The Royal Mail’s 26-stamp, alphabetical journey around the UK concludes with the second part (M-Z) of its UK A-Z series and the launch of 14 new stamps, featuring iconic landmarks across all four countries. UK A-Z Part 2, issued on 10th April, celebrates some of the UK’s most famous tourist attractions. They range from the impressive Narrow Water Castle in Northern Ireland and the dramatic Urquhart castle in Scotland to the beautiful Portmeirion in Wales and our own Manchester Town Hall.

The First Class Manchester Town Hall

Manchester Town Hall was designed and built in 1877 by Alfred Waterhouse, and is the headquarters of Manchester City Council.

The original Manchester Town Hall was constructed between 1822-1825, but was quickly outgrown as Manchester enjoyed the boom years of its local textile industry.

Planning for a new town hall began in 1863, when the Manchester Corporation demanded a building ‘equal if not superior, to any similar building in the country at any cost, which may be reasonably required’. They were presented with a building in 1877 that is regarded to this day as one of the finest interpretations of neo-gothic architecture in the United Kingdom.

The town hall was granted Grade I Listed status in 1952.

Royal Mail has kindly let me offer you a complete set of the new set of 14 stamps of the UK A-Z Part 2 completely free.

Unfortunately there’s a small number of sets available.

To make this as fair as possible leave a comment here and I’ll put all comments into a draw. I’ll then ask the winners to email me their addresses and I’ll send off their set.

Happy commenting!

The Cornerhouse and Library Theatre move to First Street is not news.

However I noticed that Manchester City council have asked for expressions of interest about the design of a development in the Cultural Quarter of the city of Manchester. 

And of course the development is expected to include

• a multi storey car park
• retail/leisure units
• a hotel development
• a “major new public realm” including external performance space
• The bringing together of the “Library Theatre Company and Cornerhouse, to form a new cultural organisation”

So it’s expected that we’ll get up to five cinemas, some contemporary gallery spaces, a 500 seat theatre with smaller studio space and education spaces, a large café/open foyer.

The building is expected to be around 5,000 sq. m.

And interestingly the estimated contract end date is 31st May 2012.  Doesn’t give them long for construction if the Cornerhouse and Library Theatre are expected to relocate for 2014 does it?

Well, it’s a done deal. Heaton Park will have a new sports development.

Of the 3 councillors I contacted 1 replied immediately and one after they’d attended the planning meeting.

As to what they said…

Both councillors made the point that the development was part of the Restoration Masterplan for Heaton Park agreed by English Heritage and the Heritage Lottery Fund some 12 years ago. 

“This part of the park was designated as a Sports Zone in 1998, at the behest of English Heritage Lottery Fund as a condition of providing a substantial grant for renovation of the park to bring it back to its original condition. This included the removal of bowling greens and tennis courts from within the view of Heaton Hall, to be relocated to this site. The bowling greens were established there with a clukbhouse from funds for the Commonwealth Games and this latest application completes the promise to provide tennis courts again.”

One of them also noted that they’d visited Heaton Park for over 50 years and…

“would not tolerate any ‘eating up chunks of land’.  The Council are mindful of the prestige of the Park and indeed are the very ones who care for and look after the Park.  The Council would not tolerate any misuse of the land.”

As to the objections the councillors said,

“I have to tell you that I have received more comments in support of this application than opposed to it. Most of the objectors come from the Prestwich area of Bury, despite their own Council supporting the application on the grounds that they need increased facilities of this nature in their area.”

“For information, Planning only received 14 objections for Hr Blackley residents.”

Obviously, if people aren’t aware of how to complain that tends to reduce the number of objections. However, it’s perfectly clear that the time to object was in 1998 when the original agreement to renovate the park was made. Would we have objected then? I think the answer is probably not.

The only problem I see is whether my definition of “misuse” of the park would be same as the councillors.

So, let’s see what happens with the park and whether the councillors, and future councillors, follow the line they say they will.

Heaton park is still under threat as the Manchester Town Hall planning committee meet to rubber stamp the recommendation by the town planners to allow the go ahead of a sports complex at Heaton Park.

This is the continuing struggle of the council in what seems to be a concerted effort to use the green space they have stewardship for on the behalf of Manchester residents.

And to me stewardship doesn’t mean taking what belongs to me and then giving it back to me smaller than when I originally gave it to you.

It seems as though the council may be thinking of all the business rates they can get in from the complex, rather than the green lung that Heaton Park has always been for Manchester residents.

The council agreed to let flats be built within the Heaton Park perimeter a few years ago. OK there was already a building there, but it was low rise – not several floors to spoil the view. And recently of course there was a strong pressure to move King David’s school to the park.

Now the sports complex.

Is it any wonder that the Manchester residents, me included, really think that the council aren’t interested in maintaining the Heaton Park green space for current and future residents of Manchester?

Do you really believe that the sports complex is the only development that is going to be allowed in the park? What happens if it becomes successful? More football pitches, more parking, more food outlets needed?

What about future planning applications? They’ll have even more of a precedent to allow development to continue in Heaton Park. Does this mean Heaton Park would no longer be the largest municipal park in Europe? What then, it becomes the largest park in the UK? Further development and it becomes the largest park in North Manchester? All because the council was too short-sighted to see the future.

And why build the development on Heaton Park anyway?

There are massive numbers of brown field sites that could be used to put sport complexes on. May I suggest that the Manchester Town Hall Planning Committee seriously consider the importance of the park to the Blackley, Cheetham Hill, Crumpsall, Moston, Middleton, Prestwich and Whitefield communities and to all Manchester residents who currently come over for concerts and events and for just simply taking a lovely walk somewhere that seems to be outside Manchester while still being in reach.

If you want to make your voice heard email your councillors (see www.writetothem.com to find your Manchester councillor) and let them know your feelings.

If you can get out of work for a while there’s a meeting in front of Manchester Town Hall at 1:30pm and people are going to go into the planning meeting with a spokesman to put the pro-Heaton Park voice forward.

Heaton Park is still (probably) Europe’s biggest municipal park. I live near the main gates and obviously enjoy walks in the park with my children. Over the last few years there has been a lot of improvements carried out in the park.

However, there also seems to be an attempt by the council to eat away at the park.

They built two new car parks, one for the new children’s playground reached via the St Margaret’s entrance.

The other car park leads directly from Sheepfoot Lane.

There was also the idiotic idea that a school should be transferred into the park. Yes it’s land, but it’s not meant for development – it’s meant for all of Manchester’s people to use.

And now the council are building two pedestrian gates on the Bury Old Road side of the park. Presumably because of the Oasis concerts scheduled for 4th, 6th and 7th June this year.

It makes you wonder how we’ve coped with "only" having the gates we have at the moment, which to give them their due do seem to be able to cope with quite massive amounts of people.

For example, there are actually two large gates very close to the two new ones plus a smaller pedestrian one nearer to the Heaton Park metro station. And of course a little further down Sheepfoot Lan we’ve the gates to the new car park and another gate a little further down from there.

Obviously I’ve a vested interested in the park remaining undeveloped, that is as a park, because I live right next to it.

But more than that, I really believe this park is the jewel in the Manchester’s crown of greenery and to chip away at it is like chipping  away at a flawless cut diamond it devalues it’s use to future generations of Mancuions.

Hopefully, these gates are as far as the council are nibbling away at the park. However, I’m not holding my breath!

Well after all the money spent by the "Yes" and "No" camp we discover that really Manchester people don’t want to pay to go into Manchester.

Is that a surprise, or not?

And now what is the next step.

Given that the council (and us) really do need to have money spent on the transport infrastructure what do we do?

There is no Plan B at the moment, or so we’re told.

However, I suspect we’ll get a different congestion charging scheme that may, or may not be offered up in a referendum.

I suspect the reason the charge was rejected was that no one really believes what this government tells us they’re going to do. After all we could have accepted the congestion charge and still been left with a not particularly impressive transport system at the end of it if the government delayed the funding or even reduced it so that chunks of the scheme would have been removed or reduced in scale.

Rather like the original Metrolink Big Bang. Where suddenly funding we thought had been promised wasn’t after all. Do you remember that?

The Royal Mail has promised to go around all the post boxes in the voting areas and get all votes posted by the last post today and then deliver them for counting at 10pm tonight. So if you want to vote you can!

There seems to a lot of heat about the vote in the media but a lack of interest on the part of the those who will be affected.

Maybe that’s because people believe that the votes will keep coming until we vote the right way – "Yes." Certainly that’s what several people I’ve talked to have said.

How will the vote go?

It’s difficult to predict because of the apparent massive apathy and the equally passionate supporters on both sides of the argument.

In one of the letters in today’s Manchester Evening News I noticed that one (long) letter pointed out that small businesses would move out of Manchester. Workers would start at a time that allows them to go through after the charge period thus creating another congestion.

And the congestion charge supporters brightly point to the fact that the traffic infrastructure will be massively improved by the government money. A point I remain to be convinced by.

After all if there’s talk of delaying needed aircraft carriers what’s the likelihood of Manchester receiving all the promised money? Remember we were promised money for the Metrolink expansion by the "New" Labour  government who decided not to bother after all.

I still remain in two minds on the one very optimistic hand I want to believe that the money offered would improve the Metrolink to all areas, including the Trafford centre and Manchester Airport.

On the other hand I remember the broken promises of bus deregulation, of other transport initiatives and of the downright lack of belief in the truth of a politician’s promise.

Good luck Manchester, how ever it goes!

This post is well overdue as the Quacky Races I’m talking about were over a couple of weeks ago when Manchester was basking in unusually clement and sunny weather. The event was held at Clayton Vale a pleasantly landscaped and reclaimed council rubbish tip from decades ago.

The Friends of Clayton Vale had organised a duck race, with side shows and the opportunity to pig out in the cafe.

Myself and assorted daughters turned up and put our names down for the first ducks. We then retired to the assault course to see how quickly the three of them could run down a bench, hop through tyres, scoot under a giant crawling net, leap through a converted wheelie bin and arrive breathless at the finish.

The course became a must go to for almost every child that came to watch their duck get trounced by the eventual winner, who I’m sure had an outboard motor under one wing as he was so far in front of his rivals.

You may have guessed that our own ducks failed to make the grade and didn’t even get a place. Still we all had a great time and there were a bunch of people there who were obviously enjoying themselves making sure to encourage their ducks with loud quacks and cheers.

As well as the vital cafe and sweetie shop there were also simple fairground games that were manned by volunteers and where everyone seemed to win something.

All in all it was a very pleasant way to spend a sunny and warm Thursday.

And anyway, I’ve stopped brooding on our loss at the Quacky races this year.

I’m looking forward to the re-match next year. Does anyone know where I can get a professional yellow duck as a ringer?

Technorati tags: Manchester, Manchester Leisure, Quacky Races, Friends of Clayton Vale

del.icio.us tags: Manchester, Manchester Leisure, Quacky Races, Friends of Clayton Vale

IceRocket tags: Manchester, Manchester Leisure, Quacky Races, Friends of Clayton Vale

LiveJournal tags: Manchester, Manchester Leisure, Quacky Races, Friends of Clayton Vale

A private company has a remit, given by Manchester City Council, to provide fun for the Manchester public. Part of what this company does is to put on days when they provide things like, say, a bouncy castle, some face paint artists, a sports coach or two at one of the municipal parks.

As you know almost every municipal park has a bunch of Friends who are volunteers who help to make events like these, and their own, accessible to their local communities.

So it would make sense for this private company to contact the Friends of the parks they plan to hold events at to co-ordinate with them wouldn’t it?

For two reasons:

1. So they don’t have events that clash!
2. So the Friends can help them publicise the event

Well funnily enough I was speaking to a Friend who’d not been “officially” told about these events but heard about it and turned up to offer assistance. When they got there they found a number of people ready to educate and entertain the children. Unfortunately nobody had advertised the event. That meant money had been spent hiring a bouncy castle, hiring sports coaches and everyone else to sit around bored whilst children (who were on holiday) swanned around the streets unaware of the fabulous time that had been arranged for them.

The company running this event, or non-event, doesn’t lose out as the Council still pays them. The Council doesn’t lose out as they’ve allocated money to pay for the entertainment from the budget set-up to do that. There are two groups who lose out: the council tax payers and the children.

Council tax payers because money was spent to no good purpose, money that could have been used more effectively.

The children because they would have enjoyed the entertainment laid on.

The questions I have are these:

1. This was only one park, if the same happens at every park aren’t the company and the council wasting shed-loads of our money?
2. Do the council check number of attendees?
3. If the council checks numbers of attendees do they compare them to events run by each parks Friends?
4. If the attendee numbers are lower do they ask why?
5. Does the council just give money to the private company or does it tie part of the money to performance?

At the moment it sounds as though this company is running events and the taxpayer is simply subsiding the company’s employees to sit around having idle chats with the people they’ve employed.

And it may only be one way of losing our council tax money, but if that’s the way it’s looked at there could be hundreds of little ways of losing or wasting money that people don’t even consider.

LiveJournal tags: Manchester City Council, Manchester Rates Payers, Manchester Council Tax Spending

Technorati tags: Manchester City Council, Manchester Rates Payers, Manchester Council Tax Spending

del.icio.us tags: Manchester City Council, Manchester Rates Payers, Manchester Council Tax Spending

IceRocket tags: Manchester City Council, Manchester Rates Payers, Manchester Council Tax Spending