|
Post by Admin on Dec 19, 2008 14:19:32 GMT 1
Tell us what you like or dislike about the scenarios.
|
|
|
Post by resident on Dec 22, 2008 14:00:34 GMT 1
I like the idea of a network of small pedestrian friendly roads and can imagine creating a pleasant environment.
I am pleased to see that Luxford field is retained in all three plans as the focal point of the town.
I like the idea of having a "Town Square" or other open area to connect the High Street to any developments around Luxford field. It is important that the High Street does not become cut off from any new development.
I like the idea of planning "blocks" with the ability to mix and match like a jigsaw. However this does not allow for areas of mixed use to be clearly show. (eg Offices above shops, Flats above shops etc.)
I am not so happy about the increased size of the Supermarket. This I feel is disproportionate to the rest of the town. Increased Grocery provision should be provided by increasing choice rather than simply making one huge store. An enlarged store would stock large amounts of non-food products threatening other small retailers and risking leaving the High Street like a ghost town. The larger supermarket would have its own parking and this control over parking gives them an unfair advantage. They may offer 3 or 4 hours free (to customers) but the worrying expression "Parking management to achieve more efficient use" suggests parking charges to use the proposed multistorey at the top of town.
I don't like the idea of large areas of residential within the town centre. There are a number of developments that although people may think have gone away are actually still under appeal waiting for an answer from the Secretary Of State. These will increase the population by 10-15%. It is not necessary therefore to add extra homes in the town centre. I would not object to the possibilty of mixed use but the use of the connecting roads by residents would go against their pedestrian friendliness.
Previous proposals have offered an "Enhanced High Street" but in fact this has never been delivered. Improvements to the pavements, crossings, Bus stops and the provision of cycle parking have all been promised in the past but are never forthcoming. The frontages of many of the buildings are in need of retoration and repair. Dealing with these issues and enhancing the High Street should come ahead of any new development. Tesco will pay for development of their site and other developers can see profits from building new units with flats. Unfortunately the High Street does not get this kind of support because it's already there.
On the whole I think the proposals offer a more community centred idea rather than the Tesco dominated proposal provided by St James's investments. I imagine a town centre with a variety of shops including some national retailers with a High Street of smaller independants for example The pantiles in Tunbridge Wells or the Lanes in Brighton. However this requires investment in the current High Street and prevention of domination by any one retailer.
|
|
neil
Junior Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by neil on Jan 2, 2009 18:49:19 GMT 1
I dislike the proposals where the supermarkets increase its footprint on the town. By all means allow it to build upwards.
The planners should be bold and increase the size of Luxford field.
|
|