Residents of a Nottinghamshire estate have expressed strong opposition to a newly constructed boundary wall, situated on Mornington Crescent in Nuthall. The wall, which stands at six feet, was erected as part of extension works carried out at a local home, prompting heated discussions among neighbours. Criticism from residents has labelled it a "monstrosity," with some even claiming it gives the area the appearance of "some sort of prison."
The contentious wall has sparked concern particularly from neighbours Anthony Wilson and Tony Pinkstone. Mr Wilson, a 58-year-old veteran, stated that fifteen residents objected to the wall's construction, yet none reportedly received any communication regarding their objections during the planning process. He described the wall’s approval as "an absolute travesty," arguing that it has negatively impacted the aesthetic of the entrance to the estate and the overall impression of the neighbourhood. He stated, "What they have approved has absolutely devastated the entrance to the estate and it’s destroyed the presentation of the neighbourhood."
Mr Pinkstone, aged 69, also commented, saying: “It’s completely destroyed the street scene. This estate was always attractive with open front gardens.” He believes the wall is devaluing properties in the area, creating a harsher environment for residents.
Jonathan Lewis, the homeowner responsible for the extension and the wall, defended the legality of the construction, asserting that all procedures were followed and planning permission was obtained from Broxtowe Borough Council. "Nobody has come to me and said anything. They can come here. We have followed the rules to the absolute letter," he remarked. Mr Lewis further added that his wall is not unique to his property, citing similar constructions in the vicinity, and expressed satisfaction in its appearance.
A spokesperson for Broxtowe Borough Council clarified that the wall has planning permission and noted that the design adhered to approved plans, stating, “The wall in question has planning permission, and the heights of both the wall and the pillars are in accordance with the approved plans.” Adjustments to the wall's position, slightly setting it away from a neighbouring property, have also been approved as a non-material amendment.
In a separate, but equally contentious matter, campaigners in Nottinghamshire are raising alarms over the potential redevelopment of Tollerton Airfield, proposing the construction of 1,600 homes on a site previously used for dismantling aircraft. Local residents and campaigners assert that radioactive materials, specifically radium-226, could be present due to the historical dismantling of Lancaster Bombers post-World War II. The ex-RAF base was sold by Rushcliffe Borough Council in June 2022, with plans set by developer Vistry to redevelop the land.
Sarah Deacon, chair of the Save Nottingham City Airfield group, emphasised the importance of investigating the site for safety, citing historical references to similar cases where former airfields have been deemed hazardous. “When you look at sites like RAF Kinloss, where they scrapped fewer aircraft than they did at Tollerton, they identified radioactive material there", she noted. The discussions have been further intensified by uncertainties regarding the transfer of responsibility for safety assessments after the Ministry of Defence confirmed that records had been given to the civilian owner.
Rushcliffe Borough Council and Vistry have acknowledged the concerns but assured that any planning application for the site would include a contaminated land assessment and a proposed mitigation methodology. A council spokesperson stated, “This detail will be considered during the determination of the application and any future applications for the wider allocated site.”
Meanwhile, significant findings regarding taxi licensing in Nottingham have surfaced, revealing that many local drivers are opting to obtain their licenses from Wolverhampton, despite the distance. The cost discrepancy is substantial; a one-year license in Nottingham City costs £148 compared to just £49 in Wolverhampton. This has led to 701 drivers from Nottingham being licensed in Wolverhampton.
Asif Maqsood, spokesperson for the Nottingham Taxi Owners' and Drivers' Association, has expressed concern over the perceived influx of inadequately trained drivers into Nottingham's streets. He claimed that competition from Wolverhampton-licensed drivers is severely affecting local businesses and noted ongoing issues with drivers unfamiliar with local regulations and road usage.
Nottingham City Council, which is working to persuade local drivers to license with them rather than Wolverhampton, is unable to restrict applications based on applicants' addresses due to legal stipulations. A spokesperson explained that U.K. law allows drivers to apply for licenses from any authority. This situation has incited frustration among local drivers who plead for a fairer licensing environment.
Both news stories highlight growing community concerns regarding development decisions and regulatory frameworks within Nottinghamshire, reflecting a broader dialogue about local governance and residents' rights in shaping their neighbourhoods.
Source: Noah Wire Services