Residents in losing battle to save fountain amid 'eyesore' claims

The 'lilypad fountain' will be bulldozed as part of Nuneaton's regeneration



Nuneaton town centre's iconic 'lilypad fountain' will be demolished despite major opposition to the plans. Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council is still forging ahead with plans to use £40,000 of government cash to remove the fountain in Market Place due to what it claims to be anti-social behaviour, vandals and druggies.

It is a decision that has split opinion in the borough with some in favour while others vehemently oppose it and petitions have been set up to save it. At a full council meeting, the differing opinions were evident with a number of public questions submitted.

Sharon Isolen wrote: "I live in one of the flats nearby the thankfully soon-to-be demolished fountain. When it works and is cleared, it looks nice for all of a week and then it looks like human waste, smells of urine and beer.

"I will be glad when its gone. The seating area is used by various people, some disabled and families that is true, I often walk past it on my way home and see the junkies and alkies use it and people don't sit near them apart from one group

"Not only that but I've often overheard the local tea leaves talking about what shop they're going to rob next or already have. No group has come to ask residents in the town what we think apart from the current council, I don't even think other groups have asked nearby shops."

Brian Walmsley submitted a written statement in which he suggested claims made by the council about why the fountain needs to be demolished are a 'fallacy'. He said that his own Freedom of Information Act request to Warwickshire Police in regards to incidents of anti-social behaviour of 'concern' at the fountain over five years, revealed just five calls.

He added that claims the fountain is a magnet for ASB are unfounded and served as a 'pathetic cover story' to get rid of the feature. Eunice Wormald branded as 'non existent' claims the fountain must be removed to make it easier for those with mobility issues.

Councillor Sam Croft, cabinet member for finance, answered some of the questions and said that the removal of the fountain was a small part of the plans to regenerate the town centre. "It is a brutalist, concrete eyesore that is currently taking up space in what should be an attractive central market square," he said.

"It's a hangover from the era when concrete was king. It is frequently vandalised and dirty and once we have used government grants to demolish it, I’m pleased that we will never again have to use council tax money for repairs and cleaning.

"Removing it, not only removes an eyesore that detracts from the heritage environment, but will open up a central plaza to allow us to have more space for events, markets, and outdoor dining.

In regards to the question about space for mobility, he said: "It's not been suggested there is no disabled access whatsoever around the fountain. However, it is very much the case that the fountain is a bottleneck for pedestrians, and opening up the space will ease the flow of people, for example, on market days or when large scale events are held such as the Christmas lights switch on."

He rubbished claims made by Mr Walmsley that the area is not a magnet for trouble and said the Nuneaton Central and Abbey areas have the highest amount of anti-social behaviour in Warwickshire "This is an extremely difficult problem, and we all need to play our part, including the police," he added.

"One of the ways that this council can help is to design out trouble spots, and remove focal points where potential troublemakers can congregate. What we need to do, and we will do, is support forces of law and order.

"Mr Walmsley’s answer is to insist that crime and disorder is not happening. I am sure people will make the right judgement on that. We will carry on with our plans for regenerating our towns, rebuilding our communities, and serving the people of this borough."

Council responds to restaurant rumour over Nuneaton's landmark lilypad fountain removal



Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council's leader has responded to rumours that the landmark lilypad fountain was removed to make way for a new restaurant. The issue over the demolition of the water feature continues to court controversy.

After a mini-protest was held to try to stop the diggers from starting on Monday, work has been taking place all week to remove the feature from Market Place. Rumours have surfaced that the reason why the council has removed the water feature, which has been a focal point in town since the early 80s, is because a restaurant wants to move into the former bank building behind it.

CoventryLive put this suggestion to the Town Hall and, in a statement, Council leader councillor Kris Wilson has criticised the 'in the know' keyboard warriors. He went on to say that there will be a new seating installed and 'much more flexibility' in that area.

“We are working hard to regenerate our town centres and make them great places to visit," the statement read. "It is good to see work going on that will change Nuneaton town centre for the better. I have heard all kinds of rumours about this work – many of which have been spread by so-called ‘in-the-know’ keyboard warriors online. But let’s be clear.

"Removing the fountain will help support our aim of providing more space for town centre events, improve the way people can move around the centre of town and reduce anti-social behaviour. Having spoken to town centre traders, I know they are pleased to see improvements being made. There will be some seating to replace what is being removed, but most of all we will have much more flexibility in that area once work is complete.

"We cannot continue to live in the past and idolise it with rose-tinted glasses. I am looking forward to seeing this work completed and another step towards our vision of a Nuneaton that has been transformed and fit for the future.”

The cost of the removal of the fountain, around £40,000, has been a source of contention. The council has used some of the £4,028,173 given from the government's UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) to pay for it. This cannot be used be used as part of the normal budget but there have been sections of the community who claim that this money could have been spent on something else.