Developers urged to rethink their projects

4:20pm Monday 2nd July 2007

Dear Editor, As members of the Pembroke Dock Civic Society, we would like to draw the attention of your readers to two quotes contained in an issue of a Civic Trust for Wales magazine made a little while ago and the Daily Telegraph.

"If Heritage carries on like this, it is likely to talk itself out of existence." and "Places and artefacts are abandoned for the intangible and ephemeral".

"There are strong messages here for everyone, to safeguard the good, and encourage the best of the new urban design. Local people care about where they live, and want to make it better. We all know there must be planning and control, but the impact on the environment, on residents and the business people, should have pride of place in discussion before any major decision are made. People need to feel safe in their neighbourhoods, without any fear of unnecessary inconveniences, or what could be described as undesirable overcrowding, or creation of dangerous conditions on the roads. Any sort of anti-social, or even the threat of it, must be avoided. High density housing, with dwellings wedged in unlikely places, do not bode well for the future. Even green spaces are becoming priceless jewels, and townsfolk dread any more disappearing.

The Pembroke Dock Civic Society wishes to take account of present trends, not to oppose worthwhile developments, but to have their opinions far better respected.

We refer to certain matters which have been highlighted in the past year, not only by us, but by other individuals and bodies as well. There are the misgivings about the future of Withybush Hospital, the encroachment by developers on to the Bush Camp Playing field, the attempt to construct houses in gardens, or garages to back out on to quiet residential roadways. New houses, probably very well designed, are often without adequate parking facilities - thus cars, lorries and trailers litter former green spaces, originally planned as attractive approaches to well kept residential areas. Cautions should really have gone to these people sometime ago.

We've always understood that we paid for our roads in our taxes. Why then is it possible for councils to rent areas, bordering the pavements, to householders for parking purposes? Can this be regarded as a Stealth tax? Apart from anything else, the result has been roads crowded practically all day, little chance of visitors parking for short periods outside a sick friend's house, shopping difficulties for disabled, and a tendency for garages to be less used. The system has already had the effect of a quite substantial fine being issued to someone who only parked for a few minutes. Surely a caution would have been sufficient, or was this part of obtaining a target success?

We don't think our concerns are unreasonable, we urge all ambitious developers to rethink their projects urgently, and not be primarily motivated by the expectancy of excessive profit. We know there is an element of risk of course, especially in this era of climate change. What difference in water levels will there be in what might be regarded now as the foreseeable future? This comment refers to the proposed Marina in Pembroke Dock. We've already made our doubts known on the enormity of the project, though we would welcome a more modest plan. We thoroughly endorse the letter written by Mrs Druro and the gentleman last week.

We would remind everyone involved that a far more critical appraisal should be given to any application for building projects, whether big or small. In a conservation area, especially if they would change the landscape considerably.

P Thomas 19 Presely View Pembroke Dock