Hands On Our Park website (unofficial): The BAD Things!

So, basically, what's all the fuss about?

The council want to improve the Town Park, allegedly, and we would support that broad aim. These are our objections:

First, what is wrong with the park now?

• It has been badly neglected.
• The excuse for this has been lack of funds.
• Signage is poor, neglected, inaccurate and / or missing. (And in some cases contradictory). See some examples on the right and below - clicking each picture will give you a bigger view. Some files are quite large and may take a while to appear. We have an entire gallery of neglect here.

In addition, paths are not maintained and quad bikes and motor bikes are not excluded. There has been an attempt in the last few weeks to put up a barrier see right - but the bar on the left is too high for horses (the people putting up the barrier did not know this was a bridleway) and of course it is incomplete, so everyone just goes round it.

The latest report has some proposals we are very unhappy about:

1 The development of formal Gateway entrances

At the southern end, the proposed gateway at the Stirchley station site will obviously impinge on a pleasant open space area of the park, the access off Stirchley Lane is totally inadequate and the proposed access is in the middle of an entirely residential area.

2 The opportunity of an 'In Park' sustainable light transport system to connect areas of interest within the park, to promote central and southern areas and to enable strategic linkages between the Town Centre, the Park and Ironbridge (Blists Hill)

Would this be the infamous park and ride scheme included in the council's local transport plan as submitted to the Government Office West Midlands (and described by them as insufficiently justified) - but not in the version of the plan available to local residents???? Nothing wrong with park and ride in principle, as long as it does NOT go along Silkin Way, which is a long-distance foot and cycle path - what worries us is WHERE ARE PEOPLE GOING TO PARK???? We do so hope there is no intention to usurp the current Elms playing fields.

3 The opportunity for enhanced community and pocket park areas in the Stirchley and Malinslee parts of the Park

What on earth is a pocket park? We'd rather have the whole outfit, not just the pockets!

4 An enhanced southern Informal Events Ground

This would bring the noisiest, most obtrusive activities into the quietest area of the park. Fairs and carnivals have been suggested, along with toilets, electricity and water points. We are sure the local wildlife will be no happier about that than local residents. And is it just us or will this be a traveller magnet?

5 The opportunity for a regeneration scheme in Paddock Mount / Langleyfields area, Randlay Car Park and a small scale frontage development opportunity along the Stirchley Road area of the Park

This is the real problem. We object most strongly to the disposal of this area of the park - please do not be fooled as the Cabinet members were into thinking 'residential and commercial development' will be taking place NEAR the park - they unwittingly approved a new map hacking this area out of the park, in spite of also approving all kinds of exciting in-park improvements for it. Please study our maps page and make sure you are more clued up than your local councillors!

We also object to the chopping out of the area including the Arena (WHY???), to the identification of the strip along Stirchley Road as a 'development opportunity', the description of Randlay car park as another 'development opportunity' (read sell off for cash), and the failure to make use of Stirchley Grange for its original excellent purpose.