Tag: Swindon

It’s nice to see that the Mechanics Institute Building has received some remedial attention to its roof, to protect the theatre area of the building. The large expanses of blue plastic are not pretty, but it’s better than the building being left more exposed. Of course, if the owner hadn’t removed all the roof tiles several years ago — since when this end of the building has significantly deteriorated — there wouldn’t be a need to cover it over now.

It seems that the University of Bath now wish to seal their departure from Swindon in rubble. The university has submitted a planning application ‘for the demolition of main campus building and all associated outbuildings/ sheds.’ Now, I wouldn’t go as far as the government’s representative in South Swindon, Ms Snelgrove, and describe it as ‘a wonderful campus building’, but as school buildings of the 1950s and 60s go it’s not that bad.

Note also how effective Ms Snelgrove’s attempt to protect Oakfield Campus has been. In the face of her own government’s legislation — which obliges owners to pay full business rates on empty commercial properties — it’s so far been a total failure.

One thing has been missing from discussion of Radio 1’s Big Weekend coming to Swindon. That is how much it will cost Swindon Borough Council to support it. There’s been plenty of speculation, but nothing from the council to say how much they estimate it and the associated fringe events will cost.

Given that no other council has turned down the chance of hosting this event in the past, does the cost really matter? Well, yes. Even if you believe, as komadori does, that this is something that the council should support, some evidence for that belief would be comforting, especially considering the cost cutting that the Council felt was necessary for this year’s budget.

The Council claims there should be an economic benefit to Swindon, and quote the estimated benefit to Preston of holding the event in 2007 of about £1.4M. With the cost to some councils that have hosted the event in the past being as high as £0.5M, the economy in a mess and applications for tickets seemingly half what they were last year (tho’ still heavily oversubscribed), that benefit could easily disappear and become a debt.

It’s good that we now have some more details and the rather speculative proposal for an indoor ski slope on the site of the Oasis. It’s less good that the reporting of those details is at best regurgitating the sales talk of the promoters and at worst just wrong.

THIS is the image that could represent Swindon to the rest of the country, and the world.

Actually, the image I have reproduced here is what the facility might look like — if you’re gullible enough to believe artist’s impressions that is. The image illustrating the Adver’s story is of the building with its lid off.

The multi-million pound snow dome would play host to the longest ski-run in the world.

Aah, spot the journalist who’s swallowed the promoter’s hype at face value. The actual length of the ski slope is just 980 ft: hardly world-record breaking. As explained on the promoter’s website, the design incorporates a moving circular slope that continuously rotates. The claimed length of the ‘ski-run’ is the distance that someone could ski in one hour — about 12 miles or 19 miles, depending on which page page of their site you believe — with the run rotating at maximum speed. That’s rather a lot of snow and hardware rotating at just under one revolution per minute.

THE SKI-TRAC DOME houses a huge 175-metre (570 ft) diameter rotating snowfield…. Using new “Mag-lev” technology, the snow deck, with its 200 mm (8 in) snow cover will “float” on an electro-magnetic field without the need for wheels, thus ensuring frictionless, vibrationless, silent, and maintenance-free rotation.

And that’s a maintenance-free flying pig I can see coming in to land. Nothing as big and complex as this bit of machinery is going to be maintenance free.

The whole contraption, including other attractions, climate control and snow production, would consume enough power that it would need its own gas-powered turbines to provide electricity.

Though such a venue might be a great asset for Swindon, in both planning terms and technology this proposal seems to have a very long way to go before getting vaguely close to reality.

A year ago, I suggested that, with some town centre sites that had already been demolished being amongst last scheduled for redevelopment, it would be good if they could be put to some use, rather than just surrounded with hoardings.

Some of the parts that have been demolished are, in the grand plan, the last that will be redeveloped, the old police station for example. As these sites would, even without the economic problems, be vacant for several years, you’d think something better could be done with them than just put hoardings round them. Just grassing them over to give a bit of green space for a while would be a big improvement.

The councillor with responsibility for such things at the time, Mr Young, agreed and said the process had already started.

Couldn’t agree more Komadori (sic). I have actually already kicked off a conversation to see if this can happen – either used to add additional parking to make it easier for people to get in to the Town, particularly during the construction phases when access may be more challenging and we need to do all we can to support the traders, or as green spaces for the interim.

I raised the issue again with the New Swindon Company in December, and was told that they were in discussion with Swindon Borough Council on some sites they could guarantee would be vacant for three years, with the intention that they could be used as a mini adventure park for children.

After over a year of talking, you’d think there might now be some action on this. By action I mean some construction, not yet more talking as proposed by Mr Martin.

The fact is that a lot of this land is going to be sitting there doing nothing for a number of years to come, so why not do something with it.

And it’s taken you a year to notice that?

At the moment we are working with the New Swindon Company to negotiate with landowners, in the areas where we don’t own the land, to get an agreement in principle.

As Mr Young said he had got things started a year ago, just how much discussion does it need?

We will then be putting it forward for consultation. We want to hear what ideas people have.

Fine, but why wait until now when this has been given consideration for over a year already?

I really hope to get it initiated this year. First we have to look at consultation with the owners, then with the public. We are probably looking at some time in the autumn for that.

Initiated this year? That be political spin for no action until next year.

With the economic recession already slowing Swindon town centre’s regeneration to a snail’s pace, this dithering by Swindon Borough Council beggars belief. With only £140,000 for the scheme, they could well spend more money on talking than on actually doing anything.

I’m not sure whether the developers of Swindon’s Front Garden will be happy about being identified by the International Herald Tribune as

A glaring example of the real estate market gone bad.

Perhaps they’ll take solace from the thought that if the Tribune’s London correspondent believes that Swindon is “about an hour’s train ride south of London” perhaps her understanding of the housing market is as poor as her geography.

At least the international attention will be more welcome to them than the misplaced attempts by the Front Garden Action Group to thwart the sales of houses in the Front Garden. Some of their suggests look like grasping at straws.

There is no supermarket, no schools, no library, a very limited bus service. I think Sovereign are jumping the gun.

Well, the development is closer to those amenities than some existing parts of Swindon. It’s just a five minute walk (I’ve tested that) to the nearest bus service, and another ten to schools, supermarkets and — for the moment — a library in Old Town. Based FRAG’s analysis, parts of Cheney Manor, Moredon and Okus should be declared unfit for human occupation.

Some of the group’s other actions are just pointless obstruction.

Next month we will be writing to solicitors, estate agents, developers and so on to warn them that if they don’t let people know something about the history of flooding and noise at the site they may be opening themselves up to legal challenges in the future.

The law prescribes what information has to go in Home Information Packs. Information on environmental risks such as flooding is optional, not compulsory. But leaving these inaccuracies in what the campaigners are saying aside, just what do they hope to achieve? Do they think that if they can deter people from buying houses in the Front Garden, the developers will then demolish all the houses, dig up all the roads and put the land back to how it used to be? Just look at the area where Westlecott Farm used to be and you’ll see that it is too late to go back.

The damage to Swindon’s Front Garden has already been done — obstructing the marketing process now is just a worthless exhibition of sour grapes.

I’ve recently been to Mela Contemporary Indian Restaurant. It’s taken me quite some time to get round to righting about it because I’ve been struggling to think of something to say about it. I still am. The problem is that it was just so average. The way the prawns were arranged on the Taweli Chingri starter was mildly artistic and the taste nice, but nothing remarkable. The main course Hash Bahar was of a similar standard taste wise. Visually, it was undistinguished, apart from a large red pepper slice, which seemed to feature of all their main dishes. Now, I’m not one to go for very hot curries, but when I choose a mild option, I expect something mild in hotness, not mild in flavour. The only other notable feature of the food was that all the meat options were halal with the exception of the duck.

With little worth remarking on in the menu, that leaves only the service and the environment to lift the experience above the average. In these respects, Mela does well, with a fairly prompt service that attentive without being intrusive. The decor was clean and modern, though I wouldn’t go as far as their website to call it ‘stunning’. So overall, not much more than an average experience, with even the price, £20 excluding drinks, not much more than average for Swindon.

Today brings that rarest of rare events: Mr Montaut making a sensible and understandable suggestion. Here’s his utterance from that rare lucid moment.

We can keep the car park open and redirect people on to existing public transport. This will cut the costs to the council taxpayers while preventing the traffic nightmare that will be caused by completely closing the site. It would also support Thamesdown Transport through these tough times while supporting the administration in delivering promise 43.

Promise 43, for those that have forgotten, is

We will work with bus companies to increase the frequency and hours of operation. We will also work with parish councils to develop good rural transport links and increase overall the number of bus journeys by 13% by 2006 and a further 20% in the following five years.

There’s only one slight flaw in Mr Montaut’s argument. Currently there are no Thamesdown Transport services that pass by the Groundwell Park & Ride car park. The number 17 service does pass very close though, as it loops round Penhill before heading directly into town along Cricklade Road. It seems this isn’t good enough for the campaigners.

As a commuter, normal buses take too long to get to work, particularly for users living in village areas. It would just add to journey times.

Even with a loop round Penhill, would taking a bus service that uses the bus lanes really take longer than driving a car and joining the traffic jam? Is it really the journey time that bothers Ms Spinks, or is it the thought of having to share a bus with residents of one of Swindon’s more maligned estates?

In a contest, it’s important for the participants to know and follow the rules. Those that don’t know the rules tend to lose or worse, get disqualified. This basic requirement applies not just to sports, but to any contest: school exams, elections, mortgage applications, the list is endless. Somewhere in that list are planning enquiries.

As I’ve noted before, the Save Coate campaigners have admitted to being amateurs when it comes to planning enquiries. In their surprise at how the Coate Enquiry has been run, that amateurishness is apparent.

All of those signatures that took time and effort to get together were just counted as one complaint.

If they’ve read the guidance for participating in planning appeals, they should’ve known before they started that would be the case. It doesn’t take much effort to find a couple of examples on the Planning Inspectorate’s website that show how petitions have been treated in previous enquiries. Why do they think it is that many of the big environmental activist groups don’t bother with petitions but run mass letter writing campaigns instead? It takes less than a second and zero thought to sign a petition. They may be good for publicity; unless backed-up by submissions from others making a similar point, they’re almost worthless for winning a case.

I think Swindon Council really passed up a number of opportunities to challenge the developers, so it was left to us to do it.

Or perhaps Swindon Borough Council’s counsel was sticking to the rules, rather than raising issues that the law does not allow the inspector to consider.

I just hope that the planning inspector appreciates the views of the people of Swindon and will take those on board.

That’s very unlikely, as he’s not heard the views of the majority of the people of Swindon. All he’s heard are the views of the council, the campaigners and the developers.

I don’t wish there to be development in the area near to Coate Water, but neither do I wish to have a group of unelected environmentalists claiming to represent the views of Swindon.

The government has recently announced that it is giving Swindon Borough Council an extra £428,873.52 — yes, the figures are calculated down to individual pennies — of tax payers’ money (or more accurately, given the way the government has squandered our money, of tax payers’ debt). According to the government press release, there are no strings attached to this money.

Local Government Minister John Healey has today confirmed that 360 councils will receive their share of £100million within the next few days, to be used as they see fit to help meet local needs and priorities – particularly helpful in this difficult economic climate.

Naturally, the government’s representative in South Swindon, Ms Snelgrove, has been quick to comment.

I am calling on Swindon Borough Council to use this money to save Old Town and Walcot Libraries and look at how the Groundwell Park & Ride can be kept open…. I will be asking the Council for full details of how they intend to spend this money and to make sure it isn’t swallowed up within the Council.

’Tis an odd choice that. Now, as I’ve made clear, I’m no fan of the proposals to close the Park & Ride service. I don’t find Mr Edwards’ latest argument for not supporting the service convincing either, as it’s far better to seek a long term future for the service with it still running than with it closed. However, though both it and the library closures have received plenty of publicity, they affect relatively few of Ms Snelgrove’s constituents — particularly the Park & Ride service which is in Mr Wills’ patch. Something that affects far more of her constituents but has received far less publicity is the sharp increase in the cost of Residents’ Parking Permits. On that, Ms Snelgrove has nothing to say. And I say that as someone that neither lives in a Residents’ Parking zone nor owns a car.

It really shouldn’t surprise Ms Snelgrove that she’s known as the government’s representative in South Swindon when she chooses to support issues for their political point scoring value rather than for their impact on her constituents.