Who are Tenbury Futures?

The latest issue of the Teme Valley Times is now available from your local stockists, and once again it contains information and ideas provided by Tenbury Futures.

On their website they describe themselves "A Proactive Alliance of Concerned Local Residents and Businesses" and whilst they remain an "organisation" with no identifiable format or leadership, they seem to have decided to take the position of Town Council, Chamber of Trade and Civic Society to name just three local organisations.

Or is it they disagree with the democratically elected organisations so decided they would just ignore them and create sufficient confusion to get their opposing voice heard.

They claim that the "majority" this and the "majority" that, but if you look closely at the figures you will see that in fact what they really mean is the "majority" of the tiny minority who expressed an opinion or answered a closed question.

In their latest questionnaire they have replies from 32 shops, (out of nearly 100) so were the other shops not interested, did they have opinions that didn't meet the criteria, or did they feel that Tenbury Futures didn't have a mandate to be asking the questions, or did the questionnaires only go to the traders who they thought would give the right answers?

The Town Council and other duly elected representatives have been working and lobbying for many years to get the bridge repaired, and yes the closure will be a major inconvenience, but nothing compared to perhaps losing the bridge altogether in the next flood.  If that happened, who would people look to for a solution?  Tenbury Futures or the various Council officials.

I reported back in April that the bridge would have to close for repairs.  Why is it only now six months later that there is a call to postpone the work? If the traders were so unhappy with the plan, why did so few attend the Chamber of Trade AGM, or at least have the subject raised as an agenda item.  Is it perhaps that the chances of the Tesco application being approved is very high, and this is seen by Tenbury Futures (aka the TesNo group) as a way to also postpone the planning decision.

I think many of the ideas presented by Tenbury Futures have merit, but we live in a democracy with systems and procedures, so it's far better to join the establishment and try to change it from the inside than to keep floating ill conceived ideas in the press.  Perhaps, these proactive residents can join some of the existing Tenbury organisations and invigorate them with energy and new ideas.

WCC appear to sink new bridge plan.

From yesterdays Shropshire Star :

Campaigners aiming to stop Tesco’s multi-million pound bid for a new store in Tenbury Wells will tonight plead with councillors to support their alternative plan for the former Cattle Market site.


I was expecting the Pump Rooms to be packed with all the Tenbury Futures supporters, so was rather surprised to see only 2 people that I recognised from the Futures group plus 3 other members of the public (who don't usually attend).


Matt Crawford spoke on behalf of the Futures Group.

He explained that Tenbury Futures "acted as a focal point point for concerned people, businesses, former residents & tourists"

He went on to say "that the ideas were from the 300 returned questionnaires" and that the majority of the people wanted "the reuse of the RBB building, additional car parking, space for the Holy & Mistletoe market and room for the Food Fair & Applefest" also that "Plan B was just one possible use for the site" also "details need to be fleshed out"

He claimed that the Cattle Market had been "closed for 12 years" (which surprised me) and that "a number of grants would be available" 

Tenbury Futures plan to form a "Public Interest Company" and that investors would be "offered a return on investment" with income being derived from "rental income, car parking charges and the sale of excess electricity"

Tenbury Futures had made an effort to contact the site owner, but he remained illusive.

In a later part of the meeting,  WCC Cllr Ken Pollock said that he had visited the Cattle Market site with the County Council's Engineering Project Manager who commented that it was very unlikely that permission would ever be granted for a bridge in that location, and if it was, then for the necessary road linkages, a building on Teme Street would have to be demolished (He didn't say which but I think it's safe to say the Spar block)  With the cost of the planning, land purchase, bridge & road works then the scheme would cost many £Ms.  It was also unlikely that WCC would agree to add another bridge to their ongoing maintenance budget. (See press release for full details)


So that idea is dead then! 


Additional information.


Press Release from Cllr Pollock


289 people returned the Tenbury Futures Questionnaire, of these 101 were from Tenbury Wells & 34 from Burford.  The majority of the people who completed forms also wrote objection letters to MHDC regarding the Cattle Market planning application.
2130 people are registered as voters in the Tenbury Town Ward (this excludes St Michaels)
The 2001 census reported a population of 3,316 in Tenbury Wells and 1,108 in Burford.

Inspired genius or deluded lunacy?

The new issue of the Teme Valley Times (available now from the usual stockists) seems set to split opinion around town.

Whether the new Tenbury Futures ideas are inspired genius or deluded lunacy, you will have to decide for yourself.

Personally I think many of the ideas are great, no harm in 'blue skies thinking' but the chances of them being implemented are as slim as me retiring on a full pension.

What better, than have our ancient monument of a bridge serve out it's days as a footbridge, but (& I'm only guessing) the Fire Station was built with a yard for a reason, the two houses who will loose their garden would have to be compensated and isn't the turn from the Cattle Market rather tight for that volume of traffic. After all protesters claim it is too tight for the volume of traffic likely to visit Tesco. 

I know the graphic is labelled not to scale, and so it might be.  The area that is now the Spar loading bay seems to have moved, and the area between Sal's Den and Temeside House increased.

It is a great shame that these suggestions have come so late in the day.  The money and plan to refurbish the bridge is on target, and the money and plan to improve the public realm in nearly in place.  I cannot see WCC halting everything at the 11th hour and starting again with years of planning and undertaking all various compulsory purchases necessary for the scheme.

Far better perhaps, to go ahead and repair the bridge.  Much of the work would have to be done anyway even to allow its safe operation as a footbridge.  Then perhaps, we can start the decades of lobbying required to get a bypass if indeed that is what people want.  One word of caution though, a bypass is great for diverting unwanted traffic away from the Town Centre, but the unexpected consequence can often be that the "wanted" traffic also takes the easy option and shoppers go elsewhere. (Yes I know the Futures idea is for the new road to link back into town)


Tenbury Advertiser 28th July 2011