RE: Development North of Dorchester – DOR 13.

Following recent correspondence from STAND and others, may I shed light on the history of the now resurrected scheme.

Dorchester Civic Society examined the 1980s proposal and found it failed on many tests.

The Society formed a Cokers Frome Action Group that now arises as STAND. After a public meeting the town’s people made their opposition known, lobbied councillors, publicised their opposition and forced the council to look elsewhere.

Then, as now, this landowner and-developer led scheme found favour with the then WDDC: an oven-ready scheme. It was rejected by the town. The council was forced to consider development west of Dorchester beyond Thomas Hardye School.

The attractions were: 1. Connectivity with the existing town: extending water, sewerage, gas, and transport links and using, initially, the existing schools, shops, entertainment facilities etc.

2. Walkability for pupils to reach schools, and for residents to shop and work without car use was a bonus.

3. No despoilation of the literary and historical associations of the views across the water meadows of the River Frome and the setting of Celtic Poundbury hill fort.

4. The chance for (as has happened ) Poundbury to develop its own services as development over 30-plus years created its own market. For main, bulk shopping the town’s South Street etc. served, as now.

5. This “Village” satellite is meant to be self-sufficient/freestanding yet connected with/dependent on Dorchester.

Paradise. So what is it? Milton Abbas or Milton Keynes?

The inadequacy of Dorset Council’s draft local plan has required a six month delay whilst the council asks the developers to mark their own homework with some research, to counter concerns raised by Historic England. Say no more!

I see the Dorcher Civic Society's website has presented cogent reasons for finding that DOR 13 fails on the grounds of lack of viability and sustainability, and its inability to protect the town’s nationally important visual, historical and literary heritage.

This latter defect would no doubt damage Dorchester’s unique tourism offer, now so much improved by the enlarged Museum.

ANTHONY GANNON

Dorchester