Horrified by car park ‘monstrosity’

■ Green waste charges will increase pollution and congestion. Despite the wishful thinking of Conservative councillors, home composting is not a solution for everyone. When, as predicted by the council, over half of those currently using green bins fail to sign up for the new paid-for service, what will they do with their garden waste?

From discussions that I have had with residents, some will compost, some will have bonfires, but the majority would sooner drive it to the household waste site.

There are nearly 60,000 garden waste bins being used at present. If just 10% decide to drive to the tip instead of having a fortnightly collection, then that is 12,000 extra car journeys a month.

The Conservatives tell us that less garden waste recycled is good for the environment as it means less journeys by refuse trucks. Yet the trucks still have to drive up every road, even if half of the residents no longer recycle garden waste. The additional car journeys will be many times worse for the district’s air pollution than any small reduction in waste truck journeys.

This financially-driven policy is a giant environmental backward step and when this council shows its true colours, green isn’t one of them.

Cllr Mike Sole

Church Lane, Kingston

■ After a very pugnacious article about the prospect of the city council charging for the clearance of garden waste, you ask what we think of the idea. Here’s the logical response.

Vote Conservative. Endorse a Conservative Party austerity budget. Applaud a Conservative county council and a Conservative district council’s meek acceptance of greatly reduced funding from a national Conservative Party policy. Accept garden waste disposal charges.

So vote, endorse, applaud, accept - and whistle a happy tune.

Tyler Hill, Canterbury

I cannot think that I am alone in being horrified at the visual impact of the large brown monstrosity that has recently risen from the ground along Station Road West.

The reality is that the new building that now dominates the road is by a large margin even uglier than I imagined it would be when I registered my objection to the planning application.

I feel for the residents there who have to look at it day after day whilst they rue the loss of all of the lovely trees that used to grace the area.

And I wonder how visitors arriving in our city will react?

Full of happy expectation as they alight from the train at the prospect of a day spent in a city with a rich cultural heritage and World Heritage Status designation, only to come face to face with our own blot on the landscape. By the time they reach St Dunstan’s their spirits will have been well and truly dampened, which is a great shame and something our traders and visitor attractions don’t deserve.

Indeed it is so awful that even some of the visually challenging new purpose-built student accommodation blocks almost (but not quite) pale into insignificance.

Thank goodness for the Canterbury Society’s Design awards, the work of the Canterbury Heritage Design forum and examples of good practice such as the Debenhams development to justify the belief that new buildings can be beautiful as well as functionally fit for purpose.

Ever the optimist, I believe that in 15 years’ time, and after considerable loss of council tax payers’ money, the building will be declared by a more enlightened city council to be redundant and the demolition team called in.

I would propose a lottery for the privilege to be first with the wrecker’s ball - proceeds to go towards the planting of replacement trees and new hedges.

Cowdrey Place, Canterbury