Dimsdale Street

[arty]

Has anyone got any information on the status of the land at the rear of Dimsdale Street? I assume that the land and old school are owned by HCC,and I find it strange that this small area has been left to deteriorate so much. The rear of Bob Hill's old premises was recently converted, so I would have thought that either the school or land was suitable for some sort of use. Politics & legal reasons?

[Sudi]

On one of the museum's history walks a few years ago, the guide mentioned something about a dispute over who really owned it, which has been going on for decades.

[Steve]

Archived discussion on the old forum ...

http://www.hertford.net/yoursay/topic.a ... IC_ID=5734" target="_blank

[arty]

Archived discussion on the old forum ...

http://www.hertford.net/yoursay/topic.a ... IC_ID=5734" target="_blank

Indeed - thought that something may have been discussed in the past. Mind you, that was 2011 - someone must have some new information by now. However, I agree with Marylyn's comment about the residents, although it's all a bit of a mess around there....

[Ted Badger]

Has anyone got any information on the status of the land at the rear of Dimsdale Street? I assume that the land and old school are owned by HCC,and I find it strange that this small area has been left to deteriorate so much. The rear of Bob Hill's old premises was recently converted, so I would have thought that either the school or land was suitable for some sort of use. Politics & legal reasons?

Was there a reason for asking? Just curious!

The site had plans drawn up to convert the school part of the building into 3 bungalows (utilising the existing buildings) and for 2, 3 or 4 bedroom houses to be built on the spare bit of land that is used as a car park at the bottom. The plans were scuppered at the time by the fact that provision had to be made for 1.5 parking spaces per new property, and the fact that access would have to be opened up to the site to allow the cars entrance. Essentially the existing playground was to be the car park for the owners of the new properties, but most existing on-street parking would be lost in order to facilitate this.

Also, the proposed new houses on the spare bit of land (the 'temporary' parking plot) were designed to maximise the space (understandably from the architects point of view) but would have completely in-filled the plot from the rooftops of the existing buildings in height and up to the edge of the road, and would have created quite a dark and claustrophobic block of buildings with the street winding almost canyon like between them. Perhaps a bit flowery in description, but you get the idea.

So, generally I think the feeling was that the residents were
a) happy for the top part of the development and the conversion of the old school buildings into property, but:
b) not happy that most on-street parking would be lost - (I imagine it would mean the closest place to park would be Hartham car park, or Port Vale)
c) not happy with the idea of the new properties in-filling the plot on the bottom part of the site.

Since the original plans were laid out, I think provision of parking places for new properties has been removed, but there haven't been any re-submissions as far as the residents are aware.

A chap who lives in the street, and that used to work for the council on planning (and therefore gifted with the understanding of the process that the council go through, as well as the contacts) has been driving for a statement of intent for the land, but without too much success. If you'd like me to put you in touch with him, then he will be your best source of information!