Despite being told they would be consulted by Stoke-on-Trent city council, licensees Jason Barlow and Sue Grocott feel they have been kept in the dark over the plans to regenerate the Lichfield Street end of Hanley.
Since the council accepted an outline planning proposal back in February which would see the transformation of the dilpidated East West Precinct into a modern shopping centre, along with the demolition of the Coachmaker’s Arms in the process, Jason and Sue have heard nothing, apart from what they have read in the press.
Last week, after reports that the project may never actually go ahead, the council and the developers, Realis, reasserted their stance, confirming that the proposal was still very much alive, and that they would also be working with the authority on plans to replace the eyesore of a bus station.
But, whether ultimately the plans go ahead or not, the fact that the council disregarded 10,500 people who wanted the pub to stay, what is amazing is the way in which these demolition plans are handled, without considering communicating in an effective manner with those who would be detrimentally affected by the plans.
Jason said:
“I think this recent news is all a bit of a PR stunt.
“There has been no news since the outline planning permission was granted, no final planning proposal has been put in.
“But I have heard nothing from the council or the developers since that meeting on February 13th. We are completely in the dark.”
There is evidently some debate over whether this contentious project will ever begin, or indeed, the embarrassingly bad bus station will ever alter. But what is very wrong about the whole deal is how the authority consistently continues to disregard the views of the public which it serves. And not talking, writing or sending a carrier pigeon to keep those who will lose their businesses and their homes into the bargain is simply unforgiveable.
I drink in the Coachmakers, it’s the best in the city centre. I don’t go that often but I hardly ever go to Hanley anyway, or else I would.
I certainly support this struggle. I am with them. I’ve seen the puff pieces for this shopping centre and they are utter dross. Anyone who would knock down a part of our past, present and future (look how many get pleasure from it now and will in the years to come- over 10,000 have put themselves forward and there are surely others). Why ruin our life and times for an idle fantasy of thousands of people coming to this city from the likes of Birmingham and Manchester, which will never happen?
It is time to preserve the old houses, in fact build new terraces in the same style as the bigger Edwardian ones like they have done around Knutton to replace Charter Avenue/Wilmot Drive. What next, will they knock down Smallthorne because it isn’t trendy enough and replace us with something like Norton Heights?
Surely they’ve learnt from the tower blocks and the likes of Tin Town that when architechts think they’re being clever, they’re doing no such thing.
No, the people of this city will be heard.
Just a small comment on the Bus Station. The actual Bus Station is built on unstable ground – that’s why its there. Before it was built the site was occupied by two schools, Hanley St Johns ( my old school) and the original Hanley High School (then known as High Grade); before they were built the site was a mass of excavations for marl and coal.
The filling-in of this site to build the schools was mostly ineffective. The High School soon after completion was abandoned due to severe subsidence; after demolition in the ’50s the site remained unstable and not suitable for building on but it was ideal for a centalised bus station as we have today.
It is true the built northern frontage is in need of re-building and development but the Bus Station itself still serves the local population well; particularly the resident quarter to the East. The new bus station would be to the west in the ‘Culture Quarter’ presumably to service the theatres by busing in school parties etc.
It comes as no surprise that licensees of the Coachmaker’s Arms Jason Barlow and Sue Grocott have been kept in the dark over the pub’s future despite promises from the council and Realis to keep them informed of any developments. This is yet another example of the shabby way so called “Ëœconsultations’ are handled by some of the city’s decision makers.
It is widely agreed that the Coachmaker’s Arms is a viable business with the potential to make an attractive feature for the East West precinct when, or if, it is built. Agreed that is by the general public but not the people who presume to make decisions in their name.
The dog in the manger (appropriate I suppose at this time of year) attitude taken over this issue by Realis and some people on the council is symptomatic of why so many of the plans to regenerate this city have failed, the people in charge too often equate listening to public opinion with demonstrating weakness.
Actually it is quite opposite, a council with something resembling a real strength of purpose in this area would listen to what the people who have to live, work and shop in Hanley long after the developers have skipped town have to say and modify its plans accordingly.
Well, Adam Colclough, I wrote to my councillors asking them that they join me in opposing this scheme, and all three of them ignored me. I suppose, in their view, it is a matter for city centre residents only. As if just because we don’t live in Hanley we never visit there or work there or have any other interest in the place?
Who are your Councillors?
Dopey, sleepy and grumpy