Dear All

 

I am hoping that I have included everyone with an interest in this issue to cover everyone’s queries regarding this job.  Please let me know if you think I have missed anyone out.

 

Concern has been raised by some residents of Oakfields regarding the styling and finishing of this project, and it would seem that the same message has been forwarded on to a number of you to take up separately.  I hope therefore that this email will clarify the situation for everyone.

 

The scheme originated from the completion of the first phase of fencing work adjacent to the garages in Oakfields.  It was instigated via the Safer Guildford Partnership as local residents had been concerned about people climbing over what was an inadequate fence at the time.  Following completion of the first phase, the second phase was designed up by a member of staff who has now left the authority.  This phase was expanded to include replacement of the allotments boundary fence at the request of local residents and our Parks and Countryside department.  Since sufficient funds were already allocated, this has been easily incorporated and planning permission obtained.

 

The idea behind the scheme was to install robust fencing which could not easily be climbed over to the allotment boundary.  It was also decided to remove the means by which garden waste and general rubbish could be tipped behind the existing fence.  It appeared that the adage “out of sight is out of mind” was relevant here since it was discovered that the entire length of boundary was heaped with rubbish behind the fence. (See view 1 attached) This has now all been cleared.

 

The new mesh fence is located on GBC land.  At the end of Oakfields, where it meets the turning circle, close boarded fence has been removed to allow an open view of the allotments. This was considered to be more attractive than the poorly maintained fence. (See View 2)  The line on which this fence stood has been demarcated by the insertion of timber post and rail fencing.  There is a gap between this post and rail fencing and the new mesh fencing which has been maintained as a gap for many years.  The origin of it was investigated via our legal department when we designed up phase 1 of the project.  It would seem that the land and fence was left over after the original development of Oakfields, but is registered to GBC.  The development company has long since been insolvent and no longer exists.  The original lines of the fencing have, however been maintained. (See view 3)

 

To finish off the scheme, it is intended to plant a line of mixed native hedging shrubs directly behind the rear timber boundary fence to create a deeper boundary and prevent intrusion of the space. Near the oak tree, clumps of hazel are proposed. This planting is aimed to be undertaken by the end of this year’s planting season which is the end of March.  Small saplings will be planted as these have a greater chance of establishing than more mature specimens.  A time lapse of 2 or 3 years should be expected before a thicket will be established.

 

A complaint has been received regarding the quality of workmanship of the fencing.  I have no reason to agree with this complaint since I have inspected the work and am satisfied that it is completely up to standards expected for such work.

 

A complaint has also been made regarding the condition of the grass in front of the fence which belongs to the adjacent property (although the complaint was not received from the owner of the grass).  The complaint refers to the poor condition left by the contractors.  My colleagues have addressed this with the owner, and as soon as it dries out sufficiently, the grass patch will be treated to make good.  I understand that the owner is satisfied with this proposal.

 

Finally, the complaint has been raised that the new fence affects the security of the houses backing on to the new fence.  In answer to this, I would suggest that the new mesh fence makes the security better rather than worse since the original fence was broken down in many areas and long past its replacement date.  Since the original fence was also lower than the replacement, and constructed of traditional chain link which can easily give foot holds for climbing, the new fence is preferable.  The removal of the rubbish which was building up behind this fence also means that access over the rear timber fences of the property will be more difficult as the height difference between ground level and the top is re-established. The establishment of a thorny hedge will be a deterrent to any would-be intruders.

 

One concession I am happy to implement regarding security, is to remove the return length of post and rail fencing adjacent to the access gate, which could conceivably be used as a step up and over from Oakfields into the allotments.  I have arranged for this to be implemented as soon as possible. 

 

The work here has been carried out as a result of requests from various quarters and pressure was applied to officers to implement this scheme at a time when the Projects Team was short staffed.  The implementation was therefore considerably  delayed.  It is therefore somewhat bewildering that now that the scheme is at long last implemented, that complaints should arise. Whilst I am always willing to look into concerns made by residents, I feel that the issues have been considered as part of the design and that once settled in, the resultant arrangement is superior to the original in terms of security and visual amenity.  See photos View 4 and 5.

 

 

 

ALISON DAVIDSON

Projects & Conservation Manager

Environmental Policy & Design Service