Cotswold villagers 'up in arms' as county highways replace dry stone wall with fence

Villagers are "up in arms" over an historic dry stone wall which was replaced with a wooden fence by highway workers.

People in Selsley, near Stroud, are angry with Gloucestershire County Council which initially said the wall would be rebuilt.

Stroud District Councillor Steve Hynd and resident Marisa Godfrey have written to Shire Hall’s highways department to express the villagers’ disappointment over the stone wall being removed with no community consultation.

They say the county council had promised to rebuild the wall which needed repair to stop the road collapsing.

But instead, without consultation with district councillors or King’s Stanley Parish Council, they proceeded to remove the wall completely and put up a fence on top of a small wall instead – a job costing a reported £200,000 and taking nearly 12 weeks.

Councillor Hynd had been campaigning for years for the county council to rebuild the wall as the initial cracks soon developed into sections of collapsing wall, causing a risk to anyone walking, cycling or driving past it.

Earlier this summer Highways confirmed that the work would finally be carried out. But Cllr Hynd said he was “horrified” to find out, only as the cement was drying under the new wooden fence, that it had replaced the wall.

He said highways accepted this move was a cost-saving measure, despite the wall bordering a historic parkland and being situated near the Cotswold Way.

“As well as the aesthetic change, I worry that replacing a traditional dry stone wall with a wooden fence is just a false economy,” Cllr Hynd said.

“Cotswold stone walls, when erected by skilled local craftspeople, can last for decades with occasional straightforward maintenance. This wooden fence will need replacing in a few years’ time.

“However, my main issue is the lack of communication with the community, who I know are furious about this. We weren’t told the wall would not be restored to its former standing.”

Marisa Godfrey, who lives in Selsley West, said it was only when the work was nearly complete that residents realised the wall was not going to be rebuilt as promised.

“A lot of people in the village are angry and disappointed about this. It feels to them like there is one rule for the county council and another for residents; as a local farmer said to us, he would never get away with removing a historic dry stone wall on his land”.

The removal of the wall had implications for the appearance of the village, she added.

“Dry stone walls are an intrinsic feature of the Cotswold landscape – an ancient craft that has been passed down through generations – and rural residents are rightly proud of the artisanship and heritage that goes into creating them.

“These beautiful walls define our villages and farms. They take skill to build but we have those skills right here in the Cotswolds and the job should have been done by a skilled local craftsperson. Instead of which, we have this nasty bodge job.”

Cllr Hynd also said what added insult to injury was that because of this work, part of Selsley West and Middleyard was left without a bus service all summer.

“After months of having a rubbish bus service, the community doesn’t even have the consolation of knowing it still has its heritage preserved in the form of a properly built wall.”

King’s Stanley Parish Council asked the county council for a comment and they said the wall required urgent repairs as it was the retaining structure to the adjacent footway and road.

Highways say the recently completed works cost more than £200,000 and to have reinstated a wall the project cost would have doubled, according to a post on the parish council’s Facebook page.

“To construct the wall to its former height that prevented pedestrians from falling into the field would have doubled the project cost and duration since the additional weight loading of the wall above road height (called the parapet) would have required an even stronger lower section (the retaining wall part).

“The cost of building a Cotswold drystone parapet solely for amenity value could not be justified against finite public funding and would have meant other critical highway projects could not progress.

"Whilst not a like-for-like replacement, the livestock-proof wooden post and rail fence is very cost-effective and used extensively in rural settings.

“We do acknowledge and appreciate people’s views concerning the impact on the visual amenity and please be assured the design of the wall and livestock-proof fence topping were done so to be as considerate as possible, but mindful of the financial constraints we must operate with.

“In terms of conservation status, we did check with Stroud District Council and the site/wall did not fall within the local conservation area and was not protected as such.

“To re-emphasise, it was essential Gloucestershire Highways carried out the repairs to the lower section of the wall to protect the public highway, the utility services and most importantly people’s safety before the road collapsed.

“Had it collapsed, there would have been a much longer period of the road being closed, designs drawn up, works planned and then carried out – and Gloucestershire Highways would have also incurred the significant extra cost of repairing the damaged utility services.

“I hope that people will appreciate we acted in a responsible way to minimise public expenditure and inconvenience caused to both local communities and businesses.”

Gloucestershire County Council said the wall required urgent repairs costing more than £200,000, which have now been completed.

“The lower part of the wall retained the road, footway and utility services from collapsing into the fields – so needed replacement. To build the wall to its former height alongside the footway would have doubled the project cost and duration.

“The livestock-proof wooden post and rail fence is used extensively in rural settings and was designed to be as considerate as possible to the local area while ensuring we use public funds responsibly.

“We accept that our communication could have been clearer on the details of the plan for this project and we would like to apologise for this and any inconvenience caused during the works.”

Credit: Carmelo Garcia, Local Democracy Reporting Service