please empty your brain below
Not an area that I am familiar with at all but an interesting post.

Fishislandskin | 14.12.16 - 7:18 a.m. | #

As I understand it, the allotment holders were not happy with the development plan, as it involves them being displaced.

dg writes: They went to the High Court with a test case against Watford council last month, but lost.

Andrew | 14.12.16 - 8:26 a.m. | #

My family has lived in Swiss Avenue just down the road from the present Watford Met station since the 1930s so I have been very interested in all the developments over the past few years. Glad the allotment battle has been mentioned and the fact that the loss of Watford Met station would be a blow to a large number of commuters. Interesting to think that the Met line was going to be extended into the centre of Watford at one stage. I think they had even earmarked the terminus building in the town

Tones | 14.12.16 - 10:56 a.m. | #

Something re the campaign to "save" the existing Metropolitan terminus: here.

Presumably the commercial imperative to develop the land around the hospital and the football stadium - much needed executive flats and car parking, no doubt - will mean the allotments will go anyway, whether or not the Underground link goes ahead on time.

Andrew | 14.12.16 - 11:04 a.m. | #

"I think they had even earmarked the terminus building in the town "

It's still there, at 44 High Street.

timbo | 14.12.16 - 11:21 a.m. | #

Having seen all that work that has been done it would be a colossal waste of money if it did not go ahead.

Jon Combe | 14.12.16 - 1:20 p.m. | #

@Jon Combe

The "sunk cost" fallacy. Circumstances change, or there may be a reassessment of what is value for money.
Abandoned projects may have been a colossal waste of money, but you are just wasting more of the stuff by throwing bad money after good if you can't justify any future expenditure solely on its own merits.

timbo | 14.12.16 - 2:27 p.m. | #

I thought the term for residents of Watford was Watonians?

If the CRL/MLE/MLX doesn't go ahead, then the economic hit of that will decrease the project's expected yield and they will have to cram in even more housing to make up the shortfall. Or the hospital will see it's "right to have a new clinical facility" evaporate, because you can bet it isn't the commercial part of the development consortium that'll take the hit.

Uncle Audrey | 14.12.16 - 2:30 p.m. | #

(several comments about the financial and political viability of the project have been transferred to yesterday's post)

diamond geezer | Homepage | 14.12.16 - 5:12 p.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy