Thursday 22 September 2011

Letter to The Citizen, 22 September 2011

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 10:36 AM
Subject: Planning Policy

The Editor
Dear Sir
From the increasing number of letters appearing in the Citizen criticising the proposals for the development of the railway triangle, St Oswalds and  Kings`s Square, it is pretty clear that there is lack of confidence in those entrusted with the future development of this once great and industrious City.  All of the proposals lack imagination and vision.
The `one size fits all` answer to the question of any redevelopment appears to be `more retail space`. 
Imagination does not mean destroying the heritage of the city by destroying good traditional architecture and replacing it with currently fashionable fancy (and cheap) buildings that will soon date but good land use in the city that will ensure the future prosperity of the city while genuinely enhancing the quality of life for its citizens and giving good value for money in the long term.
It is clear that some good work is going on, linking conservation to development, but real vision is needed and opportunities taken.  The quays was imaginative in concept but has been of limited success for a number of factors, not all the city`s fault.  Principally it is not `site specific` enough by not making more of its location - once inside the shopping mall for example one could be anywhere - no views through to the Docks, no shipping reference.  So why Gloucester when you can get the same in Cheltenham or Bristol? 
I would urge the council to look again at the current proposals for redevelopment. 
 What is to be lost by creating a simpler but more attractive King`s Square giving desirable amenity space for markets, displays, activities or simply watching the world go by?  All of which has been successfully tried and tested.  Why such a huge increase in retail space when all that is currently available cannot be filled? 
Why greatly increase St Oswalds Tesco such that local businesses suffer yet again.  With the requirement for vastly increased hard surfacing and car parking area the flooding risk will also be greatly exacerbated?  Has 2007 been forgotten so soon?
The railway triangle.  A chance to provide an up to date station/transport interchange with proper amenities befitting of the 21st century for the convenience of travellers, to attract tourism and something for the citizens to be proud of? 
Develop the triangle inmaginatively: combine new business opportunity with an attraction that offers something Cheltenham or Bristol does not have.  Maybe a theme park developed in conjunction with a private developer, an observation tower, a `water world` or similar?  Why not?  This would then give a triangle of attractions to visitors making a visit to the city a worth while trip: shopping, family entertainment, history and culture, on offer throughout the year.
My apologies if I am simply restating views already made but I believe they cannot be over stated.
The time to act is now while all is possible. Courage, passion and vision are required.  Carpe diem!
Roger Price

Monday 12 September 2011

Letter to The Citizen, 12 September 2011

The Editor                                                                   
The Citizen                                                                  
6-8 The Oxebode                                                        
Gloucester  GL1 1RZ
                                                                                     
12th September 2011                                                  

Dear Sir
I refer to the article by Max Wilkinson on page 2 of the Weekend Citizen dated Saturday, September 10, 2011, regarding the
Elmbridge Court
hub and a possible railway station.  Gloucestershire County Council has made a good decision in rejecting the railway station which would perhaps have been known as Elmbridge Halt.
The grandiose scheme as pictured by an artist’s impression in the Citizens of Tuesday 11th July 2006 and Thursday 7th December 2006 was nothing of the kind.  The proposed station at Elmbridge was just a two platform Halt with no added track or even a cross-over.  A train stopping there would simply block the track and not serve any useful purpose such as changing trains.
In the July 2006 article, City Councillor Mark Hawthorne said that Gloucester should be placed firmly on the cross country map for services between the north of England and the south west.
A station at the north east vertex of the triangle would meet his requirements.

Yours faithfully




Brian Cowell