The tree in the Old Gaol grounds is glowing.
I entered the riverside path from the Bridge Street entrance, and took a picture of Abingdon Bridge with the leaves of the tree round me.
I also took a picture of The Old Gaol Dental Surgery.
The Vale of White Horse District Council recently allowed the application for unit 5B to become a dental clinic rather than a restaurant.
Abingdon Town Council had recommend refusal. They said The original approval for the Old Gaol development was on the basis of a mixed use development including an A3 restaurant in Unit 5B. The mixed use is important to enable visitors continued access to this part of the Old Gaol site.
A neighbour said the proposal is preferable to a restaurant. Would like to ensure adequate noise insulation.
Friends of Abingdon said the proposed change of use … raises privacy issues for patients …. Concerned that the proximity of Treatment Room 1 to the riverside path could result in pressure to close the Bridge Street entrance to the gardens.
P.S
In reply to newcomer’s comment, from Brian. I would like to add the photo above taken 24/07/2007 with the caption – ‘we had one, the developer removed it, the planners conditioned it to be replaced !!!’
I bet the proposed dental surgery will not be NHS and will be trying to get customers to spend money on having their teeth done with Persil to produce “better” (ie artificial) smiles. If they are concerned about privacy, they could install blinds.
Correct. This dentist is a completely private practice specialising in cosmetic dentistry. Fine if you have the money to spend but not a service for the general public who rely on NHS dentistry that has dwindled away over the last decade.
A willow tree on the Old Goal frontage, near the bridge, would ideally complement the vista.
I am reminded that teeth-pulling was an instrument of mediaeval torture. Is the Old Gaol the most appropriate place for a dental surgery?
That was an heroic willow tree.
What’s Cranbourne’s word worth?
Is The Vale setting new standards in ineffectiveness?
Does anyone know what happened? How/why was/is the developer been allowed to renege on their planning commitment to replace it – if that was indeed the case?
Apparently, as I understand it, it would cost the Vale too much to take them (or any other developers) to court to get it enforced, and any developer can afford to keep contesting it until it gets thrown out or the Vale gives up due to costs.
Makes a bit of a mockery of any ‘enforced’ planning conditions, really, doesn’t it?
How super!! A dentists where one sits in full view behind the panoramic glass, mouth agog, residents to watch.