The tree in front of the Old Gaol was chopped down last week as development work moved to the Old Gaol itself and the waterfront.
The Old Gaol Heron will have to find another roost.
Here is a flash back to how the tree used to look – pictured for posterity.
They should be ashamed!
Well it certainly looks like an ‘Old Fall’s again now.Sheer vandalism.
I meant of course ‘old gaol’.
I wonder if there was anything in the planning approval to protect the trees/fauna?
Shocking!!
What exactly are they going to develop there? Not more facilities which will be closed off from the public I hope? I had heard a while ago that the builders were not going to remove any more trees. When do the locals get a say in all of this?
I am really shocked at such vandalism.
Perhaps those responsible should plant twenty new trees by way of public reparation.
Move over heron, important humans coming through.
How sad it that 🙁
It looks worse for the removal. Is that how stark and bare it is going to be. Vandalism…
That is so sad! How can they be allowed to get away with doing that?
sickening vandals!!!!
Wow! That is pretty grim isn’t it? Nothing like progress and localism…
Many thanks to Backstreeter for drawing attention to this and for the pictures that illustrate the shocking business so tellingly.
Well we have seen the pictures and it seems that no-one on here knows anything about what is planned. So to whom do we apply for more information?
I moved onto a new development of houses in Abingdon a few years back. Part of the planning permission was based on the preservation of some of the trees on the site. The site manager told me that these trees were unfortunately “accidentally” damaged during the building work. However, on a positive note for the builders the lack of trees improved access to the site for the construction vehicles and made the houses more marketable…..
Cassandra – the original plans for the trees can be found on the Vale website together with the other planning docs for the Old Gaol – you will see that they specifically say that the willow will be retained, but cut back. Various other trees were to be retained as well. So the question is whether Cranbourne sought and were subsequently given permission to remove them or whether they just went ahead and did it. You could ask Cranbourne – or you could ask the Vale Planning Dept or Tree Protection Officer. You will not be alone in asking!
Absolute disgrace – they also chopped down trees in perfectly healthy trees in Meadowside not so long ago. I see the Grapes has gone too, which one will be next?
Is this anything to do with the proposed footbridge from the island, to the Old Gaol, as part of the open air theatre project?
I drove past about 5pm today and the Heron was back along with a load of Geese who were all resting on floating wood.
Its just the same as the public access onto East St Helen street which is completely blocked by a large set of gates in the driveway, and “buzzer entry” on the personal side.
And what do the planners do about this flagrant breach of the planning application?
………………………………….nothing visible!
Can’t help but observe that (to the best of my knowledge) there STILL has not been any CLEAR announcement as to the MONEY that should be coming to Abingdon for the sale of the Old Gaol.!
BTW, haven’t you noticed that flagrant breaches of the planning applications are commonplace?
James – the Friends of Abingdon took up the question of the East St Helen Street access with the Vale planners earlier this year and have been monitoring the route ever since. As a result it does now seem to be open most of the required time but as you have found, it is not exactly obvious! From East St Helen Street you don’t use the big gate, but the little one to the side. Coming from Bridge Street the gate is a bit hard to find – best to go the other way first so you know where it is.
We are also continuing to press for the “Private – No Admittance” sign to be removed… It is a long haul – we will keep trying but if others find the route closed do let the Vale Planning people know.
@hester, so you can just walk through the side gate? It doesnt look very inviting given it is closed and has “buzzer” entry. I will make a point of trying however, and perhaps try wedging it open.
I walk past it at least twice everyday.
What are the hours it should be open? I take from your post it is not 24/7.
Also as you say there is a large “Private” sign under the archway.
James – I think it is 9-5 Mon-Sat excluding Bank Holidays (yes, i know that is not enough, but….). And Yes – just push the side gate and it opens – I checked it yesterday – then walk through to the other end. if the gate there seems to be locked (it shouldn’t be) just push the green button on the wall and it will open. Then take note of where the gate is so you can find it on the way back! If either gate is locked take it up with either the site manager or the Vale planning dept…
I couldnt agree more about how uninviting it looks!
Yet again trees that should be protected are in the end expendable in the face of building development.
who at “The Vale” is responsible for letting developers ride roughshod over the regulations?
I think this is another of those threads where it would be useful to have the input of a Vale officer or Councillor.
I have also raised this issue with the Vale councillors for the ward and they have also raised it with council officers.
My view on this is very simple – if a developer commits to something during the bidding process for a site then they should be held to it unless there is some substantial material change in circumstances.
Coming back a couple of years later to say “we want to cut access because it’s making the properties harder to sell” is not a good enough reason, nothing has happened that they didn’t know when they made the bid.
If they have cut down trees that were supposed to be protected they should be made to plant a new mature tree in its place.
@Neil Fawcett.
Well I completely agree with this view. However, who has the power to enforce these sanctions etc.? Which body/officer is in a position to ensure that the builders adhere to their ‘planning promises’?
…there’s a fair amount on the planning issue – and the fact that developers happily shirk their obligations – on the AbingdonFirst website (Latest news section). Their bit relates to the blatent disregard for planning at 65 Oxford Rd… They’ve had some interesting dialogue with The Vale.
Whilst I welcome ‘The Vale’ showing they have some ‘bark’ on this matter…i look forward to seeing if they have ‘bite’ too!
Cassandra – as stated above, the officer to talk to is the Tree Protection Officer at the Vale: a number of people have contacted him on this issue and he is investigating. We await the outcome…
The Vale’s Planning department is responsible for planning enforcement.
http://www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/services-and-advice/planning-and-building/planning-enforcement
The Old Gaol is a premium development, you can’t have trees blocking water views. Why didn’t someone TEE PEE OH it?
This is totally unfair on this breed of bird. How is this possibly fair to remove their home for some development that the public knows hardly anything about?
Curiously the “private” sign has now gone from the East St Helen Street end of the public access into the development.
Someone must read this blog….well done to you Sir if its the planners, and pull your finger out please if its the developers. We are your neighbours.
Large black gates still however blocking access of course!
Wonder what it will take to get rid of those?
In other news I see the large bins are FINALLY round the back of the “posh nosh” restaurant – in the large parking area they have round the back!
james – actually the bins from the 3 take aways are located over at rye farm car park the bins behind belong to lewis bakers