Crest Nicholsons' consultation documents show us three different proposals for the same area of land. Which one are we supposed to believe will be the end result? Surely not all of them?
Here is an image taken from the southern edge of Crest Nicholsons' initial design concept for Tadpole Farm:
Here is an image taken from the southern edge of Crest Nicholsons' initial design concept for Tadpole Farm:
It shows an area of green space that Crest Nicholson have designated as 'The Common', that would separate the Tadpole Farm houses from the rest of Priory Vale.
Under the title 'What facilities could be provided?', Crest Nicholson produced this map:
In conjuction, they said "A variety of green areas could provide Formal sports areas and fields"
Then, also in the same consultation material, under the heading 'What open space could be provided?', we see this map:
The adjoing explanation reads "The plan above and the photos illustrate the varied green spaces to which informal public access could be provided"
On top of both of these possible uses for 'The Common', Crest Nicholson also stated in their March 2011 Q&A document "It is also possible that land north of Tadpole Lane could be used for playing fields to enable Isambard School to build on some of their existing playing fields without losing their overall sports provision."
So we have three possible uses for 'The Common'; Formal, Informal and Educational, all of which seem mutually exclusive. So whilst it could be argued that Crest Nicholson are only in the initial stages of their community consultation, how can the general public be expected to provide their opinions on such conflicting information? How can one area provide facilities for three different uses at the same time?
