 |
Houndwood Housing Development
Your turn to comment!
I represent the Street Society on the Core Group that is being consulted about the proposed housing development at Houndwood and, with the help of the Executive Committee, I have played a part, on your behalf, in the discussions that preceded the Planning Brief currently on display in the Library.
The planning process proper has now started and the purpose of this article is to explain some of the issues as I personally see them and to urge you as individuals to think about them and make your views known. As Les Bennett, Chairman of the Area Board, recently said:" We -want to know what you think. When it is built, it will be too late, so you have to tell us what you want and don't want".
Youcan get names of Councillors from the Council Information Point and letters left thare will be forwarded to them. They are the people who will be voting this important scheme through its various stages. Most of them do not live in Street and, of those who do, several are prevented from participating because of a connection with C& J Clark. One letter from an individual is just as valuable as a paper from the Street Society.
Scale of the development: You will be aware that the Local Plan originally earmarked the site of the new warehouse for 300 dwellings and that well over 400 units are now proposed to be built on the area it will have vacated. The replacement area is somewhat larger and nearer to Street. This, we are told, justifies in planning terms the considerable increase in numbers based on so-called 'recommended densities'. There is plenty of room for an opposing view but it is unlikely to prevail without huge protest and a change of heart at many levels.
Dense but affordable, and healthier: Houndwood is therefore likely to be a dense development (90 units per hectare in places) and Street will have to cope. The relentless transformation of Street from the 'village' beloved of Streetonians to the 'market town' envisaged by the planners is set to continue. The scheme should however, in my view and with considerable regret, now be judged by the imagination and creativity with which it meets that challenge. It sets out to tackle an identified need for accommodation that small protect people from toxic chemicals used in their construction and allow both planet and people's arteries to benefit from fewer avoidable car journeys.
Yes, there will be yet more traffic in Street. It will be harder to park. We wonder where the new people will work. Some of them may bring social problems. Cramped living quarters may create them. It is not difficult to to imagine a run-down ghetto.
On the other hand, the new residents may be our children and grandchildren on their way up the housing ladder, or new people attracted to a place where things happen and shops open rather than close, or even ourselves looking for central accommodation with fewer responsibilities. There might even be an increase in community spirit. Many people will take to walking and cycling more. As for jobs, the next fifty years will see changed working patterns for everyone everywhere. It is also unlikely that the private car will remain its noisy polluting self The project is an experiment that could succeed as well as fail.
An architectural and environmental showplace for Street. As I explained in a previous Newsletter, the positive and encouraging aspect to all this is the close involvement of members of the Clark family and their express wish to create an architectural showplace for Street developed according to the best possible environmental principles. I described the interesting visits that were arranged in order to open up the minds of planners, councillors and local people to new standards of technical innovation and design, a far cry from the usual housing estate. Recent visits of my own to C & J Clarks HQ buildings have been a reminder of the artistic sense of this family firm, today as in the past.
Since my previous report, C & J Clark have appointed the award-winning architectural firm of Feilden, Clegg and Bradley to prepare a Master Plan for the site and to oversee its implementation. This is really good news and should make it more likely that reality will match fine drawings The 'Planning Brief itself. It has now been approved by Mendip District Council and, once the Master Plan has been prepared, developers will be invited to tender for individual parcels (starting at the Southern aid). They will have to meet the general standards and conditions set out in the Brief. Some are set by Mendip District Council. Other more stringent design and environmental conditions are being set by consultants appointed by C & I Clark.
Residents9 concents. Nearby residents were consulted as a group early on and, as a result, properties in West End and Cranhill Road will gain a rear access: Buildings at the Southern end will be designed to mingle with existing terraces in scale and style and the building line will be continued at West End across some of the current open space. It is intended to retain the Barn. Care will be taken to avoid overlooking existing properties, Through traffic will be discouraged.
Parking: There has also been some increase in the amount of parking space on the site. The original intention had been to 'design out' the private car in this central site, but the consultants have listened to local people who pointed to the inadequacy of public transport and the fact that many future residents will need cars to get to work.
Something very different for Street. The Brief has lived up to its promise to be quite startling and to provide many debating points:
-
The most immediately contentious item has proved to be the suggested Landmark building of 'up to 8 storeys' alongside the warehouse. The consultants would however like us to think not of a vandalised 'tower block' but of up-market penthouses with fine views in a really stylish building designed by Clarks to set the tone of the estate. Do you agree? Is this a red herring?
-
There is provision for banks of apartments of 3 to 4 storeys on the Western boundary. In a sense these rather alien elements are the price that has to be paid for generous open space within the estate and for keeping existing groups of trees. Too stark for Street? Have they got the balance between open space and personal space right?
-
The watercourse is to be opened up and there is a plan for a landscaped walkway beside it by way of a Village Green. This and other retained landscape features are of great importance ecologically and visually and should go some way to make good the loss of the informal open space used down the years by Street people. Can parents be trusted to look after very small children or does the theoretical risk to them of shallow open water outweigh its drainage and environmental benefits - and the pleasure of feeding the ducks?
-
There is a plan for a MUGA (Multi-use Games Area) for teenagers and adults. Should it be lit at night? Or on the Batch?
-
Could a creche and/or cafe be made to pay?
-
Another bold proposal in the Brief is an area reserved for Co-housing, the scheme for a simpler, more communal way of life that is becoming increasingly popular in Canada and Scandinavia. It has distinct ecological and social advantages and could be another 'first' for Street.
-
Also quite revolutionary is the proposal to create 'Living Zones', popular on the Continent. Rather than streets and pavements in the residential areas, there is shared space round the houses. Think of driving very slowly through a campsite where people are walking about, children are playing and the car is no more than tolerated.
-
What sort of management scheme will ensure the maintenance of high standards and who will pay for it?
My hope is that these questions will have sparked your interest and that you will visit the Exhibition in the Library with an open mind and with your children and grandchildren in tow. You are being invited to contribute to decisions that will affect their well-being and which could also influence the design of housing estates far beyond Street.
Sue Monaghan
|
|
