SWINDON Council has hit back against criticisms of its development plans at Coate.
As reported in yesterday's Adver, the council has set out plans to build 750 houses at Commonhead, near Coate Water Country Park.
Campaigner Jean Saunders said the proposals went against the council's promise not to build in the Coate and Banbury Wick area if no university comes forward to build a campus there.
advertisement
However, deputy leader of the council Fionuala Foley said the proposals were all about constraining development in the area and maintaining the beauty of the landscape.
"People need to be reminded that there is still a live planning application for 1,000 houses and a university on the site," said Coun Foley.
"The idea of the Swindon Core Strategy is to constrain this development to just 750 houses.
"I take great offence at any suggestion that the council does not care about Coate Water.
"We are absolutely committed to the protection of Coate and to that end we are working with English Nature to define how best to do this.
"I live near Coate and regularly walk around the area.
"As a council we are passionate about Coate water and want to do everything to protect the buffer zone and the flight paths of birds."
Jean Saunders, and other members of the Jeffries Land Conservation trust have plans to set up a land fund with the intention of buying the land and turning it into a wildlife haven.
The trust has previously fought proposals by Bath University to build a campus on the site, and has asked that the land be re-designated as an Area of Local Landscape Importance.
Mrs Saunders said it was important to recognise it was not just Coate water that would be affected by the proposals.
She said: "This landscape is unique, not just in Swindon, but in the world.
"The council also has to consider the beautiful views from Liddington Hill and the area of outstanding beauty. These views are equally as important as the views from Coate Water.
"Likewise it's not just the wildlife at Coate Water that is under threat.
"The hinterland is equally important in maintaining the viability of wildlife in the area."
A petition against the development has now been signed by 35,000 people.
Posted by: A Tax Payer, Peatmoor on 8:08pm Thu 14 Feb 08
And I take great offense that the council are even considering 750 houses around the Coate area you greedy money grabbing so and so's. I suggest that everyone gets onto their local councilor and remonstrate with them over these proposals and let him or her know in words of one syllable that you will not vote for them at the next election.
And I take great offense that the council are even considering 750 houses around the Coate area you greedy money grabbing so and so's. I suggest that everyone gets onto their local councilor and remonstrate with them over these proposals and let him or her know in words of one syllable that you will not vote for them at the next election.
Elected councilors need to stop faining offence - they do this all too often. You are making decisions on our behalf which we don't like. If you don't like our response either listen to us or leave the job to somebody who will - it really is as simple as that.
Elected councilors need to stop faining offence - they do this all too often. You are making decisions on our behalf which we don't like. If you don't like our response either listen to us or leave the job to somebody who will - it really is as simple as that.
alan, I agree with your response. It's very poor for a professional politician to claim 'offence' about perfectly legitimate accusations that arise from those who pay their wages based on those same politicians actions.
This Council have, admittedly, been painted in to a corner by the Labour government and John Prescott's nightmare 'vision' of a country covered in concrete and tarmac but they could have done a lot more to prevent Swindon turning into the random assortment of cheap flat blocks and poor quality housing that it now is.
I'm just thankful I won't be living in this town in ten years or so from now. If you think it's bad now, there's far worse to come...
alan, I agree with your response. It's very poor for a professional politician to claim 'offence' about perfectly legitimate accusations that arise from those who pay their wages based on those same politicians actions.
This Council have, admittedly, been painted in to a corner by the Labour government and John Prescott's nightmare 'vision' of a country covered in concrete and tarmac but they could have done a lot more to prevent Swindon turning into the random assortment of cheap flat blocks and poor quality housing that it now is.
I'm just thankful I won't be living in this town in ten years or so from now. If you think it's bad now, there's far worse to come...
If, as she says, they are committed to the protection of Coate and maintaining it's beauty, I have a helpful tip: Don't build 750 ruddy houses there! (or is that too simple?)
If, as she says, they are committed to the protection of Coate and maintaining it's beauty, I have a helpful tip: Don't build 750 ruddy houses there! (or is that too simple?)
Posted by: angry monkey, Swindon on 10:46am Fri 15 Feb 08
I'm far from being a tree hugging hippie, but I have no idea why they are so desperate to build on / near coate.
***Crazy idea alert***
Build 750 homes elsewhere. Or just dont bother
I'm far from being a tree hugging hippie, but I have no idea why they are so desperate to build on / near coate.
Posted by: dalekdave, Swindon on 4:05pm Fri 15 Feb 08
[quote][bold]A Tax Payer[/bold] wrote:
And I take great offense that the council are even considering 750 houses around the Coate area you greedy money grabbing so and so's. I suggest that everyone gets onto their local councilor and remonstrate with them over these proposals and let him or her know in words of one syllable that you will not vote for them at the next election.[/quote] Are you swampy in disguise?
I have mixed feelings about this and personally, as a fellow Peatmoor dweller feel more worried about yet more development to the north and west of swindon.
Swindon has to build thousands and thousands of new homes which I am reliably informed have been approved by the a Regional Development Agency which seems to sit somewhere miles away and doesn't give a stuff about Swindon. Having said this, one of our erstwhile Councillors apparently sits on this body so has agreed to this plan.
My point is that if Swindon truly has to develop and build this many houses (and that I believe is the real issue here) then the land at Commonhead is no more precious than that in other parts of the twon. In fact, arguably less so as the East has seen so little development compared to the rest of the town.
A Tax Payer wrote:
And I take great offense that the council are even considering 750 houses around the Coate area you greedy money grabbing so and so's. I suggest that everyone gets onto their local councilor and remonstrate with them over these proposals and let him or her know in words of one syllable that you will not vote for them at the next election.
Are you swampy in disguise?
I have mixed feelings about this and personally, as a fellow Peatmoor dweller feel more worried about yet more development to the north and west of swindon.
Swindon has to build thousands and thousands of new homes which I am reliably informed have been approved by the a Regional Development Agency which seems to sit somewhere miles away and doesn't give a stuff about Swindon. Having said this, one of our erstwhile Councillors apparently sits on this body so has agreed to this plan.
My point is that if Swindon truly has to develop and build this many houses (and that I believe is the real issue here) then the land at Commonhead is no more precious than that in other parts of the twon. In fact, arguably less so as the East has seen so little development compared to the rest of the town.
Posted by: emmylou83, Stratton on 4:19pm Fri 15 Feb 08
[quote][bold]KeepItReal[/bold] wrote:
Why not concrete over the lake and put a couple of tower blocks on it...[/quote] I heard a rumour somewhere that they are thinking of doing that, not sure about the tower part though.
KeepItReal wrote:
Why not concrete over the lake and put a couple of tower blocks on it...
I heard a rumour somewhere that they are thinking of doing that, not sure about the tower part though.
Posted by: Libertarian, Swindon on 5:43pm Fri 15 Feb 08
[quote][bold]Al Smith[/bold] wrote:
SBC have no one to blame but themselves - didn't they propose and support the development at coate.[/quote] I think this person shows a total lack of understanding of how planning issues work.
I understand a Government report came out some time ago saying that it was a correct place for building and there was no reason not to. This put the Council in an impossible situation as they had lobbied for no development to be carried out at Coate.
As this is the case and they then have a choice.
1. Refuse everything - this will get challenged at an appeal and they know they will lose. That will cost the Council (tax payer)many hundreds of thousands of pounds and will not have any control of what type of development get put there.
2. Or they can make sure that the area gets the best deal possible.
Burying their heads in the sand saying no,no,no won't help.
Most contentious planning issues are taken out of the Council's hands.
Remember the govt. report has given the go ahead for development and developers know that it is easy pickings from now on.
If 35,000 homes have to be built in Swindon (and we have no choice) the Council have to seriously consider every application properly or a govt. inspector will do it at a very high cost.
If you don't like the fact that Swindon has to build that many homes I suggest that you lobby your MP to stop it. It will make no difference I reckon but worth a try if you can be troubled to do so.
Al Smith wrote:
SBC have no one to blame but themselves - didn't they propose and support the development at coate.
I think this person shows a total lack of understanding of how planning issues work.
I understand a Government report came out some time ago saying that it was a correct place for building and there was no reason not to. This put the Council in an impossible situation as they had lobbied for no development to be carried out at Coate.
As this is the case and they then have a choice.
1. Refuse everything - this will get challenged at an appeal and they know they will lose. That will cost the Council (tax payer)many hundreds of thousands of pounds and will not have any control of what type of development get put there.
2. Or they can make sure that the area gets the best deal possible.
Burying their heads in the sand saying no,no,no won't help.
Most contentious planning issues are taken out of the Council's hands.
Remember the govt. report has given the go ahead for development and developers know that it is easy pickings from now on.
If 35,000 homes have to be built in Swindon (and we have no choice) the Council have to seriously consider every application properly or a govt. inspector will do it at a very high cost.
If you don't like the fact that Swindon has to build that many homes I suggest that you lobby your MP to stop it. It will make no difference I reckon but worth a try if you can be troubled to do so.
Posted by: Libertarian, Swindon on 6:27pm Fri 15 Feb 08
[quote][bold]A Tax Payer[/bold] wrote:
And I take great offense that the council are even considering 750 houses around the Coate area you greedy money grabbing so and so's. I suggest that everyone gets onto their local councilor and remonstrate with them over these proposals and let him or her know in words of one syllable that you will not vote for them at the next election.[/quote] And I take great offence that you have no inkling of who you should be lobbying.
Remember that this decision (and report about Coate)to make Swindon a high growth area came out of John Prescott's office. So I hope that all the complainers above didn't vote for this government as that would make you very hypocritical. Being ignorant of planning laws is one thing but being a hypocrite I find disgraceful.
And why aren't you complaining to you MP. [bold]They are the law makers of this land so lobby them.[/bold]
A Tax Payer wrote:
And I take great offense that the council are even considering 750 houses around the Coate area you greedy money grabbing so and so's. I suggest that everyone gets onto their local councilor and remonstrate with them over these proposals and let him or her know in words of one syllable that you will not vote for them at the next election.
And I take great offence that you have no inkling of who you should be lobbying.
Remember that this decision (and report about Coate)to make Swindon a high growth area came out of John Prescott's office. So I hope that all the complainers above didn't vote for this government as that would make you very hypocritical. Being ignorant of planning laws is one thing but being a hypocrite I find disgraceful.
And why aren't you complaining to you MP. They are the law makers of this land so lobby them.
[quote]I understand a Government report came out some time ago saying that it was a correct place for building and there was no reason not to. This put the Council in an impossible situation as they had lobbied for no development to be carried out at Coate.[/quote]
[quote]My point is that if Swindon truly has to develop and build this many houses (and that I believe is the real issue here) then the land at Commonhead is no more precious than that in other parts of the twon. In fact, arguably less so as the East has seen so little development compared to the rest of the town.[/quote]
Very interesting observations councillors.
Problem is we already know that Mike Bawden (ex council leader) negotiated a "deal" with Bath University, which started this whole controversy, on land that was never on the agenda.
That would be the same back stabber on the Regional Development Agency.
I understand a Government report came out some time ago saying that it was a correct place for building and there was no reason not to. This put the Council in an impossible situation as they had lobbied for no development to be carried out at Coate.
My point is that if Swindon truly has to develop and build this many houses (and that I believe is the real issue here) then the land at Commonhead is no more precious than that in other parts of the twon. In fact, arguably less so as the East has seen so little development compared to the rest of the town.
Very interesting observations councillors.
Problem is we already know that Mike Bawden (ex council leader) negotiated a "deal" with Bath University, which started this whole controversy, on land that was never on the agenda.
That would be the same back stabber on the Regional Development Agency.
Libertarian is entirely correct.
We can **** and moan as much as we like about the over-development of ALL areas of Swindon, but it's John Prescott and his Labour government that had ensured the demise of Swindon and many towns like it.
Libertarian is entirely correct.
We can **** and moan as much as we like about the over-development of ALL areas of Swindon, but it's John Prescott and his Labour government that had ensured the demise of Swindon and many towns like it.
Posted by: Al Smith, Swindon, UK on 9:13pm Fri 15 Feb 08
Libertarian, Swindon aka Councillor xxx perhaps?
I fully admit I don't understand the planning process.
However, my memory is still reasonably good (if a bit fuzzy).
One thing I do remember is Thamesdown BC in the late 80's fighting tooth and nail a planning application for a business park at Coate. In the end Nicholas Ridley (IIRC) allowed the plans to go through. In the end it was never built as Major government withdrew planning permission (IIRC).
To say two jags is to blame is being economical with the truth perhaps? Afterall it was SBC (Mike Bawden) and Bath Uni who in 2004 announced the plans, they could of said no we'll fight you. Or oh let me guess two jags made them do it... threatened to give them two jabs perhaps?
Spineless?
Libertarian, Swindon aka Councillor xxx perhaps?
I fully admit I don't understand the planning process.
However, my memory is still reasonably good (if a bit fuzzy).
One thing I do remember is Thamesdown BC in the late 80's fighting tooth and nail a planning application for a business park at Coate. In the end Nicholas Ridley (IIRC) allowed the plans to go through. In the end it was never built as Major government withdrew planning permission (IIRC).
To say two jags is to blame is being economical with the truth perhaps? Afterall it was SBC (Mike Bawden) and Bath Uni who in 2004 announced the plans, they could of said no we'll fight you. Or oh let me guess two jags made them do it... threatened to give them two jabs perhaps?
Posted by: Jenni, Swindon on 10:36am Sun 24 Feb 08
The people of Swindon need to remember, the building around Coate was NEVER on the agenda. When the building of GWH was approved, we were categorically told there would be no further development there. It was Mike Bawden who “brokered” the deal to have it developed and is this not the very same person who now sits on the Regional Development Agency!!
WHY IS HE SO DESPERATE TO HAVE THE AREA DEVEOPLED???
The people of Swindon need to remember, the building around Coate was NEVER on the agenda. When the building of GWH was approved, we were categorically told there would be no further development there. It was Mike Bawden who “brokered” the deal to have it developed and is this not the very same person who now sits on the Regional Development Agency!!
WHY IS HE SO DESPERATE TO HAVE THE AREA DEVEOPLED???
I think its about time that everyone got with the program. Coate Water is man made; and whilst I appreciate it is a SSSI with regard to bird migration; there a hundreds of more important resources in this part of the world that should be protected from development.
I love walking or running round Coate Water; and it would be a shame for the site to be ruined....but no development in modern Britain that has a negative impact on the local or even regional environment is allowed without mitigation. A number of experts would be consulted (both within the Council; and more likely elsewhere) to ensure the development safeguards the integrity of the area; if not enhancing it. This is not building on Coate Water; but building near it; as the Hospital was. The majority of attitudes are NIMBY which is typical, trying to protect what is in their backyard. Its lucky that not everyone has this view otherwise we'd still be stuck in the 1950's!!!!
I think its about time that everyone got with the program. Coate Water is man made; and whilst I appreciate it is a SSSI with regard to bird migration; there a hundreds of more important resources in this part of the world that should be protected from development.
I love walking or running round Coate Water; and it would be a shame for the site to be ruined....but no development in modern Britain that has a negative impact on the local or even regional environment is allowed without mitigation. A number of experts would be consulted (both within the Council; and more likely elsewhere) to ensure the development safeguards the integrity of the area; if not enhancing it. This is not building on Coate Water; but building near it; as the Hospital was. The majority of attitudes are NIMBY which is typical, trying to protect what is in their backyard. Its lucky that not everyone has this view otherwise we'd still be stuck in the 1950's!!!!
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
Print
Email this
Comment
