Where do we go from here?

POSSIBLY the most frustrating thing for all of us who care about Salisbury is the number of good ideas and good intentions that we hear about, followed by ….. not a lot.

Nothing seems to really change. Or if it does, it takes an absolute age.

Take the Maltings and central car park, for example. Crying out for some creative regeneration. Vision after vision after framework after strategy. But fate always gets in the way.

Or the old British Heart Foundation site. No sign now of a budget hotel or a relocated library, let alone a new home for the poor old Young Gallery.

So, off I went last night to the college – where, to be fair, something has actually happened, and the rebuild is a huge, ongoing improvement.

I was there with a hundred or so well-meaning others for a Civic Society/Royal Society of Arts meeting to discuss the city’s recovery from the twin shocks of Novichok and Covid.

It was great to hear from speakers about how the college is focusing on fitting students for the world of work, about how our businesses are faring, about the need to bring back live performance and encourage wider participation in the arts, and about the Future High Streets funding to be invested in making our city centre more attractive.

There needs to be more consultation with the people of Salisbury in how best to spend this money before it becomes a fait accompli, warned the Civic Society’s Peter Dunbar. And it was pleasing to hear a Wiltshire Council officer acknowledge that they “could do consultation better”.

But it was our MP John Glen who hit a couple of nails on the head for me.

He senses people’s frustration that there is no single plan for improving Salisbury, he told us. (Perhaps there’s because the city needs to be allowed to ‘take back control’ of its destiny from Trowbridge, I thought, but I was too polite to say it.)

There are three outstanding challenges, as he sees it. 

First, to put the much-discussed ‘cultural quarter’ back atop the agenda, with a strategic look at how we use space in the Maltings. This, he feels, is something that would give Salisbury a distinctive ‘offer’ to visitors.

Second: Provision for young people. There are “significant inequalities’”in the city and there’s “levelling up” to be done locally. Too true.

And thirdly, to reconcile the future distribution of housing with green space and transport infrastructure. 

Well, as you can imagine, I was very happy to hear that.

At present we have a “diffuse set of strategies that have evolved over time”, he said. We have to work collectively with communities across South Wiltshire to decide where it will make sense to develop more housing, how we preserve green space, and how we improve our transport infrastructure.

Quite how we do that when a 'divide and rule' policy has deliberately left the parishes in our district with no formal means of joint working, I don’t know. But at least he sees the problem.

The Mayor, Cllr Caroline Corbin, made a pertinent point about the lack of diversity among those at the meeting and wondered what could be done to get members of our minority communities involved.

And Cllr Paul Sample pointed out quite rightly that we can’t rely on market forces to provide enough affordable housing for young people in an area of high prices and low wages.

But at the end of the evening – frustration, again. The same old problems had been given an airing. I'm not being rude. Everyone meant well. Everyone cared.

But no solutions. As John Glen said, no single overarching plan. And no mechanism that I can see under our present system for creating one.

What a ridiculous way to plan for the future of Harnham

IT was a long haul for the city’s planning committee last Monday.

From a packed agenda, two key items stood out, both of which mean irrevocable change to the leafy character of Harnham.

On both of them, city councillors from all parties and none (me!) stood up for our residents and spoke out YET AGAIN against the inexorable advance of greenfield development.

First it was the 106 homes on land at Waldrons Farm - the first field on the right as you head out of Harnham towards Wilton.

Now it just so happens that the previous weekend I found myself chatting to someone who has reliable connections at Vistry Homes, the would-be developers of this field, who already have permission to erect 640 homes alongside the cattle market.

And I learned that what I’d feared was true. They want more.

In something called the SHLAA (strategic housing land availability assessment) carried out by Wiltshire Council a few years ago the larger site was actually reckoned to be capable of taking 1100-plus homes. And that’s what’s on their minds.

Just think of all the water run-off from that sloping land once it’s under concrete. 

Anyway, you’ll be pleased to hear that we objected to the Waldrons Farm plan on grounds of overdevelopment, lack of pedestrian and cycle paths to the station and city centre, poorly designed access to the main road (a mini roundabout would be better), the fact that the land lies under water for at least part of every winter, its potential archaeological value, its ecological value, and the impact on neighbouring properties.

I think you get the idea. Not a lot in its favour, really. And that’s without mentioning the combined contribution of the traffic these developments will generate to the jams at the Gyratory and Park Wall and to the rat-running through Quidhampton and up past the racecourse. We are obliged to consider only the effects of this individual application.

But what can we parish councillors do, up against a Tory-controlled Wiltshire Council struggling to meet targets dictated by its own party in government – a party that’s heavily dependent on donations from the construction industry?

Plus, when we consider these applications, we often have to do so without the benefit of reports by the specialist officers employed by Wiltshire. They aren’t ready in time, or at least they aren’t posted online in time. This means we have no idea whether these experts are going to back up our own concerns, which are based on our local knowledge.

So anyway. We asked for reports from the Environment Agency and from archaeologists.

We asked for a pedestrian and cycle path to the station and city centre.

Worried about the ecological impact so close to the river, we asked for foul water drainage to be dealt with by way of an engineered solution, rather than a ‘financial contribution’.

Then we had to go through the same exercise all over again.

This time it was 101 homes on the field between Odstock Road and the Rowbarrow estate.

The developers here, Bellway, have had to redraw their plans for archaeological reasons. 

So now they want to build right up to the magnificent belt of trees on your left as you go up to the hospital. Slap opposite the Lime Kiln Down county wildlife site.

Vehicles would access the housing estate from Odstock Road, competing with the hospital traffic and speeding ambulances, and cutting across the route where staff currently walk and cycle to work.

So we’ve got ecological impact – no more ground-nesting skylarks, the risk to the ecology of the beech tree belt, planted to mark the Coronation in 1953, including white helleborine orchids which are listed as a vulnerable ‘red list’ species. We’ve got NO community facilities included, we’ve got no properties for key workers despite junior doctors crying out for affordable rented grown-up housing, we’ve got YET MORE traffic feeding straight into the Harnham gyratory with no strategy to address this.

But what can a mere parish council do?

We’ve asked for the road access to be through Rowbarrow instead.

We’ve endorsed all the environmental concerns of Salisbury Area Greenspace Partnership, who want the chalk downland around the city skyline safeguarded as country parks.

But this is why governments both Labour and Conservative have favoured unitary authorities. Because they take power away from communities like ours, and make it harder for local voices to be heard.

We are left racing against the advancing diggers and bulldozers to come up with a Neighbourhood Plan to try to influence the decision makers. The same decision makers at Trowbridge who totally failed in their declared intention of relocating Churchfields businesses and developing that land for housing, which is what left us in this mess in the first place.

As if Salisbury is a ‘neighbourhood’, no more complex than any tiny village. It’s the only option we’ve got.

And that’s a disgrace.

So please, bear in mind that your city councillors are doing their best, but our best may not always turn out to be good enough. The system is stacked against us.

 

 

 

 

Would you use this car park? It's an embarrassment

IMAGINE you’re a day tripper keen to experience the delights of Salisbury. 
Just what the city’s economy needs.
“Ah, there’s a convenient car park,” you say to yourself as you spot the Culver Street stack next to the ring road. “I’ll pull in there.”
Well, this is the sight that will greet you, as it greeted me on a mercifully quick tour of inspection on Wednesday.

Graffiti, litter-strewn stairwells, windows covered in green slime, and an overwhelming stench of wee.
Presumably not helped by the fact that anyone wishing to use the facilities would have found them locked, and the doorways so filthy that only the truly desperate would have tried to open them anyway.
And acres of desolate, empty space. Not a soul was parked on the top floor despite the fact that it offers a wonderful view across the city’s old rooftops to the Cathedral.

                   

You do get people up there, though. Yobs. One of them peed on a passer-by down below the other week. For a laugh, I suppose. Fortunately the intended victim dodged out of the way in time.
Wiltshire Council owns this dump, collects the takings and is responsible for its maintenance. 
There was talking of tarting it up as part of the People Friendly Streets scheme but those in charge of the cash flow (it’s complicated) didn't like it when residents said no to a ban on through traffic. 
Wiltshire Council leaders promised massive 'savings' when they took over control of our city. Well, they're certainly saving a few quid here.

Jam tomorrow

I’VE lost count of the number of people who’ve come up to me,  before and since the local elections, with real concern in their voices and asked: “Can you do anything about this housing development up the road?”
They mean the 740 homes that'll be going up on the outskirts of West Harnham, along both sides of Netherhampton Road.
And my explanation has had to be: "Sorry, no. Wiltshire Council has already given permission. Salisbury City Council doesn't have the power to do anything about it.”
Despite the fact that these housing allocations were stitched up  some time ago, they remained by far the biggest issue on the doorsteps. I don't think anyone outside Harnham truly appreciates how much the impact of the extra traffic queuing for the jammed-up Gyratory is dreaded.

Now I hear the sound of gears slowly grinding into motion. Noises are being made about 'improving' the junctions at Park Wall, Harnham Gyratory and Exeter Street, and I hope to be able to tell you more after a briefing from Wiltshire later this month.

I suspect any investment will have far more to do with the increasing number of juggernauts thundering past our homes since this suburban road was designated a major route to the ports than it does with our parochial worries. I also suspect it won’t alleviate residents’ concerns about living in the middle of a constant and ever-increasing stream of traffic, albeit one that’s moving a bit faster. 

But you know me, I’m just an old cynic.

So how can anyone justify this unfair voting system?

FIGURES. I know they’re boring. But please, do read these ones. Because they’re actually mind-boggling.
And if I had voted for the Green Party in the recent city council elections, I’d be pretty cross right now.
Their candidates received just over 6,600 votes – that’s more than a fifth of all the votes cast in the city - but not one of them was elected.
The Conservatives, meanwhile, lost a gobsmacking 5,000 votes from their 2017 tally, to just over 8,000.
Yet although that cost them overall control of the Guildhall, they still have 11 councillors. 
Look at those outcomes. They are totally out of proportion. You cannot possibly argue that they fairly reflect the opinions of the Salisbury public.
Meanwhile Labour lost 900-odd votes, and the LibDems, despite the stonking victory of Paul Sample in the St Edmunds ward, pretty well stood still. 
The LibDems, on just over 7,400 votes, got roughly 2,000 more than Labour, yet each party has six councillors.
This is not really meant to be a complaint on my own behalf, but independents, I’d like to point out, gained 2,763 votes and sadly only one councillor (moi). So why don’t independents deserve one-third as many council seats as the Tories, when we got one-third as many votes?
The system is nuts. On this occasion it hasn’t even delivered what some argue is its big benefit, i.e. a clear mandate.
The sooner that government adopts some form of proportional representation, both locally and nationally, the sooner we will be able to  feel proud that our democracy really does represent the will of the people.

Can we make better use of the Boathouse?

MIGHTY relieved I’ve made it on to Salisbury City Council, but mighty sad that more of my fellow independents weren’t successful.

With all that’s been going on electorally – not least the costly shambles over the choice of the next Police & Crime Commissioner - the deadline for commenting on the plans for Salisbury’s proposed River Park glided quietly under the bridge today, and I have to admit that I forgot.

I’m sure a lot of other people will have done so, too. Not, however, the doughty Salisbury Area Greenspace Partnership and our ever-vigilant environmental campaigners Pam Rouquette and Margaret Willmot, to all of whom we residents owe a debt of gratitude.

While they and I are supportive of the scheme in principle, I’ve been struck by some of their concerns.

The first is what might become a missed opportunity to use the Boathouse pub – lease currently up for sale, freehold owned by Wiltshire Council  – as a welcome centre and cafe for visitors arriving at the coach park and as an information centre on the river and its ecology.

There appears to be no money set aside to cover the £275,000 purchase price quoted by the agents Savills although the council says it “recognises the potential” of the site and is “exploring its options”.

This rundown but charming building is such a crucial part of the riverside scene that surely something more than the “exploration of options” is required at this stage? Fingers crossed.

There are also misgivings about a proposal to replace the Millstream Approach road bridge with one four metres wider, capable of taking two lanes of traffic, in an area where much has been made of the intention to give priority to pedestrians and cyclists using the enhanced riverside path. No explanation of the need for this widening has been offered.

There’s much more to learn from these thoughtful comments, and if you’re interested, it’s planning application no. PL/2021/03601 on the Wiltshire website.

The city council, while also supportive of the project, has asked to be involved in all aspects of its design and delivery.

Here’s one city councillor who will be taking a keener - and much better informed - interest from now on.

It's such a luxury being free to say what you like

THERE’S a tremendous luxury about being retired.

It’s that sense of freedom. I love it.

I don’t mean the freedom to jaunt off on a world cruise (assuming you can afford it). Even if we were allowed, with things the way they are pandemic-wise.

I mean the freedom to say what you really think and to pursue what you believe in without being beholden to anybody and without having to keep one eye on your future prospects.

And that's what our former MP Robert Key is doing with great gusto, by issuing a series of well-informed and hard-hitting videos online that ought to be required viewing for every student old enough to understand.

Because this lifelong Conservative really nails what’s wrong with our current unitary and parish system, via subjects ranging from housing, roads, cycle lanes, traffic regulation, the vexed issue of the Salisbury bypass … all of which boil down in essence to this: a load of stuff that’s being done to us and decisions being made for us without our consent.

It’s insulting and absurd, as Robert says, that our city has been demoted to parish status, and it’s had a disastrous effect in terms of local democracy, with so many people now so disillusioned they can’t be bothered to vote. 

I’m talking about intelligent people I’ve met on my walks round Harnham. They’ve just given up. “It doesn’t make any difference what we think” is what they say. 

It's shown, too, by the fact that none of the Big Three parties has been able to muster a full slate of candidates for every ward in the May elections. Traditional party supporters have had their arms twisted (metaphorically) but have declined to stand for office. Yet the party leaders show no sign of recognising why this might be.

What people like, as Robert points out, is to feel that they have a say in their local community and are listened to. But it ain’t happening because Trowbridge is too remote.

Unitary government for Wiltshire is a failed experiment, and he sees no reason why it can't be changed.

 To find out more and follow the unfolding series of interviews, go to the SOS – Save Our Salisbury group on Facebook.