Responses to Consultations
December 2009
LIAISON WITH TOWN CENTRE COMMUNITY POLICE TEAM
Current Police Officers are; Sergeant Claire Greenaway, PC David Walton, CSO Derek Hughes-Beddows.
1. CSO Derek Hughes-Beddows is organising weekly 'surgeries' at Poppies Cafe, Milk Street, every Wednesday afternoon from 2 p.m.
2. Current PACT priorities for the Town Centre are:-
A. Motor vehicles are using Fish Street other than for access. This will be monitored by the police.
B. Under age-drinking. Several initiatives in place including seizure of ID where it has been misused by minors.
C. Pubwatch bans for those persons who commit offences in and around lincensed premises where drugs and/or voilence are involved. There are now 39 member premises in the town who belong to Pubwatch.
3. Litter-picks:-
Run by CSO Derek Hughes-Beddows, and usually every four weeks. There will not be one in December, so the next ones will be 24th Jan, 21st Feb, 21st March, 18th April and 16th May for 2010.
4. Purse chains are available at the Town Centre Police Station. They are free and will be fitted by a memers of staff. The T.C..P.S is situated in the Pride Hill/Riverside shopping mall at the bottom of the escalators at ground level.
5. Anyone wishing to have priority information from the police can join Ringmaster, and receive it through emails, but a signature is required - also can be done at the Town Centre Police Station.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 2009
Comments on the Shropshire Core Strategy: Policy Directions
By Shrewsbury Town Centre Residents Association - October 2009
Our remit is confined to the interests of the town centre and all those proposals that affect the community in the town centre, the prosperity of the town centre and the ambience currently making Shrewsbury the wonderful place we all respect and enjoy. Our comments are therefore not generally relevant to most of the document, which has worthy and appropriate proposals.
Our concerns are fundamental and come under the main heading of the desirability of targeted growth especially with the emphasis on Shrewsbury itself. In the first place we question the whole concept of growth, and secondly we are alarmed at the targets set. Nowhere has the government explained why growth is necessary.
We fully accept that there is a need for new dwellings, but judging by the waiting lists for dwellings and the nature of those on the waiting list, it is quite clear that the demand is measurable and is almost entirely for so-called affordable housing. The figure for 3 million new dwellings in the UK by 2026 is based, so we understand, entirely on a computer program predicting the number of new households expected by that date. The program has numerous variables including birth rates, death rates, net immigration, ageing population, family breakdowns, mortgage interest levels, unemployment levels and house prices, with much of the data provided by the Office of National Statistics using predictions for all these factors. No-one will know whether or not these predictions are wide of the mark until the anticipated 2011 National Census. That all these parameters could vary in a direction totally unforeseen is a distinct possibility. The final analysis and predictions came from the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit basing their conclusions on data that appears to be changing dramatically and deviating from the predicted curves as foreign labour returns to their homes, and birth rates have risen.
These predictions have all been made prior to the current financial crisis, which affects nearly all the parameters put into the computer program, and so whatever doubt existed in respect of the proposed targets for housing has been magnified now that the crisis has unfolded. This means that we do not believe that the figures for new dwellings in Shrewsbury are justified. As the Local Development Framework progresses, we fear that land set aside for development could be sterilised unnecessarily to the detriment of the community.
That in the old Borough of Shrewsbury & Atcham an average of over 1000 new dwellings each year has been built is no reason to continue this. Our concern is that continuing growth of this level for the foreseeable future will result in an urban sprawl, which will destroy the ambience of our market town. Our current urban population of around 60,000 is sustainable and maintains the environment in an equable state. Were it to rise to 80,000 or 100,000 the fabric of the built environment will deteriorate, the traffic restraints will result in intolerable congestion and the consequent pollution, a problem already in many parts of the town, will make life unpleasant for everyone.
As for the commercial growth, what evidence is there that this is sustainable? The world is in a state of high tension with tremendous changes in the structure of world trade. The shortage of useable water, the poisoning of so much of our environment and the mal-distribution of resources especially food are now recognised by governments world-wide, and there will inevitably be a reduction in growth in developed countries and a balancing growth in developing nations. To aim to increase our commercial enterprises when the present is in decline and the future unpredictable, only the blind and the foolhardy will endeavour to set targets for growth in retail and in office development as well as housing.
For these several reasons we consider the figures for new dwellings, new offices and new retail developments unsustainable and unacceptable. In our opinion the focus should be solely on affordable housing to meet local demands. There is a clear need to define the nature and types of affordable housing in order to prevent the building of poor quality dwellings just because they are cheaper. We fully support CABE's criticism
(11th August 2009) of the quality of new dwellings being provided by developers, for, although their report is a study of housing in the South-East, it also applies to the quality of new dwellings in Shrewsbury.
Accordingly "affordable housing" should not mean substandard dwellings nor poky apartments, maisonettes and bed-sitters. They should comprise dwellings that would accommodate families in rooms of adequate size for furniture and space for children to play, and the meaning of affordable should relate to its funding and not to and lowering of its quality. This need could be accommodated mostly on urban brown-field sites and specific settlements in the rural area where they are needed for the rural community. There is no need to use any green field sites outside the old ring road, and the proposal to accept development on Area D is quite unacceptable. To allow further expansion of out-of-town developments will only add to the traffic problems as well as attract revenue from the town centre to its detriment. In particular we see no need to propose more dwellings for commuters, who work out of Shropshire, or for newcomers seeking to retire here.
To expand the town in the manner suggested will so change it, that its attractiveness will go, and the very reason for people wanting to live here will no longer exist.