Chilton Annual Meeting on Tuesday evening was very well
attended.
In my address to the meeting, I said that I felt that Chilton was feeling under siege at present. This is due not only to the anticipated impact on the community of Chilton Woods but also the sad result of the recent Prolog planning application. One small victory last year however was the success of the campaign to stop the car wash at Home Base from extending its working hours on a Sunday. Also on the plus side the new health facility is likely to be a plus for the parish.
Redrow gave a presentation about Chilton Woods. Their much travelled roadshow now attempts to explain the complications that have been created by their decision to consult at the same time as the Babergh Development Framework is going through its adoption process. However it seems that uncertainty still remains, at least in the developer’s mind, with regard to where the boundaries of the development will ultimately be drawn. Perhaps things will become clearer next week at the second meeting of the Steering Group.
Details of Chilton’s celebrations to mark the Queen’s
Diamond Jubilee were given by Peter Clifford.
These will take place on Saturday 2 June. There will be a cream tea (funded by the
Parish Council!) in St Mary’s Church at 4.30 p.m. The event will include a quiz. I hope that as a non-resident I will be
allowed to attend since I am fond of both cream teas and quizzes.
Moving on, but also on the subject of Chilton, I was pleased
to see Val Herbert’s spirited defence of our heritage assets in the Free Press
on Thursday. (We are stewards of old
buildings). How right she is! Like
Jack Owen and a number of other people, she is suspicious of the quality of the
jobs that will be created at the new giant facility. Her message is clear: ‘even if it (the development)
had promised 1000 jobs, it would still be on the wrong site’.
On the same page I was dismayed to see the article on
Chilton written by journalist, Catherine McMillan. It was terribly ill informed and I am
contemplating a riposte.
No comments:
Post a Comment