Following much activity on the Grumblesheet about this application, culminating in a Meeting in Pontypool on Monday 14th of September, we hope that discussion can continue here, and allow the Grumble Sheet to discuss other matters. Please comment on this blog topic for matters concerning St James Field.
Fuller details can be found below and here
Essentially, Park Est have applied to put an 8 place car park in the rear of St James vicarage in 2008 and were refused below taken form council's minutes:
IT IS RECOMMENDED: Refuse
The proposal involves the substantial hard
surfacing of a visually important wedge of green space.
The scheme would
significantly harm the setting of the Grade II listedSt James’ Hall, St James’
Vicarage and the adjacent Pontypool Registry office andadversely impact upon the
visual amenities of the local townscape and Pontypoolconservation area.
The
removal of the mature ash tree would also have a negativeimpact upon the
character of the conservation area.
The proposal is thereforeconsidered to
be contrary to Policies H1, H3, G1 A & Biv of the Torfaen Local Planand
conflicts with the advice of Planning Policy Wales (Paragraphs 6.5.7 &
6.5.15)and Welsh Circular 61/96 (Paragraphs 11 & 70) in relation to the
setting of listedbuildings and conservation areas.
The council asked Park Est to reduce to 3 spaces and they agreed, hence the new application. At no time did the council consult with residents before they entered into this mitigation. Under delegated powers the council approved the demolition of the rear brick addition and the refurbishment works inside. The new application is to remove the existing garden to the rear of the nursery and put in a car park, remove the rear garden of the vicarage and build a play yard for the nursery.
In order to achieve all this 3 mature healthy trees, numerous shrubs and hedgerows and grassed gardens will be removed. The residents all objected on grounds of loss of visual and residential amenity. The family who live in the vicarage have objected and are fearful of being evicted by Park Est. Mrs Helen Greenwood has emailed and said she has made her objections to Park Est and is VERY fearful of being evicted. At no time did the council consult with the family or the nursery on these new plans and they are angry and on our side. None of the residents received a letter regarding this application and have agreed to state this under oath. I have sought representation from Fred Wildgust, who refuses to assist. I have sought representation from Paul Murphy who is proactive in reducing CO2 emissions and will assist as best he can. Pontypool Community Council have strenuously objected.
Please click the link below to comment further
7 comments:
Please note, comments and discussion prior to 15th of September can be found on the Grumble Sheet.
I feel I must clarify the misconceptions Mrs Greenwood of Ysgol Feithrin (Free Press Sept 16) has concerning the removal of the gardens of St James Hall and St James vicarage in Pontypool's town centre conservation area. The 3 trees due to be chopped down to make way for the new nursery's car park are over 30 years old, 40 feet in height and bifurcate that much again. These very trees provide a privacy screen from overlooking into our homes from the civic centre offices and were protected for this reason. These trees also provide a sound and pollution buffer from the busy buses on the main road. These issues are not disputed. We will be dead and buried before any newly planted trees achieved this. All the greenery including hedgerows, shrubs etc are to be bulldozed, period. These are not to be replaced on the new plans, a hard surfaced car park will be the only thing that replaces them. It is very important to note that we are the residents who live here 24/7 (the nursery is private, rented and for profit), any plans approved will affect us more than anyone else. We will lose a great deal in terms of air quality, and visual amenity and loss of value in our homes. I would like to ask your readers if they would like to overlook a car park when they don't have to?
Janice Cook
St James Field Pontypool
In the Free Press there is an article on the Heritage bid by TCBC.
This tells us that TCBC have recieved permission from the Heritage Lottery Fund to start developing the Pontypool Townscape Heritage Initiative.
We have on the one hand this council having monies to save the Towns heritage, and on the other hand tearing it down in St James' Field.
Janice, couldn't get to meeting so what is the outcome? I read in the Free Press that the nursery does want the new area. Am I the only one who thinks that Ms. Greenwood doesn't know her own mind? Every time she says something it is different!
Dave, You saw her reply...You saw her email saying she was being threatened with eviction by her landlord...Lynne Neagle PCC Paul Murphy, Bob Wellington and John Cunningham have all STRONGLY in writting opposed this plan to destroy our Conservation Area for 3 inappropriately placed concreted car places. What more can I say? Her emails have been forwarded to all parties by me, so they now know she is being leaned on. NO ONE wants this from the highest parliamentry level to the highest ranking officers on the Council to the people who are actually effected the one who live here 24/7 US RESIDENTS OF ST JAMES FIELD.....If you want to conserve the last untouched part of historic Pontypool town centre - email the council planning dept TODAY.
Dear Mr Wellington,
I emailed you last week after Paul Murphy and Lynne Neagle confirmed to me that they were opposed to the removal of the last 2 mature green gardens on St James Field (the Hall and Vicarage) to make way for a concreted 3 place car park. I note from the 'Town Centre Regeneration Strategy Consultation' the following regarding St James’ Field....It states "St James’ Field is a small but distinctly different area characterised as a quiet predominantly residential cul-de-sac but also including a dentist, dance school and entrance to a children’s nursery. It is not proposed to change the character of this area but to emphasise its green and tranquil qualities."
I am very concerned about the plans (which Planners are recommending to Planning Committee) which will in fact remove the greenery and tranquil qualities, thus changing the area's character altogether.
There appears to be a conflict of information, one one hand the Authority admit that St James Field is an area of special interest and character defined by its mature green space, yet on the other hand they are seeking approval to destroy this.
It would be obvious that the car park proposed is detrimental to achieving the aims in the Regeneration Strategy.
I would be eternally grateful if you would confirm that this is so.
Post a Comment