|
AS
you can see
from the picture above, works was progressing nicely at Sleeper's Point,
the apartments development next to the Railway Hotel in Pillory
Street.
And I think they will undoubtedly be an asset
to the area - better than the coal yards that used to be there, no
matter how necessary the yards were.
Yes, I do really.
But don't think I am going back on my objections (Letter
from Nantwich, November 2005) to the influx of new homes. I still
think we are getting too many for a town the size of Nantwich.
Someone commented to me that they didn't approve of a four-storey
building on the Pillory Street site as it would dominate the Railway Hotel. But,
as I told them, I would rather see a four-storey development on one site
rather than have two lots of two- or three-storey developments on
separate sites to attain the same number of homes. If we must have more
houses, keep them all together on a single site. In any case, from the
road you can only see three storeys (that's all the front section is).
Of course, since this Letter
was written more |
|
houses have been approved and built, and (in
2015) that is still an on-going situation.
THIS is where I show my ignorance of natural things. I have tried to
find out before and failed. I understand that water is not an
element that is continually regenerating. Mother Nature doesn't take
some hydrogen and some oxygen (in a ratio of two parts to
one) and mix them together to top up the
Earth's
water supply. What we have now is all we'll
ever have. (See
below for an answer).
Is it any wonder we are starting to
have water shortages? Just think how much water is "tied up" in a home:
in the toilet(s) cistern and bowl, in the hot and cold water tanks and
pipes and
in the central heating. Multiply this by all the new houses being built
and wonder no more about where the water has gone.
And that is on top of all the water sitting in bottles on supermarket
shelves, in water dispensing machines, etc . . .!
Yes, I know the water we use gets recycled in one way or another, but
every new home takes its share |
|
of the resource and retains it until it is
used, replacing it with the same amount from the natural stock, ad
infinitum.
I HAVE to admit that the developments are changing the look of Nantwich
to the extent that - in the main -
they are better than what was there originally, in the
town centre particularly. But I still feel that too much development
will alter the character of Nantwich to the extent that it will not be
the town that has attracted so many tourists. Especially if the town
begins to look like any other in the U.K.
And with the way people tend to move around these days with their jobs
surely, even with a growing population, we have enough houses now. At
one time "Only two left", "50% sold" could be seen on the
developers' advertisements, suggesting to me
that
there should
be a moratorium on new homes until all unoccupied ones had been sold.
I know that developers need to keep building in order to stay in
business - and if they disappear who will build homes in the future -
but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. Surely?
|
