This story begins with a moral. "Don't buy at auctions unless you're really sure you are getting a good price for something that you not only want, but can also use".
Don't pay over the odds for an unremarkable bit of land you can only cheaply get to down a tiny cobbled lane, for example.
As of the end of February (and after a huge public outcry), the developers' construction methodology statement has been rejected. They have the right to appeal, but we doubt that can make any difference. For the latest, keep checking back from time to time - we have an RSS feed.
For those of you who want to read the history, its below (and elsewhere at the site). For now, we're safe, but these things have a nasty habit of changing...
Pre-History
And so our story begins. And ends. Three planning applications, one appeal and three (or is it four?) attempts at providing an adequate 'Construction Methodology Statement' later, here we are, about to find out "In October" according to a letter we read in The Times (not one sent to the people who live here, but that's another story) if the street is to be forever changed and the lives, not only of the people who live in it, but also those of the tens of thousands who use the road it spurs off, will be profoundly and unnecessarily disrupted. For years. Four years.
What was that moral all about? Oh, yes. If only someone had looked, they'd have realised that it isn't possible to do what is being asked down such a tiny road as this. Nothing personal. Its just silly and a great number of people have committed themsevles to proving that in the hope that it can be made to go away.
Please look around the site and then act - everything is in 'What can you do?' - the last red link on the left.