Mr Bluh seems to have some very basic misunderstandings of communication.
We said we would listen to them and that is what we have done, even if they didn’t like everything they heard.
Hint to Mr Bluh: if you’re listening, it’s you that should be doing the hearing, not the other way round. But then if, as has been reported, the staff at Groundwell Park & Ride have already been made redundant, the whole ‘listening’ exercise was a sham anyway.
I’m no fan of the proposals to develop the area to the east of Coate Water, but I still despair at the approach of the campaigners opposing the proposals at the current planning enquiry.
The campaigners admit to being amateurs.
We’re amateurs, it really is an unfair contest. It’s like playing rounders with your hands tied round your back.
It shows. They forget that they are not the only ones opposing the plans at the enquiry. Swindon Borough Council is opposing the plans too and, whilst they may not have as deep pockets as the developers, they’re certainly not in the amateur category.
If you’re participating in a quasi-judicial process like a planning enquiry, it’s worth sticking to the rules, not ignoring them. Not doing so tends to annoy those in control, and risks the valid arguments getting lost in an ocean of irrelevant dross. If one disagrees with the statutory bodies that have an obligation to express an opinion on applications such as this, careful argument is required to explain why.
David Richards, officiating, said: “My understanding is that the problems of the flood risk is that the Environment Agency has withdrawn its objections.”
Mrs Saunders responded: “So have a lot of people — it doesn’t mean they’re right.”
Hmm… not much evidence of careful argument there, nor evidence of a belief in democracy either. Arrogant dismissal: one; effective campaigning: nil.
With support like this, if Swindon Borough Council win this enquiry, I suspect it will be despite the campaigners, rather than because of them.
Mr Rushforth of the University of the West of England believes that the Oakfield site in Swindon does not feel like a university.
I am not sure that people thinking of sending their sons or daughters to university would think it was appropriate. It does not have the feel of a university campus.
I’m not sure what Mr Rushforth thinks a university campus should feel like: his own Frenchay campus in Bristol is not exactly stunning. Oakfield is mainly flat open fields, much like the site near Coate Water that he would prefer to locate a UWE Swindon branch on. Frenchay is also quite flat, but looks like a factory estate and office park. Neither feel like a university campus to me, but Oakfield does have the benefit that with some good architecture and landscaping — plus a smattering of students, of course — it could be made to look and feel like one. For the Frenchay campus it is already too late.
The fields around Coate don’t feel to me like a housing estate. I doubt that would convince Mr Rushforth’s developer partners. Logically, the planning inspector should find Mr Rushforth’s argument equally unconvincing.
It must seem like an unfortunate bit of timing for the blue nest councillors controlling Swindon Borough Council that, whilst they are attempting to axe the Park & Ride bus service, for a claimed saving of £331,000, that unnecessary and unelected bureaucracy known as the South West Regional Assembly has decided to chuck £150M in the direction of Swindon for transport improvements. Our developers’ poodle, Mr Bawden, seems pleased with this outcome, despite the embarrassment that it might cause his colleagues. The expenditure includes £22M and £111M for phases 1 & 2 respectively of the Swindon Rapid Transit Network. Phase 1 concentrates on ‘traffic management’ — so more roundabouts and traffic lights. Phase 2 concentrates on public transport.
Development of a two tier public transport network with rapid transit corridors; increase in bus routes covering most areas of Swindon; exploring technology options for rapid transit corridor.
Both phases claim to address the issue of ‘Existing P&R schemes under utilised.’ If the current administration in Swindon gets its way, they won’t just be under utilised; they’ll be non-existent.
I’ve visited two exhibitions today showing visions for Swindon. First was the young amateurs. The ‘Visions for Swindon’ exhibition by Swindon College School of Arts included several imaginative designs. Being from young students, some lacked practicality, but the more realistic ones still showed original ideas that if turned into reality would be unique.
Then it was on to the professionals. The New Swindon Company’s exhibition of their designs for tidying up Canal Walk. Now, I’m all in favour of things green, but the proposal for a green wall is completely out-of-place A solid wall of greenery in a place where it’s surrounded by steel, glass and concrete walls looks ridiculous. It would look rather less silly if they spread it around a bit, so that there was some greenery on all the surrounding walls too. According to one of the company’s representatives at the exhibition, it will be first in the country. I guess she’s never seen an ivy covered wall, nor read her company’s own bumf which says there’s already one in London.
Then there’s the water features. The water jets in the display have already been dropped, I was told. The other water feature in the design, stylised puddles, or ‘Natural Stone Rainwater Water Features’ as the designers call them, were clearly giving the representatives a few problems: they were very keen to emphasise that they wouldn’t be a safety risk.
With the hyperbole being spouted to support these proposals making repeated reference to the Wilts & Berks Canal, it’s odd that they propose to relocate the Golden Lion statue. A statue that marks the site of the Golden Lion Bridge over the canal is rather pointless elsewhere.
Adding to the hyperbole, as has become traditional for all matters related to town centre regeneration, is one of our local councillors. This time, it’s Mr Young’s turn to be in twaddle mode.
We think greenery helps bring the town centre back to life and makes it a much more pleasant place to be and make people come into the town even if it’s just to see it.
I agree that it’ll make the town centre more pleasant, but if people are going somewhere just to see greenery, I suspect they’ll choose the countryside where there’s rather more of it.
McDonald’s felt that before Wharf Green was done, it was dragging the area down.
Hmm… guess they didn’t like the competition.
It’s very important to us to set a high standard with public realm improvements, and we want to hear what local people have to say.
Aah, the deceit of faux consultation! With work on Canal Walk due to start in July, the time for influencing the design is well passed. The New Swindon Company’s hubris is equally over-the-top.
The design concept aims to provide a vibrant, accessible street scene, encouraging visitors and shoppers to come to Swindon town centre as an exciting destination in its own right as well as for the shopping.
It’ll take rather more than a few trees, a hedge, new paving stones and stylised puddles to do that.
By renewing Canal Walk we aim to… provide a unique identity and quality environment… making Swindon an exciting place to visit.
A few trees an puddles amongst the paving stones as a source of excitement… developers must lead a dull life.
The designs for Canal Walk are the effort of no less than four consultancy companies. The New Swindon Company would’ve been better off hiring the college students.
The BBC seem to have misread the adjudication from the Office of the Schools Adjudicator for school in Oakhurst. The Beeb’s interpretation suggests that the Al-Habib Islamic Education and Culture Centre’s proposal was successful.
The Muslim voluntary-aided school in the Oakhurst area of the town would give priority to Muslim families for half the places. Adjudicators said they were impressed by the Al-Habib educational centre’s plans for the school which would see Muslims integrated with other faiths.
Well, yes, the adjudicators did say they were impressed by the Al-Habib Centre proposals, but, as the Adver has correctly reported, they still opted for Swindon Borough Council’s community school proposal.
Conclusion
There is a clear and urgent need to open a new primary school to meet the needs of the new community of Oakhurst in North Swindon. The overwhelming majority of those living in the area support the proposal made by the Council for a Community Primary School. Whilst the proposal made by the Al-Habib Centre has a number of positive features, it is less strong than the proposal made by the Council in the key areas of school standards, impact on travel and community cohesion and the support shown by parents and others. We therefore conclude that the new school should be a Community School established and operated by Swindon Borough Council.
It’s nice to see our national public broadcaster checking their facts so carefully.
Update, Sunday 8 February I see the Beeb corrected themselves at 10:12 this morning.
If you’re a bureaucrat in charge of one of Swindon’s numerous partnerships, what would be the best way to justify your cost to the local taxpayers? Do something worthwhile perhaps? On second thoughts perhaps not. Do something worthless instead and write a piece in the Adver, claiming that everything in Swindon is within your remit. That’s the approach of the head of the Swindon Cultural Partnership.
What does the ‘C word’ actually mean?… As far as the Government is concerned, culture means just about anything that isn’t working or sleeping…. So, yes. According to that broad definition of culture, anything goes…. Culture may be all the things that the government say it is, but it is something else too. It is us.
If culture is ‘us’, then we don’t need this bureaucracy to tell us what culture in Swindon is.
The news that Sovereign Housing is to invest £ 48M in social housing in East Wichel and Priory Vale is really nothing to boast about. Step forward Mr Renard.
We welcome any investment in Swindon, especially during these difficult financial times. It just goes to show companies are still willing to invest here.
Sovereign Housing Group is a charitable company and gets most of its money for house buying from government grants. If the site of Woolies in Regent Street was occupied by a charity shop, would the council claim that as evidence of a booming town centre?
As I’ve noted elsewhere, one of the less pleasant experiences when stepping out from the Brunel Centre into Havelock Square is the rather sickly smell of cooking doughnuts. That said, I wouldn’t wish to deny anyone visiting Swindon town centre their dose of doughnuts, just not in such a cramped location. Swindon Borough Council has taken a different view, refusing licenses for both the doughnut seller and a hot-dog stall.
Hot food trailers and vans tend to function as portable shop units, operating in isolation. Where it appears that they are being used (or will be used) principally to save on costs relative to competing cafes and take-aways, a street trading consent will not normally be granted.
Where the infrastructure or trading opportunities are such that a fixed retail unit could not be justified or accommodated, a fast food trailer will be considered for consent.
’Tis an odd political world where a blue-nest controlled council is opposed to competition. The change in policy comes after what was described as ‘a comprehensive consultation exercise’ — so comprehensive that only four organisations were consulted. The logic underpinning the policy is also, to be generous, poor.
In all three cases it is plain that there is a significant customer demand for their services, otherwise they would not survived over a long period. In terms of location, that suggests that the stalls are conveniently placed for their customers. The desirability of the pitches from the commercial standpoint of the traders is not in any doubt. The question remains whether pedestrianised areas within retail developments are there for the benefit of shoppers and fixed retail premises or whether they are just another resource for accommodating additional commercial activity.
If someone chooses to buy something from one of these stalls, does that not make them a shopper? If ‘resource for accommodating additional commercial activity’ is such a bad thing why bother with the town centre regeneration?
Update: within a few days the doughnut seller has been granted a new pitch in The Parade.
I find Mr Greenhalgh’s reasoning, if one can call it that, for proposing closure of the Groundwell Park and Ride odd.
We either make savings where we can or we put up council tax.
That didn’t seem to cross your mind when you voted to put up your own allowances.
While the park and ride is an excellent service we are losing a lot of money because it is simply not covering its costs.
Until last year, Thamesdown Transport ran the park and ride bus service for a fee and Swindon Borough Council kept the profit or suffered the loss, depending on how successful the service was. Then that was changed so that, like any other bus service, the bus company runs the services that are profitable and keeps the profit from them, whilst the council subsidises the loss making ones. As parking in the park-and-ride car park is free, the council have, of their own choice, changed the funding arrangement to one where by definition they are guaranteed to make a loss and the bus company guaranteed to make a profit. It doesn’t cover its costs because you’ve set-up contractual arrangements that guarantee that, Mr Greenhalgh.
The number using the service is not that great so I don’t think the effect on traffic will be huge.
That seems to contradict the assessment in the council’s own budget proposals.
“There is some risk that this proposal may impact on our Local Transport Plan assessment and the ability of the Council to secure regional/national funding for future transport schemes. There may also be some impact on general bus network as the operator will lose profit from these services.”
Translated from public sector bureaucracy-speak, that’s quite huge.
We have good parking facilities in the town centre and while this is not an ideal situation it is something we have to look at.
And I’m sure that the knowledge that you’ll make much more money from charging them to park there had no influence on your decision….
This would not be a permanent move and hopefully there will be a change in government and Swindon will be given the kind of funding it needs.
To quote from the council’s own budget proposals again.
“This proposal may impact on our Local Transport Plan assessment and the ability of the Council to secure regional/national funding for future transport schemes.”
Regardless of the colour of the government, a habit of abandoning facilities in an ill considered financial panic is hardly a way of encouraging government to spend taxpayers’ money here.