So I went round the corner any made a complaint to the nice lady at the HDC in the Town Council Offices.
I was told I could comment online. Except the information at the library is radically different to what was provided online at the HDC site. This is unacceptable! HDC have now changed consultation document to the correct version.
Now down to the nitty gritty of the planning consultation. The cinema is off. For all the cinema freaks out there this is not the site for a cinema.Why?
There are going to be problems with plonking a cinema on this site. This is because this site has always been open land.
The first problem is this development will back onto a number of houses. Build it too high and you are blocking light. If you were living in those houses would you really want a three or four storey building backing onto you house? I wouldn't.
The second problem is the restrictions on Lidl over deliveries. If HDC imposed the same sort of restrictions as on Lidl, the cinema would close at 9pm.
The third problem is over noise. Air-conditioning plant, vehicle movements and general disturbance are all things to be considered in the planning process.
I don't feel the cinema project has been thought out. Mainly because the way this cinema project has come about. The logic seems to be: We want a cinema. There is spare land. Build the cinema on the spare land.Of course if you disagree with this simple logic then the supporters are up in arms. I still reckon the best place to put any cinema is next to the Eat n' Bowl. The land has been used for leisure purposes. Put these two buildings together and we have a mini Leisure Park.
The up side to this plan would be the Town Council would get money from this project and then will be able to build a new outdoor swimming pool.
What also concerns me is the tarmacing over of the public open space. This is a valuable urban open space. Time we stood up for this piece of land.
2 comments:
The outdoor swimming pool site next to eat'n'bowl has been examined by Operators but it is too far from the Town Centre and from parking and therefore all have dismissed the site. Furthermore, that site was under negotiation with the Regional College for 18 months and has strategic importance for other land-locked nearby areas and these considerations make the land value too high for a Cinema.
Regarding Lidls - the access to the HDC car park from Cambridge street is already agreed under the original transfer terms when Cedar House School was sold.
The consultation completed before Xmas with overwhelming support for a Cinema. THe Development Plan for the site is avaialble at HDC's website (search for Old Fire Station).
On 21 Jan 2010 HDC Cabinet approved the site to be provided for leisure use (the planning group for a cinema).
As for the Outdoor swimming pool site, this has been nearly sold for ages and has yet to be sold. The money HRC thought it was getting from Government isn't happening. So sitting on this land is doing no one any good. If the college want the land they can buy it.
Regarding Lidls - all I am pointing out is the planning condition on the Lidls site and is a 9pm curfew on deliveries. All I point out is what is good for Lidls should be good for the development site. Or is HDC changing the rules to suit its own development.
Indeed as blogged much later I've pointed out the vast majority of the 28 respondents are for the Cinema on this site.
As for access the only mention of this in the consultation document is:
A Deed of Covenant between the District Council
and Lidl dating from 1998 allows for a right of
way for servicing vehicles to pass and repass
over the Lidl car park for the purpose of servicing 12 Huntingdon Street and the old Fire Station
Nothing in that statement states they can do this for the new development. There is a difference between access to the car park and access to a new development.
None of this will change my mind that this is the wrong development for that site.
Post a Comment