Residents form group to fight proposals for homes behind memorial garden

Rosalind Oakley (front left) and Glenda Leney (front right) with some members of the group

Rosalind Oakley (front left) and Glenda Leney (front right) with some members of the group

First published in Local News

Residents have vowed to fight developers who want to build behind a memorial garden.

An outline planning application for up to 67 homes on green land to the rear of London Road, Maldon, has been submitted to Maldon District Council on behalf of Linden, and six charities which own the land.

The site is behind the Leech Memorial Garden, which was left to the town in the wills of two sisters, Edna and Joan Leech, who died in a plane crash in 1974 so that “visitors could enjoy its beauty and tranquillity.”

Local residents have joined together with the Friends of Leeches Garden group to form the Leech Garden, Beacon Hill, Maldon Hall Farm and Cemetery Group as they fear it will not only destroy the peace and quiet of the gardens but that it will impact on the view and historical aspect of the location, which has views towards Beeleigh Weir.

Rosalind Oakley, of Bower Gardens, Maldon, said: “It’s not about ‘not in my backyard’ it’s about protecting it for future generations and defending our landscapes."

A full planning application is yet to be submitted.

A spokesman for the charities, said: “The charities involved take any concerns from local residents seriously.”

Comments (10)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:20am Wed 6 Aug 14

Jack222 says...

Build.

WE need the houses;.
Build. WE need the houses;. Jack222
  • Score: 1

12:07pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Dengie D says...

Is nothing sacred to these profit hungry developers or MDC
Is nothing sacred to these profit hungry developers or MDC Dengie D
  • Score: 0

7:29pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Regbluebottle says...

I'm all for building new houses in the District, but this really is an inappropriate place for development. I'm firmly an anti-NIMBY but these sisters gave Leeches' Garden to the town and protecting it as such.
I'm all for building new houses in the District, but this really is an inappropriate place for development. I'm firmly an anti-NIMBY but these sisters gave Leeches' Garden to the town and protecting it as such. Regbluebottle
  • Score: 3

12:22pm Thu 7 Aug 14

maldonlife says...

The sisters generously gave the Gardens to the Town and the site to the Charities for them to raise money. The charities will benefit from the sale of the land and we desparately need more housing in Maldon.
The sisters generously gave the Gardens to the Town and the site to the Charities for them to raise money. The charities will benefit from the sale of the land and we desparately need more housing in Maldon. maldonlife
  • Score: -1

11:36am Fri 8 Aug 14

Hawthorne says...

maldonlife wrote:
The sisters generously gave the Gardens to the Town and the site to the Charities for them to raise money. The charities will benefit from the sale of the land and we desparately need more housing in Maldon.
Well a least one person has read and understood the article. The Gardens are not subject to the development plans. The field behind the gardens is. It was given to the charities so that at the appropriate time they could sell it for development to raise funds. It's not doing them any good just sitting on their books is it?
[quote][p][bold]maldonlife[/bold] wrote: The sisters generously gave the Gardens to the Town and the site to the Charities for them to raise money. The charities will benefit from the sale of the land and we desparately need more housing in Maldon.[/p][/quote]Well a least one person has read and understood the article. The Gardens are not subject to the development plans. The field behind the gardens is. It was given to the charities so that at the appropriate time they could sell it for development to raise funds. It's not doing them any good just sitting on their books is it? Hawthorne
  • Score: 0

12:19pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Dengie D says...

Hawthorne even by your standards this should be blatantly obvious, however I'll spell it out for you....

The proposed new housing estate (featuring 67!) houses will mar the peace and quiet of the gardens. (You do realise people will be living in these 67 houses don't you?) Now with that fact in mind remind yourself of the reason the Leech sisters left the gardens to the town.

"so that visitors could enjoy its beauty and tranquillity"

It’s an insult to a kind and generous legacy
Hawthorne even by your standards this should be blatantly obvious, however I'll spell it out for you.... The proposed new housing estate (featuring 67!) houses will mar the peace and quiet of the gardens. (You do realise people will be living in these 67 houses don't you?) Now with that fact in mind remind yourself of the reason the Leech sisters left the gardens to the town. "so that visitors could enjoy its beauty and tranquillity" It’s an insult to a kind and generous legacy Dengie D
  • Score: 1

12:28pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Hawthorne says...

Dengie D wrote:
Hawthorne even by your standards this should be blatantly obvious, however I'll spell it out for you....

The proposed new housing estate (featuring 67!) houses will mar the peace and quiet of the gardens. (You do realise people will be living in these 67 houses don't you?) Now with that fact in mind remind yourself of the reason the Leech sisters left the gardens to the town.

"so that visitors could enjoy its beauty and tranquillity"

It’s an insult to a kind and generous legacy
You're ignoring the fact that the other field was left to a number of charities. How do you think that those charities are going to benefit from that legacy? Do you not think that the sisters had it in mind that the land would be sold / developed for the charities benefit? Or did you think they would be happy just to have a nice little field?
Also I think in general if you have to insult to make your point, you've lost the argument.
[quote][p][bold]Dengie D[/bold] wrote: Hawthorne even by your standards this should be blatantly obvious, however I'll spell it out for you.... The proposed new housing estate (featuring 67!) houses will mar the peace and quiet of the gardens. (You do realise people will be living in these 67 houses don't you?) Now with that fact in mind remind yourself of the reason the Leech sisters left the gardens to the town. "so that visitors could enjoy its beauty and tranquillity" It’s an insult to a kind and generous legacy[/p][/quote]You're ignoring the fact that the other field was left to a number of charities. How do you think that those charities are going to benefit from that legacy? Do you not think that the sisters had it in mind that the land would be sold / developed for the charities benefit? Or did you think they would be happy just to have a nice little field? Also I think in general if you have to insult to make your point, you've lost the argument. Hawthorne
  • Score: 0

8:45pm Fri 8 Aug 14

An alternative view says...

Hawthorne wrote:
Dengie D wrote:
Hawthorne even by your standards this should be blatantly obvious, however I'll spell it out for you....

The proposed new housing estate (featuring 67!) houses will mar the peace and quiet of the gardens. (You do realise people will be living in these 67 houses don't you?) Now with that fact in mind remind yourself of the reason the Leech sisters left the gardens to the town.

"so that visitors could enjoy its beauty and tranquillity"

It’s an insult to a kind and generous legacy
You're ignoring the fact that the other field was left to a number of charities. How do you think that those charities are going to benefit from that legacy? Do you not think that the sisters had it in mind that the land would be sold / developed for the charities benefit? Or did you think they would be happy just to have a nice little field?
Also I think in general if you have to insult to make your point, you've lost the argument.
"Also I think in general if you have to insult to make your point, you've lost the argument."

Hear hear
[quote][p][bold]Hawthorne[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dengie D[/bold] wrote: Hawthorne even by your standards this should be blatantly obvious, however I'll spell it out for you.... The proposed new housing estate (featuring 67!) houses will mar the peace and quiet of the gardens. (You do realise people will be living in these 67 houses don't you?) Now with that fact in mind remind yourself of the reason the Leech sisters left the gardens to the town. "so that visitors could enjoy its beauty and tranquillity" It’s an insult to a kind and generous legacy[/p][/quote]You're ignoring the fact that the other field was left to a number of charities. How do you think that those charities are going to benefit from that legacy? Do you not think that the sisters had it in mind that the land would be sold / developed for the charities benefit? Or did you think they would be happy just to have a nice little field? Also I think in general if you have to insult to make your point, you've lost the argument.[/p][/quote]"Also I think in general if you have to insult to make your point, you've lost the argument." Hear hear An alternative view
  • Score: 1

10:37pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Dengie D says...

I didn't insult anyone, I simply drew attention to your poor level of comprehension....and btw if a situation arose where a person did insult another, the insulted person doesn't somehow win by default

Have you got to grips with the impact the 67 homes will have on the peace and tranquility of the garden?......It's rather fundamental to the story.
I didn't insult anyone, I simply drew attention to your poor level of comprehension....and btw if a situation arose where a person did insult another, the insulted person doesn't somehow win by default Have you got to grips with the impact the 67 homes will have on the peace and tranquility of the garden?......It's rather fundamental to the story. Dengie D
  • Score: -2

11:06pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Hawthorne says...

Dengie D wrote:
I didn't insult anyone, I simply drew attention to your poor level of comprehension....and btw if a situation arose where a person did insult another, the insulted person doesn't somehow win by default

Have you got to grips with the impact the 67 homes will have on the peace and tranquility of the garden?......It's rather fundamental to the story.
Have you got to grips with the fact that the sisters made two bequests and not one? One of which was to benefit certain charities? You seem to be very keen on blocking the wishes of the sisters in one regard... So much for your support of their "kind and generous legacy".
[quote][p][bold]Dengie D[/bold] wrote: I didn't insult anyone, I simply drew attention to your poor level of comprehension....and btw if a situation arose where a person did insult another, the insulted person doesn't somehow win by default Have you got to grips with the impact the 67 homes will have on the peace and tranquility of the garden?......It's rather fundamental to the story.[/p][/quote]Have you got to grips with the fact that the sisters made two bequests and not one? One of which was to benefit certain charities? You seem to be very keen on blocking the wishes of the sisters in one regard... So much for your support of their "kind and generous legacy". Hawthorne
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree