Logo Image
return to the previous page





report offensive content
click to view site banner advert 2

click to view site banner advert 3


text version




bookmark this website print this page    



A picture for Tisbury-Three-Card-Trick


HINDON LANE Development – recreational areas
Here is an excerpt of official Minutes of the recent Parish Council Meeting which considered the matter further.

‘The Councillors were reminded of the meetings in October concerning the above and also the proposals favoured by residents of Tisbury as expressed at the last Parish Council meeting.
Draft resolutions had been previously circulated with the agenda and additional information was provided on ‘open space’ as defined by the Open Spaces Act 1906. Cnllrs. subsequently resolved the following as their preferences for use of the recreational areas associated with the Hindon Lane development, item 1 being the only resolution to remain unchanged to those made at the July meeting
1 The request for the play area within the development to be grassed and fenced (including gates, but with no play equipment provided) to remain unchanged.
2 The designated area for a proposed new swimming pool to be allocated to 6 new housing units, with a capital receipt to the village of around £350,000 to £400,000, providing that this request be covered within the Section 106 agreement to ensure that the monies remain within the control of Tisbury PC for the benefit of the local community.
3 The Parish Council should, preferably, be granted the freehold of the 8 acre field. Failing that it should be granted a lease of the field for at least 125 years at a peppercorn rent. In either case it would be acceptable for the Parish Council to be required to use the field only as an open space within the meaning of the Open Spaces Act 1906.
4 The proposed provision of formal (R2 Policy) outdoor adult sport and leisure facilities to be commuted to a capital sum allocated to Tisbury Parish Council for their future use under the terms of the policy.
5 For all the above, commuted sums to cover increased insurance and maintenance costs to be available to the village for a minimum of 10 years.’ ***************

Not sure what sort of a decision ‘item 3’ was supposed to be. Is the field owner likely to transfer the Freehold if the alternative is granting a 125 year lease even at a Peppercorn Rent? Hopefully the Hindon Lane Question has at last been resolved.
Understandably the new housing will displease many currently there resident, but the former doomed rear guard action fought in defence of the ‘Status Quo’ will have inversely added to the cost of the houses being built, and may well be to the detriment of Tisbury ‘yet to come‘.

PLANNING CONSULTATION is theoretically a good thing, however ‘Nimbyism’ should never be allowed to intrude on the legitimate aspirations of the Homeless. For it is they who will get a foot on the lower rungs of the ‘Housing Ladder’ when others move up it. It seems better not to confront the inevitable, but to try and influence its advent for the common good rather than merely one’s own. There are different legitimate opinions either side of every Planning Decision. All can empathise with Hindon Lane Residents who are to have a Commercial area tacked onto the ‘Fry Development’ in the immediate vicinity of some current back Gardens. The units were the only issue that invited successful confrontation, an issue that might have been fought on the basis that there was plenty of opportunity to construct such facilities at the Station Works Site. Now Hindon Lane is to have all the original Housing, six extra Houses, and the Work Units. The term ‘Shot oneself in the foot’ comes to mind for instead of adopting that limited approach, our late lamented Parish Council resolved to try and shift the entire Development down onto the Station Works Site. One can not even now rule out the prospect of having houses built there too. One of the arguments that will most assuredly be propounded by that Site owner will be that Tisbury already has Units ‘off ’ Hindon Lane and at Fonthill and other ex. Farming Work Units in the immediate area. The Buildings of ‘Place Farm’ once suggested as workshops, have become Dental Office Space. One appreciates that there are Government Policies affecting the use of Redundant Farm Buildings, but ‘Horses for Courses’ would be a better Policy.

The writer would rather that ‘his’ neighbouring Farmyard remain but a range of fine 19th.Century Ashlar Cut Stone Farmyard Buildings as has been there since 1833. But now properly enough the first is being converted for a House. Since that is, as it is, it is a matter of regret that it and other buildings of its ilk are not permitted better fenestration. Our new neighbour’s adjacent Business Premises is less welcome, but one imagines that will eventually become another house. Heaven only knows what is to become of the rest of the Farm Yard. Neighbours have already experienced Stone Dressing, Car Repairs, Builders, Wood Workers and Joiners.
Buildings of the Court Street Farm and Ley Farm have become Residential as too have those Allotments and the Coal Yard behind the High Street, the which Development someone described as an ‘Un- altruistic. One should not doubt that someday the Allotments behind Hindon Lane will become Housing, as too the land between Hindon Lane and the River Nadder. The latter land is already being ‘edged in’ upon via the ‘Lady Down Estate’ . ‘C’est La Vie’.

One has been here before on this web site. ie.

Was Contemporary comment on the Public Consultation Meeting concerning the Hindon Lane Development. Held at the Victoria Hall Tisbury. 19. 06.07.

‘Seemingly one of the provisions of the Hindon Lane planning consent was that the Developer provide an area of land whereon might be constructed a Swimming Pool. Tisbury already has a swimming pool and apparently has no wish to become involved with another. The matter under consideration was what might better be done with this piece of land. A recent Parish Councillor made suggestion that it become a Car Park. A member of the Public suggested an apparent variation of the ‘Three Card Trick’ ie. That once in possession of the land the Parish sell it back to the Builder to build even more houses there on. Clearly that man was not a resident of Hindon Lane, This lead to the suggestion that the money so raised might be used to enclose the existing Swimming Pool. Further it was suggested that alternatively, the land be utilised to raise income. However some present had no wish to enclose the Swimming Pool on the basis that its all year round maintenance would be a financial burden. Another said that no sort of a decision could be arrived at without consideration of the ‘Budget’ available. The answer to that point is that there is no Budget, merely a piece of land. Suggestion was made of a Youth Centre. (Is not the old Magistrates Court currently so used?) There was the suggestion that all the land involved might continue to be farmed by the Fonthill Estate. A doubt was expressed on the basis that the land might, so become subject to an Agricultural Tenancy, and would thus be lost to the village until ‘kingdom come’. ……….
Another member of the Public wanted assurance that when it came to the ‘Affordable Housing’ Tisbury’s kith and kin might head the queue. The Planning Officer said that he would try to include such ‘gradation’ in the appropriate agreement.’ ……

And too another time
‘ONE FURTHER NOTES -that a decision has been reached concerning that piece of land that is to be gifted to the Community when the Hindon Lane development is effected. Seemingly sixteen members of the Public out of the twenty six who attended the meeting voted that the ground be used for a Car Parking area. Eight voted that this proposed swim pool area be used for a sports pitch or other youth activity space. Apparently no one wished to see affordable housing on the site. The Parish Council went along with the suggestions made. Those members of the Public who made it to the meeting should be commended for their vigilance. Few were aware that the matter was to be considered prior to the July Parish Council Meeting. I was unaware that the Agenda appeared on the Council Web site. At an earlier meeting the Chairman of the Parish Council kindly advised me that the decision on the swim pool area was one for the people of Tisbury to decide. I really do not think that sixteen members of the public represents the voice of Tisbury. Goodness me it is hardly more than the quantum of the recent Parish Council. One wonders how many of those sixteen who voted have a personal interest in what is the convenience of Hindon Lane in particular.’

contact : John B. Pope
Email : pionono@tiscali.co.uk