BASE HEADER

I have lived at Oakdene Crescent for just over 30 years, and my late husband and I were among the many who opposed the first development of social housing at Oakdene Crescent. The problems which arose after those houses were built have still not been addressed, nor have the concerns arising out of increased traffic to/from the Station, only vindicating our concerns which led to our opposition to those houses and those problems still remain:

* There are many problems already in existence with parking along the length of Oakdene Crescent, at its junction with Station Road and in Ash Close. Each property has space for two vehicles, but many now need greater parking, and there are traffic problems and Oakdene is reduced to single track along its length, and vehicles parked at its junction with Station Road and Ash Close cause considerable problems.
* I understand that a 30mph limit is proposed for Station Road; this will be unenforceable and visits by the local PCSO will not be sufficient to deter speeding motorists using Station Road to/from the Station. Station Road is a rat run at peak times for motorists either going to/from the Station or using it as a short cut from the A4189 Warwick/Henley road to the A4177 Solihull road.
* The first three houses in Oakdene Crescent are on a private sewer. The others have their waste dealt with via a huge underground tank and pumping mechanism in the drive of No.4 Oakdene Crescent. This particular set up still has problems, only yesterday afternoon the road was blocked completely by a tanker which had come to empty the underground tank and the smell was vile, on a day when windows had to be open because of the heat. There are often problems with the system, requiring the maintenance company to visit to rectify. This system has not worked efficiently since the outset; we must express our concerns that if six houses can cause such problems, this can only escalate when many more are built.
* Neighbouring properties in the Elms are affected by sewage problems, which no one wants to own and which Severn Trent refuse to admit are present and there has been sinking in next door gardens. None of these problems were experienced before the properties were built and, despite Severn Trent's assertions to the contrary and their complete lack of response, the law of probability says that the construction of the underground tank etc. are the root cause.
* There are absolutely no amenities at Hatton Station, for families, for the elderly or vulnerable; the only amenity is the Station. The bus service is intermittent and at times which are unsuitable for getting children to local schools, thus throwing families' reliance back on to private cars when there are infant/junior school children in the family. Equally there are no amenities for youngsters of any age; the children play in the street, running risks with cars etc. As they get older they get into mischief and residents get frustrated with them, we have instances of this "mischief" leading on to minor crime. The youngsters are bored; the adults are irritated; eventually the adolescents acquire wheels, either a car or motorcycle and a different situation emerges. This pattern is repeated with different age groups growing up. There have been one or two youngsters who have caused more serious problems; with the increase in the numbers of properties for families and no amenities, these problems are likely to increase.

I have looked at the different proposed areas on the website; what I cannot see or work out is the criteria by which these areas are judged as "possible" or "suitable". If I could understand the principles, then I might judge differently. The houses in Oakdene Crescent were built four/five years' ago on the premise of a "local need"; indeed that was the undertaking given to the residents at the time. NONE of the people who have taken up those properties have any local connection, and never have had any local connection; be it family or employment, which only confirmed the suspicions of local people who were opposed to the development.

I do not object to the land at Oakdene Crescent being utilised in some way, rather than as an area for dumping rubbish; but NOT without SENSIBLE answers being proposed to some of the obvious problems that such a development will create, i.e. hugely increased traffic and a woeful lack of amenities for families who might take up residence there.