Craig
TS Administrator
Whilst that reel does show a rural location, we've got to remember the site itself is HUGE:
We can see the village of Stewartby poking out at the south of the site, Wixams to the east and Wootton to the west. The land around there is very flat, so I don't think it's possible to say there's no issue with views once higher structures in the area are built, but considering the existing warehouses in the area I don't think it's one that's too difficult to get past. But, I do still think the main issue is that there'll be questions to answer in regards to increased traffic for residents, particularly at opening and closing times. That goes for the surrounding businesses in the area too.
They are however more easily overcome than say the London Resort site. The surrounding major roads leading into that area were already hideously overcapacity, even during off peak times. I never saw how that could be easily sorted, even when taking into consideration the third Thames crossing (also hideously delayed) in the area and the daft plans for boats from a park and ride site and to/from Central London.
In Bedford there's plenty of high capacity major roads in the vicinity which will probably also require some changes, but the roads on approach to the site will almost certainly need substantially upgrading to ensure the surrounding businesses and villages are not affected. A much easier job than mucking about with the A282 and the M25! We've also got the previously mentioned train stations, not to mention lots of land that's not separated by a massive river for remote park and ride sites - or even utilising the railway stations to ferry guests from further down/up the line.
As for why London Resort went for their location down south, the answer is probably a complete naivety for the project from the outset. A new operator, a local link to the area and wanting to go for the "prestige" of being "in London" seemed to trump common sense and the many, many valid questions that were asked about the practicalities of the location from the outset.
Back to Universal UK, and I don't think planning permission will be a walk in the park that some believe. But it's a much more realistic prospect and do believe they'd eventually get it versus what London Resort were trying to do.
We can see the village of Stewartby poking out at the south of the site, Wixams to the east and Wootton to the west. The land around there is very flat, so I don't think it's possible to say there's no issue with views once higher structures in the area are built, but considering the existing warehouses in the area I don't think it's one that's too difficult to get past. But, I do still think the main issue is that there'll be questions to answer in regards to increased traffic for residents, particularly at opening and closing times. That goes for the surrounding businesses in the area too.
They are however more easily overcome than say the London Resort site. The surrounding major roads leading into that area were already hideously overcapacity, even during off peak times. I never saw how that could be easily sorted, even when taking into consideration the third Thames crossing (also hideously delayed) in the area and the daft plans for boats from a park and ride site and to/from Central London.
In Bedford there's plenty of high capacity major roads in the vicinity which will probably also require some changes, but the roads on approach to the site will almost certainly need substantially upgrading to ensure the surrounding businesses and villages are not affected. A much easier job than mucking about with the A282 and the M25! We've also got the previously mentioned train stations, not to mention lots of land that's not separated by a massive river for remote park and ride sites - or even utilising the railway stations to ferry guests from further down/up the line.
As for why London Resort went for their location down south, the answer is probably a complete naivety for the project from the outset. A new operator, a local link to the area and wanting to go for the "prestige" of being "in London" seemed to trump common sense and the many, many valid questions that were asked about the practicalities of the location from the outset.
Back to Universal UK, and I don't think planning permission will be a walk in the park that some believe. But it's a much more realistic prospect and do believe they'd eventually get it versus what London Resort were trying to do.
Last edited:
