THE CITY OF WINCHESTER TRUST LIMITED
REPORT OF THE COUNCIL AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED
31 MARCH 2001
Development Control Committee
Winchester currently faces four major pressures which could significantly change its character. One has been with us for many years (and will probably continue for many more), two come from external sources and the fourth, sadly, seems to be self-inflicted.
The first is the perennial problem of what to do with the internal combustion engine in all its forms. Instant personal mobility to go wherever we wish to go has become an integral part of our way of life, but where should we keep our cars when we are not using them? While the Trust supports the City's policy that new developments should have minimal parking provision, we do appreciate this requirement can cause great difficulties, especially for young families. Deliveries to businesses all over Winchester are essential for its commercial survival, but is it beneficial for its health to have its main arteries clogged up by motorised leviathans making deliveries during the working day?
The second is the increased number of dwellings demanded by central government, and the necessity for Winchester and its district to provide accommodation more suited to its requirements than the 'des-res' type of house that the commercial market wishes to build. Their four and five bedroom houses with attached or detached garages will certainly find purchasers, but this is not what Winchester actually needs. What are needed now are smaller, more modestly priced dwellings which the people who support the local infrastructure by working in schools, hospitals, local authority offices, etc, can afford. Increased residential density in the city-centre also seems a good thing, although it could also be argued that the consequent reduction in properties available for commercial use could have a detrimental effect on Winchester‘s economic viability.
The third is posed by the telecommunications industry and its desire to erect masts in the ever-closer spacing demanded by digital technology. These edifices cause everyone a great deal of angst, a condition that isn't helped because the people who live nearby are primarily worried about possible health dangers. The local authorities are not allowed to take this aspect into consideration when reaching their decisions, which have to be made on planning criteria such as visual impact. Masts in the quantity the industry wants to install would certainly have a considerable impact on the City's appearance, and it can only be hoped that a future change in the technology will provide an alternative to the present intrusive equipment.
The fourth is less obviously detrimental to the fabric of the City, but the cumulative effect of its various activities is insidious and could potentially be as damaging as the other three. This threat stems from the local authorities themselves, in the form of schemes for traffic calming, improving security and lighting, and street refurbishments and 'improvements'. The need for some of these is not in dispute, but the sad fact is that most of the proposals seem to have been lifted from instruction manuals for the various requirements. The plans may look good on paper but have little sympathy or relevance to the actual area concerned - how else could it have been proposed at one time that Canon Street should have traffic bumps? Anyone using this street knows that its narrowness provides natural in-built traffic calming although, knowing how thoughtless many drivers can be when parking their cars, it must be admitted that bollards are probably a good thing! The rash of CCTV cameras can look obtrusive and the higher lighting levels they require do nothing to improve the atmosphere of the historic city centre, but at least they provide a valuable service to the community. lt is more difficult to understand why it should be considered necessary to illuminate quiet residential streets to what seems to be a main road standard just to meet the upper requirements of some British Standard or European recommendation. It is even more difficult to comprehend why street refurbishments automatically seem to include pavements that cun/e and bulge, and as many different materials as can be fitted into the scheme. Winchester is fortunate in having a richly-textured environment, and so-called improvements should not detract from it.
Aspects of these pressures turn up in many of the applications seen by the Development Control viewing panels, with a variety of permutations of how they overlap and inter-relate with each other. It is right that there should be general Trust policies about traffic, increased density of housing, telecommunication masts and alterations to the street scene, but they need to be applied flexibly to the schemes being studied because the circumstances surrounding each will be different. The panels aim to make comments which reflect these policies but, in an ad hoc process such as this, views may be expressed which do not always meet with all Trust members’ approval.
Please bear with us if you feel this is so - we're doing our best in a constantly changing scene. Or, better still, why not join our band of panellists and help us to reach our conclusions?
Shione Carden
Chairwoman, Development Control