Harold Hall, the man who is happy to ravage the countryside, destroy the lives of thousands of villagers, create the misery of traffic chaos for eight years and sneer "NIMBY" at anyone who has the audacity to object to the idea is revealed as a hypocrite of the first order.
It seems that Harold was not too happy when plans were revealed to extend licensing hours at the local YHA earlier this year, as it would shatter the peaceful surroundings of his Warningcamp home, an area of "outstanding natural beauty" near Arundel.
He Said ... "Watch out. The hostels are fine on the face of it, but watch out for the special events. They are open for weddings, family anniversary weekends and things of that nature, so they need to be watched very carefully. People need to be prepared."
I almost wept with compassion at the thought of poor Harold having his peace and quiet disturbed by the occasional rowdy wedding.
How would he feel about having a town built at the bottom of his garden?
Read more ...
Anyway, I'm done with bashing Harold. I'm not usually one for character-assassination, but this little snippet really got my bile rising.
Friday 27 June 2008
Thursday 26 June 2008
Porky Pies
It's very apparent from reading the FAVG's website that they regard their proposed funding of the Arundel by-pass as a key selling-point, and they miss no opportunity to emphasise this.
Here's a list, it's a bit repetitive but soldier on, as the point will become clear:
"The redevelopment of Ford airfield would help to bring about the early delivery of the Arundel A27 by-pass through providing a substantial financial contribution."
"The redevelopment of Ford airfield would also help, through providing a substantial financial contribution to bring about an early delivery of an Arundel A27 by-pass."
"The redevelopment of Ford airfield would allow for significant financial contributions toward the funding of an Arundel A27 by-pass to help alleviate the traffic congestion and also make provision for other associated local road infrastructure."
"The proposals would improve infrastructure in the area, including contributing toward the improvement of the A27."
"Ford airfield Eco-town presents a fantastic opportunity for Arun to have an exemplar project that will be zero carbon, providing much needed new homes, new jobs and new social infrastructure, including a major funding contribution towards an Arundel by-pass."
"The Eco-town is planned to help provide funds and the early delivery of an Arundel A27 by-pass."
"The Eco-town is planned to help the early delivery of an Arundel A27 by-pass."
OK, definitely the 'hard sell', but now for the the interesting bit.
Here's an extract from .....
Notes and recommendations
from session 1 of Eco-town challenge.
"Funding the proposed Arundel A27 by-pass should be abandoned, as it is not consistent with sustainable principles."
Time to clean up your website chaps or you could be accused of misrepresentation, or of being deliberately misleading, or even ... of telling porky pies!
UPDATE 28/6/08
I've just read the "Terms and Conditions" on the Ford Eco-town website, and it seems that they ..."cannot accept responsibility for any inaccuracies, omissions, or errors" ....!
That's some disclaimer!
Surely it should be incumbent on the people proposing a development of this magnitude to give an honest and truthful presentation, rather than create a convenient 'get-out' clause in order to fabricate with impunity.
Presumably, if this monstrosity gets built, and it turns out to be a flooded commuter town with no facilities and a traffic gridlock, they can smile and say ... "Well, if you look at the small print ..."
Here's a list, it's a bit repetitive but soldier on, as the point will become clear:
"The redevelopment of Ford airfield would help to bring about the early delivery of the Arundel A27 by-pass through providing a substantial financial contribution."
"The redevelopment of Ford airfield would also help, through providing a substantial financial contribution to bring about an early delivery of an Arundel A27 by-pass."
"The redevelopment of Ford airfield would allow for significant financial contributions toward the funding of an Arundel A27 by-pass to help alleviate the traffic congestion and also make provision for other associated local road infrastructure."
"The proposals would improve infrastructure in the area, including contributing toward the improvement of the A27."
"Ford airfield Eco-town presents a fantastic opportunity for Arun to have an exemplar project that will be zero carbon, providing much needed new homes, new jobs and new social infrastructure, including a major funding contribution towards an Arundel by-pass."
"The Eco-town is planned to help provide funds and the early delivery of an Arundel A27 by-pass."
"The Eco-town is planned to help the early delivery of an Arundel A27 by-pass."
OK, definitely the 'hard sell', but now for the the interesting bit.
Here's an extract from .....
Notes and recommendations
from session 1 of Eco-town challenge.
"Funding the proposed Arundel A27 by-pass should be abandoned, as it is not consistent with sustainable principles."
Time to clean up your website chaps or you could be accused of misrepresentation, or of being deliberately misleading, or even ... of telling porky pies!
UPDATE 28/6/08
I've just read the "Terms and Conditions" on the Ford Eco-town website, and it seems that they ..."cannot accept responsibility for any inaccuracies, omissions, or errors" ....!
That's some disclaimer!
Surely it should be incumbent on the people proposing a development of this magnitude to give an honest and truthful presentation, rather than create a convenient 'get-out' clause in order to fabricate with impunity.
Presumably, if this monstrosity gets built, and it turns out to be a flooded commuter town with no facilities and a traffic gridlock, they can smile and say ... "Well, if you look at the small print ..."
Hello Barton Willmore...
The Barton Willmore Partnership are big fans of this blog... They have notched up 86 visits since May 13th..! Our logs have thrown up some interesting stats over the last few months too! More about this later...
Being someone who knows a thing or two about web analytics, I find it highly unlikely that fordairfieldecotown.co.uk has got anywhere near 300,000 visits as reported in the Bognor Observer today... 3,000 more like..!
Being someone who knows a thing or two about web analytics, I find it highly unlikely that fordairfieldecotown.co.uk has got anywhere near 300,000 visits as reported in the Bognor Observer today... 3,000 more like..!
Wednesday 25 June 2008
Jobs for the Boys.
Accepting the premise that industry and commerce would be attracted to setting up shop in the eco-town, what mechanisms could operate to ensure that they would employ 4000 residents, as envisaged by the FAVG proposals?
Tax-breaks, subsidies, penalties for recruiting outside the town?
What business would want to operate under such restrictions?
What if a company needed skills, experience and qualifications that nobody in the indigenous population could offer? Obviously, they would have to employ a workforce from further afield. The other side of that, is that residents who had skills that were not required by local industry would have to seek employment outside the town.
What about the self-employed? Tradesmen, jobbers, care-workers ... people who need to be mobile in order to carry out their business.
The reality is that peak hours would see a mass exodus of people leaving for work outside the town, and a mass influx of workers driving in.
In short - commuter chaos.
Just like any other town.
Nothing 'Eco' there!
The more you examine these proposals for an environmentally-friendly community, the more unworkable they become.
Tax-breaks, subsidies, penalties for recruiting outside the town?
What business would want to operate under such restrictions?
What if a company needed skills, experience and qualifications that nobody in the indigenous population could offer? Obviously, they would have to employ a workforce from further afield. The other side of that, is that residents who had skills that were not required by local industry would have to seek employment outside the town.
What about the self-employed? Tradesmen, jobbers, care-workers ... people who need to be mobile in order to carry out their business.
The reality is that peak hours would see a mass exodus of people leaving for work outside the town, and a mass influx of workers driving in.
In short - commuter chaos.
Just like any other town.
Nothing 'Eco' there!
The more you examine these proposals for an environmentally-friendly community, the more unworkable they become.
Tuesday 24 June 2008
Neil Champion - writes...
Mr Gummidge,
Thought you might like some more of my musings
Dear Eco-Towns team,
Unfortunately, I feel I have to write to you again to express my frustration and to request that the Ford, so called eco town is removed from the list of possible sites.
I have made other points regarding this ill thought through development in previous letters, but this time I would like to raise the following question.
How is the development to stop the new houses being bought as second homes? and therefore not providing the much needed extra housing for local people we are told we need.
This is what has happened to large percentage of the new riverside apartments built in Littlehampton recently, so why should it not happen at Ford? After all it is a beautiful site, close to Clymping beach the only non-built up stretch of south coast between Brighton and Bournemouth and within easy reach of both Arundel and Chichester.
Are we to sacrifice our farmland, so eco-second home owners can visit Ford two or three times a year?
I did put this question to Developers at their presentation on Saturday the 21st June on the Airstrip (The only actual piece of concrete and not farmland on the proposed site) and their response was. "Oh we hadn’t thought of that”
Makes you wonder what else they haven’t thought of.
Thank you for your time, I hope you take this letter and the recommendations you make as seriously as they deserve. Remember once built upon the site will be developed forever.
Yours Sincerely
Neil Champion
Thought you might like some more of my musings
Dear Eco-Towns team,
Unfortunately, I feel I have to write to you again to express my frustration and to request that the Ford, so called eco town is removed from the list of possible sites.
I have made other points regarding this ill thought through development in previous letters, but this time I would like to raise the following question.
How is the development to stop the new houses being bought as second homes? and therefore not providing the much needed extra housing for local people we are told we need.
This is what has happened to large percentage of the new riverside apartments built in Littlehampton recently, so why should it not happen at Ford? After all it is a beautiful site, close to Clymping beach the only non-built up stretch of south coast between Brighton and Bournemouth and within easy reach of both Arundel and Chichester.
Are we to sacrifice our farmland, so eco-second home owners can visit Ford two or three times a year?
I did put this question to Developers at their presentation on Saturday the 21st June on the Airstrip (The only actual piece of concrete and not farmland on the proposed site) and their response was. "Oh we hadn’t thought of that”
Makes you wonder what else they haven’t thought of.
Thank you for your time, I hope you take this letter and the recommendations you make as seriously as they deserve. Remember once built upon the site will be developed forever.
Yours Sincerely
Neil Champion
Will the real Harold Hall please stand up?
It would seem that our friend Harold was not always so keen to bulldoze his way through greenfields and regional planning procedures.
From The Argus February 8th 1999:
Planning committee chairman Harold Hall stressed: "The long-term future of the County must not be undermined by making hasty decisions on where the new housing should be built."
"We will need to consult widely and work with the districts."
Click here for the full article.
He also had very strong views on how essential the A27 by-pass was to future housing development:
From The Argus February 8th 1999:
Planning committee chairman Harold Hall stressed: "The long-term future of the County must not be undermined by making hasty decisions on where the new housing should be built."
"We will need to consult widely and work with the districts."
Click here for the full article.
He also had very strong views on how essential the A27 by-pass was to future housing development:
Harold Hall, Leader of West Sussex County Council and a member of the Regional Assembly said: "Without improvements to the A27 we may be unable to deliver on the strategic locations carefully identified in our Structure Plan for new housing to meet Government guidance."
"The economic regeneration we want to see along the South Coast will not be realised without the improvements on the A27 at Worthing/Lancing, Arundel and Chichester which are identified following the study. "
Click here for the full report.
Well Harold, given that there has been no wide consultation with the districts, and the Eco-Town Challenge team has ruled out any 'deals' to build the A27 bypass, we all look forward to seeing you drop your support for this ludicrous scheme.
Monday 23 June 2008
Setback for Brown 'eco-town' plan
Gordon Brown's "eco-towns" policy has suffered a setback after a report said some schemes were not much better than housing estates with green edges added. Click for more...
DOWNLOAD REPORT HERE or Read the FORD extract below...
Ford
The proposal’s strength of vision is commended; however, the relationship with separate bid for an enterprise hub needs further explanation. The bid’s breadth of thinking is commended, as is the clear understanding that an eco-town should set an example for sustainable living.
The site is challenging and the scheme needs to impact positively on issues that are currently affecting Arun, namely social deprivation, unemployment, an elderly population and a lack of social cohesion.
The concept develops the features and infrastructure of the site relatively well, adding a mixed-use employment core, an education campus, an energy centre next to the existing recycling plant and relocating the rail station. Explore why businesses would be attracted to the area and explain how high calibre jobs will be pursued using the eco-towns brand.
Inevitably there will be some commuting to London, especially given the town’s potential to become part of Thameslink, as development here could lead to its reintroduction to the programme. Demonstrate how commuting off site will be minimised in this proposal. Funding the proposed A27 Arundel bypass should be abandoned, as it is not consistent with sustainable principles. Consider a radically different approach to transport, potentially using Personal Rapid Transit as demonstrated by the Ultra scheme under construction at Heathrow. The Parkway, promoted by the enterprise hub bid, may not be sustainable in
a world where oil prices continue to rise. Provide more information on the public realm and examine how to create travel behaviour change especially related to workplace travel planning and cycling.
Use the green space strategy as a starting point for the masterplan; the proposed network of green spaces, neighbourhood allotments, wetland habitat and the reintroduction of the canal could be instrumental to creating an identity for the area.
The ambition to create Code for Sustainable Homes Level 6 housing is praised. It is encouraging that the breadth of areas to be addressed is understood and that there are some numbers available. The proposal should set targets for carbon emissions for all building types on the site as well as interrogating both design and construction techniques to demonstrate how this will be achieved.
Establish how the proposed measures of success for the development, ie exporting energy, zero-waste off site, and net water use, will be achieved. Calculate the potential energy demand and how much energy in kWH can be generated through the proposed anaerobic digestion of waste.
Explore further the potential for local food production. Investigate linking this sustainable enterprise with schools and colleges in the area. The lifestyle emphasis of the proposal is impressive, although evidence of local support for the scheme is needed. Produce a road map to 2020 and a ‘day in the life’ of a habitant to focus on the behaviour change that will be needed to deliver a successful project. Look at the composition of the community, in particular the role of teenagers in the development.
Demonstrate how the procurement and design ambitions of the project will be realised and describe how it will manage possible future growth. Propose how high standards will be maintained and detail assurances for the delivery of the town.
DOWNLOAD REPORT HERE or Read the FORD extract below...
Ford
The proposal’s strength of vision is commended; however, the relationship with separate bid for an enterprise hub needs further explanation. The bid’s breadth of thinking is commended, as is the clear understanding that an eco-town should set an example for sustainable living.
The site is challenging and the scheme needs to impact positively on issues that are currently affecting Arun, namely social deprivation, unemployment, an elderly population and a lack of social cohesion.
The concept develops the features and infrastructure of the site relatively well, adding a mixed-use employment core, an education campus, an energy centre next to the existing recycling plant and relocating the rail station. Explore why businesses would be attracted to the area and explain how high calibre jobs will be pursued using the eco-towns brand.
Inevitably there will be some commuting to London, especially given the town’s potential to become part of Thameslink, as development here could lead to its reintroduction to the programme. Demonstrate how commuting off site will be minimised in this proposal. Funding the proposed A27 Arundel bypass should be abandoned, as it is not consistent with sustainable principles. Consider a radically different approach to transport, potentially using Personal Rapid Transit as demonstrated by the Ultra scheme under construction at Heathrow. The Parkway, promoted by the enterprise hub bid, may not be sustainable in
a world where oil prices continue to rise. Provide more information on the public realm and examine how to create travel behaviour change especially related to workplace travel planning and cycling.
Use the green space strategy as a starting point for the masterplan; the proposed network of green spaces, neighbourhood allotments, wetland habitat and the reintroduction of the canal could be instrumental to creating an identity for the area.
The ambition to create Code for Sustainable Homes Level 6 housing is praised. It is encouraging that the breadth of areas to be addressed is understood and that there are some numbers available. The proposal should set targets for carbon emissions for all building types on the site as well as interrogating both design and construction techniques to demonstrate how this will be achieved.
Establish how the proposed measures of success for the development, ie exporting energy, zero-waste off site, and net water use, will be achieved. Calculate the potential energy demand and how much energy in kWH can be generated through the proposed anaerobic digestion of waste.
Explore further the potential for local food production. Investigate linking this sustainable enterprise with schools and colleges in the area. The lifestyle emphasis of the proposal is impressive, although evidence of local support for the scheme is needed. Produce a road map to 2020 and a ‘day in the life’ of a habitant to focus on the behaviour change that will be needed to deliver a successful project. Look at the composition of the community, in particular the role of teenagers in the development.
Demonstrate how the procurement and design ambitions of the project will be realised and describe how it will manage possible future growth. Propose how high standards will be maintained and detail assurances for the delivery of the town.
It's not like me to agree with the Daily Mail - but...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1027315/Why-eco-towns-destroy-environment-supposed-save.html
It's amazing how many press articles are now being written exposing the ridiculous contradiction that is an 'eco town' - meant to be green, actually a carbon nightmare!
It's amazing how many press articles are now being written exposing the ridiculous contradiction that is an 'eco town' - meant to be green, actually a carbon nightmare!
Terry Knott on BBC Radio 4
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/puffbox/promo/regular/7468411.stm
An interview with Terry on Radio 4 yesterday
An interview with Terry on Radio 4 yesterday
Eco-town plans attacked over public transport links
The choice of sites put on a shortlist to be England's first ecotowns has been strongly criticised for their lack of adequate public transport links and other shortcomings by a government advisory panel.
One site is dismissed as looking like "a typical commercial scheme", and several will need to significantly improve their plans, a report will make clear today. Read more here...
One site is dismissed as looking like "a typical commercial scheme", and several will need to significantly improve their plans, a report will make clear today. Read more here...
Sunday 22 June 2008
Gordon Brown's eco-towns policy just ‘greenwash’
The “eco-towns” policy promoted by Gordon Brown has suffered a setback with an official report warning that many of the schemes are little more than ordinary housing estates with a green label attached.
The report, to be released tomorrow, says some schemes, whose critics include Dame Judi Dench, need to do far more to tackle pollution and congestion. Some need to be redrawn, while others have no chance of being accepted as eco towns.
A source said: “Some are little more than ‘greenwash’. Out of 15 shortlisted proposals, we were not convinced there were 10 that had earned the right to be given the go-ahead.” Read more here...
The report, to be released tomorrow, says some schemes, whose critics include Dame Judi Dench, need to do far more to tackle pollution and congestion. Some need to be redrawn, while others have no chance of being accepted as eco towns.
A source said: “Some are little more than ‘greenwash’. Out of 15 shortlisted proposals, we were not convinced there were 10 that had earned the right to be given the go-ahead.” Read more here...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)