said it would change the estate's nature, create more traffic and encourage crime.

Estate owner and environmental champion Jeremy Paxton had branded them as Nimbys – Not In My Back Yarders.

However, Cotswold District Council planning committee yesterday took their concerns on board and voted 11 to two not to allow local residents into the spa.

Their stand went against planning officers' recommendations and a county highways officer who said there would not be an increase in journeys.

It took members 10 minutes to find a valid planning reason to refuse based on traffic grounds.

They were criticised by Coun Margaret Rickman (LD. Cirencester, Chesterton), who supported the idea and said: "Members just don't like it and are scraping the barrel for a reason to reject it."

Minutes after the decision, outside the meeting, Mr Paxton vowed to lodge an immediate appeal.

"It's pure Nimbyism from people who have bought a holiday home which they visit infrequently and rent out," he said.

"The committee has gone against highways, a Government-appointed body which had no objection, and the officers' recommendation."

Mr Paxton had wanted to open up the ArtSpa to keep it financially viable and to integrate the community.

The plan was only a stopgap until all of the approved 575 lodges, which each carry a membership for six people, have been built as only 220 are currently occupied.

He told planning members "thousands" of people who weren't tenants already visited the estate daily, including fishing clubs and school nature groups and he vouched for the calibre of any new spa members.

"The criteria will be tougher than simply buying a holiday home," he said. "They will be fine, upstanding members of the community."

Norma Patterson, from Ashton Keynes, backed Mr Paxton's view and said opening the spa to new members would benefit the wider community.

Somerford Keynes Parish Council had said the scheme would "open the floodgates" and double the number of traffic movements.

Representing residents, Jaqui Pembroke, called for a "comprehensive traffic survey".

But Coun Stephen Hirst (I. Tetbury), said: "We're assuming all the external members will come at once – there'll be a mile-long queue of cars.

"This is a practical expansion of a commercial site up to a maximum level of membership."

14
Tweet this article
Report

14 Comments

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by wednesday, london

    Thursday, October 22 2009, 9:58PM

    “mR Paxton sold a private estate, he should stick to his word. When it opened Elizabeth hurley was not allowed to join spa.....so why now?”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by No Dramas, Bristol

    Tuesday, August 11 2009, 5:59PM

    “Why all the excitement?

    I've got a mate with a place on the estate. Personally, I much prefer to travel abroad on holiday, but having a second home suits him, and he's got no issue with any of this, one way or another.

    As far as he knows, any cars coming to the spa won't be going anywhere near the properties since they're planning a separate entrance for them. And even if they were driving round the estate, they're unlikely to be the nightmare vision of ASBO-wielding chavs in Corsas which some people seem to envision. At £2,000 pa per subscription? Probably not.

    I doubt any children or property values are endangered by this. Neither will the Cotswold District Council planning system collapse, nor will the local community be brought to its knees.

    Really, a sense of proportion would help. This is about people joining a spa. Not very many of them. No more people than will be using the estate in the future, if plans go ahead. So, what's the problem?”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by Posh Girl, Tredworth

    Friday, August 07 2009, 3:13PM

    “Homeowner, you are not doing your children any favours. They will have difficulty coping with the real world when they eventually come into contact with it. I grew up in a rather posh area and, although I was allowed to mix with ordinary children from the age of four-and-a-half, even then it was a bit of a culture shock. I hate to think of the shock that it would have been, had I been cossetted for my whole childhood and privately educated. By the way, you can't spell diminish.”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by Resident of the Real World, Normalshire

    Friday, August 07 2009, 8:27AM

    “This whole development is an absolute disgrace anyway, planning permission should have never been granted to allow these eyesores to be built in this area. They have already commandeered the areas surrounding the pools, which could previously be fished/walked around/enjoyed by the COMMON MAN, you know, people with just the one home, which has to suit us for all purposes, even weekends, and all for 2nd homes, my heart bleeds for them and their spa (NOT), I wonder how many of them actually bother to use it anyway?”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by BBJ, Fairford

    Thursday, August 06 2009, 3:42PM

    “Grockle War avoided! Also a bit of a blow for Jeremy Paxton. And, after all those freebies and helicopter rides for this massive contract to be sold to the CDC Planners in the first place. Must have outlaid thousands albeit in return for millions.
    I should have thought the owners who bought in good faith have a strong legal case on the face of it. Similarly, against the planners were they to change their mind.”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by verchiel, Fairford

    Thursday, August 06 2009, 1:29PM

    “What exactly is a "Spa"? Is it a place where lazy people get artificial exercise on machines? If so why on earth would any local resident want to go there amongst a load of sweaty secondhome owners in ghastly designer shorts?
    Perhaps Fairford residents should use this as a crystal ball and stop kidding themselves developers and second home owners will let them anywhere near their holiday camp - if it ever materialises..”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by chris, glos

    Thursday, August 06 2009, 12:35PM

    “Well said Queen of Sheba, Gloucester and snob, In a moated castle, i can see the headlines now, very very long queues at spa in cirencester, no one else can get access to it due to the influx of people wanting to use it”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by Queen of Sheba, Gloucester

    Thursday, August 06 2009, 12:16PM

    “Homeowner, there are many people out there who paid a premium to purchase a property in a quiet and realatively safe area. Many of them had no fences and the traffic is/was minimal and the children could play safely. However many of these areas have been extended and grown so they are no longer the nice area they paid a premium for.
    Why are your children at any more risk than children in the "outside world" do they not understand that if they run across roads in front of a car they might get hurt? What on earth will they do when they leave home and get a place of there own?
    If the spa was open to locals I am sure it would be strictly controlled, there would be speed limits in force (to protect your little darlings and other residents) and I don't expect for one minute that every single member would turn up at once.”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by snob, In a moated castle

    Thursday, August 06 2009, 10:31AM

    “Dear homeowner
    You may have not recognised but the economy has changed considerably over the last 12 montsh and new wasy need to be looked into to make existing development economical.
    In the meantime i would suggest that you educate your children not to play with traffic and that to ''run freely'' with nature does not mean with a ton of metal in the middle of a two way line of asphalt.”

  • Profile image for This is Gloucestershire

    by Homeowner, Lower Mill Estate

    Thursday, August 06 2009, 10:24AM

    “This is more complex than the article reports. We are not Nimbys. We were sold expensive properties in a gated quiet community with no fences so our children could run, play and cycle freely around the estate. Having a sugnificant number of additional cars entering and driving through narrow roads puts our children's lives at risk.

    Local residents have wonderful facilities at the Leisure Centre in Cirencester and at the Four Pillars Hotel. Jeremy's proposed memberships would deminish as each house is sold and when it suits him, and not the homeowners at Lower Mill, he will withdraw the option for 'local residents' to join.

    On a legal point, when we bought the properties we were sold a private estate with 'excusive' membership of the Spa which we funded through our purchase price.

    The planning committee were clearly concerned about the application and quite rightly refused it.”

        Your comments awaiting moderation

        Add your comments

        max 4000 characters