The King’s School debate continues

ilovemacc reader Sue Whitham comments on the ongoing King’s School redevelopment debate.

Once again, Cheshire East councillors are listening to concerns about the development proposed for this Iconic Site. Decision deferred again! Well done! This site, which is well- known to all Maxonians peering through the Memorial Gates of the ( former) school,  does not deserve the insensitive treatment still being put forward. 

Number of units, style of new- builds, paucity of parking spaces, drastic reduction of the green space, provision of affordable units, demolition of the Cricket Pavilion……. all these issues are not adequately addressed by the developers.

I am particularly moved by the passionate defence of the War Memorial Cricket Pavilion. The current plans destine this modest building for the wrecking ball. This notion, evidently supported by the School as well as the developers, is completely and morally wrong, as has been said many times.

This striking building, which exactly complements the school’s well- known facade, stands in the way of access, and the proposal is to remove it and build a couple of expensive detached houses in questionable style. This is scandalous, shameful and so obviously money- grubbing that nobody can fail to see the plot!

It should be repurposed as a bijou dwelling. Best on the whole site!  Many “historic site” developments retain small buildings such as gardeners’ cottages, hospital laundries and so on, to give “character”. That would work very well here.

That a War Memorial should be wilfully abandoned by those who had previously cared for it beggars belief. 

Contrast the removal by Royal London Insurance of their War Memorial, a most graceful Guardian Angel, from their former Wilmslow Offices to pride of place at the very entrance to their new offices in Alderley Park! I wrote to commend their action, and they replied their Values could not allow them to abandon the Memorial! “Its place is with us. Where else could it be?”

Do we learn something about King’s values from this? Let the reader decide.

Sue Whitham