Daft Ideas

In Tunbridge Wells the local press and social media is not short of material publicising daft ideas for infrastructure developments. Often there is a short period of frenetic support for an idea, usually by the groupies for whom the originator of an idea can do no wrong.  After this burst of activity, nothing.  The recent nonsense regarding the development of the Odeon site is a classic.

 

The daftest idea I read was the proposal that a shaft be sunk at  Fiveways and a passenger station built in the railway tunnel.  Sadly the name of the originator of this proposal escapes me but he/she is my choice for the Twerp of the Year Award.

 

 

The new block

The block of terraced houses being built on the former garden of the Red Lion in Rusthall proceeds apace.  Price of a house over £500,000.  We have an artist's impression adorning the side of the office on the site.  The houses have no architectural merit, very little garden and a route march to the waste bins.

 

 

 

 

 

Storm in a Thai cup Rusthall

Before lockdown the Red Lion in Rusthall served Thai food which received rave reviews and had a live jazz night on Saturdays.  Since the partial lifting of the lockdown the Thai food service has resumed but the jazz nights are off limits.

Sadly all has not gone well since re-opening.  The popular Manager left before the re-opening but why has not been made public.  This week all Thai kitchen staff have been given notice.  Before lockdown the pub was closed on Mondays but is open now for what may be described as pub grub.  

The surmise locally is that Thai is out and pub grub in every day.

The locals, well some of them, are up in arms and have taken to social media to vent their fury.  Fingers are being pointed, accusations made and conclusions reached based on no hard evidence or  any unbiased  objective analysis.

New Blogger

Had to move from Chrome to Mozilla Firefox to access the 'new' Blogger format. Not keen on the new arrangement and not an improvement.

Planning Shambles (6)

Most of the new wall has been demolished and re-building on a new line is in progress.  A change demanded by Kent County Council has resulted in an improved sight line.  You will recall from an earlier post that Tunbridge Wells Borough Council was mindful to do nothing. This will form the basis of a formal complaint.

The re-built wall does not accord with the approved plans.  The difference is not major and although the outcome is not ideal I suspect KCC will apply the de minimis rule.

Opposition parties in Tunbridge Wells

The disaster that is overwhelming the retail sector in town and city centres has been accentuated by the COVID crisis.  However the problems existed well before the virus struck.  There is a desperate need for something to attract people into Tunbridge Wells, apart from the mayhem of boozers.  One idea was to develop the town as a cultural centre and a major proposal was for a new theatre to replace and improve on the Assembly Hall which is slowly falling apart.

An unholy alliance of opposition parties,  some members of the controlling party and a rat-bag of assorted local loud-mouths and foghorns killed the theatre scheme and with  it any future the town may have had.

Now these self-same councillors are seeking to replace the leader of the council for failing to be dynamic in dealing with the consequences of the virus.

Planning Shambles (5)

At last!  The offending wall is being demolished.  Tunbridge Wells Borough Council stated the wall was 'broadly' in accordance with the plans and decided to do nothing.  Fortunately Kent County Council  was not of the same opinion.

Planning Shambles (4) An end in sight?

Today there was a site meeting between the developer. Kent County Council Highways and Tunbridge Wells Borough Council  planners to consider the issue of 'the wall' (See earlier posts)

The outcome. conveyed to me by TWBC

Part of the wall is to be rebuilt where that part obscures the vision splays agreed in the planning permission.

Not before time!

Letter in today's Daily Telegraph:

SIR – Lists of user-friendly bars (Letters, July 1) will always lead with Maurice’s Peacock Inn in Nottingham, during the swinging Seventies.

Bells on the wall would bring pints of Shipstone’s in a jiffy, delivered with banter from another era.

I knew the pub well.  It was located on Mansfield Road, just up from the site of Nottingham Victoria station and opposite York House where I worked.  Many a happy lunchtime and after work sessions.  The lounge bar had a bell system.  Activate the bell push and Maurice would appear, tea-towel over his shoulder, take your order and reappear with tray and drinks and non PC banter.  Happy days.

Planning: Shambles ((3) Red :Lion Wall

The saga continues.  Recently I published the e-mails I sent and received on this matter.

https://kentcommunityactivist.blogspot.com/2020/06/planning-application-2-shambles.html

On 08 June Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (TWBC)  e-mailed me:

I have visited the site, and spoken to the developer. The wall being rebuilt broadly fits the detail of the plan 05D on 19/03589/LBC. As the development has always been controversial in terms of the visibility splays of access to the site, I believe they have adjusted it slightly for better visibility. As such I do not see this as a substantial breach of the plans.

In other words TWBC is happy to do nothing.

A few days later Kent County Council Highways (KCC) visited the site and contacted TWBC.  the upshot was this e-mail from TWBC dated 19 June.

I have since had a chance to hear from KCC Highways and they agree the wall, as built, is built on the wrong line in part.

The developer accepts this is an error of their making, and will be realigning it to comply with the visibility splays.

Rather a change!

However the developer has not realigned the wall. Instead he has continued building it. Time for me to complain again:

I e-mailed KCC on 01 July and received this response on 02 July.

At this stage I can advise you that  the developer is aware of this matter and  that the wall is under further consideration by both the highway and planning authorities.

Another change of stance.  What a shambles.  I fired off this response to KCC.

Thus 'further consideration' means let the developer continue to built and then?  Oh dear the work is so far advanced we should not stop it.  The developer should have been stopped.

I'll keep you posted.  My opinion is that the developer will get away with it. I shall be making a complaint to TWBC and KCC  in any event about how this matter has been handled.

Hacked, or what?

In the past three months I have come under attack from what I assume to be a hacker.  My name and address was used to complain to the local council about a garden fire.  The e-mail address used was not mine.

More recently I  have supposedly joined a dating site.

Today it is claimed I made a complaint on another matter.

Someone out there does not like me.  I couldn't care less and await further activity with interest.

Dame Vera Lynn Statue.

How insensitive can you be? Is it April Fools Day?  At a time when an idiot of a chief constable bends his knee before the Black Lives Matter vandals (criminal damage no less) it is suggested that a statue be raised for a white woman who sang about white cliffs and is a symbol of our oppressive colonial slave-trading past. Come on get a grip.  

No.  What we need is not a statue of Dame Vera but one of the Labour MPs: Dawn Butler, David Lammy and Diane Abbot all looking longingly into the eyes of Saint Jeremy surrounded by a throng of snowflakes and Liberal Democrats.

Planning Application (2) A shambles

In May I published a post on the development of the Red Lion Garden to build a terrace of 3 x 3 bedroom houses.  Planning permission has been granted for this to be a 3 x 4 bedroom development.

The developer has been busy.

A major concern of mine has been the line of the wall in the bottom two photographs which does not follow the line on the planning application.  Remember sight lines is a key factor in the decision to permit the development.

Correspondence flowed between me and the Planning Department:


From me 2 June:

Dear Sirs

I note that the boundary wall is being rebuilt in accordance with the plans currently before the planning authority for decision and not in accordance with the plans approved on appeal and also the decision of 8 April 2020 in respect of wall details.  The wall being built allows for two entrances whereas the approved plans are for one.

As work on the wall started on 1st June there is time for the wall to be built as approved.  I await your response.

From the Planning Department 3 June

Dear Mr Hopkinson,

The bricks were removed by a machine in blocks as there was no way they could remove them individually by hand, due to the shattering. I was on site to witness this.

As for any change in the line of the wall, I will visit the site to see what it is they are doing.

Yours sincerely

From me  5 June:

Further to your e-mail of 03 June I trust you have visited the site or plan to do so in the near future.  You will note that the wall changes direction opposite the gate to 57/55 Lower Green Road.  Initially the bricklayers laid a few bricks in the correct direction but were told to remove them to permit  the wall to be set off in the new direction.  Where the wall should have changed direction there is now a 90 degree curve which does not appear on any plans,  

From the Planning Department   8 June

Dear Mr Hopkinson,

I have visited the site, and spoken to the developer. The wall being rebuilt broadly fits the detail of the plan 05D on 19/03589/LBC. As the development has always been controversial in terms of the visibility splays of access to the site, I believe they have adjusted it slightly for better visibility. As such I do not see this as a substantial breach of the plans.

Yours sincerely

From me to Planning Department  8 June:

I am not surprised by your response: indeed it was in accord with my expectation given the current thinking within the Town Hall.   Words such as 'broadly' ring alarm bells.

The demolished wall was listed and was to be replaced by a new wall utilising the bricks in the demolished wall on a slightly different alignment: an alignment which appears in the original drawings, the appeal documents and the revised application.   The Planning Inspector approved the alignment in the plans and did not require any 'improvement' as a condition of approval.

The carefully drawn up plans for the wall had two purposes:

1.  To have visibility splays which would be approved

2.  To satisfy the listed building requirement.  

Having achieved this the developer, retrospectively aided and abetted by the planning authority, has chosen to ignore the plans.  The new wall bears little resemblance to the demolished wall.

I agree with the objective of improving the sight lines but the changes made will have no significant effect.  Why were the changes not included in the most recent planning application?  It looks like changes being made 'on the hoof'' and hope no-one notices.

A second e-mail from me dated 8 June:

I have read the most recent comments of the Council's Conservation Officer and KCC Highways.  Were these comments made before your decision to agree to the changes to the wall as they are broadly in accordance with the plans?  Indeed has either been consulted regarding the changes?

Looking at the curved part of the wall this appears to restrict vision of the road to the north from that which would obtain from a straight wall.   Quite important from a road safety aspect but hey ho it is broadly in accord with the plans.

From the Planning Department 19 June:

Dear Mr Hopkinson

I have since had a chance to hear from KCC Highways and they agree the wall, as built, is built on the wrong line in part.

The developer accepts this is an error of their making, and will be realigning it to comply with the visibility splays.

Yours sincerely

Bob Wykes RIP

I was saddened to read of the death of Bob Wykes a former chairman of the Bridge Trust;  Bob was involved in setting up  the trust in 1995 and was one of the original directors.  He was a 'mover and shaker' who had a strong presence at board meetings. In 2004 he became chairman   and I was fortunate to be his vice-chairman for a number of years. He retired from the board a couple of years after I left.  He was an unassuming person, without side, who confronted problems head on. The trust and those the organisation assisted out of homelessness owe Bob a huge debt of gratitude.

News of his death has come as a shock, so soon after the death of Len Horwood.

Planning Application: Rusthall

In 2019  Inspector C Osgathorp on behalf of The Planning Inspectorate allowed an appeal against the decision of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (TWBC) to refuse planning permission for a three-bedroom, three homes terrace on land adjoining the Red Lion Pub. 

The decision of C Osgathorp in full is on TWBC's website.


The original application had been opposed by local residents, Rusthall Parish Council, Kent County Council and TWBC on road safety grounds.

TWBC has received a planning application to change the proposed developed into a terrace of three four-bedroom houses.  Local residents have opposed the application on road safety grounds.

In the meantime the developer has started ground levelling and utilities work.  An access road has been driven into the site and the sight lines for traffic coming upon the junction are clear to see.  The worst fears of the protesters look like being realised.  Remember the name: C. Osgathorp.

What's in a name, or myths about charities (Part 1)

Sadly some people lose all sense of reason when it comes to charities.  After all, isn't charity all about volunteering to do good works for the benefit of the poorer sections of our society?  No!! is the short answer.

A dose of reality:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charity-inquiry-the-public-safety-charitable-trust-limited/charity-inquiry-the-public-safety-charitable-trust-limited

The Charity Commission doing its job.  Health warning: don't be fooled by the word 'charity'.  Quite apart from examples of .charities not being charities in law  there is a list of the types of activity deemed to be charitable. including the advancement of education which covers private schools:-as we know, well-trodden haunts of the poor.  The legal framework needs wholesale change.

The Centre of Industrial England

You would be forgiven should you think the answer is Birmingham or Sheffield. The centre, according to Chesterfield  Borough Council, was Chesterfield and in recognition of this the boundary signs on the main roads leading into the town had the strap-line 'The Centre of Industrial England'.   The validity of the claim depends on definition.  Is the 'centre' geographical, based on numbers of people engaged in industry, or some other measure.  Ambiguity and/or vagueness may be an attribute!

Chesterfield has a rich industrial heritage. Coal mining, ironworks, heavy engineering all gone along with their supply chains.

All aboard

Television news has shown images of near-empty trains during the rush hour (Underground apart).  Given the cost of commuter travel and the time involved how likely is it that many people will seek to work at least part if not all of the working week from home or local offices?  The savings in cash and time would be considerable for people in commuter belts.  Would reductions in long distance business travel make the case for HS2 even more shaky?

Smoke gets in your eyes.

A few days ago a near neighbour lit a bonfire made of garden waste. A lot of smoke drifted on the breeze. Someone complained to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council using an on-line form. Today I received a letter from the Council thanking me for my 'recent call'. However I made no such call. Whoever did used my name and address .but the e-mail address was not mine!

Free Bus to Sheffield

I was born in Sheffield and lived my early years in the city.  A long-time supporter of the Blades and Yorkshire cricket I visited the city many times.  I live now  in Kent and I have not been to Sheffield for over 30 years.  The nearest I came was travelling on the M1 over Tinsley viaduct.

Now is the time to rectify this sad state of affairs. I plan to travel to Sheffield for free, using my 'pensioners' bus pass.  Working out the route has not been easy, but it can be done.  I look on it as an adventure.

My destination is Pond Street Bus Station, now rather grandly known as Sheffield Interchange.

The Virus

We are self-isolating.  At our age and given our health issues it is the only sensible thing to do.  Neighbours, family, Sally Army and friends have rallied round and this, together with supermarket deliveries, means that we do not need to go out.  A special mention for Rachel who has called on us (and spoken with us from a good distance!).

Len Horwood RIP

The death of Len Horwood is reported on the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council's Facebook page. He served as a councillor for many years.  I met him for the first time in 1996 and saw him 'in action' as a councillor for four years.  I retired in 2000 and next met Len in a barber's shop in Camden Road.  He opined that I would be missed on the council. I suggested my absence would not be missed after a week to which his response was that it would be shorter than that, say a couple of days.

We met up again when I became a director of Tunbridge Wells Mental Health Resource.   He was the director responsible for overseeing the finances of the charity to which was added the position of chairman.   He ran a tight ship and the charity owes him a huge debt of gratitude for the time he devoted to its work.   Only one thing got in the way of his commitment to the charity,   the annual pilgrimage to the Cheltenham Festival.

Concerning this virus

We are informed that the vast majority of people will suffer only mild symptoms and for them it is not life-threatening.  From the way people are panic buying you might be forgiven for thinking the effect on the general population was akin to the Plague.

There are 'at risk' groups. I happen to fall within two categories - my age and my underlying health issues.  I am not unduly concerned and I am taking the recommended precautions.

Brexit Day

YIPPEE!!