Untitled Document

The Saxon Paddock Committee is asking for YOUR help to protect a lovely area of wild land to the west of Hinckley in Leicestershire at the very Heart Of England Please email or fax Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council NOW

July and high summer ; leaves filled out on bushes and undergrowth dense green , the colourful carpet now made , the majestic ash trees now in full splendor against blue skies standing tall and proud in the south-eastern edge of the land, these 'trees of life' . The hedges of ancient hawthorn now in Saxon Paddock now thicken out in the warm days; the rare maritime pine remains steadfast and thrives in its central location, and will continue this year bringing shelter to the birds and ground life. Now the full picture is shown, the year continues a hopeful time, and a time to use the lessons of the past to improve the future. This year we thankfully see again the true colours of nature in this island of countryside - and with good will, they shall return in years to come, for this truly is a pleasant part of England. (Howard Priestly)

The dawn chorus, the air in the early morn is again filled in Saxon Paddock as this cathedral of natural birdsong starts it's service of the year , for many of the choristers are greeting the lengthened days , warm, and bright in this enclave of nature - here now is the true Summer. (HP)

Please, do your best to help us to save this little area of peace and nature for now and future generations.

Please help us by emails of support for our aim to protect this land, addressed to the local council (click on title to 'mail)

also heard well in Saxon Paddock Area is Anker Radio (from local George Eliot Hospital - Maternity Dept. on 1386 am (Medium Wave)

If you represent a commercial organisation, which recognises the need to protect nature, please contact our Treasurer, initially at the

We are entirely voluntary and all funds go to the purchase or rental of the land and it's running costs. We seek sponsors both locally and internationally.

The CFTP needs more members - if you live in the area of Saxon Paddock and want to get involved then let us know.

If you can publicise Saxon Paddock in any legitimate way or help us in local collections or simply spread the word - please do.

Saxon Paddock Committee has no connection with any similarly named groups or organisation, no political or religious affiliations or restrictions , our aim is simply to purchase and protect this small area of land and preserve it, as it is, for all to enjoy and for the wild plants and small animals to continue to flourish .

for protection of public footpaths and rights of way join the Open Spaces Society http://www.oss.org.uk

Looking for a good place to stay and eat at, out of town? then visit Upton Barn

The Comments made in Saxon Paddock News do not necessarily reflect the official views and are not controlled by the SPC. Please note we always welcome responses by Councillors, officials of Councils, Companies and Organisations in reply to items shown and any request for publication as a 'right to reply' will be respected - however, silence is deemed as acceptance.

In a move apparently bucking the trend we understand from reliable surces the first five companies to move onto 'Tungsten Park' are ready

At a time when all over the country projects are failing and firms going under at least it seems one project has won through

We have also been asked to point out that security of the site was always maintained

but Tungsten still don't see the severe risk - neither do the Borough Council

SPC say a secondary access/egress to Tungsten Park/Marina Court is a safety essential - in an emergency where will the vehicles and workers go with only one way out - if that way is blocked!

on Tuesday 26th May finally and properly after over 30 - yes 30 years - campagning by residents - but pussy footing by all three political parties- these residents won!

So beware now speeding motorists this area is no longer your 'foot down' haven - from tomorrow strict monitoring will apply.

Some 12 or more years ago, before this sound deflecting bund was created, it was a place where bluebells grew until the then tenant thought he'd get more wheat/ oil seed rape so he cut down the trees and cleared the land - however it had been the base of a railway track 100 years before that and where small trees could grow , moss and ivy thrive - his crop was poor and patchy and it wasn't worth the trouble and cost of removing the trees that actually had helped take-up excess water from an otherwise bog land and water field.Will these people never learn...

The 'balancing pool' could be properly landscaped as a natural attraction for wildlife and residents of our area to enjoy

In other countries and other parts of our country the local council work to improve peoples lives by improving the peoples surroundings - but Hinckley Council and Leicestershire County Council don't bother at least in our area.

In a move ostensibly to restrain the 'taking-over' of the 'Letters' pages of the Hinckley Times by letters from Councillors - a move welcomed by most readers sick of seeing photos of certain Councillors and reading overlong items in self-support; The Editor has totally unintentionally but naïvely deprived ordinary folk of the right to have their views read - if on a political theme. The motive for this was the up - coming County Council Elections in June - but surely we are entitled to even criticise those standing as candidates?

Instead of restricting comment should it not be the aim of a free press to encourage it!

This seems unprecedented that any newspaper should , even with the best ideas and ideals , remove the right of the people to voice freely, opinion on anything -

once again rather than speaking with residents, the SPC or our County Councillor, the County Engineer has put this in

We asked for barrier and handrail (barrier to prevent skateboard users running onto traffic on Paddock Way - handrail to allow safe negotiation of rise and camber by disabled or elderly)

NO WHEELCHAIR USER can now attempt the path with access of 58" only at an angle - however skateboarders can still weave between and risk being hurt by cars on Paddock Way quite easily!!

OUR COUNTY COUNCILLOR COMPLAINED ABOUT HEARING 'THIRD HAND' but why didn't he make it his business to ask about

The Saxon Paddock Committee asked in late March why speeding was still such a problem in our area even after the publicity and Vehicle Activated Signs (all two of them) were installed.

A check was made by the Constabulary - it was then discovered Leicestershire County Council had blundered (something they're good at it seems) and the required stages of 'signing off' and paperwork on details of length of road covered by the 30 m.p.h limit had not been completed.

We were told three weeks ago it would , from then, it would take approx. 5 weeks to put right

Perhaps the Tories and Lib Dems should stop calling each other names and act like public representatives!

Was the Saxon village here before Hinckley - archaeologists say very possibly!

Good for the people of Hollycroft - but Saxon Paddock Area can't even get support for a public notice board!

Councils praise themselves and a government rubber-stamp quango awards them 'top marks' (!) - whilst tax payers complain

deliberately blocked and rerouted without permission by developer 3 years ago

This path leading down onto Paddock Way, in place of the former legal route path which ran level where Crest Nicholson erected the 'sound deflecting' wood fence, slopes down 5ft (1.5 metres) and widthwise west to east has a 4" (10cms) camber !! anyone even needing a walking stick is at risk of falling.

Tungsten' should be linked to Harrowbrook' and not have separate dangerous chaotic junction entrance

Tail backs to A5 as a sign of the future - peak time drivers anger at planning blunder

Quote Councillor Crookes when Tungsten's Hells Crossroads was before Planning Committee which could have avoided all this trouble 'We must pass this or it'll cost us'

BUT THE QUESTION MUST BE ASKED OF COUNCILLOR BILL; IN THE RECESSION WITH HINCKLEY TRADERS ALREADY SUFFERING, HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL STOP SHOPPING IN HINCKLEY IF THEY CANT DRIVE IN WITHOUT A LONG WAIT?

No sound or rotating cone indicator as proper crossings taken out of service

After suffering unnecessary pavement and crossing closure for two months with no real help from County Councillor, residents have yet more upset!

thanks to our Liberal Democrat Borough Council, Conservative County Council and a Labour Government Planning Inspectors ruling in 2000

Council to be asked how much strategic housing land survey cost local tax payer

Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council, blaming of cause central government, have just spent tax payers money on what those who make millions - the so called 'developers' should have been obliged to do - finding land in any way suitable for house building.

At the same time the Liberal Democrats, whose party - like the Conservatives - pledged to protect such things as 'green belt' land and 'urban green spaces', has given planning permission for non essential 'development' of a number of green fields and urban green spaces in the Borough.

They, the Lib Dems, also said they would provide facilities for the people - not Persimmon Homes, Crest Nicholson (Midland) Ltd, Bryant Homes or Bovis Homes Limited , etc.

Why do all three parties tell us lies to try to get elected - what will happen in June at County Hall?

Labour set it up - Lib Dems supported it - Tories didn't but are now in control of it - we hear nothing of it's business or it's decisions before its too late and have no means of objecting its members are not elected but 'appointed'

ANY BODY KNOW WHAT THE EAST MIDLANDS ASSEMBLY DOES? - HOW MUCH IT COSTS US? and

Official notice not publicly displayed until it was too late to legally object!!

Footpath - What Footpath ??? (the U61 as people from Warwickshire first experience it!)

main streets 'adopted' (meaning now YOU pay to maintain 'em) on housing estate

but condition that rerouted U61 Public Footpath (western end of Waterside 'park') be properly finished as Crest-Nicholson had agreed

No wonder residents increasingly ask to be 'moved' (by boundary change) into Warwickshire!

In November 2007 out of date traffic figures were used by Hinckley Planning Department - Planning without proper research condemned:

Recent police survey presents a level of traffic not realised by either County or Borough - it is now feared chaos will cause grid-lock at peak times in The Paddock Area with serious risks to emergency services caused by 'play it by ear' traffic light controls at 'improved' (construction company's description) junction

We ask why were 'old' figures used in 2007 when Council glibly gave planning permission for yet more 'development' on Coventry Road in apparent ignorance?

Why the continued delays at tungsten 'park' junction? - why the continued risk to pedestrians?

It would seem the County Highways Dept. are bending over backwards for tungsten but doing as little as possible for the local council tax payer.

A covert monitoring of the area of Coventry Road used, by speeding motorists without regard for the 30 m.p.h. speed limit, which after 30 years hard work trying to get an out of touch County Council and Police Authority finally was applied in early Spring this year, has revealed most drivers are going too fast and over the limit for a residential area .

The Committee For The Paddock has told TPA News that they have been informed officially by Leics County Constabulary that the speed monitoring white camera van will be sited in The Paddock Area next Spring.

The webpage Manager has been asked by the Secretary/ Acting Chair of the CFTP to print the following unedited origin Neighbourhood Watch Net

They hold meeting after meeting in over heated offices which cost thousands but restrict signs which save lives

CONTINUED IGNORANCE FROM COUNTY HALL - LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T CARE A DAMN!

County Councillor requests, for safety sake on dark nights and in poor visibility, in view of no highway work being done, unnecessary barriers be removed at 'Hell's Crossroads' - but again no response

And what do the County Council do - no enforcement - they simply hold their hand out to the developers

Lets be fair, the construction workers can only do one job at a time and obviously the buildings etc, need to be up as soon as possible, incase those prospective occupiers go elsewhere (PLEASE!), however the building workers are a separate team to the roadway constructors - surely if there was a hold-up the County Council should have been properly informed by Tungsten, or if the alleged 'monitoring' by the County Council was taking place know already after A COMPLETE MONTH when nothing requiring the barriering off of the crossing or pavement was being done?

Surely between them 'Tungsten' and Leics. County Council can avoid unnecessarily barriering- off a proper safe crossing since late October for no reason?!

This is what we said on the 1st November when it was obvious the Highways Dept. had no intention of properly, safely marking the 'required' and compulsory, temporary crossing

Despite desperate pleas by the Secretary of CFTP County Council officers see no need to mark or sign the temporary crossing just west of the Ashby canal bridge - and our Leicestershire County Councillor and M.P. write emails and letters which are ignored by senior officers at County Hall

BECAUSE NO-ONE WITH ANY IDEA, AFTER READING WHAT Mr. TREDINNICK AND CC Mr. BILL HAVE REQUESTED HAVE THE RIGHT TO IGNORE THE COMMON SENSE OF IT

If a child is injured because some jumped-up 'god' at Glenfield can't be bothered to do his/her job then that officer and indeed the County Council are guilty of negligence!

Talks with numerous Highways Dept. Officers have achieved nothing - buck passing to the Developer (who has done his job but would be actually breaking the law putting more signs up!) , saying the pedestrian, motorists is responsible -rather than admitting a 'Duty of Care' by the Leicestershire County Council. Saying anything but doing NOTHING to protect the council tax payer, having closed -off a safe crossing (for 'development' work) but put in two sloping kerb-edge stones 1 yard wide and done nothing more at a narrow crossing where even 'baby buggies' are too wide and mothers face a desperate struggle to cross in the face of fast on-coming unrestricted traffic!

NO WARNING SIGNS AT THE CROSSING - NO ROAD MARKINGS TO SHOW RIGHT OF PEDESTRIANS

We have been officially told that by 2011 The Paddock Area will loose it's analogue TV signals and all 'square' screened TVs and earlier wide screens with 'normal' tuners will not work unless fed by a FreeView receiver - however Hinckley is in Leicestershire and Leicestershire is in the fabled 'East Midlands' - which strangely extends to the Lincolnshire coast (!!!)

The 'East Midlands' gets its main FreeView stations from Waltham (250 kW analogue, 4 kW digital) too far east to even give good pictures in parts of Leicester - hence a relay/repeater for the City, but Hinckley has to rely on Sutton Coldfield (West Midlands County and sub-region) items such as regional news therefore include Nuneaton but not Hinckley.

OfCom say because Hinckley is served sufficiently by Sutton Coldfield transmitter (1000 kW analogue 8 kW digital) it will not get a relay of the East Midlands - even though news items concerning Hinckley will only be seen in Hinckley on Cable (Virgin) or Satellite (Astra/Sky).

Residents get notification only 2 days before work starts - senior county council officer 'apologies' for not even telling our County Councillor

On Friday only two clear days before all the disruption starts to put in a cross roads leading, it seems, into a hardly begun development with only the base of one unit in place, no drainage or services !

Yesterday residents received a letter dated two days earlier (so why not delivered then?) notifying them of the fact that walking , let alone driving, between The Paddock Area and Hinckley will be hazardous for 3 months.

Of cause without our knowing anything about it (even the County Councillors were not told) 'prestart' discussions between contractors based in Rugby and County Council people at Glenfield had sorted everything out - or so they have assured themselves without consulting us or our elected representatives.

So if you're planning on using Coventry Rd (B4666) to drive into Hinckley from Watling St (A5) don't, because Tungsten will slow you down!

At least this work should have been left until after the 'Festive Season' surely!

God alone knows how this il-timed venture will affect already cash-strapped shop owners at Christmas in Hinckley.

If you live in The Paddock Area (between Ashby canal bridge and the Watling Street) do your shopping at Morrisons or Nuneaton (unless you have a lot of time to wait).

If you live in The Paddock Area don't try to walk up to the Church unless you are nippy on your feet crossing over at the bridge already an accident 'black spot'- so please take care of yourself - the County Council wont!

We used to think the public, the council tax payer came first with the councils - didn't we?

Now it's the contractors and our well being and quality of life come a very poor second .

If you feel fed up with County Hall and how it doesn't include you phone 0116 2323232 and ask for the Chief Executive - tell him how you feel about being the last to know!

This week we hear Hinckley' Council Planning Department modestly claiming 'top' performance in speed and efficiency in dealing with planning applications (Hinckley Times 16th October) splendid - but not so very long ago the then Tory controlled council supported by the Lib Dems moved successfully (did any Councillor oppose it - no! ) to restrict public speaking at planning committee meetings from 3 minutes (maximum) to a sickening 2 minutes only. The reason stated and presumably agreed by the then opposition was 'the meetings were taking too long' (quote council official). I've been in attendance at a number of these planning committee meetings and believe me it's not the public holding forth that elongates and presumably makes these meetings 'less efficient', it's a certain few councillors whose opinions - not researched facts - extend in duration, but very regrettably do not increase the content quality of debate.

Indeed, little research such as impact on the environment, detrimental effects on air quality, social impact is actually carried out by even the planning officers as a visit to the councils web site reveals, even site inspections are a novelty - hence the speed of pushing through all but those applications strongly politically objected to - and then not on a party basis but often a personal political basis where Lib-Lab-Con seems to 'blend' into them (the people) and us (the councillors) with the real decision made through the wording (biasing?) of the officer's report!

Of cause when I spoke of this to Planning Officers I was quickly reminded rather snotily ' we're under no obligation to allow any public speaking at the Planning Committee meetings ' . (!)

Perhaps those whom we bestow the honour of being elected to be our representatives, some of whom recently cried out in pain when it was suggested, perhaps a little cruelly, that councillors who didn't turn up to meetings should perhaps be replaced by others who would attend, might perhaps give we the people more opportunity to voice directly our agreement or disapproval more fairly and now reinstate the full 3 minutes as perhaps, just perhaps, our words might make more sense than theirs?

Then, perhaps we might not feel somewhat jaundiced when reading 'a borough to be proud of' on delayed council planning permission notices.

Paddock Area News has now been told by the Chairman's office Royal Mail HQ London that there will definitely be no relocation of the Hinckley sorting office for at least the next 12 months and after that should a relocation be considered, it will be the subject of a full public consultation period of 4 to 6 weeks.
The questions we now must, I feel ask is why the council planning officers accepted this as part grounds to support first the 07/00529/FUL (rejected) then the 07/01150/FUL (passed) - why obviously no checking was done with Royal Mail - and indeed why tungsten (erroneously) indicated it was agreed with Royal Mail on the plans submitted to the Council.

There were safety issues with both the alleged new building and the present town centre property - however we have been told the much less difficult Health & Safety issues in the town centre complex have now been fully addressed.

We rarely quote a newspaper but anyone reading this weeks Hinckley Times (published today) would be rightly puzzled by items on page 2 and 23 -

On page 2 it seems the council (Lib Dems) is concerned green space signed away by the former administration (Conservatives) may not now be used or built on. The reader is reminded that a quite sincere fight went on by the Lib Dems to prevent the council owned green space being lost. It seems, as is in no way unusual, what is said by a party in opposition is reversed and contradicted when in control !

Surely the present administration should now act to keep this part of Brodick Park green.

This and the former administration have one thing in common - no clearly defined green space policy.

On page 23 in an item also showing The Leader , Councillor Bill is reported as saying "Great" at the findings of the Appeal launched by Tungsten properties ltd- the result being to reject the Appeal to build 25 buildings on the former farm land the North field - so Tungsten can now build only 24 buildings where children played on the last open countryside in our area.

This potentially dangerous development design (single entry from centre of traffic light zone!! and no secondary access/egress - not even in an emergency) should be challenged by the council and referred under special security/safety provisions to the Secretary of State.

We want the canal unspoilt - though the flats on Waterside Park, right next to it, hardly add to the attraction - but what about the safety of workers in 'marina court' (Tungsten Parks other name) and what about the residents quality of life next to 'hell's junction'?

Tungsten Properties loose their 'greed' appeal - though Hinckley planning officers didn't help

The Planning Inspector has rejected Tungsten's badly advised attempt to have their cake and eat it (the passed 20th November application) and ALSO still appeal the rejected 28th August application - greed is not the way to run a business;

and what of the missing secondary access/egress road - what if there's an emergency at Royal Mail ?

The Council should now provide means to make the estate safe - a rear access road from

WATERSIDE 'PARK' - no place of fun or even safety as disabled are ignored by County Hall - in a damning move of councillors more keen on their expenses than safety in the shire, Leicestershire County Council is about to approve a re-route of the Public Footpath between Coventry Road , Hinckley and the Watling Street (A5) , a path which is undrained, incomplete at the Watling end and a danger to the elderly and disabled at the Paddock Way (off Coventry Rd) end - a dangerous slope leading onto the pavement which in winter will be a potential death trap!

Senior members of The CFTP have seen their objections and complaints ignored or explained away by trite comments from County Council officers who are only keen to look after the 'developers' interests - not the folk whose taxes pay their salaries ! These people should resign.

However, by approving an unsafe path the County Council are effectually breaking the law - but will our County Councillor remind them of this ?

Despite all efforts by Councillor Bill to protect the green space next to the canal opposite Canal Way, officers of the council are dragging their feet and , it seems, finding petty details to delay the proper adoption and protection of this open space.

We ask why ? , surely with the loss of the North field these officers can get off their back-sides and perhaps do something for the residents and tax-payers instead of acting as developers agents - perhaps some senior officers should be rubber stamped out!!

Yes that's the logic of the Microchip Operated Vehicle Activated traffic lights designed at County Hall Highways Dept.

So if there's a fire or similar 'incident' Emergency vehicles have to negotiate long lines of traffic in four directions and drive on the wrong side of the road to get to those needing help.

Cars are trapped in Tungsten Park because their lights are on RED - but what if the fire's in Tungsten Park - with only one way out!

As for the rest of the process give yourself plenty of time for your journey into Hinckley as the timing of the lights will be 'based on traffic flow and volume' - in other words "How long's a piece of string" technology!

Reason fails in the struggle to provide a decent playing field for The Paddock Area

The 'Independent' Inspector has let everyone down - he should be ashamed of himself

In his report which is simply 'rubber stamped' by a committee at County Hall he maintained we had not provided enough evidence of use by the local people of the North field - our Secretary spoke against the 'recommendation' to refuse our application for village green status of the North field but the 'talking heads' ignored his words and our County Councillor , a member of the board who might have saved the day 'was on holiday'!

Children are pushed aside so two car sales firms and a sorting office can move into a residential area!

We could have had a wonderful community facility - instead we have noise, lights at all hours and traffic - thanks to our planning officers and committee at Argents Mead!

BUT OF CAUSE NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE SMELL OF DIESEL OR THE NOISE -THEIR LOCAL AIR WON'T BE POLLUTED BY BENZENE.

TUNGSTEN' WANT TO BUILD 25 NOT 24 UNITS BUT HAVE ADMITTED CUSTOMERS FOR ONLY SIX UNITS

They could have easily offered a couple of acres to the children - but are too mean

The 'three ring circus' that is Hinckley & Bosworth' Council planning department, blunders on...

May 8th 2000 - Planning Inspector gave permission resulting in the loss of all but 1.3 acres of countryside in the area between the Ashby Canal and Watling St - 47 acres to the south of Coventry Road - 12 acres to the north.

Strict time limits for commencement of construction were detailed as conditions in the Inspectors Report.*

At every stage the Hinckley' Council planning dept. were 'more than helpful' in extending permission.

however nothing happened on the land to the north and the traditional farming continued.

2003: Hinckley Council planning dept. gave permission to extend outline planning permission for the North field although the same department had (apparently) opposed planning permission previously.

2005: detailed planning permission given by council for 10 'small' (!) industrial units - permission expired 2007 - May 8th*

'We cannot stop industrial development because a Government Inspector gave permission for that in 1999 .......'

On 20th November 2007 Councillor Crooks said, opening the debate on the second application by Tungsten Properties Ltd to 'develop' the North field, "If we don't pass this it'll cost us' - it 'coloured' the entire debate and the application, with no site inspection, was passed 9 votes to 2.

Councillor Bill spoke against the application but, again, said 'nothing could be done' and blamed the 1999 Inspector - it's hard to take anyone seriously who says in the same breath I'm against it - but it must be so.

So whatever you, the people, say if you get time off work to speak at the Appeal (10 am) on the 12th August (against rejection of Tungsten's first application dated 9th May 2007 for 25 buildings on 'Tungsten Park' sic) it wont really matter because our Liberal Democrat council have already given permission for 24 buildings (including the car sales and repair buildings working 6 days a week and Royal Mail sorting centre working 24 hours 7 days a week!)

The Council know they've cocked it up and have a blind cheek trying to suggest our words at the Appeal on the 12th can put it right

Let's be clear Tungsten Properties Ltd have every right to Appeal the first application rejection even after the council planning committee, without a site visit, passed the revised application. In the circumstances Tungsten' have done nothing wrong at all, indeed any company so guided and considered by the Officers and Councillors at Argents Mead would have been quite wrong not to Appeal for 25 buildings when 24 was so 'magnificently supported', in ignorance, by the Councillors (save 2) of the Planning Committee in complete disregard of the people of lower Coventry Road.

It is entirely the present Borough council who have failed to recognise a legal fact - the 1999 ruling by the Planning Inspectorate is clearly and indisputably after 7 years

Any claim by any developer that the 1999 ruling on the Crest Nicholson (Midlands) Ltd Waterside Park application gave rights in 2007 or later is not correct and should have been considered by the Councillors and if necessary taken to court.

It must be said in their favour that Tungsten' have never relied upon the 1999 ruling.

Any statement by any Councillor indicating a 1999 planning application ruling is perpetual and 'writ in stone' is obviously quite wrong but it seems these Councillors chose to believe this to be a fact rather than bothering to look up the relevant section of the revised Act' they ask a Planning Officer and if he or she says black is white, because it saves effort, - so be it!

Perhaps it's time the Councillors, regardless of political party - who didn't even think a site visit necessary in August 2007 or November - went on a training course to update their 'skills'. They are deciding things which will affect the lives of residents those who elected them - surely these residents have rights in the same way as 'developers ?

If you do attend the second day of the Appeal on 12th August bare in mind the result will in any case thanks to the naivety of the Councillors '....cost us' - but regrettably not them!

Of cause we knew it - because the traveling speed camera is stationed 400 yards (360 metres) east of our area when in Coventry Road and 'Speedwatch' never materialised.

If the Microchip Operated Vehicle Activated traffic light system planned, should 'Tungsten Park' go ahead, at Long Meadow Drive is to be relied upon (God help us!) then the race between that junction and the Watling St (A5) will make life (more) hell for residents - but the Highways Dept. can't see the traffic for the vehicles!

After the CFTP brought the matter of the proposed rerouted public footpath (U61) being not lawful under the terms of the Disability Discrimination Act(s) 1995 and 2005 to the attention of the Highways Dept. (Footpaths), in that the slope up from Paddock Way prevented wheelchair users, frame users and even walking stick users from attempting the path - we expected action. We have not yet had a clear statement of intended enforcement from Leicestershire County Council we therefore advise that disabled residents make firm comment to the County Council concerning the Council's Duty Of Care under the Act. We shall continue to press for the path to be made safe by restoring it to it's former route.

We are amazed that it is being said (by the council) that the council are doing a grand job taking over the mowing etc, of the green space between Canal Way and the canal - what they are doing is normal practice when a road is 'adopted' and the developer signs over the road and immediate green verge etc, to the local authority and gives up maintenance for an agreed one off payment.

They condemned , rightly, the hypocrisy of the Labour Government in cutting domestic waste collection funding, but whilst pushing re-cycling the lib-dems are still like Tory councils restricting collections.

What happened to our £82,000 (paid by Crest' to provide leisure space in OUR area - which was bitterly complained about by Councillor Bill but never sorted out

Why have they not extended the public speakers time from the lousy 2 minutes allowed at planning committee meetings.

Despite the provocative action of the sub contractors to Tungsten' in doing their very best to remove all traces of green open space on the North field, despite the closing off of the land to residents , despite the illegal (County Council Overseen !!) removal of hedgerow to the south during the nesting season against the Hedgerow Regulations - Our registration application and the enquiry have taken place and are going through consideration at County Hall. The contractors efforts failed to intimidate all but those who wouldn't have spoken up anyway. We thank all those who took the trouble to find time and make the journey to speak for the application - but again the council shamed itself not one Councillor asked to speak for us and a Planning Officer actually spoke to oppose our application.

' ... we want to see as much of the green space saved as possible' (quote Lib Dem propaganda)

Both the former Dog Stadium and field next to it are being again considered by well known developers whilst access onto Nutts Lane is not practicable the only route to these homes must be Long Meadow Drive - more traffic onto Coventry Road !

As this borough council seems incapable of fighting any badly placed development we hold no hopes of preventing yet more chaos.

PLEASE NOTE: References to 'The Paddock' in news items before 9th April 2009 are to be read as Saxon Paddock and 'The Paddock' and Saxon Paddock are the same area of land. Please be informed Saxon Paddock is private land.

Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council and Leicestershire County Council both claim to be really working for the tax payer , looking after his or her needs , providing facilities (?), help- so they claim, but their planners fall down on the job.......

The owner with a 3 year old child asked the Hinckley & Bosworth Council for help - he got 6 sand bags

We regret though a press release was issued by the Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council (which the council did not feel required to give us copy of ), we have so far been given no suggestion of any further help or compensation from any authority, organisation or company - truly a most regrettable and shameful lack of responsibility.

UNTRUE statement - but the council does nothing but make excuses not to have it changed or moved

For over 22 days this untrue statement has been allowed to upset residents and traders in lower Coventry Rd - the Planning Enforcement Office at Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council seem either unfit or even frightened to actually do their job and get it either amended or removed --- WHY?

This board has been erected , presumably to attract companies to what was for many decades an open field used for leisure , dog walking etc., and only within the last two years set with a crop having been ploughed up in 2005 after Crest-Nicholson obtained full planning permission to build 10 warehouse and office units - that planning permission is still in effect and NO PLANNING PERMISSION FOR ANY RETAIL SALESROOMS has even (as at 25/03/07) been applied for (quote Planning Dept. Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council).

We are surprised a reputable car dealership such as Martin Rumble has apparently allowed its name to be used in such a way.

We suggest the council uses its powers to request this board to be removed until such time as it is true.

Because of the genuine distress this inaccurate sign is causing to residents we put the case to the Advertising Standards Authority - however 'point of sale material falls outside of the Code' , The Trading Standards Dept. at Leicestershire County Council said it was 'outside their jurisdiction and we should contact the local council .....' We again spoke to the Hinckley council planning department who told us they had no control of wording on such a board as long as it (the board) was under a certain size.

However, knowing the board to be actually near the retaining fence on the highway side of the property boundary hedge on Tuesday 27th February 2007 we spoke to the Highways Dept. at Leicestershire County Council - this evening it appears though the wording is still to our knowledge (as checked with Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council planning dept.) erroneous, no request for amendment or adjustment has been made to the company responsible - Today 1st March, we spoke again with the Highways Dept. we await a further inspection.

At the meeting on the 16th March a senior planning officer did offer to ask the developer to 'move the sign further back into the property' - but it's still there.

No planning permission has been granted for any of the suggested uses other than warehouses and offices which in this part of the borough are plentiful (indeed 1000's of square feet are lying vacant in far more favourable positions) we simply asked Tungsten for a small donation of land (part of the 11.75 to 14 acres) for a football/cricket field and community centre - for the people - We were cynically refused this basic request.

Why bother with Public Relations when a company is dealing with a borough council so remote from public opinion as Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council

Hinckley' council are 'in talks' with the developers about a 'possible' planning application - so why can't Hinckley' Council insist that the incorrect message on this board which stands in a potentially dangerous place (see barrier item above) and which is worrying residents be put right ? whose interests comes first ? the local tax payer or prospective developers ? these people are making fortunes by building on farm land why can't the Hinckley' Council make it a condition of any planning permission that some land be set aside for public use? - i.e. playing field and community centre and enforce safety standards for displays.

There have been complaints that this board is distracting drivers at a point where even before it was erected, the pedestrian safety barrier ( far right of above photograph )had been knocked down twice because of a dangerous 'kink' in the east going highway which slightly 'bottle necks' where it crosses the bridge. Drivers new to this road fault need all their attention to be on the highway and the Highways dept. of Leics. County Council are already failing in their duty to correct or at least mark this point with a caution sign. We claim the council are derelict of their duty of care to both road users and footpath users allowing a sign so close to a potentially dangerous 'fault' in the roadway. The sign must be removed!

We ask all residents of lower Coventry Road to make their views known to the council when the last remaining open field in our area becomes subject of yet another planning application.

We are already almost surrounded by industry, empty ugly warehouses and dangerous roads where speed limits seem more fiction than fact - ENOUGH'S ENOUGH!!

Latest on this board: we were told on Monday 12th March by a representative of 'Tungsten Properties' the wording would be added on the Martin Rumble item 'subject to planning permission' but nothing has been done yet.............. (23/4/07)

WHY HAS THE AREA OF COVENTRY ROAD BETWEEN THE ASHBY CANAL AND WATLING STREET SUFFERED SO MUCH SOCIAL NEGLECT WHY ARE THE RESIDENTS BOTH OLD AND NEW FEELING THE CANAL BRIDGE MARKS THE END OF THE 'AREA OF CARE' WEST OF WHICH HINCKLEY COUNCIL FEELS NO FACILITIES NEED BE PROVIDED, MOTORISTS ARE FREE TO SPEED AS MUCH AS THEY LIKE , BORED TEENAGERS HAVE NO SPACE FOR SPORTS OR ACTIVATES - ELDERLY NO PLACE TO SIT OR WALK AND CHAT IN A COMMUNITY AREA IN THE SUN -- IN AN AREA WHERE OVER 900 MORE PEOPLE LIVE THAN IN 1999 (47 acres) NOTHING HAS BEEN PROVIDED BUT A VERY SMALL 'PLAY AREA'

Residents of lower Coventry Road have commented on how the super new 12 metre high metal street lamps have been (quote) 'waving about in the wind' - funny how the old type concrete/metal 10 metre high lamps stayed confidence - inspiringly rigid in the strongest of winds ! - isn't progress wonderful...........

We invite councillors or council officers to have their say (unedited) in defense of such things as the felling of basically healthy trees, a total spoiling of Argents Mead and nearly £300,000 wasted on a rusting bandstand, installation of mini traffic islands in areas to small for normal vehicles to easily maneuver , a town centre dedicated to evening boozing and little else, play and greenspace policies which because of ludicrously unrealistic planning exclude rather than include children and families, ideas to use former factories for quite inappropriate purposes where car parking is almost non- existent and traffic control are afterthoughts - some of the most farcical policies of the 21st century.

MASSIVE AREA OF HOUSES TO BE BUILT ON OUTSKIRTS OF HINCKLEY - obscene loss of Countryside

The so-called East Midlands Regional Assembly , an unelected gathering of appointees who claim to represent counties such as Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Rutland and even Lincolnshire have decided on inflicting more than 4000 more houses on the outskirts of Hinckley - that's at least 500 acres of countryside lost between Hinckley (in Leicestershire - in the 'East Midlands Region') and Nuneaton (in Warwicksire - in the 'West Midlands Region') so presumably the, again, unelected West Midlands Regional Assembly will be involved and with such a massive loss of countryside and monstrous mass of concrete and brickwork both the Towns of Hinckley and Nuneaton will be merged and renamed regardless of county (and 'regional') boundaries. If this had been announced on April the first it would have been a good joke, but it's real and very serious.

WHAT THE HELL ARE THESE UNELECTED QUANGO MEMBERS THINKING OF - ARE THEY TOTALLY WITHOUT REASON?

We suggest the abolition of these undemocratic, expensive and unrepresentative il-informed so - called regional assemblies before they do more damage to our area and destroy our countryside.

High winds and heavy rain have caused some damage to property and flooding of gardens in The Paddock area. Please check weather conditions particularly before long journeys . Here is a link to the Hinckley area weather page ------

We asked for a playing field and Community Centre on the north field - THEY SAID PERMISSION had to be granted to a 'certain developer' for warehouses and offices (!!)

We asked for compensation so that added traffic noise soundproofing could be added to properties at noisy junctions and crossings on lower Coventry Road - WE GOT EXCUSES

We complained about dangerous cycle/pedestrian path markings - AGAIN NOTHING

We said our sleep was upset by street and property security lights and industrial noise - NOTHING

Ancient Hawthorn hedge victim of 'chainsaw logic' THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED

Habitat loss for at least three years because, at least we were told, 'waterside park residents say the hedge blocked out the light'

- from the NORTH (!?) - or was it just 'bloody-mindedness' by a certain 'developer' ?

Still the Councillors and Officers of Hinckley' Council make up excuses rather than protect this land.

The CFTP has complained about dumping over the fence from the Waterside Park car parking area it may not be residents as security to this car park is nonexistent, however since the cutting of the hedge monitoring of car number plates of these dumpers has been possible (even in darkness) so beware ......

STILL NO PROPER ACTION FROM OUR COUNCILLORS - YET ASHBY ROAD GOT A SPEED LIMIT - WHY NOT HERE ???

SPEEDING But nothing is done, it seems we live too far from Charles Street, Leicester for speed patrols, cameras or even drive carefully signs, even the pedestrian controlled crossing is ignored and there are increasing cases of total ignorance , by motorists of those wishing to cross even when the motorist gets a red light to stop!! Particularly in the evenings we get the impression we live on a racing track . They know they can get away with it on this section of Coventry Rd - the Police say speed limits on lower Coventry Road are 'unenforceable' - then what do we pay our taxes for ?

Why are our representatives not insisting on a 30 mph limit and 24 hour speed controls ???

Equipment IS available to read number plates in total darkness and at split second timing - there's no excuse.

It seems Taylor Woodrow have now put in a planning application (06/00786/OUT) to build 117 houses off Nutts Lane between the Ashby Canal and the Dog racing Stadium - the estimated 200 odd cars will add even more to the headache of present residents of this area and cause even more congestion to the A5/ Watling Street and Coventry Road.

Latest: On Tuesday 10th October the Hinckley' Council Planning Committee refused planning permission for the above - nice to think they can make the odd correct decision!

However, of cause Taylor Woodrow , with the present central government attitude will almost certainly have a good chance at appeal.

More formerly open farm land to be built on , The Government claim to want to support the countryside but allow more and more green-field development , the Council say they want to 'protect the countryside' but no doubt have already opted to pass this application without opposition (opposition ?? - who are they ?) - 'a poor opposition makes a bad administration'.

Meanwhile nothing is said about the north field which could- if the council fought hard enough- be still used for the benefit of the people however it seems an archaeological dig is about to begin on this site.

Crest-Nicholson (Midlands) Ltd not content with building 424 houses on a flood plain now named Waterside Park have put in for planning permission to build '89 dwellings' on the land which is at present a Greyhound Stadium

Common sense again prevails - the above Crest' plan has tonight (5th Dec 2006) been refused.

However Crest- Nicholson are bad losers and, even it seems accepting (or ignoring ?) the particular difficulties of the Greyhound Stadium site and the appalling traffic conditions already in that location, wasting their money and committing a major public relations blunder on an appeal to the D.o.E (Deputy Prime Ministers Office) It will be a pretty dumb Inspector that doesn't tell them NO - even with the present governments crazy ideas on house building!

We are destroying the countryside and the next generation's natural quality of life

And the council should get the north field development stopped by the Deputy Prime Ministers Office as a special case as it will create a dangerous road junction.

Would win awards for tasteless sick stupidity with their latest idea of putting a bandstand less than 80 yards from a garden of remembrance !

Yes it's true and so that those paying tribute to the relatives whose lives were given in two world wars can see and hear the bands and performers the council has cut down a bank of shading trees they claim 'had rot' , though at least three had no rot at all and if the, so called, 'tree surgeons' had had any idea they would have reported the health of the unaffected trees rather than destroy them.

Meanwhile those in the parks and countryside department have been instructed to defend all felling or mutilation of mature trees as in the public interest - now there is rot in that!

The CFTP is totally opposed to destruction of natural habitat be it grass land or trees. DEFRA say since 1960 the bird population has diminished by 40% - yes 40% and yet Hinckley Council destroy habitat!

And the Councils 'enforcement officers' did nothing to prevent The Paddock hedges being drastically cut - we say sack them and save our money!

Because Crest-Nicholson (Midlands) Ltd could not provide 'official' open space and other public facilities as part of the Waterside Park housing development the Planning Inspector in 1999 required money to be paid for such facilities to be provided by the council for the local residents on another nearby area off the Crest' site - Crest paid the Hinckley' Council £82,000 which seems to have 'disappeared' for no public facilities have been created by the council in the area between Ashby canal and Watling St. in the five years since this was paid - We ask Where has the money for our facilities (lower Coventry Rd/ Waterside Park) gone ?

Well we can tell you it's NOT going for the benefit of the people of lower Coventry Rd or Waterside Park - which it was meant to - its gone to the improvement of Brodick Street and Langdale recreation ground - even the council admits this is 390 metres (427 yards) away ! What are the councillors thinking of - and why are our 3 ward councillors not speaking up for us - YET AGAIN ?

The fact is the Hinckley Council believe that a survey involving answers from 600 people throughout a borough of many thousands is a truly representative answer to the question 'how far are you prepared to walk or make your children walk to a leisure area or recreation ground and Hinckley council claim people are prepared to walk between 400 metres ( that's 437 yards in English ) and 700 metres ( that's 766 yards - nearly half a mile!) - this may not be so bad in a quiet village but along a busy, noisy town main road it's just not on -

Members of the CFTP , The Representative of Crest Nicholson (Midlands ) Ltd , Councillor David Bill and officers of Leicestershire County Council met at 9-30am on 15th August 2006 on the site to discuss the proposed rerouted Public Footpath to the west side of Waterside Park between Paddock Way and Watling Street. Though the Secretary of the CFTP put forward a sincere plea for an additional, quite separate , fenced off Public Footpath sited nearer the present legal position of the path (right next to Paynes Garages fence) which has been unaffected over 100 years, this was ignored by the county council officers who seemed only to hear the Crest' point of view. It must be stated the Crest' representative did accept the serious fears of the Secretary that the safety of the children using the 'play area' could be jeopardised by the path running right next to where they played.

On the 8th November in the Council Chamber at Argents Mead , Hinckley we spoke up to prevent Crest-Nicholson(Midlands) Ltd destroying The Paddock , we fielded a small but honestly motivated team opposing Crest's appeal for planning permission which they rushed in even before the Council's Planning Committee could discuss the subject in January of this year. However the Planning Dept. at Hinckley was supported by the Planning Committee in opposing Crest's application.The Appeal was rejected - Crest' lost and a small step was made in the direction of reason.

On 12th July a rather ill-informed Council Planning Committee approved, against the interests of their electors, with no discussion on the safety or otherwise of the entrance/ exit road - only a few yards (metres if you will) from a curve in the road and a bridge - and with little understanding of the environmental impact of the design, one of the silliest most unrealistic planning applications ever conceived. Building 10 industrial units (in four blocks) on open green field with no one wanting or needing them ( no firm as yet shown interest in using them) next to Harrowbrook Industrial estate where empty units stand.

WE UNDERSTAND CREST' (WHO ARE HOUSE BUILDERS NOT EMPTY WAREHOUSE CONSTRUCTORS) DID TRY TO GET A CHANGE OF USE FOR THE NORTH FIELD FOR MORE HOUSES - THE PLANNING DEPT., FORCED TO CONFIRM A PLANNING INSPECTORS 'VERDICT' for the land to be for 'employment use', SAID NO!

WHAT THEY COULD HAVE DONE WAS USE IT FOR A PLAYING FIELD AND COMMUNITY CENTRE AND EMPLOY A GROUNDSMAN AND CARE TAKER - isn't that employment use?

EUROPEAN UNION LEGISLATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND THE RIGHT TO A SAFE AND GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN IGNORED.

As with the ill conceived Harrowbrook Industrial Estate right at the back of them the people of the north side of this part of Coventry Road have had their views ignored.

Members of the CFTP living near the entrance to this north field 'development' will be monitoring closely , noise pollution, light pollution, traffic congestion and other public safety issues

17 months ago a young girl lost her life the result of speed AND seriously badly considered traffic controls and road/ pavement markings on lower Coventry Road - in March of this year an accident report was submitted to the County Council pointing out various hazards though ignoring the fact that we still have a 40 - not 30 m.p.h. - limit in an area claimed by both the council and the Transport Secretary to be 'built up' (on both sides) . We still have the single white line on the south pavement (17" from the kerb) which DIRECTLY contributed to the accident and indirectly to the death, we still have traffic lights on a almost constant default of green crossing the junction of Long Meadow Drive , the primary access to the 424 house development 'Waterside Park' forced on us in 2000 by Crest-Nicholson (Midlands) Ltd. We still have cars traveling at ridiculously dangerous speeds particularly in evenings and hours of darkness. We don't have speed cameras or any sort of speed restricting constructions.

Our County Councillor has again called for action on this but perhaps instead of asking he should be telling

So it seems nothing is being done to make lower Coventry Road safer for both sensible road users, cyclists or pedestrians.

We pay the bulk of our council tax to Leicestershire County Council whose job it is to keep our road safe , they make bogus claims of 'efficiency' on their web site meanwhile because of the 'Council's ignorance people get hurt and even killed on the Counties roads, not simply because of inexperienced young drivers (always a get-out for the authorities) but because of bad planning by County Hall.

Hinckley has plenty of empty industrial property with no need to use up countryside for more

(2007 - May- They are!! where people could have a proper sports and community cenre)

LATEST: AND YET MORE VACANT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS ON DODWELLS BRIDGE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE!!!

SO WHERE'S THE SENSE IN TAKING MORE GREEN FIELD LAND FOR EMPTY WAREHOUSES - LAND WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLAIMED FOR USE AS A PLAYING FIELD AND COMMUNITY CENTRE FOR LOWER COVENTRY ROAD AND WATERSIDE PARK .

GET RID OF the hideous 12 metre high street lamps (Motorway height in a residential area on a B road)

GIVE US a 30 m.p.h. speed limit in line with the rest of Coventry Rd(on a widened road in a built up area)

Begin sequential changing of the traffic lights at Long Meadow Drive to regulate the speed of drivers who ignore even the 40 m.p.h. limit after dark (speeds of over 80 m.p.h. have been monitored!!)

STAND UP FOR US when we ask for more leisure space between Ashby Canal and The Watling St. (A5).

MAY 2007 - NOT ONE OF THE ABOVE ITEMS HAS BEEN ACHIEVED BY OUR COUNTY COUNCILLOR - NOT ONE!!

The design of the crossing nearest the Ashby canal bridge has been criticised as near impossible for disabled users. I have been told the wheelchairs , Zimmer frame users and cyclist must use the crossing on the west side of the 'T' junction (eventual crossroads) - has no one at the council(s) realised that this restricts these users to the north side of Coventry Rd with no proper crossing for over a mile!. Our Secretary inquired why no audible crossing 'beeps' where used at the Long Meadow Drive/ Coventry Road junction lights/crossings - the official answer is rather than confuse blind or poorly sighted folk who might hear another crossing beep and think it's their crossing beep - no beeps are fitting at all and a 'tactile rotating cone' situated under the button unit starts to rotate when the blind person should cross - o.k. As long as your finger's on the cone but hardly reassuring half way across!!

We have now handed in our petition signed by the residents of Lower Coventry Road and Waterside Park requesting -not more leisure area - but some leisure area! Crest-Nicholson has made available nearly £200,000 to the Council as a condition for planning permission for phases 1 and 2 of their 'Waterside Park', originally the Council opposed the 'development' of the countryside south of the Coventry Rd, it seemed then that they supported the residents; So now we ask in all reasonable thinking should not the money obtained for leisure and education from Crest' be used for the benefit of the people directly affected by the D.o.E decision to overrule the local Council and local public opinion and allow these 400+ houses to smother our open countryside in the 49 acres south of Coventry Rd.

The Committee For The Paddock is not allied to any political party and it is hoped that all three main parties want the best for the people in this part as well as the rest of the borough .

We continue to press for the painting of white signs to indicate to pedestrians to be watchful of cyclists approaching behind them on the shared foot/ cyclepath - there have been a few incidents where people could have been injured, however , between Paddock Way and Long Meadow Drive there is only ONE sign, should anyone ever get injured please contact the Chief Executive of Leicestershire County Council by phoning 0116 2323232 , meanwhile we will continue to point out the risks to the council officers concerned.

The designers of the crossings at Long Meadow Drive/ Coventry Road should now redesign the crossings as in October 2004 invalid access regulations were updated, as the crossings of Coventry Rd nearest the canal bridge and on Long Meadow Drive with 90 degree turns are not suitable for wheelchairs and whilst having a FIXED time period to cross are NOT MONITORED for pedestrian safety, so is Leicestershire County Council breaking the law?

We ask disabled users to make their views clear to the Leicestershire County Council (phone 01530 262380) - if you say nothing they'll do NOTHING

Some years ago our Secretary put forward an idea of a pedestrian subway making use of the canal path under the bridge on Coventry Rd , with of cause protective fencing and lighting under the bridge, a way to make it really safe to cross the increasingly busy road at this point - it was ignored and continues to be ignored because the wrong person thought of it.

DON'T PUT RUBBISH BAGS ON PUBLIC ROADS OR LAND IT'S ILLEGAL AT ANY TIME.

our plan for Saxon Paddock is simply a gravel path and two bench seats a pedestrian gate and the required security - nothing more - no houses (424 is enough) no bricks, concrete, street lamps, cars - simply this - nature protected properly

HONESTLY - ISN'T OUR WAY BETTER ? Now will Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council help ?

ARE OUR HOMES AT RISK? - increased severe vibration of buildings to the South of lower Coventry Road is regularly being reported - this seems far worse than before the road was re- built, also some residents report increased noise level from heavy vehicles at all hours of the day and night.

The results of a survey by Leicestershire County Council on traffic noise, vibration and pollution were a 'white-wash' based on the statement that a (quote) 'quiet road surface material' was used by the subcontractors - however the vibration to houses on the south side has worsened since the road was re-laid - if your house shakes when heavy vehicles pass phone Mr. M Dakin at Leicestershire County Council on 0116 2657160 (mailto:mdakin@leics.gov.uk) - he seems to think all's well, but if he'd actually come out of his office and see (and hear!) for himself - he'd know differently

To obtain information, free booklet (number 4) on application for compensation, phone 0870 1226 236 or call County Hall on 0116 2323232

If you live in Leicestershire, 65.7% of YOUR council tax goes to Leicestershire County Council

- yes 65.7% and what do they give us back??? (answers on the back of a postage stamp please)

----------------------------------------------------------And they call this 'development' !

Two pictures same place 1999 and ---------------------------------2004 is this what we want more of ?

Two years ago this lamp post 12 metres high (not 10 metres as is normal) was erected on our 'B' road (!) and already it looks dangerous and should it fall, who do we sue the Contractors, Sub contractors or County Council ?

As a result of the roadworks the road surface was widened by 1.8 metres (just under 2 yards).Re-siteing of street lamps and pillar box, re-laying of drives between road and front walls/ fences and verge grass was done and the road surface was lowered by 75 to 100 mm (3" to 4") in order to maintain verge levels appropriate to residents drives. This work was funded by and subcontracted by Crest-Nicholson for Leicestershire County Council.

The white line painted about 14" from the curb on the south side and part of the north side of Coventry Rd is a safety line for cyclists it is NOT a dividing line. We are asking that 'symblems' be painted on the pathways to indicate more clearly that both pedestrians and cyclists are allowed to use the pathway.

Incredibly the Leicestershire County Council has recently repainted the white line which contributed to a fatal accident in June 2004 , this after a report to the council earlier this year critisised the position of the line.

Whilst these lines may have use on housing estates etc. in 30 m.p.h. speed limit zones, they are positively DANGEROUS on main roads with 12 metre high lighting.

We have asked that this white line be removed because it is misleading in street light and gives road users a wrong impression of the position of the kerb. Had standard street lamps been fitted instead of the 12 metre high motorway units which the County Council insists are 'better' these white lines would be better illuminated - as things are there have been several incidents of motorists nearly hitting the kerb because they were misguided by these so called 'safety lines.

However, as usual Leicestershire County Council say they are 'Ministry approved' - we will continue to press for it's removal or repositioning on the actual kerb.

LATEST:After attention was drawn by the then Committee For The Paddock to potential dangers to road users it has been recommended in a County Council report, that extra markings are now made on the kerb edge of combined footpath/ cyclepaths this and other suggestions are as usual too little to late! However some major improvements were not considered in the report and the urgently needed 30 m.p.h. speed limit is STILL not supported by the Leicestershire Constabulary - we ask them for a reason why we are being ignored on this....

Presumably this report was 'shelved' as no action has been taken on any of its findings --------------(?) ---------------

(A Department of The Environment Inspector approved this last recreation area should be built on !!!!)

An item which caused much bitterness on the north side of lower Coventry Rd in the summer of 2005.

OUR FIGHT TO PROTECT THE COUNTRYSIDE REMAINING IN OUR AREA - now only 1.3 acres at The Paddock - CONTINUES -----

Parking on footpaths/cyclepaths has become a problem with only the most thoughtless of motorists in 2005

PLEASE NOTE THE REGISTRATION NUMBER OF ANY VEHICLES CAUSING DANGER TO PEDESTRIANS OR OTHER ROAD USERS BY NEGLIGENCE OR SPEEDING AND REPORT THEM TO THE POLICE

2005 --Paddock Way junction is one of the poorest marked road junctions in the area but nothing is done

Still pedestrians and cyclists risk injury from vehicles at the unmarked junction of Paddock Way and Coventry Rd - Officials at Leicestershire County Council STILL REFUSE to request clearer halt sign road markings at this dangerous junction.

Of the £80,000+ the council obtained from Crest-Nicholson NONE will be used in our area of Coventry Rd !!

We understand our local councilors are working to prevent the misuse of this funding but there have been months of silence ------- (no change on this issue May 2006!)

WHY ARE RESIDENTS OF LOWER COVENTRY ROAD TREATED LIKE MUCK BY HINCKLEY COUNCIL?

All inquires about planning applications should be made in person at the Council Offices, Argents Mead, Hinckley or phone 01455 238141.

If you are a resident with a road- works problem telephone 01455 283341 (Leicestershire County Highways Dept.)

This information is given to help maintain good relations around The Paddock area and to avoid rumour and misunderstanding. Please contact us at the above number or email address, we will endeavour to keep our web-page as an on-line notice board (subject to copyright and Internet regulations).

Disclaimer All information given is subject to alteration at the last minute due to circumstances beyond the control of the Saxon Paddock Committee , Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council, Crest-Nicholson and Leicestershire County Council and no responsibility will be held or taken by them for any information given in this document or Internet website upon which it is made available. All illustrations, photographs and diagrams on this site are copyright of The Committee For The Paddock / Paddocksave unless otherwise stated. Any person or organisation wishing to publish or display copyright material from this site must first obtain permission from the Secretary or Chairman and indicate the copyright in the published item.

Plans Copyright Crest-Nicholson/ Leicestershire County Council/ Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council

Old street lamps (now replaced) shown as circles - new lamps as partly filled circles e.g. lamp outside 516 has been removed

Plans available on large scale at Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council, Argents Mead, Hinckley.

Don't let them fill our countryside with housing estates - countryside lost is lost for ever!

Regrettably we are no longer able to show area roadworks on this website, however we cannot be prevented from giving our visitors a link which will assist in finding this information.

We continue to press Warwickshire County Council (general site link) for roadworks information ( or a site link) covering neighbouring areas e.g. Nuneaton.

Remember, if your local Councillor says information 'is restricted' remind him of the Freedom of Information Act 2005 and your rights!

STRANGER AT THE DOOR - always ask for an identification card, these are legally required to be shown by persons visiting private dwellings on behalf of commercial and public organisations (e.g. Double Glazing Companies , Meter Readers , Emergency Services ) ask them to show the card through a window - never open the door to strangers if you're alone in the house - if a caller acts suspiciously call 0116 222 2222 or 999 if no proper identification card is clearly shown , even if the person is in uniform - REFUSE ENTRY

Any local events can be advertised on the news page and any donations received will be welcomed.

We Still need much more support towards saving the small area, known traditionally as 'The Paddock' we need new active members who can attend bimonthly meetings, deliver newsletters, spread the word.

Become a 'FRIEND OF THE PADDOCK' Today!

Thanks for your visit - STAY SAFE in Saxon Paddock Area.

Legal Disclaimer any items or events advertised on this Committee/ Saxon Paddock News web site are for information only and the Saxon Paddock Committee in no way endorses their purchase or use under the Sale of Goods and Services Act (U.K.) or any other acts in the same regard worldwide. All events advertised are unpaid advertisements unless otherwise stated and any web site links are purely for information unless otherwise stated , the Saxon Paddoc Committee disclaims any responsibility should the items fail in any way. Whilst the Saxon Paddock Committee make every effort to check and confirm all information quoted on this web page neither the Committee or it's officers will accept any legal or moral responsibility for any information comment or view expressed herein.

In the interests of clarity Imperial measurements - i.e. ft, yards, miles etc., are used ( or equivalents stated) on this page.

Suggestions, by the Committee, for the use of former tithe names of Hinckley as street names in the neighbouring Waterside Park housing development have been accepted by the local Council and the developers with Long Meadow Drive, Pinfold Close, West Hyde, Merry Hurst Place and Applebees Meadow being accepted.

This site is best viewed using Netscape 7.2 with Academy Engraved LET and Belwe Bd BT fonts enabled

Special thanks to Paul Knight for his continued help in the design of this page.