Save Our Space - Our Objections to the Plan

Here's a summary of our objections to the Council's Plan. You may want to mention some of these points in your letter to the Council.

• New Plan vs Old Plan.
  The 2002 Draft Plan was a much better plan than the new one. It involved far fewer houses and retained most of the 'Bungalow Garden' as a park. You can find a plan of it here. We believe that the differences between the old draft and the current plan are so large that the Council should conduct a proper consultation, as it has in the past, and give people a real opportunity to make their views known.

  In addition, the new plan has apparently been designed for the future efficient development of land within the Southern Area if it becomes available, but is currently outside the Council's land ownership. You can see these areas, which we have shaded blue, here. We think this is highly unsatisfactory. Those who own the pieces of land in question may find their houses difficult to sell with such a threat hanging over them.

• The 'Bungalow Garden'.
  What is proposed here (22 houses) will completely destroy an invaluable site. The garden has ponds, a water course, many mature trees (only one of which the council plans to retain) and is host to a huge variety of wildlife, particularly birds. You can read more about this garden and our vision of what it could be like here.

• Car Parking and Traffic Issues
  The council claims that only 31 public car parking spaces will be lost. However their calculations have several flaws:
  • they have forgotten that 9 of the spaces in the new multi-story Nursery Car Park are reserved for the houses built on top of it.
  • they have made no car parking allowance at all for some of the new flats
  • they have been extremely optimistic about the number of spaces they can cram into the Nursery car park (they show 83 in the area that currently has only 73)
  • they have shown no disabled spaces (which have to be 50% wider than normal ones)
  • although many of the houses have three or four bedrooms they have allowed only one parking space per house.
  • they have made no allowance for visitors.
  We believe a better figure for the shortfall in spaces is at least 70 rather than 31.

  The effect on traffic, particularly on market days, is likely to be severe. Currently cars are often queuing up in Heath's Nursery, waiting for a slot to become available. Imagine that happening in the proposed multi-storey car park with its narrow aisles and ramps.

• The effect on the Town
  The loss of car parking space in the Southern Area is bound to have a detrimental effect on the town, particularly the upper part. If visitors cannot park at the top of the town, fewer will visit it. Trade will suffer. Traders in the market on Friday's and Saturdays will find they have fewer customers (and a much harder time getting their stalls set up).

  The erection of three-storey houses on currently open space will remove the open views of hills, trees and fields that characterise the Southern Area.

• The Housing Proposals
  It is hard to take some of these seriously. For example, 8 two-bedroomed and 2 one-bedroomed flats have been shoe-horned onto the overgrown verge beside the main road that runs down between the Nursery and Heaths Nursery Car Parks (Area F). Although parking slots are provided, these are sited in a very dangerous place - parked cars will have to revers out onto the busy road.

  Similarly, the 9 3-bedroomed houses built on top of the Nursery Car Park (Area G) have only a single aspect on the ground floor (since the wall at rear of that floor divides it from the car park).

  When you look at the plans, you can see that the designers have followed a very simple rule - squeeze a house or flat onto every piece of land that isn't currently being used as a road. What has been an open space for centuries will be turned into a densely packed urban space.

• The Nursery Car Park Proposal
  Here are just some of the questions that occured to us while looking at this page of the plan.
  1. On market days many of the traders park their vans in the Nursery Car Park (as can be seen here in a photo taken on Friday 21st November 2003) Where are they expected to park when the Nursery becomes a multi-storey car park and Heath's Nursery becomes a housing development? The height restrictions will surely prevent them from using the Nursery.
  2. Will the existing mediaeval walls be retained? If so, the car park will be obviously be considerably smaller inside than the existing Nursery. Given the depth of excavations necessary the existing mediaeval walls (which have little in the way of foundations) will need massive supporting buttresses if they are not to collapse.
  3. On the "Decked Car Parking Layout" drawing, 83 spaces are shown at ground level. The existing car park (which is hardly generous with space and has no pillars supporting a roof), only manages to fit in 73. How is this possible?
  4. On the "Indicative Land Use Mix for Housing and Car Parking" list, 239 public spaces are claimed. This includes 54 spaces at first floor level in the Nursery. On the "Decked Car Parking Layout", 9 of these spaces are reserved for residential development, so the proper figure is 230 spaces, 40 less than are currently available.
  5. Have the parking layouts, turning circles and ramp layouts been approved by traffic consultants? Are all the slots at least 4.8m by 2.4m? Are all the aisles at least 6m wide? Which are the disabled bays (which should be 1.2m wider)? Is the vertical clearance on the two lower floors at least 2.1m? Is provision made for disabled vehicles carrying wheelchair lifts?
  6. No lifts are shown (is there room for them?). How do disabled people get in or out?
  7. It is claimed that the houses here provide "overlooking to provide security to Leechwell Lane". Why is this necessary? No robberies, muggings or other incidents have ever been reported in Leechwell Lane.

  Back to the Main SOS Page