Brailes Parish Blog

Occasionally I am made aware of items that appear on “the other site” - the one where the Webmaster swapped his spell checker, grammar checker and logic checker for a pack of felt-tip pens - which make me smile to myself, but one has appeared which cannot be allowed to pass without comment.

I refer to the item posted to the forum, relating to a planning application, which I will reproduce below in order to add comments (fair use of copyright material - not a concept understood by all, apparently…)

The errors in the quoted text are not mine. The intended meaning should become clear with a little mental effort.

“Had a letter this morning about planning for the crinkle crankle wall formerly owned by martin coles, saying that partial demolition and development into housing.”

The planning application relates to buildings attached to the wall - not the wall itself. The development into a dwelling relates to the buildings, not the wall. Also, the property was formerly owned by “Martin Cole”

“I notice there are no notices by the drive way so thought i’d best let the rest of you know.”

There is a notice in place at the junction of the driveway with the High Street…

“if you want to object or comment then reference is 08/02537/ful before the 31st october.
there are only a handfull of crinkle crankle walls about (Its listed grade 1)”

The application says Grade II…

“and with the water problems from this fields springs i personally think development is a very bad idea.”

Having been resident in the area for most of my life, and having helped out on that farmland for some fifteen years, and walked over it for almost forty years, I have to say that other than when the area has been in severe flood, I have never seen water rise in that field, nor any surrounding it. The copious amount of water that flows into the High Street from that field during flooding, as I’m sure the original poster is aware, comes from Castle Hill, and Castle Hill Lane, via the ridge and furrow pastureland…

And the same poster’s second submission:-

“its just another way to get a house by the back door”

I cannot see how applying to convert a barn into a dwelling can be construed in such a way - seems via the front door to me.

“the buildings are fine were not redundant as farm buildings and as such should be left as they are.”

The buildings are far from fine - in some part they needed attention more than thirty years ago, and they are hardly likely to have improved. I have no idea how long it is since the buildings were sold to the present owner, however, since the farm is still a working one, and those buildings are not necessary for the farm to continue working, one would think by definition they are redundant…

“we don’t need any more houses in brailes (there are severa for sale as it is)”

Ummm - this must be the daftest thing I ‘ve read for months.

“with the infrastructure not being able to cope, sewerage, water and drains all need an upgrade before any more housing is built.”

According to the planning application - he must have read it? - sewerage is to be treated by a stand-alone plant and drainage by soakaways. Is there a problem with the water supply? I’m not aware of it!

“The crinkle crankle wall was an C17/ C18 idea allowing a thinner wall as it widens the footprint. theyre quite rare now most being in east anglia (Glenham hall suffolk being a good example) the brailes one is one of only 3 in the midlands and the only one in warwickshire and unique hence its high listing.”

Grade II listing is not classed as “high”. It is also not true to say that the Brailes’ “crinkle crankle” wall is the only one in Warwickshire.

It is true, however, to say that the wall in question is in need of  some extensive repairs, the cost of which most of us “locals” would be unable to afford. I have no doubt that if the planned development does go ahead, then one of the conditions attached to it will be that the wall receives the attention that it needs to continue to stand. It is of course the case that the wall stands wholly on private land, with no public access, so the only people who are able to view it without the use of binoculars are the owner, the farmer and the residents and visitors of Brailes’ House - and possibly, eventually, visitors to the new dwelling!

Before the inevitable deluge of replies appear, I ought to point out that I don’t know and have never met, nor had any dealings with the present owner of the wall and buildings. I don’t really have any preference for whether the development goes ahead or not - it won’t affect me unduly, though possibly moreso than it will affect most people in the village.

I feel though that any development ought to be considered on the pertinent facts, rather than one person’s fantasies, published as fact.

Will Doherty.

I - along with a lot of other people, I have no doubt - have watched with interest the works carried out at the Old Coach House. Having had my say previously regarding the flooding issues and properties at risk in the village, I feel it is only fair to share my views on the works…

The standard of workmanship appears to be very high, the property externally now looks better than it has for many years, and one assumes it is now floodproof to a great degree.

In general I’m not easily impressed, but I must say that having seen the endeavours and efforts of the owners, together with those of the workmen involved, I am impressed!

Well done to them!

Will Doherty.