www.torfaen4us.co.uk |
ST JAMES FIELD - LACK OF REPRESENTATION Report by JOHN COOK:
|
5th December 2009
|
I have too long stood by while my wife has taken all the nonsense Councillor Wildgust has thrown our way. I can confirm that on 20 July 2009 I emailed Mr Wildgust to ask him to represent ALL the residents on St. James' Field (ON THEIR REQUEST). He did not have the courtesy to reply to me. And Cllr Wildgust was copied on to all correspondence between Mr Duncan Smith of Planning. A copy of all emails is held on file for verification. To come out with his statement of reasons for lack or representation is an afront to common sense and understanding of planning laws and EU directives.
MR. JOHN WILLIAM COOK
The Mount St James Field Pontypool
Below is the letter of objections. Note, we also cited Planning Policy Wales Trees and Woodlands Act 5.2.8; 5.2.9. Planning Policy Wales Technical Advise Note 18 - 2.13; 4.14. EEU directive 34.
ALL STATUATORY LAWS
We residents of St James Field are greatly concerned about a planning proposal of St James Hall and Vicarage to be heard before Torfaen Planning Committee next week regarding the removal of two of the last Victorian green gardens left in the town centre Conservation Area of Pontypool and putting a concrete car park in their place for just 3 car spaces for nursery staff. As you are aware urban cramming in Victorian and Edwardian residential streets is a very serious disease that is destroying our valleys town centre heritages. Removing mature trees and hedgerows takes away valuable breathing spaces and foraging habitats full of biodiversity and according to Lord Stern is detrimental to our health and well-being. In this case the 3 30 plus year old healthy trees, mature hedgerows and gardens to be removed are in the curtilage of two prominent grade 2 listed buildings in Pontypool’s Conservation Area and are protected under the Pontypool Conservation Area Appraisal (Adopted) : Quote ‘Much of the quality of the streetscape is conditioned by the trees growing along the rear boundaries of the properties along Hanbury Road, and are in the control of individuals this environment is theoretically at risk unless these trees are protected in some way.’
Despite this Torfaen Planners are recommending this application. We have had Friends of the Earth survey the trees and contrary to the planners view, they have found them to be healthy mature specimens of some 25 - 35 plus years in age and not showing any signs of damaging pathways.
This last green, historic oasis within Pontypool is a fantastic urban area and SHOULD be protected for our future generations. We have NO right to cu t down trees and concrete over this beautiful area of town, it will not alleviate any parking problems in real terms. Creating concrete jungles costs lives in terms of depression, and encourages unhealthy lifestyles. The Authority has a duty of care for our Communities and must remember this when looking at this area and seeing how much stress and strain this area is being put under.
The current Regeneration Strategy Consultation states that with regard to St James Field Quote 'It is not proposed to change the character of this area but to emphasise its green and tranquil qualities.'
And the officer believes that by removing all the trees and gardens with mature hedgerows and grasses will not compromise the character. We residents disagree as does PCC, AM Lynne Neagle, Cllr Cunningham and the Right Hon. Paul Murphy who have viewed the plans and visited the site. You see the two gardens to be developed are the only20two gardens left that the Strategy refers to. Once the 40 foot high trees are removed the character WILL be altered, and removed, and replaced with a hard standing car park in one of the gardens. It is everyone's duty to question planning officers and view the area and plans to form an unbiased opinion. We ask that you please afford us that, we have too much to lose when the trees are to be bulldozed. Any new trees to be planted are to be immature specimens and will take 30 years to reach the size and beauty and amenity that the current trees offer. We residents will be deceased by that time. This street is the only untouched original area of historic Pontypool town centre left and we residents are privileged to live here.
The land use change would have negative and long lasting impacts not only on the quality of our daily lives, but also impact adver sely on the wildlife that harbor there. Song thrushes have habituated the hedgerow for some years now returning year after year, attracting quite a following among the bird watching community. As well, the enclosed gardens attract horseshoe bats which feed in the microclimate a fforded (the bat protection society have monitored the area and found it to be prolific with them). When this enclosed green space is bulldozed and tarmaced over we will have lost a great asset and haven that we should be protected and conserved not squandered away for business and commercial gain.
We note that the trees in question be felled due to the ivy.
We have sought advice from experts on climate change and biodiversity, and who advise us that ivy on trees in not a death warrant. We are advised that the ivy be removed and a breathing space of one year be allowed for the trees to recover. We have also had the utility Company attend site on 6 August where they inspected the trees, trimmed them and pronounced them no longer a nuisance to the power lines.
All of the above objections which we felt valid, the Council felt were merit less and would not mitigate on. We are not NIMBYS (we did not try to stop Tesco, but embraced it), we do however believe that we are pri vileged to live in a Conservation Area and chose to live here because of the 'protection' a Conservation Are offered.
So I urge TCBC to see sense and protect and conserve this green and tranquil area for the future heritage of Pontypool. With this in mind we should not encourage parking directly outside the front door of our place of work, but seek environmentally sound alternatives to reduce our CO2 emissions.
Thank you on behalf of every resident of St James Field;
Mrs Luke, Mr &Mrs Edwards and family, Mr &Mrs Casey, Mrs Evans and family, Mrs Fulgoni and family, Mr Sewell, Mr &Mrs Cook and family
IN CONCLUSION CAN ANYONE TELL ME OR MY NEIGHBOURS OR WIFE HOW THIS IS "arguments of the campaigners were poorly thought and based on personalities and not practicalities"? (See Here fo Fred Wildgust's recent response in his newsletter .)
THANK YOU, JOHN WILLIAM COOK
|
|
On the chatroom on this website Cllr WIldgust said
"As regards St James Field I could never support the request to oppose the planning application. The land was a mess and need to be cleaned up, the trees were self setters and need to be removed and replanted with quality trees."
|
| |
|