BOB'S COMMENT SUBMISSION
UPDATE 08JAN24:
Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) agree to host a resident meeting Monday 15 Jan 2024 Youth Club at 7pm,
This meeting is a direct result of the comments made by residents at the Annual Parish (Resident's) Meeting in April 23. In May 23 BPC noted,
"Concern was raised about North Somerset Local Plan Policy in relation to solar panels and wind turbines on agricultural land and its impact on farming. Suggestion that a Parish Meeting is held for the next Local Plan Consultation for the Parish Councillors to hear residents’ views." (Min 364.10) The place and time for this meeting were finalised by BPC at their meeting on Monday (Min 373.5). (NB It is an official resident's meeting hosted/chaired by the parish council)
Please support your rural community and post comments on North Somerset Council’s (NSC) proposed Local Plan 2039 by 22 January 2024 here, especially Section 5 Countryside policy DP53 (See letter to Town & Parish Councils and presentation to NSC Executirve Committee)
NB: North Somerset Council state,
"At the close of this consultation period the council will summarise the main issues raised by the representations and submit that summary to the Secretary of State. If the representations raise matters which would suggest changes should be made to the Local Plan before the document is submitted the council will consider the appropriate way to proceed. The examination is expected to take place in summer 2024. This will be followed by the report of the inspector. If the document is found to be ‘sound’ by the inspector it is expected that the Local Plan will be adopted by the council in December 2024 at the earliest... The right to appear or be heard at the examination is limited to those persons who make representations seeking a change to the plan at this stage” (See Local Plan p2 & p10)
NSC Local Plan Guide (PDF) states that, “this consultation is a bit different to the previous three consultation stages in that the Government asks you to consider (Planning and Country Planning Act 2004 s20 as amended) whether the Local Plan policies are:
Compliant - does the plan meet the legal requirements made under various statutes?Sound - has the plan been positively prepared, is it justified, effective, and consistent with national policy? Meet the Duty to Cooperate - has the council engaged and worked effectively with neighbouring authorities and statutory bodies? This means that specifically, we (NSC) are asking people to consider whether the policies and proposals in the Plan meet any of these tests when making a comment.”ConsultationOpensClosesInformationNorth Somerset Local Plan 2039 Pre-Submission Plan (Reg 19)
27 Nov 2322 Jan 24 at 5pm"Representations made at this stage will be submitted to the Planning Inspector appointed to oversee the examination and will be made public"
Local Plan 2030 Pre-Submission Document (300 page PDF) & 53 supporting documents
NSC Current Interactive Local Plan Policies Map
NB: Previous 'Renewable Search Areas' of Local Plan Solar and wind mapping has been removed?
Agriculture Land Classifications vs NSC Local Plan solar, wind, housing, etc. proposals on that landAgriculture Land Classifications in current Solar PV SPD 2013 p34. See also NSC GI Strategy Fig16
Solar, housing, etc. Local Plan 2038 mapping . compared to no current Local Plan 2039 mapping?
Not all farmers are land owners. Those that are not landowners depend on their landlords to continually extend their leases, so that they can continue to farm. The actual land owners could live in the community, another part of the country, even abroad, using the land for investment purposes (e.g. in 2018 Bristol Airport was majority majority owned by Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Canada!)
NSC and TOWN & PARISH LOCAL PLAN CORRESPONDENCEDATETOPIC19DEC23 &
06DEC23
Presentation at NSC Executive Committee Regarding concerns over Farming, Food Production and Food Security30NOV23 incl Farm Video
NSC Transport, Climate and Communities Policy and Scrutiny Panel27NOV23
Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) SPD Consultation responsebio17NOV23
Draft Rural Strategy Considerations (still unpublished by NSC, draft due end of Jan 24)APR22
Previous BOB Local Plan presentation and April 2022 Consultation submissionsHOW IS NSC AND ITS POLICIES STRATEGICALLY ASSESSING AND PROTECTING FOOD PRODUCTION AND FOOD SECURITY IN NORTH SOMERSET?
Why is farming, food production and food security NOT a NSC Corporate Plan priority or 'ambition'? (See NSC Corporate Action Plan Land Use and related blog)DEFRA Agriculture in the UK Evidence Pack September 2022 update (PDF)
"20% of England’s sheep herd is in the South West39% of England’s dairy herd is farmed in the South West.The West Midlands has the smallest average farm size compared to the average for England, closely followed by the South West [so if small farms are encouraged to diversify e.g. solar, BNG, nature recovery, housing, etc. food production and security will be affected]In 2020, after deductions for wages, rent, interest and asset depreciation and taking subsidy contributions into account, the total income from farming in England was £3.6bn, with the South West contributing the most (19%) and the North East the least (4%).Since 1988, the amount of food consumed in the UK of UK origin has fallen from 66% to 58% and the amount of food consumed of EU origin has risen from 18% to 23% over the same period. However, food of UK origin rose 4% and food from EU origin decreased 5% in 2021 compared to 2020.."Farming and environment evidence packs - latest editions(p177) Policy DP43: housing (including rural exception schemes)
"Developments will be expected to provide 38.5% affordable housing on greenfield sites and 20% on previously developed land.." How will food production land be protected?NSC defintion "Sustainable development: Development which meets the needs of the present generation, without compromising the needs of future generations to meet their own needs." (Glossary) NSC policies need to protect the future of farming, food production and securtiy for future generations.
(Page 98) Local Plan Policy DP7 Large scale renewable and low carbon renewable energy
NSC definition "Renewable energy: Energy generated from the sun, the wind, water and plant material (biomass).""Proposals for energy generation from renewable and low carbon sources including wind turbines, solar photovoltaic arrays, biomass and hydropower (marine, river and tidal) schemes will be supported subject to no unacceptable impact on: (a variety of caveats including) ..."Infrastructure assets including power lines, roads, rail and aircraft safety." Food is one of the government's 13 Critical Infrastructure Sectors, NSC's policies do not appear to reflect this status, however, "On greenfield sites, all proposals should seek to support continued agricultural use and biodiversity improvements" "Proposals for biomass/bioenergy developments will be approved provided they are of a scale and type which is appropriate to the location" "NSC definition "Bioenergy: Energy that is made from biomass or biofuel. Biomass: Organic material of biological origin (plant or animal), used as fuel to produce electricity of heat. This will include wood, energy crops or animal waste from farms." (Glossary) Biomass/Bioenergy production should not replace food production for people and animals."North Somerset Wind Energy and Solar PV Supplementary Planning Documents will be updated to highlight potential locations identified as most technically suitable areas for renewable energy schemes from the Renewable Energy Resource Assessment Study (2021)."NSC Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Arrays SPD 2013 pg32 image pg34 image and Wind Turbines 2014. How are ethical and environmental issues to be addressed e.g. production (mining slave and child labour/health & safety, use of coal powered stations, etc.), shippping (carbon miles), decommissioning (landfill & other environmental issues) Where are these updated documents published? Why are these important documents not updated and referenced during this consultation? Are these SupplementIary Planning Documents(SPD) the same as the published 'Landscape Sensitivity Assessment Solar PV and Wind Energy' Document?NB Independent analysis of the carbon emissions associated with new nuclear plants have demonstrated they have smaller lifetime greenhouse gas footprint than that created by solar power and about the sam"e as wind power. It also operates 24/7, not just in the daytime or on sunny or windy days." (EDF and IPCC)"The SPD will also provide guidance in relation to the Landscape Sensitivity Assessment (2021), which assessed the landscape sensitivity of different parts of North Somerset in relation to solar PV and wind turbine development." Current version in consultation is Landscape Sensitivity Assessment Solar PV and wind energy development NOV 23,
C.67 "LCA G1 has a lower landscape sensitivity to solar PV developments as it has a greater sense of visual enclosure provided by the gently undulating landform and surrounding woodland and mature hedgerow boundaries."C.68 "LCA G2 has a slightly higher sensitivity to solar PV developments due to its more open character with low hedgerows, and the high frequency of seminatural habitats and historic features..."(pg 140)"For some uses it may be possible to return the land to productive agricultural use without any loss of quality, should the proposed use no longer be required. For example, solar farms or similar. Suitable measures will be put in place to ensure this could be achieved."What suitable measures can be put in place?(See mega solar developments in Langford)
(p204) NSC Local Plan DP53 Best & Most versatile land states,
"The proportion of Grade 1 land in North Somerset is approximately 7% and 10% for Grade 2. 60% falls in Grade 3..." How much of this land is already in use as food production for people and animals, regardless of whether it is 3a or 3b, the latter seemingly a target for solar, housing, nature recovery, BNG, etc.? Note that the 3b land classification is said to be ‘moderate quality agriculture land’, not poor or useless, and has a role in current farming (See Langford Mega-Solar Development on grades 3b and 4 agriculture land) and mega-solar project maps on BOB. No mention of 3b or quantification of the area of land involved?(p205) Local Plan DP54 Rural Workers Housing
"Farmers are encouraged to diversify their activities and supplement their income from enterprises other than normal food production." What is being done to protect or 'offset' the land for the existing food production and food security? What is NSC doing to improve this locally?(p91) Policy DP5 Climate change adaptation and resilience
"Protect spaces for local food production and market gardening including allotments, tree planting, community orchards, community gardens and identify opportunities for community composting""A Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) will be prepared to set out the detail for how these policy requirements will be implemented."Where is the detail of this document? Will it include protecting farming?(p93) Local Plan DP6 Net Zero Construction READ THIS POLICY IN DETAIL
SEE GOVERNMENT ENERGY BILL - "...under this new legislation, those who fail to adhere to energy consumption regulations could face imprisonment for up to a yearand fines of up to £15,000"
Good God! Is Britain really going to jail people who disagree with net zero?
"... getting design right from the outset is much more cost effective than needing to retrofit later. The report recommends a space heating demand of 15-20kWh/m²/year by 2025 at the latest. ...guidance on meeting net zero recommends a maximum total energy use of 35 kWh/m²/year" What if you use more?"Renewable Energy Offsetting Residual energy demand should be met through the generation of onsite renewable energy, but if this is not technically feasible, the requirement may be met elsewhere by means of offsite renewable energy generation." What is NSC's expectations for old/ residential and non-residential buildings?"Renewable energy offsetting must only be used where it is demonstrated as not technically viable to meet the residual energy demands through onsite renewable energy generation. This is to ensure that new buildings are as energy efficient as possible and will not need retrofitting in the future. The council has a renewable energy offset scheme. Renewable energy credits will be purchased in order to achieve the net zero energy balance. This will be an agreed cost per kWp or per kWh generated, to meet the net annual energy demand for a scheme.The price per kWh generation shortfall will be agreed at planning application stage. An update to Creating Sustainable Buildings and Places Supplementary Planning Document will set out the process for securing offset credits, where these are required""A building’s energy use is now considered to the best measure for net zero compliance, whilst reducing emissions on-site is no longer the best measure of sustainable design. Total energy use and space heating metric targets are considered to be the best mechanism to model and monitor net zero compliance because the electricity grid is decarbonising. One of the key advantages is that these metrics can be checked once the building is occupied without requiring further modelling or analysis."Local Plan Glossary re: Absolute Net Zero and Net Zero Operational energy and Net zero whole life carbon building and Net zero embodied carbon building and Net Zero Energy Standard: How will NSC treat old buildings with regards targets and offsets?How much of this 'off-site' renewable energy will use food production land?Carbon offsetting report – 'Carbon offsetting within an energy intensity policy framing Report to West of England Authorities Final' 30 June 2022
"Prioritising rooftop solar would minimise the use of agricultural land for solar development and the associated landscape and other impacts. This is likely to align with understandable public and political opinion that we should prioritise rooftop installations ahead of greenfield solar." "... there are legitimate trade-offs between the use of roof-space for renewable energy generation to get to a net zero operational balance, and the use of limited roof space to meet policy requirements around climate adaptation, for instance for green roofs to provide habitat and mitigate overheating or the provision of roof gardens or amenity space for residents. This might mean that in inner urban areas where overheating is likely to be a greater concern, authorities place a greater emphasis on climate adaptation considerations and accept slightly greater use of off-site renewable energy to achieve a net zero operational balance." (30JUN22- updated 17NOV23) Does this mean NSC policies put greater emphasis on 'climate adaption' rather than on food production and security? Will inner urban areas, that have little/no open land, be looking to use rural NSC countryside to achieve their chosen net zero targets? How does NSC intend to protect agriculture and 'offset' food production and security?(p18) Policy SP2: Climate change
"The council declared a climate emergency in 2019 and has a target of being carbon neutral by 2030"When were public given evidence to support this and when did the public vote on this NSC decision?(p60) Policy LP9 Bristol Airport
"More than two thirds of local authorities in the UK have declared their commitment to help delivering the Net Zero Transition through declaring a climate emergency."Therefore one third have not - on what evidence did NSC declare one?(p115) Policy DP15: Active and sustainable transport
"Road transport greenhouse gas emissions represent a fifth of total UK emissions, the biggest contributor being private vehicle trips. The transport sector is, at 49%, the largest single source of carbon emissions in North Somerset. (not farming or emmissions from cows) This is considerably higher than the regional (South West) average of 24% and the national average of 24% from transport (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, 2019). For the West of England region, transport CO2 emissions will rise by a further 22% by 2036 if we don’t act, increasing the risk of droughts, floods and extreme heat globally and in the South West. Current private vehicle trips and predicted growth represents a significant challenge in meeting national and local carbon reduction targets. It is not expected that mass take-up of low emission vehicles will solve the problem alone, nor will it solve the challenges of capacity, congestion, deteriorating health and well-being and pressure on space. One of the biggest challenges in reducing highway transport emissions is encouraging behaviour change."(p121) PolicyDP18: Travel plans
support delivery of the North Somerset Active Travel Strategy and Climate Emergency Strategic Action Plan, encourage a greater proportion of trips by active travel modes, shape active travel neighbourhoods, reduce car travel and encourage sustainable travel, especially walking opportunities, for journeys less than one mile.(p130) Policy DP22: Visitor attractions
"Proposals must meet climate change objectives and have no adverse impact on environmentally sensitive areas such as the Mendip Hills AONB and areas at risk of flooding and minimise the development of permanent structures and hardstandings."(p151) Policy DP34: Green infrastructure
"The North Somerset Climate Emergency Strategic Action Plan identifies the need to replenish carbon stores in the district. GI is relevant since it involves providing and maintaining areas of vegetation and trees... The GIS objectives include ... the creation of bigger, better, more and joined-up woodland, grassland and wetland habitats to achieve the ambitions of the West of England Nature Recovery Network’""Where it is not possible, practical or desirable for green infrastructure provision or enhancement to be made on site, then adequate measures for off-site provision will be made, which may involve formal agreements and financial contributions" How much of this off-site provision will be on food production land? How will NSC assess and offset food requirements?(p154) Policy DP35: Nature conservation
"Where a development requires off-site mitigation for greater horseshoe bats it is expected that developers will consider the use of the North Somerset Nature Parks strategic mitigation sites as a preferred means of achieving that mitigation. These Nature Parks are located in areas that have been modelled as providing the most important habitat and connectivity for bats and encompass a mixture of existing prime habitat for protection and areas that are suitable for enhancement". Does the modelling match real world outcomes? Will other districts also use NSC sites for offsetting their nature requirements (not only bats)? How will this effect farming, food production and security?(p159) Policy DP36: Biodiversity net gain (BNG)
"If it can be demonstrated that it is not possible to achieve the required BNG on site or that there are overriding benefits in making provision elsewhere, then off site mitigation may be acceptable. Where off-site mitigation is required, preference will normally be given to locations close to or well related to the development site" Has it been proven that developing on land (destroying nature in one are) and offseting it by using an off-site mitigation actually protects or improves nature?"Natural England produced a Biodiversity Metric 4.0 in July 2021 for most developments, and a Small Sites Metric (SSM) for use on small development sites in some circumstances (such as where no priority habitat, protected species, or off-site mitigation is involved). These (or any subsequent versions) provide the methodology for the BNG calculation. The calculation and BNG assessment must be set out in the biodiversity gain plan, including data and maps showing habitats affected and proposed.""... this policy requires that developers should firstly aim to avoid, then minimise, then mitigate for, adverse impacts on biodiversity on site, before resorting to off-site mitigation... developers may be able to demonstrate that there are clear overriding benefits in providing supporting habitat for species away from the development (perhaps where species are sensitive to disturbance), in which case off-site mitigation may also be acceptable."See Bodiversity Net Gain Consulation blog(p25) Policy SP6 Villages and rural areas
"The policy approach allows rural buildings to be converted to dwellings, subject to criteria, as it makes use of an existing resource." How does NSC policy ensure that barns needed for feed, housing animals and machinery, etc. are not lost?Where there are no existing suitable sites within settlement boundaries, a variety of non-residential proposals may be acceptable outside settlement boundaries." How will NSC policy ensure farming and variety of food production is not reducted?NSC definition "Rural building: All buildings outside of settlement boundaries other than permanent dwellings ... and buildings on existing or safeguarded employment sites, quarry or waste sites. Primarily this is likely to be agricultural building"(p27) Policy SP7: Green Belt
"The Green Belt is regarded as a multifunctional asset which not only carries out the traditional purposes set out nationally by maintaining openness and protecting land from inappropriate developments, it also ensures productive farmland ..." Bleadon is not in a green belt area(p31)SP9 Employment
"Updated economic forecasts have been used to assess the requirements for employment land demand over the plan period (Employment Sites and Premises Requirements Evidence, Hardisty Jones Associates, 2023). This assessed economic forecasts across a range of sectors using data from Cambridge Econometrics and Oxford Economics. The assessment modelled the corresponding demand for employment land and premises across the range of business land typologies in North Somerset and across the West of England." 81.25ha over WSM, Wolvershill, Clevedon and Portishead. Do the models reflect real world requirements? How much of this is greenfield food produciton land?(p130)Policy DP22: Visitor attractions
"Changes to farming policy and support payments are likely to result in an increasing number of farmers and landowners looking to diversify their businesses and potentially include visitor accommodation, camping and glamping" Will current or increased levels of food production be guaranteed or reduced?(p162) Policy DP37: Trees, woodlands and hedges
"Proposals for off-site provision is made where tree planting is not appropriate or practical on site" Is food production to be used as tree off-site provistion?(p165) Policy DP38: Landscape
"Where some harm to the local landscape character is unavoidable, but a development is otherwise deemed beneficial, then positive mitigation measures should be secured by a landscape condition or planning agreement involving works on or off-site as necessary."Will "rolling valley farmland" continue to be productive in a range of food produce (arable, sheep, cows, pigs, etc) especailly if landowners (not necessarily farmers) may be encouraged to diversify into solar panels (possibly with just sheep and no dairy produce) , wildflower meadows, trees/forestry, etc.?(p208) Policy DP55 Agriculture and land based rural businesses
Definition of "Land based rural business development: A business which requires a rural location and is totally dependent on the use of the surrounding countryside for its business success such as horticultural, equestrian development, farming" (Glossary p294) Not just food production"Planning permission will be granted for agricultural or forestry development on existing and new holdings, or development for the purposes of farm based and other land-based rural businesses or diversification provided that:" Will NSC guarantee that there will be no adverse effect on food production (for people and animals), e.g. wih the rise in planting trees?"Farm diversification activities can contribute to the local economy by providing opportunities for employment or recreation for residents and visitors and by resulting in increased patronage for local shops and services. Such activities, where they come within planning control, will generally be supported provided that the character and appearance of the countryside are not harmed." Will food production be 'harmed', character and appearance over necessary function of food production?(p209) Policy DP56: Equestrian development
"Permission for equestrian development will be permitted provided that either individually or cumulatively:.." a number of exeptions that do not include the protection of food production? Equestrian use removes land from food system category.(p214) Policy DP58: Conversion or re-use of rural buildings
"Retailing will not be permitted, other than farm shops, small scale village stores, proposals under 200m² or proposals that are ancillary to the main use.If the building was completed within 10 years of the application being submitted for an agricultural or equestrian use the applicant will need to demonstrate that the conversion of this building is essential for the long-term benefit of the associated agricultural/forestry/equestrian operation." How does this policy protect farms who rent rural building for the housing of animals, feed, machinery, etc.? How will this use be 'offset'?(p218) Policy DP60: Employment on green field land in the countryside
"Development proposals for new buildings for business use (Use Classes B2, B8 or E(g)) on previously undeveloped sites outside settlements will only be permitted where no suitable redevelopment sites or redundant rural buildings suitable for re-use are available and: • The proposal relates to processing locally grown produce or other land based rural business; However, how does this policy prevent the other caveats from reduces food production?(p221) Policy DP62: Visitor accommodation in the countryside including camping and caravanning
"The construction of new buildings for use as visitor accommodation outside the Green Belt and AONB will be permitted provided that: ...(conditions)Proposals for new or extended touring and static caravan sites outside the Green Belt and AONB will be permitted provided that:... (conditions)All visitor accommodation should: Not have a significant adverse effect on the living conditions of adjoining occupiers or adversely affect the operation of working farms;...(does this also include rotatied land use for crops and animals?)Proposals to use mobile homes on longstanding existing holiday parks for permanent residential accommodation will only be permitted if: They are outside flood zone 3; and They are easily accessible in relation to existing facilities and services."How does this policy prevent 'caravan creep' and protect food prodcution?NSC Strategic gaps Background Paper NOV23 (PDF)
"...., the relatively sensitive nature of the landscape, taking account of the topography and views, would suggest that if significant development was proposed there could well be a landscape reason for refusal." So how does this fit with potential solar panels over Bleadon fields? Does NSC's definition of development include business (caravan) and energy related development, or just housing?
SOME NSC Budget Info1andBudget Info2(06DEC23)
RURAL FINANCINGREPF - Grants to Rural Business £106,229 in 2023/24 and £159,342 in 2024/25REPF - Grants to Rural Communities £70,817 in 2023/24 and £106,229 in 2024/25Addition - Rural England Prosperity Fund - DP566 £177K in 2023/24 and £266K in 2024/25How have rural communities accessed this funding, how has it been spent?What has been allocated to Bleadon? REPF (17JAN24)Decarbonisation of heat (boilers) £1.8 million (Grants & Contributions)Decarbonisation at Campus £1,197,000 (£886K Grants & Contributions + £311K Capital Receipts)Eco Bus (library outreach vehicle (mobile replacement) £175K (Borrowing)Office for Low Emission Vehicles (OLEV) £212,508 (Grants & Contributions)Low Emission Vehicle Provision - Match (grant to be added once known) £45K Borrowing)Purchase of Vehicles - Place (Electric vehicles?) £548,597 (£351,332 Borrowing + £123,266Waste & Recycling - vehicles and electric vehicle top-up £12,352,595 (Borrowing)Reserves & Revenue + £74,000 Capital Receipts)Environmental Services & Safer Communities - overspend of £1.423mPurchase of Land to support biodiversity net gain £300K (Borrowing)Land for Yatton Secondary £2 million (Grants & Contributions)Land at Parklands Village £384,527 (Grants & Contributions)Land Release Fund - Churchill Avenue, Clevedon £350K (Grants & Contributions)Land Release Fund - Uplands, Nailsea £481,020 (Grants & Contributions)NSC faced "... a £50 million budget gap between now and 2028 - but since then, they've narrowed that to just £13 million. Just under £4 million of that ne eds to be found for the next financial year.""At this time the council expects to receive £314.625m of grants and contributions from external stakeholders to fund specific schemes, which is the largest component of the programme, although the council will need to borrow £111.132m in order to be able to deliver all aspects of the programme." Budget Info2CAPITAL PROGRAMMEBORROWINGAdult Social Service£0Childrens Services
£5,559,624Housing
£421,498Corporate Services
£13,491.998Place
£91,659,010TOTAL
£111,132,130How much of this debt is attributed to NSC declared climate crisis, nature crisis and environmental related projects?How much public land has NSC sold and for what purposes?In particular, how much smallholding land has been sold, and what effect has this had on farming?The total area of NSC smallholdings land as at 31 March 2022 amount to 166ha (410 acres). S See Langford solar developments.(Video 17mins)
European Commission - Grazing for Carbon (10MAY17)
"The potential of grasslands as a sink for carbon is enormous in Europe"
What is NSC's plan for meat in the future, will local people rather than political party 'green' politics direct NSC decsion making? (See C40 Mayors Dietary Plan)
---
See also:
Short Guide to the pre-submission Local Plan 2039 (PDF)
How to respond to the consultation (PDF)
Related Biodiversity Plan Consultation(OCT23)Previous Local Plan Consultation(APR22)and related info
NSC Climage EmergencyNSC Nature Emergency and Declaration (PDF)]]>
10 Jan 23 at 5pm
"North Somerset Council's new leadership has mapped out its priorities for the next four years."
OverviewandCorporate Plan & Budget and Action Plan
BOB Response 10 Jan 24
BOB speaks at NSC Executive Meeting (06DEC)
Regarding concerns over Farming, Food Production and Food Security
Video 4mins
Previous BOB Response 16 Oct 23
OPEN, FAIR, GREEN NORTH SOMERSET
OPEN"... means listening to you and your views on the decisions we make. It means being accountable for how we spend your money and ensuring we provide the very best value we can"The open statement "Weston-super-Mare – our largest town is set to become the second biggest settlement in the West of England over the next decade" after Bristol (confirmed by Mike Bell 04OCT23), has been removed from this version of the Corporate Plan compared to the 2020-24 version, why?Large increases in development may affect agricultural land, food production and food security.FAIR" ... means listening to the views of all groups and acting on local issues. It means ensuring equity in access to services."Why haven't the rural community issues raised, including at the October public meeting, been addressed in this new proposed Corporate Plan?"Approximately 40% (15,490 hectares) of land in North Somerset is designated as Green Belt"with "30% of our population live in rural areas with the remaining population living in the coastal towns of Weston-Super-Mare (40%), Clevedon, Portishead and the market town of Nailsea (30%)"Corporate Plan pg 11 states, "... we will work with all our communities including our Town and Parish Councils to achieve the aims in our Climate Emergency Strategy action plan including how we will adapt to our changing environment"Is it fair that rural agriculture communities, needing land for farming, producing nutritious food and food security for everyone are not mentioned, and may be signifiicantly impacted by NSC's Coroporate Plan, Local Plan 2039 and associated policies>GREEN"...we do all we can to understand the impact our actions have on the environment and mitigate them where possible"Have NSC policies been assessed in regards to their impact on current and future farming, food production and food security? (e.g. solar, wind, Biodiversity Net Gain, Nature Recovery, housing, roads, etc.) Where has this been published?BUDGET QUESTIONS
How much is spent on the Green Agenda? Rewilding & Tree planting? Decarbonisation? Energy efficiency? Heating, heat source pumps, lighting? Green education/ indoctrination?How was the £50million deficit over 4 years reduced to £13million? (28NOV23) How much NSC agricultural land was sold?How is the remaining £13million deficit over the next 4 years proposed to be paid?How much is spent in relation to actual food production out of the "3% helping people keep well and stay health", rather than food packages and education?How much is spent on migration and migrants?Budget Info1and Budget Info2 (06DEC23)RURAL FINANCINGREPF - Grants to Rural Business £106,229 in 2023/24 and £159,342 in 2024/25REPF - Grants to Rural Communities £70,817 in 2023/24 and £106,229 in 2024/25Addition - Rural England Prosperity Fund - DP566 £177K in 2023/24 and £266K in 2024/25How have rural communities accessed this funding, how has it been spent?What has been allocated to Bleadon?Decarbonisation of heat (boilers) £1,800,000Minutes of the Meeting of The Executive Wednesday, 18 October 2023 (pg7)“(1) Affordable Housing Policy DP43 "Affordable housing (including rural exceptions schemes) is amended to increase the proportion of affordable housing sought on green field sites to 38.5% to reflect the overall proportion of affordable housing need identified in the Local Housing Needs Assessment. Officers are asked to consider the most effective delivery of that percentage, including consideration of grant input where appropriate."How much of this housing 'delivery' will affect food production and security? How much public grant money will be granted?(2) Embodied carbon Policy DP6. "Net Zero construction is amended to specify a target for embodied carbon within new buildings in order to provide clarity on how the policy requirement is delivered. Officers are asked to identify an appropriate standard using the approach recently adopted in the Bath and North East Somerset Local"NSC Corporate Action Plan Stated Land Use:
The NSCAction Plan references food but with no reference as to where and how that food will be produced? If farmers and small farms are encouraged to diversify away from farming (DP54), food production & security will be negatively affected. For example, NSC Action Plan proposes:
• “An increase in new homes on council-owned land, including affordable homes.
• An increase in identification of more areas of council land for re-wilding/ management for biodiversity.
• Increase the delivery of renewable energy on North Somerset land and buildings
• Land has been identified to secure the delivery of the required number of dwellings within North Somerset between 2024-2039.
• Land has been identified for business purposes across North Somerset to meet needs and aspirations across a range of economic sectors over the plan period, to contribute to sustainable patterns of development and commuting, and to provide a range of local employment opportunities.
• Deliver the council’s development programme to provide quality homes and jobs on council owned land.
• An increase in our carbon stores through increased tree planting and land management.”
Where is NSC’s critical infrastructure ‘Food Production and Security Strategy and Action Plan?
BOB Reports re: Farming, Food Production & Food Security
(various topics sent various departments in North Somerset Council)
Previous BOB Local Plan presentation and April 2022 Consultation submissions (APR22)Draft Rural Strategy Considerations (17NOV23)Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) SPD - NSC Consultation repsonse (27NOV23)Food Production Security - NSC Transport, Climate and Communities Policy and Scrutiny Panel (30NOV23 inclFarm Video)Presentation at NSC Executive Committee Regarding concerns over Farming, Food Production and Food Security (06DEC23)Request for support for farming to all NSC Town & Parish Councils (19DEC23 &Email)NSC Public Engagement sessions
The leader of the council Mike Bell, and Executive Members, will be hosting a number of public engagement sessions throughout November and December to talk about the Corporate Plan and budget. No need to book, please just drop by.
Monday 27 November, Hangstone Pavillion, Yatton, 6.30pm until 7.30pmFriday 1 December, Tithe Barn, Nailsea, 6.30pm until 7.30pmMonday 4 December, Castlewood, Clevedon, 6.30pm until 7.30pmWednesday 6 December, Old Town Hall, Weston, 6.30pm until 7.30pmWednesday 13 December, Folk Hall, Portishead, 6.30pm until 7.30pmExecutive members will also be joining our mobile libraries in December on the following dates to meet with residents and talk through issues and ideas. No need to book, just turn up!
Wednesday 13 December, Wrington - Memorial Hall car park, 2.00pm – 3.00pmFriday 15 December, Long Ashton – Community Centre car park, 10.00am – 11.00amMonday 18 December, Backwell - Rodney Road, 2.30pm – 3.30pmThursday 21 December, Banwell - Car park opposite the primary school, 3.30pm – 4.30pm-------
See Previous:]]>
See related Biodiversity Net Gain Consultation BOB Blog and
Draft Rural Strategy Considerations
New Local Plan Consultation 28 Nov 23 (NSC)
Is it North Somerset Council's intention to destroy farming in the district, or is this just an 'error' between different departments? If it is their intention, why not openly and publicly state this in consultations and public information? [NOTE 2]
What is North Somerset Council's plan foragriculture, food production and food security? Where is its Rural Strategy and/or Food Security Plans published? See the live NSC Local Plan discussionand the draft consultation, that went forapproval 18OCT23. On a positive note - Some previous feedback has been taken into consideration with regards draft DP7 solar proposal as seen amendedhere- so it's worth continuing to submit your feedback on these policies, especially if you wish to continue to support local meat, dairy, fruit, veg, beer and wine produce. (Mendip Times Food & Drink Golden Triangle OCT23)
North Somerset is already covered with 'green' agriculture land
Dudley Stamp Land Use
NSC plan to cover fields with solar panels and developments?
INTERACTIVE MAPPING
Where is the food mapping?
(image inclGreen Belt)
13K housing sites p200
NSC map shows fields in use for food production... so why destroy local food production?
NSC Green Infrastructure Strategy p126 - Fig 16
Draft pg 87 extract "Policy DP7: Large scale renewable and low carbon renewable energy... Proposals for energy generation from renewable and low carbon sources including wind turbines, solar photovoltaic arrays, biomass and hydropower (marine, river and tidal) schemes will be supported subject to no unacceptable impact on... NO MENTION in relation to FARMING OR FOOD PRODUCTION???:"
CPRE The problem with solar farms - the factors that should be considered in determining applications (2021)
See also DP53 Best & Most versitile land in Draft pg 181 "The proportion of Grade 1 land in North Somerset is approximately 7% and 10% for Grade 2. 60% falls in Grade 3..." How much of this land is already in use as food production for people and animals? How much land will be lost if NSC's Local Plan above and associated Biodiversity plans happen?
As to areas outside those identified in the Local Plan, i.e. coloured pink, yellow, orange, red, etc. "When assessing proposals for development on unallocated sites on agricultural land its agricultural land classification (ALC) will be taken into account. Where the land classification is uncertain or classified as grade 3 without further subdivision, a full survey will be required to establish its quality. The best and most versatile (BMV) land (grades 1, 2 and 3a) will be protected from significant, inappropriate and unsustainable proposals as follows..." [Note 1] The DEFRA Post 1988 Agricultural Land Classification mapping used by NSC via DEFRA doesn't seem to recognise existing local farming when compared to the Dudley Stamp map?
Gloucestershire "County at risk of becoming ‘Solarshire’ due to number of photovoltaic panels planned... if they are all approved it could create a corridor of one million solar panels... The new Local Plan, which is currently being developed, will set out the guidelines for development across the district until 2041, once adopted."(25OCT23)
NSC Renewable and low carbon energy generation webpage, Where is the farming, food production and food security asessed if the land is removed in any way for solar and wind technologies
Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Arrays (2013.)"3.4 We are not likely to support applications on the highest graded agricultural land (grades 1 or 2) and strongly encourage prospective developments towards the lowest graded land." NB 17% is Grade 1 & 2, 60% is Grade 3 within NSC.""3.19 Creating habitats rich in wildflowers with apiculture as part of the permanent management plan (to increase bee numbers to the benefit of surrounding farmlands)." How is NSC protecting existing food production and food security? How is it ensuring that the 'surrounding farmlands' are surviving and not being encouraged to diversify, or close due to a lack of available tenancies or appropriate grade or sized farmland?"4.6 Solar PV facilities that are developed on agricultural ground must be ‘reversible’ allowing the site to be easily restored to agriculture. Hence intrusive groundworks, such as trenching and foundations should be minimised and the use of concrete avoided where possible. Frames should be pile driven or screw anchored and not concrete-based, and capable of easy removal, allowing the ground to be fully restored. In windy areas the stability of the installation will need to be considered.""4.14 In most instances the ground beneath solar panels is capable of remaining in agricultural use. Existing pasture cover should be maintained, whilst if the land is currently arable, applicants are advised to grass-seed the site. The land will require management, and the preferred option is that sheep grazing or similar should be enabled. If the grass is to be mown, then the potential for habitat gain, through wildflowerseeding, should be considered"Regen SW assessment potential areas for large scale wind turbinesBleadon LevelsResource assessment for wind and solar in North Somerset and opportunities to support the wider sustainable energy sector (2013)"Agricultural land grades 1 and 2 excluded Grades 1 and 2 are the best and most versatile for food production."The UK government states, "... food security means strong and consistent domestic production of food combined with a diversity of supply sources that avoids overreliance on any one source... Home-grown produce is the largest source of food for the UK... In meat, milk, and eggs, the UK produces roughly equivalent volume to what it consumes. In 2020 it produced 61kg of meat, 227L of milk and 172 eggs per person per year ... The UK produces a significant proportion of its other crop needs, including around 60% of sugar beet, 70% of potatoes and 80% of oilseeds... The UK produces over 50% of vegetables consumed domestically, but only 16% of fruit." (05OCT23).
In order to be food secure, it appears that the UK cannot afford to lose any agriculture land and indeed needs to increase vegetable and fruit production.
The govt Food Security 2.4 "Food security is one of the thirteen sectors listed in the Government’s “Critical National Infrastructure” (CNI) document: CNI are “necessary for a country to function and upon which daily life depends”. [NOTE 2] (28JUL23)
Bleadon is calling a public meeting re: local plan and resident concerns, come along before putting in a response to consultation.
Previous Local Plan Consultation information
----
See also:
NSC Corporate Plan Consultation closed on 16 Oct 23, yet there was no mention of farming. However, it did note on p14,“Quality and affordable new homes will be being built on the council’s own land with infrastructure projects underway to unlock further delivery.” Is NSC selling off farmland? How much has it sold over the last 5-10 years? How does this help future generaƟons of agriculture within North Somerset, and young peoples’ career choices? How does this fit with any ‘duties’ for local food production and delivery nationally? How does this fit with NSC Local Plan re: solar, wind, housing and road network development in general?"NSC Biodiversity Consultation (Blog)NSC Rural Strategy (to come?)NSC Green Infrastructure Plan (BOB Blog)NSCEmpowering Communities Strategyv2 and Action Plan LR (PDF)NSCJoint Health and Wellbeing StrategyHWBS action plan (PDF)NSC Local Plan Consultation (Blog)Previous consultationsNOTE 1:
The draft consultation, that went for approval 18OCT23, states,
Draft pg 198onwards, indicate that many farm addresses are listed for development."Proposals for wind turbines and solar photovoltaic arrays will be supported in principle within the Search Areas shown … and the proposed site is not within (land)grades 1, 2 or 3a"(05FEB21))Draft pg 184 states, "Farmers are encouraged to diversify their activities and supplement their income from enterprises other than normal food production."Draft pg 186states, "Planning permission will be granted... provided that... In the case of diversification proposals, there is sufficient certainty of long term benefit to the farm business as an agricultural operation... Farm diversification activities can contribute to the local economy by providing opportunities for employment or recreation for residents and visitors and by resulting in increased patronage for local shops and services."Draft pg 190 states, "The conversion or re-use of rural buildings will be permitted providing that... It would not have a significant adverse effect on the living conditions of adjoining occupiers or adversely affect the operation of working farms... Retailing will not be permitted, other than farm shops, small scale village stores, proposals under 200m2 square metres or proposals that are ancillary to the main use. If the building was completed within 10 years of the application being submitted for an agricultural or equestrian use the applicant will need to demonstrate that the conversion of this building is essential for the long-term benefit of the associated agricultural/ forestry/equestrian operation"Draft pg 195 states, "Proposals for new or extended touring and static caravan outside the Green Belt and AONB will be permitted provided that... All visitor accommodation should: • Not have a significant adverse effect on the living conditions of adjoining occupiers or adversely affect the operation of working farms"NOTE 2:]]>
North Somerset Council's (NSC) Corporate Plan, p7 states, "Weston-super-Mare – our largest town is set to become the second biggest settlement in the West of England over the next decade." At the 04 October public meeting in the Town Hall, Cllr Mike Bell, Leader of North Somerset Council, confirmed that this would be second to Bristol!
How will this huge increase in planned housing/development, with its 'associated nature' offsetting of 10% BNG, affect rural communities? How will this affect farming and food production as landowners are encourgad to diversify from using their land for agriculture to using it for 30 year BNG 'nature' projects?
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationBiodiveristy Supplementary Plan16 Oct 23
27 Nov 23 at 5pm
"Developers are encouraged to consider the potential of their development in making a contribution to the biodiversity objectives and targets for particular types of habitat and species found in North Somerset." Biodiversity SPD Consultation Document
Farming Crisis & DocumentaryNSC Role?
&
Mapping
Food SecurityFood Chain Loses?NSC ProposalRelated GuidanceBNG CreditsLangford Mega Solar DevThere is no mention of farming, agriculture or protecting food production in this North Somerset Council Biodiversity consultation, yet our farming is in crisis?
BOB Biodiversity SPD Consultation response
Draft Rural Strategy Considerations
UK Farming Crisis
"The UK’s self-sufficiency is ‘slipping’,with many growers reporting receiving minuscule return" ..."As NFU president Minette Batters put it in December, the very existence of British food production is now “under threat”"A petition calling on retailers to provide a fairer deal to the UK's struggling farmers has reached over 50,000 signatures, but supermarkets are yet to respond." - To Reform the Grocery Supply Code of Practice to better protect farmers (Ends 14MAR24)Farming Charity sees Alarming Increase in Calls for Help.- Lincolnshire Rural Support Network says "...many of the calls are related to money and debt. However, the area that has seen the biggest growth – a 229% increase – is stress and mental-health related concerns". (23OCT23)Tokenisation of the countryside via Biodiversity Net Gain CreditsWhat is NSC doing to protect farming and local food production, is it protecting its farmland or selling it off, e.g. for development? (See land let as smallholdings by local authorities across England)The European Commission states, "Grasslands absorb carbon dioxide during growth of the grass plants and store it in the different tissues. The majority of the aboveground biomass will be eaten by grazing animals and the carbon will eventually return to the soil as manure or to the atmosphere via enteric fermentation." (PDF)Dutch govt plan to forcibly purchase and close 3K farms to comply with EU emissions mandate(04MAY23)
Documentary (1hr)
Farmers driven to suicide
Documentary Overview
Irish govt suggests culling 65,000 cows yearly to achieve emissions targets
NO FARMERS NO FOOD - poorer local and national economy
No Land No Food
As meat, dairy and vegetarbles stop being grown locally, increasing food costs, more people will be driven towards food banks. Governments longer term solution, UK insect eating 3D printed food(e.g UN 2013)
What can NSC and its Policies do to HELP small and medium sized local farming and food security?
How has reliance increased on food banks in the UK in the last 5, 10, 20 years as food prices increase?
House of Commons 18OCT23, "The Trussell Trust, an anti-poverty charity that operates a network of food banks across the UK, reported a 37% increase in the number of three-day emergency food parcels it distributed between 31 March 2022 and 1 April 2023, compared to the year before. This continues a general trend of increasing need for food parcels. In 2021/22 there was an increase of 14% compared to the year 2019/2020, before the Covid-19 pandemic. The increase in the year 2020/21 was caused by the pandemic, while the most recent increase is due to the cost of living crisis." (Overview and 18OCT23)Population Pyramids of the World (e.g. UK, Europe, Africa, Asia, N America, Oceania & WorldHow does farming fit with biodiversity plans such as 30 by 30 (or 30x30) a worldwide initiative for governments to designate 30% of Earth's land and ocean area as protected areas by 2030 (.e.g. UK Govt An extraordinary challenge: Restoring 30 per cent of our land and sea by 2030 (26JUL23 - p32)How will the control of water affect local farming? (E.g. UK Govt Plan for Water:- 'farm' mentioned over 100 tiimes (04APR23))How will SMART meters be used to monitor, restrict and punish farmers and residents to meet these sustainability goals? e.g. Energy firms pay out £11m after not fitting enough smart meters: Have customers had enough? Do they have the powers to forceably install meters to monitor and micro-manage residents? (10NOV23)What is the role and priorities of North Somerset Council with regards to protecting communities and local food security?
Does energy security (solar) trump local food security?Does nature recovery (e.g. 10% BNG) trunp local food security?Does carbon reduction (net zero) trump local food security?Does methane and nitrogen reduction (net zero) trump local food security?Have any long-term real-world trials or research (decades) been undertaken proving on large scale areas that the BNG approach of people managed land will give the desired output and not invaisive plant species (brambles) and/or increase in vermin (rats)? Or have assumptions been based on scaled up computer modelling?Why put solar panels on agricultureal fields at the same time as putting grass on urban roofs?In order to be food secure, it appears that the UK cannot afford to lose any agriculture land and indeed needs to increase vegetable and fruit production. (See also the NSC Local Plan consultation)
North Somerset is already covered with 'green' agriculture land
Dudley Stamp Land Use
NSC plan to cover fields with solar panels and developments?
INTERACTIVE MAPPING
Where is the food mapping?
(image inclGreen Belt)
13K housing sites p200
Langford Mega Solar Farms
NSC map shows fields in use for food production... so why destroy local food production?
NSC Green Infrastructure Strategy p126 - Fig 16.
Local Plan and Net Zero Blogs
Food Security
There is no mention of food security in NSC's Biodiversity SPD Overview, only that, "There needs to be security of the delivering for biodiversity offsetting projects. The Environment Act requires that any enhancements or provision are maintained for at least 30 years after the development is completed" (Para 8.2.3 p35)TheUK government states, "...food security means strong and consistent domestic production of food combined with a diversity of supply sources that avoids overreliance on any one source...Home-grown produce is the largest source of food for the UK... In meat, milk, and eggs, the UK produces roughly equivalent volume to what it consumes. In 2020 it produced 61kg of meat, 227L of milk and 172 eggs per person per year ... The UK produces a significant proportion of its other crop needs, including around 60% of sugar beet, 70% of potatoes and 80% of oilseeds... The UK produces over 50% of vegetables consumed domestically, but only 16% of fruit." (05OCT23).UK Govt Powering Up Britain Energy Security Plan,
"The Government seeks large scale ground-mount solar deployment across the UK, across the UK, looking for development mainly on brownfield, industrial and low and medium grade agricultural land. Solar and farming can be complementary, supporting each other financially, environmentally and through shared use of land. We consider that meeting energy security and climate change goals is urgent and of critical importance to the country, and that these goals can be achieved together with maintaining food security for the UK. We encourage deployment of solar technology that delivers environmental benefits, with consideration for ongoing food production or environmental improvement. The Government will therefore not be making changes to categories of agricultural land in ways that might constrain solar deployment." (p38) [Reference to grades 1, 2 or 3a and mapping e.g. for NSC] and..."We encourage deployment of solar technology that delivers environmental benefits, with consideration for ongoing food production or environmental improvement." pg38 (MAR23)Environment Act 2021 (10NOV23)
"1(3) The regulations may specify a commodity only if the Secretary of State considers that forest is being or may be converted to agricultural use for the purposes of producing the commodity." (p291)"2(5) The regulations may specify a local law only if it relates to the prevention of forest being converted to agricultural use" (p292)"17(2) A review must consider in particular— (a) the amount of forest being converted to agricultural use for the purposes of producing commodities (p299)"17(2)(b) the impact of the relevant provisions on the amount of forest being converted to agricultural use for the purposes of producing forest risk commodities" (p300)What is the food chain losing by the proposed NSC plans?
What is the land currently contributing to food security?DP53 Best & Most versitile landinDraft pg 181"The proportion of Grade 1 land in North Somerset is approximately 7% and 10% for Grade 2. 60% falls in Grade 3..." How much of this land is already in use as food production for people and animals? How much land will be lost if NSC's Local Plan and associated Biodiversity planshappen?What arable and/or pastoral farming is currently supported?What has been supported over the last 10 years?When was the land last producing food for animals or people?Can beef and dairy cattle graze the same land as solar panel?What will happen to local and national dairy products if the land only supports sheep? (milk, cheese, yoghurt, butter, spreads, etc.)How much infrastructure is required to install, support and maintain a field of thousands solar panels?concreting in solar panel supports? electrical wiring? sub-station wiring?how much does rainwater runoff concentrate on the land? how much erosian over the 25 year life span? How much potential leeching of into the soil?Will local generatiional farming skills be lost? What will happen over the 25-40 year lifespan of the solar panels and/or BNG projects?who are the mahority of investors in these large local solar and BNG projects? do they have a genuine interest in the local community or is it just a planning obligation and/or financial investment that can ultimately break rural communities?how do commercial these investments affect public access and views to the countrysiide?how do structures in fields (solar arrays) affect birds of prey hunting, as they need large open areas to swoop and large independent areas to sustain current and future populations.how are small mammals affected - structures will change the balance of that ecology, some mammals will thrive at the expense of others, upsetting the natural balance (e.g. an increase in rat population due to more urban style shelter under solar panels? How would this population be controlled e.g. rat poisons?)how do the change in wildflowers, plants, etc. affect the types of species that can then survive in that hababit?how will desktop AI deal with the above if no ecologist input is given?over 20-40 years lifespan of the panels and BNG projects, how are natural invasive species such as brambles controlled, with chemicals be used? e.g. glyphosate - "a widespread herbicide used by farmers to control weeds and as an alternative to ploughing, which disturbs the life beneath the soil and releases carbon (but has pupport food production locally for generations since the bronze age)"? (14JUN23)if glyphosate is used, along with panel run off, the soil may become contaminated, what will happen to the sheep, lamb that is eaten, and future agricultural use if/when the panels are decommissioned?how long will the land need to recover after decommisioning? Months, years or decades?what happens to the millions of solar panels afterwards and the toxic chemicals contained within them? "The toxic chemicals in solar panels include cadmium telluride, copper indium selenide, cadmium gallium (di)selenide, copper indium gallium (di)selenide, hexafluoroethane, lead, and polyvinyl fluoride" (30APR18 and 22AUG20)CPRE The problem with solar farms - the factors that should be considered in determining applications (2021)if the aim is to increase biodiversity via BNG how does this offset any potential loss of species on the original site, e.g. new structures and/or solar panel installations (whether mammals, insects, plants, etc.)?NB: NSC support solar and installion companies and so should therefore be able to answer the following questions:(as mailed to residents Resident Letter,Leaflet1,Leaflet2)
North Somerset Council Biodiversity SPD proposal states -
"Biodiversity Net Gain policy set out under the Environment Act 2021 is due to come into force in January 2024. Most planning applications will be required to demonstrate that biodiversity net gain of 10% has been achieved. This will be submitted to the council together with a Biodiversity Gain Plan, as part of the planning application. (Biodiversity SPD Consultation Document) No mention of how this works with agricultrure in the rural community food produciton or security?
The current SPD dates back to November 2005 and is therefore in need of a comprehensive update, particularly in light of the council’s 2019 declaration of a Climate Emergency and Nature Emergency in November 2020.
Benefits of the Biodiversity SPD can include:Helping meet local, national and international nature recovery and climate change commitmentsDelivery of Council priorities around re-wilding and the nature emergencyDelivery of site enhancements as part of North Somerset Council’s green infrastructure strategyCreation of principles and approach for biodiversity offsetting and net gain deliverySafeguarding of public access to high quality nature within North Somerset." (Biodiversity Supplementary Overview)NB "s. At the very least, all development must deliver a net gain in line with Policy CS4 of the Core Strategy" (p27)Government Definition of Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG)
Other related guidance:
Govt Biodiversity metric: calculate the biodiversity net gain of a project or development (PDF)The Biodiversity Metric 4.0 (JP039) (PDF)The Small Sites Metric (Biodiversity Metric 4.0) (PDF)NSC Biodiversity & Trees Planting including Bleadon List of Wildlife site p11-12 (PDF)DEFRA Consultation on Marine Biodiversity Net Gain (2022, privacy, letter)UK pushes protections for international marine biodiversity (20SEP23)BNG for Local Authorities including video (02NOV23)Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) Public/Business/Charity Webinars:
Wednesday, 25 October, 1-2pm Creating Biodiversity Corridors Through Our Cities (PDF)NSC plans for the city include green roofs and living walls (p42) but solar panels on green fields in rural areas?Thursday, 26 October, 10-11:30am Unlock the Hidden Potential of Your Land: Biodiversity Net Gain (PDF)what happens to agricultural inheritence?what if you cannot maintain the land for the full 30 year agreement? e.g. illness, death?does agriculture inherence tax change if the land becomes a BNG project?what are the penalties? who enforces them e.g. NSC Corporate Plan income?Monday, 30 October, 12:30-1:30pm Biodiversity Net Gain for Buyers (PDF)Bristol Avon Catchment Market (6 min video)iIs the greatest risk with the landowner/farmer to maintain the land/biodiversity'credt' for 30 yearss at the same or better level?"If there is failure to deliver, or attempt to deliver, biodiversity net gain outcomes which are secured through planning legal agreements or planning conditions, the Council will take the appropriate and necessary action to ensure compliance."(p37)Tuesday, 31 October, 10-11am Innovation Showcase: Tools to Support Biodiversity Net Gain (PDF)what are the dangers of using satellite imagery and remote sensing data interpreted by AI computer modelling rather than using proffessional ecologists and 'ground truth data'? (PDF)GentianHow does the UK BNG approach achieve the same goals as the Dutch, Irish and Sri Lankans seen in the documentary above, or reduction of exports due to war, with a resulting localfarming crisis and increased suicides?
E.g. UK farmland voluntarily taken out of production for 30+year, whereasthe EU approves Dutch plan to forcibly close farms,""Farmers who decide to close their holdings must guarantee they will not start up livestock farming operations elsewhere in the Netherlands or within the EU" (04MAY23) -- Even if their family and or the nation is in a food crisis and potentially starving?The Malaysian government banned fertilisers and put the country into poverty, famine and suicides. Fertiliser ban decimates Sri Lankan crops as government popularity ebbs (03MAR22)Ukraine Food crisis grows as spiralling prices spark export bansPalm oil prices soar as Indonesia curbs exportsUkraine bans wide range of agricultural exports "LVIV, Ukraine, March 9 (Reuters) - Ukraine's government has banned exports of rye, barley, buckwheat, millet, sugar, salt, and meat until the end of this year, according to a cabinet resolution published on Wednesday."Serbia bans exports of wheat, corn, flour and cooking oilYara curtails fertiliser output in Italy and France (09MAR22)----
See also:
NSC Green Infrastructure Plan (BOB Blog)NSC Empowering Communities Strategy v2 and Action Plan LR (PDF)NSC Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy HWBS action plan (PDF)NSC Local Plan Consultation (Blog)LANGFORD
Plans are advancing to build two mega solar farms at Yanel Farm 66ha (163 acre) and at Honeyhall Farm 67ha (over 165 acres), a total of 133ha (328 acres)NB The total area of NSC smallholdings land as at 31 March 2022amounts to 166ha (410 acres). Do these two Langford solar developments alone cover nearly the equivalent of the whole of NSC held farmland, i.e. 133ha Langford solar developments vs 166ha NSC smallholdings? What stops the remaining NSC farmland also be built on? Has any NSC farmland been indentified to be built on in the NSC Local Plan (e.g. pink/solar, yellow, redorange & orange/wind or red/housing mapped area)?Compare with 333ha in 2007, a halving of the total NSC farmland in 15 years? (NSC Smalholdings/Farmland Summary info) How is this protecting local food security and future food production/farming?If the proposed Local Plan go through, will the whole of this area in pink below potentially be solar?"Local Plans, prepared by a local planning authority in consultation with its community, set out a vision and a framework for the future development of an area. Once in place, Local Plans become part of the statutory development plan. The statutory development plan for the area is the starting point for determining local planning applications." Does this mean that residents are less able/unable to overturn any solar, wind, housing, etc. planning application, as potentially no appeal will be held as it has already been agreed in NSC's Local Plan? (PDF)Solar Company Food Security Argument (SEP22)NSC Local Plan mapping shows Solar, wind, housing,etc but NO foodlayered interactive map? See Govt suggested base mapping post-1988 and NSC base mapping vs NSC Food Growing map from its NSC Green Infrastructure Strategy (p126)Langford Yanel & Honeyhall Solar FarmsCombined Mega Solar Farm Applications
NSC Planning Mapping
Tick boxes on left of NSC app
NSC Solar, wind & housing Local Plan
NSC Local Plan Mapping
Tick boxes on left of NSC app
22/P/1450/FUL - Proposed development of a 49.9MW solar farm and associated infrastructure. | Land At Yanel Farm Churchill Green Churchill North Somerset Consultation Deadline Thu 25 Aug 2022.Developer Website states, "The site covers 66 hectares of land classified as lower grade agricultural land (3b and 4) and is suitable for sheep farming" (PDF)Natural England BNG Related Response(27AR23)Yanel Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG)23/P/2159/FUL - Honeyhall Solar Farm - Proposed Installation and operation of a renewable energy generating station comprising ground-mounted photovoltaic solar arrays and battery-based electricity storage containers together with a switchgear container, inverter/transformer units, a substation, site access, internal access tracks, security measures, access gates, other ancillary infrastructure and landscaping and biodiversity enhancements, with a widened gated access at the junction of Brinsea Green Farm and Brinsea Lane. | Land At Brinsea Green Farm Brinsea Lane Congresbury Consultation Deadline Thu 23 Nov 2023 Biodiversity Enhancement Plan - aka very large glass fields with planted marginsLarge solar farm over 165 acres (67ha) of farmland (Honeyhall Solar Farm (SEP23 & 02NOV23)Developer Website.(PDF)(enlarged image and very large pdf detailed file 6MB)CPRE The problem with solar farms - the factors that should be considered in determining applications (2021)Gloucesterhire County at risk of becoming ‘Solarshire’ due to number of photovoltaic panels (25OCT23)
"The Forest of Dean District Council has been approving plans for solar farms on a case by case basis. But there has been an accumulation of planning applications to develop such sites on fields either side of the B4215 road between Newent and Highnam. And if they are all approved it could create a corridor of one million solar panels ...During the meeting, the council agreed to prepare a draft Local Plan based on their new strategy for future approval and consultation in 2024."Previous consultationsLand let as smallholdings by local authorities across England
NSC land included in 72nd annual report to Parliament on smallholdings in England, 1 April 2021 to 31 7 March 2022 26JUL23, 71st 2020-21 & 07SEP23 amendments, 64th& 2013/14, 61st in 2010/11, 60th in 2009-10, 57th in 2006/7,Hansard Farm Summary 2006-7, and Hansard Small Holdings Colonies Volume 30: debated on Tuesday 4 June 1918DEFRA Land Ownership & Tenure (09NOV23)]]>
WHERE IS ALL THE AGRICULTURE LAND GOING... GOING... GONE?
ConsultationDeadline 16 October 2023 at 5pm.
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationNorth Somerset Council's (NSC) Corporate Plan and budget development30 Aug 2316 Oct 23 at 5pm
NSC"new leadership is mapping out its priorities for the next four years. We want to hear your views about what is most important and how council tax should be spent."
OverviewandCorporate PlanandBudget
BOB Corporate Plan Consultation Response
New NSC Corporate Plan & Budget Consultation (NSC)
NSC Corporate Plan Action Plan Consultation
What is North Somerset Council's plan for agriculture, food production and food security?
North Somerset is already covered with 'green' agriculture land
Dudley Stamp Land Use
NSC plan to cover fields with solar panels and developments?
INTERACTIVE MAPPING
(image incl Green Belt)
How will neighbouring Bristol, BANES & Sth Glos plans influence NSC's plans?
WECA Joint Green Strategy
Page 49 of the consultation states, "Proposals for wind turbines and solar photovoltaic arrays will be supported in principle within the Search Areas shown … and the proposed site is not within (land) grades 1, 2 or 3a"(05FEB21))
How do NSC plans relate to the ambitious C40 City targets of NO Meat and NO Dariy by 2030
(NO private vehicles, 3 new clothes items per year, 1 short-haul return flight every 3 years)
Mayoral West of WECA
C40 City Mayors
WEF
UK Government WEF Partnership
Visit a public CONSULTATION MEETING this week only
ask North Somerset leaders about farming, food production, food security and cash
How does the North Somerset Council receive and spend resident's money?
"The Council is well on the way to ‘paperless’ and ‘cashless’ operation and is
beginning to make use of robotics and Artificial Intelligence"
Where NSC money comes from
NSC Budget Plan
How NSC money is spent
Public Meetings in buildings and mobile libraries:
"The leader of the council Mike Bell, and the Deputy Leader Catherine Gibbons, will be hosting a number of public engagement sessions throughout September and October to talk about the Corporate Plan and budget. No need to book, please just drop by.
Wednesday 20 September, Tithe Barn, Nailsea, 6.30pm onwardsMonday 25 September, Weston Museum, 6.00pm onwardsWednesday 27 September, Folk Hall, Portishead, 6.30pm onwardsMonday 2 October, Hangstones Pavilion, Yatton, 6.00pm onwardsWednesday 4 October, Town Hall, Weston, 6.00pm onwardsp7 Corporate Plan "Weston-super-Mare – our largest town is set to become the second biggest settlement in the West of England over the next decade." At this meeting Cllr Mike Bell, Leader of North Somerset Council, confirmed that this would be second to Bristol!Monday 9 October, Castlewood, Clevedon, 6.30pm onwardsExecutive members will also be joining our mobile libraries in October on the following dates to meet with residents and talk through issues and ideas. They will also have paper copies of the engagement survey if you would like one. No need to book, just turn up!
Wednesday 11 October, Winford - Main Layby, 11:35am - 12.20pmThursday 12 October, Banwell - Car park opposite the primary school, 2.40pm – 4.30pmFriday 13 October, Long Ashton – Community Centre car park, 9.30am – 11.30am"--------
See also:]]>
The current 2022-23 AGAR Return follows the previous two years, where Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) told residents to take their concerns to the External Auditor via AGAR, rather than answer their questions. BPC’s previous lack of openness and transparency cost the council over £10K, with at least 15 resident concerns being wholly or partially upheld, including those relating to non-compliance with regulations and lack of best practice.
So how did the £10K external audit processes, and Auditors reports of 2021 and 2022, benefit residents? …. we should now get everything we should have had in the first place!! This includes:
Better governance and financial complianceIncreased best practice.Greater openness, transparency and timely access to information.Agenda that automatically contain all agenda related non-confidential documentation in the appendices.Including documentation on decision making and spending on working groups, contracts, budgets, trusts, assets and reserves.The Coronation Halls, with a stated insurance value of £1million, are now back in trust after mysteriously being logged on the council’s own Asset Register for a few years! (and 2020)The External Auditor also confirmed that if independent groups request public money from BPC, like the Playground Trust, Bleadon in Bloom Project, Halls Trust and Youth Club Trust, they should apply via the formal more transparent grant process, as all other groups are requested to do.Residents will have to wait until next summer’s 2024 AGAR to see if the new councillors, elected since May 23, along with a new clerk (qualified or otherwise), will officially do any better.
In the meantime, if you want to see documents and invoices relating to expenditure and activities for Apr22-Mar23,contact BPC's locum clerk before Friday 04 August 2023, more info here.
---
See also:
Other parish councilsWeasenham Parish Council (PDF)"Dogged resident whose constant criticism of local council sparked mass resignation declares himself vindicated as 27 of his 31 complaints are upheld David Fairchild spent five years going over Weasenham Parish Council's returns His investigations saw £15,000 of local taxpayers' money being spent on audits"Nationally -Seventh Annual Report of the Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts Second Special Report of Session 2022–23 (PDF)"Government’s annual reports and accounts estimate fraud against the taxpayer rose from £5.5 billion in total over the two years before the pandemic (2018–20) to £21 billion in total over the two years since the start of the pandemic (2020–22).Departments have a duty to recover taxpayer money lost to fraud and error and prevent it in the future".Previous Bleadon Accountability Statement AGAR Guide (AUG23)
External Audit Challenges (2020-2022)
2023
When the Going Gets ToughCould Do Better D MinusBPC Reserves Currently at £37K- incl audio2022]]>
The BPC AGAR Notice (pg1) gives council contact details and states, “Any person interested has the right to inspect and make copies of the accounting records for the financial year to which the audit relates and all books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers, receipts and other documents relating to those records must be made available for inspection by any person interested”.
The Right to Inspect the council’s records is enshrined in law (AGAR Notice pg2). "If any concerns remain after the Council has responded to queries, electors may wish to consider raising objections to the AGAR with the appointed auditor" See the last two year's challenges to External Audit and the postiive outcomes that can result.
SOME AGAR RELATED DOCUMENTS EXPLAINED
DOCUMENTEXPLANATION
SOURCEAGAR Form 3“he public Inspection period can only commence once the AGAR has been approved, published and submitted to the external auditor”
There are six main parts to this document:
• Guidance Notes (pg1&2)
• Annual Internal Audit Report (pg3)
• Section 1 Annual Governance Statement (pg4)
• Section 2 Accounting Statements (pg5)
• External Auditor’s Report and Certificate (pg6)
• Associated Appendices (pg7 onwards)
BPC’s AGAR Form 3 is available on its website or here.
NB BPC's Financial Regulations 1.13 states, "The council is not empowered by these Regulations or otherwise to delegate certain specified decisions. In particular any decision regarding:
setting the final budget or the precept (council tax requirement);approving accounting statements;approving an annual governance statement;declaring eligibility for the General Power of Competence; and addressing recommendations in any report from the internal or external auditors, shall be a matter for the full council only" AGAR NoticeThis is the official notice inviting members of the public to Inspect BPC’s records and ask questions during a strict 6 week period (BPC’s viewing period is between 24 JUN and 04 AUG 23)
It states, all related documentation must be made available for inspection.
For maximum public engagement the AGAR Notice should ideally be published on Bleadon’s five community noticeboards as well as on the BPC website.
Pages 2 and 3 of the AGAR Notice give a ‘Summary of Your Rights’ (can only be used to view BPC records between 24 JUN and 04 AUG 23 in BPC’s case, as announced 23JUN23) including:
The basic positionThe right to inspect the accounting records and ask BPC questionsThe right to ask the auditor questions about the accounting recordsThe right to make objections at audit[BPC AGAR Notice V1, V2
21JUN23 (Min 366.9) "To approve the Annual Governance Statements for 2022/23 and associated report (page 23 - 25)" and (Min 366.10) "To approve the Statement of Accounts for 2022/23 (pages 26)"
Guidance Notes (pg1&2)Includes general guidance and an AGAR Completion Checklist
See AGAR Form 3 pg2&3 whole fileAnnual Internal Audit Report (pg3+)
independent Internal Audit ticked 'NO' to 9 internal controls
The Internal Auditor undertakes a “…Selective assessment of compliance with the relevant procedures and controls in operation.” Includes:
C – Risk Assessment/RegisterD – Precept, Budget & ReservesH – Asset RegisterL – Website Information & TransparencyO – Trustee responsibilitiesNB The public have the right to access to the last 5 years full Internal Audit reports
INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS
JUN23
Internal Audit Action Plan (13MAR23)
External Audit Action Plan (12JUN23)
Section 1 Annual Governance Statement (pg 4+)
BPC ticked 'NO' to 7 out of 9 governance statements
This is where BPC officially acknowledges its “…responsibility for ensuring that there is a sound system of internal control, including arrangements for the preparation of the Accounting Statements”. Includes:
Risk Assessment/RegisterResponse to Internal Audit ReportsTrustee statementsAGAR Section 1 Approved and signed by full council 21 June (Min 366.10) Should this be 366.9?Section 2 Accounting Statements (pg5+)
BPC restated asset value Box 9 as £62,966 from £861,914 due to removal of incorrect Halls ownership instead of in Trust
States summary of BPC income, expenditure, reserves, staffing, assets and Trustee responsible for managing Trust funds or assetsAGAR Section 2 Approved and signed by full council 21 June (Min 366.11) Should this be Min 366.10? Includes current and previous precept (also see Historic Precept values)
BPC's expenditure relaates financial powers e.g. S137 and/or any General Power of Competence (GPC) BPC's GPC postition last declared.20Aug19 Min 325.7 with associated BPC GPC Policy PC declarations are only made once in the four years and remain until the next election.
How does the lack of GPC relate to BPC giving any grants, payments, donations, contributions, gifts, etc. to independent organisations, community groups etc? How do BPC manage the associated risk, e.g. via the Risk Register or Financial Regulations e.g. 1.13? For example payments to Trusts, or projects)
Last pulbic election was May 2023. Cllr appointment dates here.
Does the ‘Total Fixed Assets’ now match the published Asset Register Values?
External Auditor’s Report and Certificate (pg6)External Auditors undertake a limited assurance review. The public can use the AGAR period to ask BPC questions relating to the AGAR period (this year for decisions and expenditure for Apr22-Mar23). If no clarity is received then, from the AGAR Notice, members of the public have:
“The opportunity to question the appointed auditor about the accounting records; andThe right to make an objection which concerns a matter in respect of which the appointed auditor could either make a public interest report or apply to the court for a declaration that an item of account is unlawful. Written notice of an objection must first be given to the auditor and a copy sent to the smaller authority.”The External Auditor’s Report and Certificate is published on an updated AGAR Form 3 after the AGAR period ends.
The public should have access to the last 5 years full External Audit reports. Info currently published on the BPC website
See also Bleadon resident successful AGAR challenges in 2020-22
AGAR Appendices (pg7 onwards)Additional information such as Explanation of variances, Bank Reconciliation.
AGAR Form 3 Appendices are on the BPC website and here.Precept, Budget & Reserves (Internal Audit Report – D“The precept or rates requirement resulted from an adequate budgetary process; progress against the budget was regularly monitored; and reserves were appropriate”
BPC ticked 'NO' see explanation
Precept, Budget blog
In JAN23 BPC precept rose 18.5% from £54K to £64K (16 Jan 22 Min 359.7.2) the Budget was also set at £64K although not minuted? (Min 359.7.1) See Precept Banding Info 2022/23.
See precepts since 2003/4
BPC should monitor the Budget via montly reports available to the public either via the minutes and at AGAR viewings. The current BPC apporach comply with the BPC Risk Register e.g. Reporting & Auditingand Financial Reguations Section 3 Annual Estimates (Budget) and Forward Planning
BPC budget overview and . There is currently only a Q3 Annual Budget by Cost Code Centre
All named Ear Marked Reserves (EMRs and reviewed MAR23 Min 362.18) and their start and end balances. Additonal Reserves infoand blog
Risk Assessment/Register (Internal Audit Report - C)“This authority assessed the significant risks to achieving tis objectives and reviewed the adequacy of arrangements to manage these”
BPC ticked 'NO' see explanation
The current BPC online Risk Assessment/Register is dated 2020 Draftv3 as seen here? However, Agenda and Minutes 13MAR23 (Min 362.20) note an updated version as seen here
See BPC Standing Orders for Committees and Working Groups.
Asset Register (Internal Audit Report – H)“Asset … registers were complete and accurate and properly maintained”
BPC ticked 'NO' see explanation
Asset Register 2022-23 asreviewed 12JUN23 (Min 365.12.ii) alsoreposted for 2021-22
How does the Asset Register relate to the Maintenance Schedule, if any, and future budget setting? How does it relate to BPC Financial Regulations e.g. 12.6?
How should Trust items be listed? e.g. BPC are Trustees of the Playground and Custodian Trustees of the Village Halls, previously residents were told it should be 'nil' value on the Asset Register, so where is it recorded now? Also previous AGAR returns.
Church Clock valued at £200 but BPC started a £12K reguidling project (BVN#121 insert last page) However, a lower quote was found 12JUN23 for £8,220, appointing Timsbury Clocks (Min 365.11), a huge saving of £4K? What money has been raised for the Clock so far, where is this documented? E.g. 10JUL23 Cost Centre Codes line 601 0f £14,049? See EMRs MAR23, allocated Budget and Reserves allocated to church.
Website Information & Transparency (Internal Audit Report – L)“The authority published the required information on a website/webpage up to date at the time of the internal audit in accordance with the relevant legislation"
BPC ticked 'NO' see explanation
NB: AGAR wording has changed from:"The authority publishes information on a free to access website/webpage up to date at the time of the internal audit in accordance with any relevant transparency code requirement”
See ICO Transparency Overview.. In 2020?Councilllors reviewed BPC’s Publication Scheme see comparison with ICO Template Publication Scheme
Each BPC agenda refers to the “Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014”
Website duties are part of the clerk's role
Trustee responsibilities (Internal Audit Report – O)"Trust funds (including charitable) - The council met its responsibilities as a trustee"
BPC ticked 'NO' see explanation
From BPC website: “The Parish Council is directly responsible for the … Coronation & Jubilee Halls as Custodial Trustees [Protocol]– Operated by an independent Management Committee. Youth Centre land as Custodial Trustees [see Lease] Coronation Hall Car Park … ” and “Play Area and Equipment”Each Trust appears to be run as a charity.
NB Halls have been in trust from many years, however in the AGAR return they changed from 'N/A Trust' 2020 AGAR pg3 Box 'M' to 'In Trust' 2021 AGAR and 2022 AGARs Box 'O'. See External Auditor report para 4c. Also see Asset Register Trusts.
A record of submitted annual returns, accounts and trustees' annual report (TAR) for the last five financial periods can be found on the Charity Commission website – (although there appears to be none for BPC as a Custodial Trustee of the Coronation & Jubilee Halls, Car Park or Land under Youth Club?)
- Independent Halls Management Committee (Charity No: 1042602), and related 2010 Protocol to hold quarterly public meetings? Where are these minutes published) See External Auditor report para 4c
- The Playground/Park is managed by BPC as a Playground Charity (Charity No: 304491) who appear to have recorded/spent nothing on the park in the last 5 years but instead record this Trust expenditure in BPC accounts? Dec 21 (Min 347.10.1) “…required formal annual meeting of the Playground Charity” Last meeting 22JUN23 no minutes yet., includes Park AGM 14FEB22 See External Auditor report para 4b
BPC received a grant from NSC but no amount was minuted for £4,987.5(Dec 22 Min 358.7.5) no contract or conditions were published, intallation quotation was £9,975 (Oct 22 Min 356.7.5) given to Home Front noted in expenses(Nov 22 Min 357.8.113) (See blog)?
- The Youth Club is managed and financed independently by the Bleadon Youth Club (Charity No: 304492) and has a Lease with BPC, see Notes
Declaration of InterestsPecuniary Interests (Appendix A) and Other/Non-pecuniary interests (Appendix B) Commitment to the Nolan Principles via online Code of Conduct Newer version 12JUN23 Agenda (Min 365.12.iv) hereCouncillors’ Declarations can be found on the BPC website, along with a short biography/statement for each councillor.
Are these declarations reviewed annually?
During council meetings up to May 2023, Cllrs appeared actively discouraged to ask for clarification about potential conflicts of interest. This is indicated in BPC’s Revised MAR23 Risk Register Section 4 “… it is not the responsibility of members or the Clerk to cajole the member with a potential interest to actually declare one”
MinutesMinutes should record all BPC decisions and associated income and expenditure, including precept, project budget setting, awarded and received grants, tenders & contracts, etc.
All expenditure is authorised by two councillors.
NB: Neither Income nor Reserves are noted on the monthly minutes Can councillors authorise their own project expenditure?
See transparency section
StaffBPC only has one part-time staff member – the clerk, who is also the designated Proper Officer and Responsible Financial Officer (RFO)
All other services are contracted out (see Contracts)
BPC did not release any signed contract for the clerk post, nor job specification or job description as part of the previous recruitment process but released information in the 2023-24 financial year - clerk'sjob description, specification, advert/ website starting SCP24 and contract
Recruitment should comply with BPC's Risk Register e.g. Salaries & Associated Costsand Financial Regulations e.g. pg10-12 Reviewed 13MAR23
National Association of Local Councils Old Scales
Service ContractsAll services other than that of the Clerk are contracted out (see Staff)Contracts are stated to be reviewed annually by the Personnel Committee TOR, on the BPC website.How do contracts comply with BPC's Parish Council Risk Assessment /revised MAR23and Financial Regulations/ Revised 13MAR23 e.g. pg10-12?
Some contracts are available on the BPC website (at the bottom of the policies page)
Grass Cutting signed contract - £4K (Nov20 Min 337.7.10),
Village Ranger signed contract - £6.7K (Nov20 Min 337.7.12)
Toilets unsigned contract – £1.7K (Nov20 Min 337.7.11) See Notes
Independent Village News Editor (resigned MAR23 Min 362.13)unsigned contract – salary undeclared in minutes – previously assumed to be £400 per edition/£1.6K per annum? Jul20 (Min 334.4.vi) £350 for one edition, Sep20 Min 335.7.5 Regularise Editor appointment? Nov20 (Min 337.7.2) TOR? Dec21 (Min 347.9.f) Review of Newsletter arrangements, what was the agreed/recorded outcome? See Notes
Quarterly Financial Reports - Budget by Cost CentreBPC post quarterly financial reports except Q4/Mar – this is published in June after the accounts have been finalised?All quarterly reports for the current AGAR period 2021/22 have been removed from the BPC website,except Q3? Q4 is seen APR23 (Min 363.13)
Compare Q3, Q4/Final, May22 and Q1-2022/23 for this AGAR period - e.g. Platinum Jubilee Project?
Summary Receipts and Payments
Includes:
Income,Staff CostsAdministration, Grants, Open Spaces Special ProjectsSummary Receipts and Payments needs to be worked out from the Budget Setting document but compare with previous 2021-22 here. The External Audit Processes of 2020-22 helped to clarify BPC's role and responsibilities with regards to stated grants, contributions, project funding, etc.
Where are grant applications minuted and published? NB BPC Grant allocation for the year only stated to be £500? These type of 'Grants' should comply with BPC's Risk Registerand Financial Regulations e.g. 1.14
Example: The Independent Group ‘Bleadon in Bloom’ (BIB) Project(NB: BPC finances run Apr-Mar, BIB run Jan-Dec, how do the figures correlate? How does this fit with the Finances stated in the BIB portfolios?)
BPC Grant/Budget 2023-24 of £1K vs BPC expenditure (see minutes for Apr-July 2023) vs BIB Portfolio 2023
BPC BIB Grant/Budget2022-23 of £4,984 vs BPC expenditure of £1,402 vs BIB Budget 2022-23 of £4,224 vs BIB Portfolio 2022
BPC BIB Grant/Budget 2021-22 of £8,466 vs BPC expenditure of £3,599 vs BIB Budget 2021-22 of £4,884 vs Portfolio 2020-21
No grant application was submitted to BPC? Did BIB apply for any funding in BPC's name? If so, where is the outcome minuted?
Where is BPC's Platinum Jubilee Project budget publicly agreed and minuted? Is it £7.8K as in Q1-2022/23 overview and 31May22 quarterly info section 250 breakdown? (Why is this info not in Q4 Final 2021-22?) Is some/all the budget held in the Village Celebrations EMR at the start of the year?
BPC didn't produce any Working Group minutes, so how were the project decisions agreed and noted? Why is this informaton and parish recommendations not publicly available? (e.g. Jun 21 Min 343.7.3) How is the 2021/22 individual Jubilee Project expenditure identiffied in the minutes? NB 11 Oct 21 (Min 346.7.7) "... illegal under Local Government Legislation for any individual member to act in isolation." (Notes)
BPC's Reguilding Church Clock Project 14 Feb 22 (Min 350.7.5) 'Contingency EMR' to be used for any shortfall. How did this end up by 31MAR23 and beyond?
Itemised Expenditure per Budget Line itemThis report should indicate exactly what was spent on each project, service, etc.
Repeated requests were ignored for detailed information during APR22-MAR23 even during AGAR process. (Ideally looking for a Locking PC style itemised accountable budgeting)
Individual Invoices and supporting Receipts for each item of expenditureIndividual invoices and receipts should be present at the AGAR viewing.
Council PoliciesE.g. Standing Orders
Financial Regulations
Polcies on BPC website
See also:
Previous Bleadon Accountability Statement AGAR Guide (AUG22)
External Audit Challenges (2020-2022)
2023
When the Going Gets ToughCould Do Better D MinusBPC Reserves Currently at £37K- incl audio2022
Proposed Budget Version 1 RejectedHow much Bleadon money will the council give itself this timeWhat a Bleadon Waste- incl audioBleadon Accountability Statement AGAR GuideBleadon Parish Council Precept SettingWhat did Bleadon Parish Council Spend Half a Million On----]]>
◦11Apr 2022
◦12 Apr 2021
◦ Apr 2020 – No meeting held due to COVID19 Pandemic Policies
◦08 Apr 2019
◦09 Apr 2018]]>
Click to enlarge image
Click to enlarge image
Outline planning application for up to 33 dwellings - Land At Bleadon Hill Bleadon Hill opposite Hillcote Bleadon
A new application was validated on Tuesday 11 Apr 2023 - Land at Bleadon Hill Bleadon Hill opposite Hillcote Bleadon
"Outline planning application for up to 33 dwellings with access for approval; appearance, layout, scale and landscaping reserved for subsequent approval.”
This application is outside the parish of Bleadon but the comments deadline is Thu 25 May 2023. Here is the link to the application 23/P/0754/OUT on North Somerset Council Planning website. (Previous information here)
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
---
Some previous related applications:
OCT 2019 - Proposed 40 Dwellings Bleadon HillAUG 2019 - Proposed 40 Houses Land at Bleadon HillMAR 2017 - Bleadon Hill 79 Houses Appeal DismissedMAY 2016 - Appeal information on Bleadon Hill 79 Housing DevelopmentMAR 2016 - This Week North Somerset Decide 79 Bleadon Hill DevelopmentDEC 2014 - Outline Planning for 79 Houses on Bleadon Hill--------
See also:]]>
Click to enlarge image
Click to enlarge
Riverside Holiday Park expansion towards the river again - 36 more pitches on open space
A new application was validated on Wed 12 Apr 2023 - Riverside Holiday Village Bridgwater Road Bleadon Weston-super-Mare BS24 0AN. For:
"Change of use of recreational land ancillary to a caravan park to create 36 new static caravan pitches further to the South of the existing site”
Comments deadline is Fri 19 May 2023 (previously Thu 11 May 2023). Here is the link to the application 23/P/0556/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website. (Previous information here)
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
---
There are about 1100 residents in Bleadon living in approximately 540 dwellings There are approximately 325 houses (approx 662 people) within in the village Settlement Boundary and an additional 215+ (approx 438+ people) throughout the remaining Parish. This application would remove more even open space/green field from the site. Riverside Caravan Park currently has in the order of 260 units. This application could bring that number up to 300 units, potentially catering for over 700 people (see below)! Greater than the number of people in the whole of the Village of Bleadon at approx 662 residents! (NB these units pay business rates to North Somerset Council, but would not contribute to Bleadon taxes/precept,)
As this current application is outside the current Settlement Boundary/Village Fence, and contrary to resident's feedback to the adopted 20 year Parish Plan, residents feel that it shouldn't be approved. BPC’s Village Plan Meeting Leaflet distributed to all residents in 2005 stated, "Your views are very important, please don't complain about the future direction the village takes if you couldn't be bothered to let people know how you feel about things that are important to you!" 60% of residents responded with their views subsequently incorporated into the adopted 2009-2029 Bleadon Parish Plan (As opposed to the 30% response to the now abandoned Neighbourhood Development Plan Survey) The Parish Plan, although adopted in 2009, was never published and was declared missing in 2019, but a 103 Improvements leaflet was subsequently distributed in 2009, which shows some of the key outcomes.
In 2017, the Mercury published an article relating to an additional 90 units on the £5 million expansion at Riverside Holiday Village/Purn Caravan Park stating that, "The park has a current capacity of up to 400 people, across the campsite and in static and touring caravans." The Holiday Park was eventually granted an additional 40 units, expanding from 163 units to 203 units. It then joined with the adjacent Car Boot site on Accommodation Road adding a further 57 units, totalling the current 260 units. Following the Mercury’s statement above, this could mean the caravan park already has a potential capacity of 638 people! If a further 36 units are added it could then potentially cater for greater than 700 people in nearly 300 units! Greater than than the number of people in the Village of Bleadon of itself, at approx 662 residents!
14APR23 Weston Mercury article states:
“The planning application would see 36 additional caravan pitches created to the south of the existing site. The applicant says the roadways, drainage, water and electrical infrastructure needed for this extended site already exists. The site is accessible by foot from a bus service, which runs to and from Weston-super-Mare and Burnham-on-Sea regularly. The site also has good road links to the M5 motorway, meaning that the additional pitches could draw in more tourists” (PDF)
Previous related applications:
Riverside Site :NOV 2020 - Purn Holiday Park 10 LodgesOCT 2017 - Caravan Expansion Approved AUG 2017 - Is Bleadon set to be the next Brean Tourist and Leisure AreaJUL 2017 - 90 Caravans at Purn/Riverside Park UpdateFormer Boot Sale/Accommodation Rd site:2015/16 - 57 new units at Accommodation Road--------
See also:]]>
North Somerset Local Flood Risk Managment Strategy
09 Feb 2306 Apr at noon"The strategy sets out our objectives and actions to make your community more resilient to surface water flooding..."North Somerset Council (NSC) states that it is
"... updating our Local Flood Fisk Management Strategy (LFRMS) and would like your views. Please read the strategy and let us know your views using this accessible online questionnaire before noon on 6 April 2023. If you need materials in a different format, contact the Flood Risk team by email at floodrisk@n-somerset.gov.uk.
The strategy sets out our objectives and actions to make your community more resilient to surface water flooding (sometimes known as flash flooding) and groundwater flooding. Parts of the strategy also cover broader flood risks, such as flooding from the sea and large rivers.
The objectives of the strategy are:
a flood resilient North Somerset, today’s growth and infrastructure in North Somerset being resilient in tomorrow’s climate, North Somerset ready to respond and adapt to flooding. Over the last 8 years, North Somerset Council has received external funding and invested £3.2million in large schemes to reduce surface water flood risk, in Wrington, and Summer Lane, Weston-super-Mare.
We spend more than £1million each year to maintain road drainage and flood defences, and we are starting to use new techniques such as natural flood management and property level flood resilience."
Documents:
Summary - Local Flood Risk Management Document (PDF)Part A - Local Flood Risk Managment (PDF)Part B - Guide to RMAs (PDF)Part C - Guide to Flood Risk Funding (PDF)Part D - North Somerset Natural Flood (PDF)Part E - Flood Resilient North Somerset (PDF)Part F - Small Watercourse Maintenance (PDF)Part G - Coastal Flood Risk Awareness (PDF)---
See also:]]>
North Somerset Electric Vehicle Strategy
14 Feb 23 at 1pm06 Apr at noon"Electric vehicles present an opportunity to reduce tailpipe emissions and air pollution produced by motor vehicles in our communities and along our road network..."North Somerset Council (NSC) states that it’s
“… only accepting views via [a] questionnaire, not as individual letters or emails”. Also, it’ “...had to make the [questionnaire] text limits quite tight so [it] can analyse the results quickly and efficiently.
Read NSC’s Electric Vehicle Strategy and /or the 'At a Glance' document for increasing the uptake of Electric Vehicles in North Somerset by 2030. The online questionnaire before it closes at noon tomorrow Thursday 6 April.(Summary of Questionnaire page1 and page2)
Issues residents should consider before supporting NSC rollout of its EV strategy:
mining of core elements - cobalt, nickel, lithium - destruction of environments, pollution of water, promotion of slavery, stealing childhoods (PDF), fracturing communities supposedly to enable NSC residents to live a ‘green’ life. Colchester City Council Meeting on Environmental & Sustainabilitysafety - battery instability – spontaneous fires (PDF) - weight of vehicles (PDF)end of life recycling – poisonous chemicals, recycling dilemmas (PDF)collision insurance problems – inability to know the stability of batteries causing cars to be written off rather than repaired - repairability (PDF)second-hand car market - Electric Vehicles are taking twice as long to sell in the second hand and trade market as Petrol and Diesel cars.effect on energy consumption during an energy crisis - Switzerland(PDF)how the electric will be created and effect on rural environment e.g. solar and wind power generators on green pastures and arable fieldsNSC At a Glance (PDF)
“It is forecast that the public sector will need to fund 613 fast and 30 rapid publicly accessible charge points by 2030”As of 2022 Q3, 2,800 electric vehicles were registered in North Somerset,""It is expected that EV uptake in North Somerset will rise to 7.7% of all vehicles in 2025, and 30.1% in 2030.""By 2030, this equates to around 37,509 EVs within North Somerset.""Residents and businesses will therefore be encouraged to only undertake a journey by private EV after first assessing options above EVs in the transport hierarchy, such as walking, wheeling, cycling or using public transport. The provision of charge points should not diminish active travel and public transport as the natural first choices."NSC Electric Vehicle Strategy (PDF)
"The strategy provides an overview of EV charging technologies, assesses current EV uptake and existing charging provision, and forecasts EV uptake and charge point demand to 2030. It also discusses delivery models for the roll-out of charge points, alignment with the Revive Network, and the integration of EVs within our transport hierarchy.” What about all the issues surrounding the making and disposing of EV’s and batteries? The restricted travel issues? Safety?The Revive Network is based on the ‘Own & Operate’ delivery model, supported by grant funding... As there is a growing appetite from the private sector to invest and reducing central Government grant funding available, we will support the transition of the Revive Network to a concession model for residential charging,Opportunities to incorporate EVs and charging infrastructure within other travel modes and choices will be explored. These include:Mobility Hubs • Car clubs • Public transport • Sustainable commuting initiatives • E-bikes • Taxis and private hire vehiclesRapid and ultra-rapid charge points are more likely to attract full funding by the private sector. However, these could also be included in a broader concession agreement with slower residential charge points in order to help cross-subsidise less commercially attractive sites, particularly in rural areas."NSC state that cross-subsidy required in less commercially attractive sites, particularly in rural areas, yet rural areas may be losing their green pastures and arable fields in order to site solar and wind farms that may be depended upon to create this ‘green’ electricity to power the EVs! Also putting the local and national food security at risk.
NSC states:
“Electric vehicles present an opportunity to reduce tailpipe emissions and air pollution produced by motor vehicles in our communities and along our road network. It is recognised that greatest emissions reductions are likely to be realised through the decarbonisation of the energy grid.
However, it is important that our steps in enabling the transition to electric vehicles happen in parallel and support the grid decarbonisation, rather than awaiting its completion.
The strategy outlines our current position, sets a course for the scale of our network by 2030 and outlines the approach we will take to creating reliable, equitable and accessible charging provision across North Somerset.”
Six Objectives & Actions
We have set out 6 objectives, each supported by a number of actions which show our role of leadership and facilitation and the need to work in partnership with stakeholders, such as charge point operators, National Grid, private landowners and businesses.
To expand the network of EV Charge points in North SomersetTo seek private sector investment to fund a scaled up charging networkTo collaborate with the REVIVE Network and other key organisationsTo influence other organisations to fill gaps in the charging networkTo future proof new developmentsTo monitor the pace of EV uptake, charge point provision and government announcements---
See also:]]>
In January councillors “Resolved to agree the” budget and precept, but BPC hasn’t minuted if and what they agreed (Min 359.7.1 & 2) i.e. £64K for both? There was no information with the agenda or minutes, nor at the meeting? The Reserves were not reviewed until March (Min 362.18) (See BOB Dec and Jan Budget blogs)
BPC’s March newsletter budget spreadsheet articlesaid,
”At the council's meeting on 16 January 2023, the budget for 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 was agreed. As a result, the precept is £64,653.00 to cover expenditure over the course of the whole year. The tables below illustrate how the budget is made up”
But the budget figures in the newsletter indicated £67,193? Other columns in the table also didn’t add up correctly – BPC has now published a new budget spreadsheet on their website, with different figures up to 2022/23, but grant incomes seem to be missing e.g. for the Playground (£5K? NSC Min 358.7.5) and Bleadon in Bloom (£1K? for '60?' plaques Min 358.8.129)? Perhaps all will become clearer in this year’s AGAR process?
The draft end of year quarterly report also appears to have inconsistencies. E.g. Nearly a year on, residents are still waiting for a Platinum Jubilee final working group meeting to finalise the expenditure, but did BPC really only spend £1,252 on the Platinum Jubilee? NB: It spent £1K on two newsletter editions for Bleadon Hill, outside the parish, so what was the rest spent on?
As BOB followers know, BPC is waiting for the External Auditor’s final report on the last two years finances and governance (AGAR Min 362.7.ii, etc), the outcome will be known in a few weeks….we’ll keep you posted
---
See also:]]>
Mercury Extract
April 2013
Thoughts of an ex-councillor 2023
Other info:
A briefing for prospective candidates (Presentation)A briefing for Parish / Town Councils (8 December 2022) (Presentation)BPC "will have already been provided with an estimated cost should the elections for [Bleadon] area be contested"Local elections - Thursday 4 May 2023Notice of elections - Parish - DistrictStanding for electionGuidance and resources that you need if you are a candidate at a parish council election in EnglandDeadlinesRegister to Vote - The deadline to register to vote is midnight on Monday 17 April 2023.Postal Votes - The deadline to apply for a postal vote is 5pm on Tuesday 18 April 2023Proxy Vote - The deadline to apply for a proxy vote is 5pm on Tuesday 25 April 2023.Voter ID in Polling Stations- for the first time, electors will now have to show an 'appproved' form of photo identification before voting.If necessary you can apply for a Voter Authority Certificate(PDF) - deadline 5pm on 25 April 2023UPDATES
Timetable of events herePDFStatement of Persons Nominated and Notice of Uncontested Election ResultsShould the election in which you are standing be contested (i.e., enough valid nominations have been received for there to be a poll), the Statement of Persons Nominated will be published on the NSC website here on Wednesday 05 April.Should the election be uncontested (i.e. NSC received fewer nominations than there were vacancies) then NSC will publish the Notice of Uncontested Election Results on the same webpage and date as above.UPDATE 06APR23 Uncontested Parish Councillors - Bleadon CouncillorsElection expensesCandidates and their agents at local elections must follow certain rules about how much they can spend, who they can accept donations from, and what they must report after the election.The information you will require from NSC in order to complete your return is as follows:Last date to publish notice of election: Monday 27 March 2023Number of electors in the ward: Electorate figures for North Somerset District Council candidates election expenses (PDF)Electorate figures for Parish / Town Council candidates election expenses (PDF)It is your responsibility to fully and accurately report candidate spending. Further guidance can be found on the electoral commission website here (PDF)]]>
UPDATE 24APR23 BPC publish consultation response (PDF) only 300-400 people, out of 217K people in North Somerset, responded to the NSC consultation, i.e. 0.18% represent NSC's decision making, indicating that most people were unaware of the consultation. Is this result statistically significant? Is it enough to base policy NSC on?
UPDATE 14MAR23: Glastonbury Town Council meeting on 20 minute Neighbourhoods, the Absolute Zero Report from UK Fires and Timetable Roadmap (Adams fb) indicating the reality of 15 min Cities and Zero Emissions.(Also see FreeBathStreets)
No planes out of U.K - all airports to closeZero ShippingBeef and lamb phased out (see Dutch Farmers Citizen Movementand BBC report on political win - PDF)No imports except by trainNo cars except electric or driverless.No gas boilers /cookers or traditional wood burners (Zero fossil fuels - e.g Bristol - PDF)UPDATE 20FEB23: BOB response to NSC Active Travel Plan consultation. BPC response - when was this discussed and approved by Full Council, and how were the public consulted? Considering the 13FEB23 discussion below, this was minuted by BPC at the 13FEB23 meeting as:
"Members of the public - A resident asked why the North Somerset Active Travel Plan had not been advertised by the Parish Council and whether the Parish Council would be responding given the tight deadline." (i.e. consultation closed the following week, NO extraordinary public meeting was held, NO agreement by BPC for this submission was minnuted at the MAR23 BPC meeting?) it seems that ONLY 3-400 of 217K residents respond to the consultation, i.e. 0.18%
UPDATE 13FEB23:At their meeting on 13FEB23 Bleadon Parish Council decided NOT TO INFORM RESIDENTS nor to address this consultation, leaving it to some time in the future .... after the consultation date has passed, without Full Council or public awareness or discussion??? NB: each NSC action plan states, "we encourage you to discuss issues local to you with your Town or Parish Council and your Elected North Somerset Councillor for your ward area." BOB asked at the Full Council meeting, but BPC seemed disinterested in responding as Bleadon's Statutory Consultee? What is BPC's role, are councillors effective in representing residents? On asking the District Councillor present whether NSC would go the same way as Oxford, with restricted travel passes between neighbourhoods (see below), it was indicated that this would be for the new council to decide, after the upcoming elections.
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationActive Travel Action Plans (PDF)
10:00 09 Jan 2310:00
20 Feb 23
"Active travel is the movement of people or goods using the physical activity of a person. The most popular forms are walking, wheeling, cycling, running and scooting"
NSC want to hear from "... everybody: residents, businesses, community groups, schools, North Somerset councillors, Town and Parish Councils, and any other stakeholders in North Somerset.", so why wasn't this on any Bleadon Parish Council Agenda to inform residents of these plans and public consultation? (09JAN23, 30JAN23, 13FEB23)
GB News Overview of 15 Minute City Madness
Click image for 6mins video
Stated to be hurting communities, hurting small businesses, restricting personal freedom of movement and accusation of State overreach. With reference to parliamentary questions (PDF)
There are 7 North Somerset Council Active Travel Action Plans:
LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS Action Plan (PDF)
"The overall aim of Liveable Neighbourhoods is to reduce inappropriate through traffic", who defines 'inappropriate'? Weston Central Liveable Neighbourhood Consultation response published 31JAN23NSC Challenges, "Funding ... Community buy-in – some residents and businesses may be opposed to change initially" Surely this should be community led in the first place?Is this a future Oxtord 15 Minute Neighbourhood approach - article OCT22(PDF), Oxford Council Recommendations and Documentation. Also, Zones, Oxfordshire Council seem to want less than 100 passes per year - see sections 10 and 11 recommendations, "...clear that to effect modal shift it is necessary to rely more on ‘sticks’ to change behaviour than ‘carrots’...Recommendation 1: That the Council reviews the number of residential passes made available, with a view to pursuing greater traffic reduction through giving out fewer residential per-person traffic filter passes during the trial period than is currently proposed." (PDF)Also, Canterbury (PDF), Bath (PDF) and Norfolk (PDF)or Southend Council whose representative clearly stated "... SOUTHEND Council has ruled out ever signing up to a 15-minute city scheme which restricts residents’ ability to travel freely across the city" (PDF)How does this fit with the global C40 Cities (PDF) e.g. C40 vlog and Paris 15min City (PDF)?“Neighbourhoods are enhanced by reducing through traffic, providing quieter, cleaner and greener streets for people to live, work and play on. Everyday shorter trips are more attractive by active choices, such as walking, wheeling and cycling, with all addresses still being accessible by car if necessary” who defines what is ‘necessary’?"prioritise to enhance residential neighbourhoods to make them quieter ... make everyday transport choices by active ways like walking/wheeling and cycling more attractive""The boundary of Liveable Neighbourhoods will be clearly defined ... low traffic environment... Inside Liveable Neighbourhoods vehicle speeds and volume will be low, and walking/wheeling and cycling will be the most convenient form of travel for short journeys."20mph ACTION PLAN (PDF)
“20mph along Purn Way, Coronation Road, Shiplate Road and adjacent residential roads… Concept only at present” Who has submitted these ‘concept’ ideas, as they do not appear to have gone through any BPC motion, discussion, resolution or resident consultation?NSC Challenges, "Funding ... Resources to develop and deliver schemes once they have been prioritised."ACTIVE TRAVEL NETWORK Action Plan (PDF)
"Our starting point is that all scheme proposals will be considered against our Place and Movement Framework".(Image of map) See also NSC 'Transport Behaviour Change' Action Plan 2023-30."The first priority is for the re-allocation or re- purposing of Highway space to meet the needs of active travel.""Worle High Street - Reduce or remove through traffic to improve walking/ wheeling and cycling safety. This will encourage active travel to the High Street and to nearby schools. Improving the public realm will encourage people to spend time and money in a more attractive, cleaner and safer Worle High Street. Outline proposal'" This is just as likely to force businesses to close down due to lack of through traffic.Links to climate change and health, e.g. "Active travel is a great investment for the climate .... Physical inactivity costs the NHS up to £1 billion each year... to make as many journeys as possible by active travel."How do these plans fit with the current government "Consultation on draft legislation to support identity verification" due to end 01 Mar 2023?NSC Challenges, "Funding ... Competing demands for Highway space, and public acceptance that changes to how we use this are necessary. ,... Changes to political priorities, both locally and nationally."FIRST AND LAST MILE (to public transport) Action Plan (PDF)
NSC "approach to achieving a seamless network of inter-connected transport options within and between our towns and villages – joining the dots between transport choices such as bus, rail, walking, wheeling, cycling, micro-mobility (e-bikes, e-cargo and eventually e-scooters) to help increase bus and rail usage"reduce journeys by single occupancy vehicles to and from our towns and villages.""Reduce the need to travel by car wherever possible""increase active travel and e-mobility exponentially" reducing dominance of private cars, such as congestion, carbon emissions, air quality and social exclusion. In Vienna when planning new developments, including mobility hubs, these have led to less parking provision being required,NSC Challenges, "Funding... Ensuring correct level of resource, early engagement with procurement, and ongoing effective work with private sector – to deliver our First and Last Mile programme"See links to various other initiatives being followedRURAL LANES Action Plan (PDF)
"build a network of ‘rural lanes’ with reduced through- traffic"“This supports safer journeys by active travel and those who need to drive for access to their homes/businesses” who defines ‘need’?How does fit with the previous residents Rural Lanes action group (blog)?"reducing vehicle speeds and inappropriate routing of through traffic in both rural and semi-rural communities, together with implementation of virtual footways"Who defines 'inappropriate'?NSC Challenges, "Funding ... Community buy-in – the suggested quiet lanes will rely on community support."SAFER ACTIVE ROUTES TO SCHOOL Action Plan (PDF)
"support and enable children and families to walk, scoot, wheel and cycle to school more often""Continue to develop a programme of work to reduce the requirement for Home to School Transport for mainstream education,""Any new developments should mitigate the need for providing Home to School Transport within the catchment area for a school"NSC Benefits, "Children who walk or cycle to school tend to be more attentive and achieve better results... we aim to raise the number of children travelling by active travel to 55% by 2025"NSC Challenges, "Funding ... Schools and the school community have to be onboard with proposals for them to be fully effective"TRANSPORT BEHAVIOUR CHANGE Action Plan (PDF)
“Active travel interventions and incentives support behaviour change”, What types of interventions? Who is asking for this ‘change’ of public behaviour and for what tangible purposes?"we will prioritise to promote and help enable the shifting of everyday transport choices to more active ways, such as walking, wheeling, and cycling"" we will target investment and transport behaviour change initiatives at our more deprived areas whenever possible, to help provide residents and businesses with safer, cheaper and more green options for everyday transport journeys.""North Somerset’s most deprived areas are in Weston-super-Mare as well as parts of Banwell, Clevedon, Portishead and Pill....Open, Fairer, Greener North Somerset Council Transport Behaviour Change Action Plan – Summary 2""Travel planning and branding New Roots, New Routes (see branding in figure 2) is a travel information pack, tailored for new housing developments.""The Active Travel Champions scheme (see branding in figure 3) is to get more people walking or cycling to work through peer lead support. Our champions are empowered and supported to make positive changes within their organisations and change the behaviour of those around them... for all staff to use."NSC Challenges, "Funding... Community interventions often only available for new developments"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (PDF)
"We want your ideas about active travel interventions you want in your area. Residents, businesses, visitors and other stakeholders – we encourage you to discuss issues local to you with your Town or Parish Council and your Elected North Somerset Councillor for your ward area". Like NSC Local Plans, councillors have not put this on their agenda before the consultation deadline of 20FEB23 - Agenda 16JAN, 30JAN, 13FEB?How do these plans fit with the current government "Consultation on draft legislation to support identity verification" due to end 01 Mar 2023, and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Consultation (and noted changes) due to end 02 Mar 2023?“We will continue to seek out funding opportunities to boost our limited capability for planning, delivering and monitoring our active travel improvements and behaviour change initiatives with our communities” How will all these plans eventually be funded and maintained, more public taxes? Who is influencing these ‘necessary’ activities, ‘needs’, and ‘behaviour changes’?North Somerset Council's Aims are:
Deliver safe and frequent active travel to enable improved public health,Tackle the climate emergency (what is the evidence of a climate emergency, that these plans will resolve (info)?)Help residents address the cost of living crisis,Drive local economic developmentCreate liveable neighbourhoods with our communities and through the planning system (how does this fit with govt planning changes regarding housing requirements? NSC DEC22 press release)---
See also:
Transport consultations and projects consultation pageRegulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution (PDF - Overview)UK Fires Reports(About)Absolute Zero ReportUnlocking Absolute Zero
Zerpa
Construction Sector Innovation within Absolute Zero
Energy Sector Innovation within Absolute Zero
Materials and Manufacturing (Slide Pack)
Minus 45
Entrepreneurs not Emissions
Steel Arising]]>
The two most vocal councillors also appeared to be unconcerned that BPC has decided to engage the External Auditor at £355 per hour rather than to simply release existing information in an open and transparent manner, as reflected in its approach to this budget process.
Addtional Information:
Reserves as at 31 Mar 22Quarterly summaries (differing values across information?)Q3 2021-22Q1 and Q2 2022-23Q3 due in January 23AGAR Section 2Previously agreed budgets2022-23 Jan 22 - £64,158 Min 349.3 detail on page 22021-22 Dec 20 - £68,637 Min 338.7.4 detail on page 132020-21 Jan 20 - £55,329 Min 330.8Various Minutes (NB Nov Minutes were not accepted by full council in Dec, and the Dec Agenda also contains errors.Staff budget Jan 20 Extraordinary Minutes page 2Toilet Small Business Grant £10K July 2020 Min 334.10.3Neighbourhood Development Plan £3K? return to funde Oct 22 Min 346.4.19. BPC now creating a 'village plan' Oct 22 Min 356.7.11Wallflower CIL £1.3K Nov 22 Version 1 Min 357.7.4Clerk salary backpay £? Nov Agenda Min 357.7.6Playground NSC £5K grant Dec Agenda Min 357.7.5 (358?)Bleadon in Bloom plaques £769 Dec Agenda Min 357.8.129 (358?)Toilet Renovation - £20K unaccepted by BPC Dec Agenda 357.7.1 (358?)NSC Playground grant £5K Dec Agenda Min 357.7.5 (358?)----
See also:]]>
---
See also:
Every BPC Agenda states, "Under the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, any members of the public are allowed to take photographs, film and audio record the proceedings and report on all public meetings (including on social media)" (e.g.Nov 22 see also Govt Plain English Guide)NOTES:]]>
How is this an open and transparent approach to public decision making and expenditure?
The three new working groups are Finance, Communications and Planning (Oct Min 356.7.10). However, it isn't minuted that:
the Finance Working Group (preferred by councillors to be a Budget WG?) to be led by Cllr Davies (assisted by Cllrs Clarke & Sheppard);Communications WG to be led by Cllr Getty (assisted by Cllr Garrett) andPlanning WG to be led by Cllr Clarke (assisted by Cllrs Boyce & Williams).It is interesting to note that BPC has already has a Planning WG with unpaublished TOR and during the recent AGAR process BPC stated that it also has a Budget Working Group, but it chose not release any associated information as to when it may have met or what it may have discussed. Also, up until May 2020, following the appointment of a new clerk, BPC had in operation a Finance & Personnel Committee scheduled to meet quarterly in public, and a Planning Committee that used to meet publicly each month. All committee meetings used to be documented and had published TOR. No minuted explanation has been given as to why these committees stopped, although reference has been made in relation to not adding to the clerk’s workload (yet previously the clerk managed to attend and document over 20 additional meetings a year as seen in 2014!)
These three new Working Groups follow this year’s unminuted working groups:
Playground Training Equipment Grant Working Groupled by Cllrs Garrett & Williams (for 'independent' Charity/Trust) - May 22 Min 353.13.15 – Assumed to have a budget in the order of £10K (£5K grant + £5K Bleadon unspecified taxes/precept/reserves Oct Min 356.7.4 & 5) (Playground Remodelling Blog)Contactus WGoriginally led by Cllr Tyson - May 22 Min 353.13.14 and again Nov 22 Agenda Min 357.7.eAsset Register WGled by Cllrs Clarke & Sheppard -May 22 Min 353.13.4Neighbourhood Plan WGled by Cllrs Boyce, Garrett & Williams - May 22 Min 353.7.d? Total amount spent currently undeclared (Two grants totalling £6K + BPC budget/reserves £3K allocated?)Planning WGled by Cllrs Clarke, Davies & Sheppard - May Min 353.10.15 & Dec 21 Min 347.7.1Toilets & Coronation Hall Environs led by Cllrs Davies, Clark & Sheppard together with the Clerk - Jan 22 Min 348.4.13 Dec 21 Min 347.7.6 & 9 "to set up a working party to investigate the current state of the toilets with a view of re-furbishing in 2022" Jan 22 Min and May 22 Min 353.10.8 It seems that No Reserve was set aside. There is a maintenance budget of £4K with £2.6K currently spent (Q2). See current quote blog.Jubilee WG led by Cllr Williams - Festivities finished in June this year. Assumed to have spent in the order of £2.3K. No information has been given as to any income raised or how it was spent (Q2). Project still open as tree planting by Bleadon in Bloom yet to conclude.Bleadon-in-BloomNot a BPC run project. On 18 January 2021 BPC wrote to BOB, "The Bleadon in Bloom group does receive a grant from the council but other than that it is not run by the council. A representative from the council keeps us up to date with the Bleadon in Bloom group but it is independent of the council."BPC NewsletterNot a BPC run proejct. BOB asked BPC to add an article to 'their' newsletter, and on 14 May 2021 BPC replied that the newsletter editor, "... has [full] editorial responsibility for the Bleadon Village News it will be entirely up to her whether or not she includes your [or indeed any persons] suggestion" On 17 May 2021, the newsletter Editor wrote, "Firstly, I must state that the magazine is entirely my own ..." NB This year's Bleadon taxes/precept for the newsletter is £1,6K to the Editor and approx £3.4K for printing (£5K) (Q2).Last year expenditure was £1.6K and £2.4K respectively (£4K) (Q4)BPC has still not released the draft April Annual Parish Meeting minutes, despite this being a resident and NOT a parish council meeting (May 22 Min 353.13.12) Nor it seems have any related resident or councillor questions or proposed suggestions been put to council for consideration, over six months later.
As long-term readers will be aware, over the last decade or so, BOB has had several productive meetings with councillors regarding transparency and public documentation, but for some reason when councillors take recommendations to full council they get over-ridden. For example, September last year Min 345.7.7, councillors’ recommendations were ‘struck’ from the agenda with no further discussion, nor documented reasoning, despite BOB asking for an explanation. The minutes also imply that there was a Personnel Committee meeting, which is incorrect.
Minute (a) – No documented explanation is given as to why the Finance & Personnel, Planning and Open Spaces committees were stopped after the clerk arrived, nor why they couldn’t be restarted.Minute (b) – Previous clerks managed to get minutes out to the public within a week to 10 days. They are currently posted a week before the next council meeting, which can be three weeks later to over 18 months later (e.g. May 21 Personnel Committee, desptie being already accepted and acted upon by full council Min 343.7.1).Minute (c) - The previous clerk issued non-confidential agenda packs to the public, there is no explanation as to why this practice was stopped, despite best practice recommendations.Minute (d) - is incorrect as BPC do not publish the Reserve values in their monthly minutesUPDATE 16JAN23 - BPC reject both the November and December 2023 draft minutes (listen to the 5mins discussion)
---
See also:]]>
Bleadon councillors have ‘noted’ that they will not answer residents’ finance and governance questions, and instead has decided to engage the External Auditor at a cost of £355 per/hour!
UPDATE 21JUN23:External Audit invoices totalling over £10,307.10K Not including additional AGAR specific hours relating to the Clerk and Responsible Financial Officer (RFO) e.g "That up to an additional 20 hours work for the 2021/22 financial audit be authorised. Any additional time needed will be required to go back to the full council." 13FEB23 (Min 361.13)
UPDATE 12JUN23: External Audit Final Reports 2021/22, 2020/21 and BPC External Audit Action Plan
UPDATES: in blog below . So far, of 24 challege questions 15 were upheld or partially upheld, 2 BPC non-compliance with regulatiions, 3 recognised as not best practice by BPC, 3 needed more information submitted and 1 answered by the locum clerk. More updates also here
----
Bleadon Parish Council approved its October minutes last week, which stated that it has received the External Auditors interim AGAR Report (Min 356.7.14) that states:
“We are unable to complete our review work on the AGAR and supporting documentation as a result of correspondence received in relation to 2021/22 and/or prior years. Once we have finalised our review and completed any additional work arising from that correspondence, a final report will be provided with the certificated of completion detailing any qualifications and ‘other’ matters. Our fee note for the limited assurance review will be issued when we certify completion” (last page)
It has also ‘noted’, but not discusseed, that BPC will not answer any outstanding AGAR questions raised by residents, until they hear from the External Auditor (Min 356.4.13) – but there was no full council agenda item and no resolution to this effect? On front of each Agenda it states:"N.B Councils cannot lawfully decide items of business that is not specified in the summons/agenda…”. The only public BPC discussion was NOT to discuss the AGAR situation at all, even though a councillor was trying yet again to express her continued concern over perceived lack of due process that may be raised with the External Auditor in the future (Hear Audio from 6 minutes). The question remains as to why BPC has been unwilling or unable to clearly answer seemingly simple finance and governance related questions to date, especially when they relate to regular non-confidential monitoring of budgets, contracts, trusts, grants, etc., information that should already be readily available to councillors?
However, BPC hasn’t minuted that its AGAR responses/lack of responses have resulted in the External Auditor being engaged at cost of £355 per/hour. Nor has it minuted that the External Auditor asked BPC to restart the whole 6 week AGAR process as the required information had not been published to residents. Nor has it minuted the fact that BPC posted the notice 4 times before doing so correctly! The associated correspondence also hasn’t been noted in the related agenda or minutes?
Regardless of the External Auditor outcome, why are BPC not striving to be open and transparent, and exercise general good practice? Why does it not want residents to know what they are doing and spending in a timely, accurate and transparent manner?
Some collated questions, summarised and accepted as eligible AGAR objections by the External Auditor in September 2022, include the following, which “are all linked to governance assertions (Assertions) or items of account (Boxes) in the 2021/22 AGAR and therefore would be considered to be eligible in that respect“ NB: Governance ‘Assertions’ relate to Section 1 of the AGAR and Items of Account ‘Boxes’ relate to Section 2 General AGAR Overview.
1. the Council’s failure to publish the past 5 years’ AGARs and associated external auditor reports (Assertion 3); [NB: Original Audit Q3]See below Objection 3
2. the Council’s governance and controls around the trust funds and assets that it has responsibility for (Assertion 9 and Boxes 9 & 11); [NB: Original Audit Q5] Audit's conculsion #7 & #8 - 30MAR23 - "We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter. We note the Council’s planned improvements regarding governance and control in respect of trust funds and assets."
3. the inclusion in the AGAR figures of the Bleadon Children’s Play Area income and expenditure during the year (Boxes 1, 3, 6, 7 & 8); [NB: Original Audit Q6] Audit's conculsion #7 & #8 - 30MAR23- "We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter. We note the Council’s planned improvements regarding governance and control in respect of trust funds and assets."
4. the Council’s failure to make the grant awarding process transparent (Assertion 2); [NB: Original Audit Q8] Audit's conculsion #3 & #9 - 30MAR23- "We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise reporting matters in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of the issues that have been brought to our attention."
5. application by the Council for grant funding without Council approval (Assertion 2); [NB: Original Audit Q9] Auditor's conclusion #10 - 30MAR23- "We note that the examples that you have provided all relate to grant applications during 2022/23. We have confirmed with the Council that it did not make an application for grant funding during 2021/22. Conclusion: We do not uphold this objection."
6. lack of due process in respect of tendering (Assertion 2 and Box 6); [NB: Original Audit Q11] See below Objection 11
7. payment of some invoices in advance of Council approval (Assertion 2); [NB: Original Audit Q12] Auditor's conclusion #11 - 30MAR23- "We uphold this objection and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter"
8. poor management of the various contracts that the Council is party to, as well as the lack of transparency of these contracts (Assertion 2); NB: Original Audit Q13] Audit's conclusion #12 - 30MAR23- "We partially uphold this objection and are minded to raise reporting matters in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter."
9. the Box 9 figure which is based on an incomplete asset register (Box 9); [NB: Original Audit Q14] Audit's conclusion #5 & #13 - 30MAR23 - "We uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of this matter."
10. the Council’s failure to manage its earmarked reserves adequately (Assertion 1); [NB: Original Audit Q15] Audit's conclusion 6 - 30MAR23- "We uphold this objection and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of this matter."
11. the Council’s budget setting and budget monitoring processes (Assertion 1); [NB: Original Audit Q16] =Audit's conclusion #14, 15 & 16 - 30MAR23"We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter. We note the Council’s planned improvements regarding financial management."
12. the lack of transparency of the Council’s income, expenditure and reserves (Assertions 1 and 2); [NB: Original Audit Q17] Audit's conclusion #14, 15 & 16 - 30MAR23"We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter. We note the Council’s planned improvements regarding financial management."
13. the powers under which the Council makes expenditure (Assertion 3). [NB: Original Audit Q18] See Clerk's explanation MAR23
14. the response given to Assertion 2 of the 2021/22 AGAR (internal control); (See Feb update)
15. the approval process for the Clerk/RFO’s salary and overtime, increased hours, salary level and additional part-time jobs, as well as questioning the existence of any job specification, job description, signed contract, job evaluation documents (Assertion 2 and Box 4); (See Feb update)
16. payments in respect of the Clerk/RFO’s professional subscriptions and training during the year, which you assert should be split proportionately with his other councils (Box 6); (See Feb update)
17. poor management of the various contracts that the Council is party to, as well as the lack of transparency of these contracts, in particular the magazine editor contract and the toilet cleaning contract (Assertion 2). (See Feb update)
The External Auditor assessed the following collated objections as “ineligible since they do not relate to a governance assertion or item of account on the 2021/22 AGAR,” however, has made specific comments in response to the resident’s noted question/objection:
1. the Council’s provision for the exercise of public rights in relation to the 2021/22 AGAR, during 2022 (Assertion 4 of the 2022/23 AGAR);- we are minded to raise an ‘other’ matter in our external auditor report in relation to non-compliance with the Regulations [NB: Original Audit Q1]
2. the fact that the objections that you raised in relation to the 2021/21 AGAR have not been addressed; - We have assessed objection 2 as ineligible since the facts and grounds on which the objection relies have not been specified. The objection is too general, although we note that these issues are already being considered by us in relation to the 2020/21 AGAR [see below] [NB: Original Audit Q2]
3. the Council’s failure to publish the past 5 years’ internal auditor reports; this is not a statutory requirement although it is considered to be best practice and we are minded to raise an ‘other’ matter in our external auditor report in relation to this issue [NB: Original Audit Q4]
4. the Council’s use of informal working groups instead of committees which you assert has led to a loss of accountability and transparency to the public; - this is not a statutory requirement although it is not considered to be best practice for a local council to use working parties INSTEAD of committees and we are minded to raise an ‘other’ matter in our external auditor report suggesting that the Council seeks appropriate advice in relation to this governance issue [BOB Note: E.g. undocumented Jubilee and Playground working group decisions and prior agreed budgets and expenditure] [NB: Original Audit Q7]
5. the Council’s failure to publish agenda papers/reports with the minutes;- this is not a statutory requirement although it is considered to be best practice, and we are minded to raise an ‘other’ matter in our external auditor report in relation to this issue. Transparency is an underlying principle of local government. In our view, consistent with the principles of transparency and accountability, there would be advantages in publishing agenda papers and we recommend that the Council routinely publishes agenda papers on its website. [NB: Original Audit Q10]
6. the response given to Assertion 3 of the 2021/22 AGAR (compliance with laws and regulations); - ineligible since the facts and grounds on which the objection relies have not been specified.
7. the recruitment process for the Clerk/RFO in 2019/20 - ineligible since it does not relate to a governance assertion (Assertion) or item of account (Box) on the 2021/22 AGAR.
Previous questions accepted as eligible AGAR objections by the External Auditor for AGAR 2020-21 (17 Aug 2021)
All six objections were eligible and accepted for further consideration.
1. The BPC AGAR process - seems to contradict its published notices, e.g. no access to related doc-umentation, which I find needlessly restrictive and obstructive, especially if BPC state they are transparent in their actions.
Objection 1: You object to the Council’s provision for the exercise of public rights. Comments: We note that, in relation to the provision during 2020 only, this objection relates to the response giv-en in Assertion 4 of the Annual Governance Statement. Audit's conclusion #1 - 30MAR23- "We uphold this objection and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2020/21 AGAR in respect of this matter."
2. Contracts - Paid positions and posts tend not to be widely advertised (despite full council resolu-tion), and appear to have no published job description or Terms of Reference. When they do ex-ist BPC refuse to release them to the public, or are created after the post has been filled.
Objection 2: You object to the Council’s tendering processes and have provided some specific ex-amples during 2020/21. Comments: We note that this objection relates to the response given in Assertion 2 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements (employment contracts within 2019/20 will not be considered). Audit's conclusion #2 - 30MAR23"We partially uphold this objection and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2020/21 AGAR in respect of this matter."
3. Grants - appear to be given without application or going through full council process, despite there being a Grants Policy. Also, BPC VAT connected queries.
Objection 3: You object to the Council’s grant awarding procedures. Comments: We note that this objection relate to the response given in Assertion 2 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements Audit's conclusion #3 - 30MAR23"We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise reporting matters in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of the issues that have been brought to our attention"
4. Lack of published financial information (including for some councillors) - or information being re-moved from the website, with an increase in undocumented working groups obscuring any po-tential need for declarations of interest.
Objection 4: You object to the lack of transparency including failure to publish required infor-mation and use of working groups. Comments: We note that this objection relates to the re-sponses given in Assertion 2 and 3 of the Annual Governance Statement Audit's conclusion #4 - 30MAR23- "We uphold this objection and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of these matters."
5. Asset Register - Lack of clarity over council ownership vs 'custodial trusteeship', anomalies and omissions.
Objection 5: You object to the asset register that supports Box 9. Comments:
We note that this objection relates to an item of account in the Accounting Statements Audit's conclusion #5 & #13 - 30MAR23- "We uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of this matter."
6. Reserves - Lack of transparency and clarity over what reserves are held, why they are held, their expenditure and balances.
Objection 6: You object to the Council’s reserves. Comments: We note that this objection relate to the response given in Assertion 1 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of ac-count in the Accounting Statements Audit's conclusion #6 - 30MAR23"We uphold this objection and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of this matter."
External Audit’s further guidance on eligibility of objections. “Our decision regarding the eligibility of your objections constitutes Step 1 of the auditor guidance referred to below:
Requirements for an eligible objection
Section 27 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 (‘the 2014 Act’) provides that local government electors for an area may object to the Council’s accounts concerning a matter in respect of which the auditor could:
•make a public interest report under paragraph 1 of Schedule 7 of the 2014 Act. Paragraph 1 of Schedule 7 of the 2014 Act provides that auditor must consider whether, in the public interest, they should make a report on any matter coming to their notice during the audit and relating to the Council or an entity connected with the Council, so it can be considered in accordance with Schedule 7 of the 2014 Act or brought to the public’s attention; and/or
•make an application to the court for a declaration that an item of account is contrary to law under section 28 of the 2014 Act.
Section 27 requires that objections must be made in writing and copied to the Council. Regulation 14 of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 (‘the 2015 Regulations’) provides that objections may only be made in a single 30-day period of which notice has been given under Regulation 15 of the 2015 Regulations.
Regulation 17 of the 2015 Regulations provides that a notice of objection under Section 27 of the 2014 Act must specify:
•the facts on which the local government elector relies;
•the grounds on which the objection is being made; and
•so far as is possible, particulars of any item of account which is alleged to be contrary to law; and any matter in respect of which it is proposed that the auditor could make a public interest report under section 24 of and paragraph 1 of Schedule 7 to the 2014 Act.
Furthermore in February 2018, in exercise of the power in paragraph 9 of Schedule 6 of the 2014 Act, the National Audit Office, on behalf of the Comptroller and Auditor General, issued Auditor Guidance Note 4: Auditors’ Additional Powers and Duties (‘AGN 04’). Paragraphs 20 to 28 of AGN 04 provide guidance on determining whether an objection is eligible. We must have regard to that guidance. [See also AGN 07 - Auditor Reporting]
UPDATES
UPDATE 12JUN23 (See BPC 12JUN23 Agenda 11MAY23 Min 364.13 & 12JUN23 365.17)
External Audit Final Reports2021/222020/21BPC External Audit Action PlanUPDATE 30MAR23: External Audit's conclusions and findings Part 1 (extract)
UPDATE 14MAR23: BPC submit responses to External Audit 2020/21 and 2021/22
UPDATE 08MAR23: BPC AGAR 13 Mar 23 Agenda items especially items 14 - AGAR 20/21,15 - AGAR 21/22,16 - Internal Audit, & 18 - Reserves.
UPDATE 01MAR23: (Along with the six 2020-21) Ten of the 2021-22 eligible objections have been accepted for further consideration: (See Mar23 Agenda)
Objections 5 and 6: You object to Council’s governance and controls around the trust funds and assets that it has responsibility for and the inclusion in the AGAR figures of the Bleadon Children’s Play Area income and expenditure during the year. Comments: We note that these objections relate to the response given in Assertion 9 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements. Conclusion: We accept these objections for further consideration. Audit's conculsion #7 & #8 - 30MAR23- "We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter. We note the Council’s planned improvements regarding governance and control in respect of trust funds and assets." Objection 8: You object to the Council’s failure to make the grant awarding process transparent. Comments: We note that this objection relates to the response given in Assertion 2 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements. Conclusion: We accept this objection for further consideration. Audit's conculsion #3 & #9 - 30MAR23- "We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise reporting matters in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of the issues that have been brought to our attention."Objection 9: You object to an application by the Council for grant funding without Council approval. Comments: We note that this objection relates to the response given in Assertion 2 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements. Conclusion: We accept this objection for further consideration. Auditor's conclusion #10 - 30MAR23- "We note that the examples that you have provided all relate to grant applications during 2022/23. We have confirmed with the Council that it did not make an application for grant funding during 2021/22. Conclusion: We do not uphold this objection."Objection 12: You object to payment of some invoices in advance of Council approval. Comments: We note that this objection relates to the response given in Assertion 2 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements. Conclusion: We accept this objection for further consideration. Auditor's conclusion #11 - 30MAR23- "We uphold this objection and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter"Objection 13: You object to the poor management of the various contracts that the Council is party to, as well as the lack of transparency of these contracts. Comments: We note that this objection relates to the response given in Assertion 2 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements. Conclusion: We accept this objection for further considerationAudit's conclusion #12 - 30MAR23- "We partially uphold this objection and are minded to raise reporting matters in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter."
Objection 14: You object to the Box 9 figure which you assert is based on an incomplete asset register Comments: We note that this objection relates to items of account in the Accounting Statements. Conclusion: We accept this objection for further consideration. Audit's conclusion #5 & #13 - 30MAR23- "We uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor reports on the 2020/21 and 2021/22 AGARs in respect of this matter."Objections 15, 16 and 17: You object to the Council’s failure to manage its earmarked reserves adequately; the Council’s budget setting and budget monitoring processes; and the lack of transparency of the Council’s income, expenditure and reserves. Comments: We note that these objections relate to the responses given in Assertions 1 and 2 of the Annual Governance Statement as well as items of account in the Accounting Statements. Conclusion: We accept these objections for further consideration. Audit's conclusion #14, 15 & 16 - 30MAR23"We partially uphold these objections and are minded to raise a reporting matter in our external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR in respect of this matter. We note the Council’s planned improvements regarding financial management."Two of the objections raised have been accepted as eligible; however, they have not been accepted under Step 2 of AGN 04 for the reasons set out below:
Objection 3: You object to the Council’s failure to publish the past 5 years’ AGARs and associated external auditor reports (Assertion 3). Findings: It is a requirement of the 2014 Act and its associated Regulations that the past 5 years’ AGARs and associated external auditor reports are publicly available. We note that the Council had refused to publish these on its website and had not responded to your requests for copies of them. We are minded to include this as a reporting matter in on external auditor report on the 2021/22 AGAR. Conclusion: We do not accept this objection for further consideration.Objection 11: You object to the lack of due process in respect of tendering. Findings: Having reviewed your objections and the additional information provided by you, we are not in receipt of adequate facts or grounds for this objection. Conclusion: We do not accept this objection for further consideration.UPDATE 13FEB23: BPC part response to ojections 14-17 above
Min 361.7. "To ratify the responses provided to the questions raised in relation to the 2021/22 AGAR (pages 20 & 21 second response to follow). The Council were informed that only one of the responses to the two set of questions raised in relation to the 2021/22 AGAR had been completed so they would only be considering the response contained within the agenda papers. Resolved: To ratify the response contained within the agenda papers with the insertion of 21 in the subtitle of the letter and a check on the length of time the previous Clerk spent as a locum. The resolution was correctly proposed and seconded (For: Cllrs Davies, Getty, Hemingway and Williams. Against: Cllrs Clarke & Sheppard, Abstention Cllr Garrett)"
UPDATE 16JAN23 - listen to the AGAR discussion (listen to the 7min Audio file)
UPDATE 30JAN23 - listen to the AGAR discussion (listen to the 5min Audio file)
DEC23 - 60 not 2 plaques as stated in the approved DEC22 Min 358.8.129? and £1K grant to BIB/BPC? (listen to the 5min Audio file)
--
See also:]]>
Start
Enlarged image
Day 3 Finished
Enlarged image
Contractors will be starting work on the Bleadon playground today, Tuesday 15 November at 8am,to “install the new adventure trail”
SUMMARY DEC22: BPC received a grant from NSC but no amount was minuted for £4,987.50 until Dec 22 Min 358.7.5) no contract or conditions were published, intallation quotation was £9,975 (Oct 22 Min 356.7.5) given to Homefront noted in expenses (Nov 22 Min 357.8.113)
UPDATE 19NOV22: The contractors worked hard through the rain to complete the work in three days.
Questions have subsequently arisen as to whether BPC considered its ‘Plastic Free Bleadon’ resolution and its ‘Environmental Policy’when it chose to install plastic matting, rather than bark chippings as have been used in the rest of the playground?
---
The parish council anticipates “it taking 3 days to complete, and disruption will be kept to a minimum. The playground will remain open for visitors to use the areas where no work is taking place”.
What the ‘adventure trail’ will look like remains a mystery as the parish council hasn't officially released exactly what is being done – nor has it published its Invitation to Tender/Specification; nor its ‘Playground Questionnaire/Survey' or related responses; nor has it recorded how much the grant agreement with North Somerset is for, or how it intends to match fund this grant as its not in this year’s budget?
More transparent financial and related accountability information is needed from BPC as the Bleadon Playground Charity Trustees, to assist residents understanding of what is being undertaken on their behalf.
A recording of the decision making for the two October Playground agenda items can be found here.
Breakfast TimeLunch TimeTea TimeDay 1
Day 1
Day 1
Day 2
Day 2
Day 2
Day 3
Day 3
Day 3
Last month BPC resolved to "formally sign North Somerset’s Project Grant Agreement in respect to the Improving Play Spaces Fund”. However, BPC hasn’t recorded how much the grant was for or how it intends to match fund it. (Oct 22 Min 356.7.4 (This was part of the reason why one councillor voted against signing at this stage, and another abstained, though unminuted).
Councillors have previously discussed but not recorded using the following for grant fund matching:
the remaining Neighbourhood Development Plan grant money (stated to be £3,121 in the amended AGAR information. BPC do not publish its Reserve amounts in the monthly minutes, only after the year has ended?). Q2 financial report states £135 has been spent (presumably on its separate NDP website) The October minutes indicate that the Grant Funder has asked for the money back instead? (Oct Min 356.4.13).the CIL money received via the Toll Road house build last year, which according to Q2 financial report is for £2,387.the Playground money – The AGAR Amended Reserve information stated £2K. The Q2 report states that there is no Playground Special Project budget or EMR and that £1,528 has already been spent. There is also a £750 equipment budget • So where is the grant fund match money coming from, and how much is required in total?Last month BPC also resolved to “accept Cllrs Garrett & Williams recommendation as to the proposed installing company” for £9,975 exclusive of VAT, but BPC did not record who was awarded the contract? (Oct 22 Min 356.7.5) Again two councillors abstained due to a lack of information, but this was not recorded in the minutes. Is this the total amount required for the project i.e. £10K? Is the grant and match funding therefore £5K and if so, where is this officially recorded?
Previous Park Alterations
Autumnal Reflections Sept 2013Farce of the Ball Wall Nov 2014--------------
See also:
Why the Delay and Secrecy?Bleadon Accountability Statement AGAR GuideNOTES FROM BPC MINUTES
Feb 2022
(Public section) "District Councillors T Porter & M Solomon. They took a number of questions relating to the ongoing speed reduction works on the A370. The Chairman expressed her pleasure in noting after 18 months’ work had started on the collapsed rhyne bank. Councillor Solomon indicated that he was hopeful in securing match funding for villages like Bleadon where inclusive play area equipment could be funded. Time however was of the essence as the window for such funding was closing on the 31st March 2022"
March,April & May – no comments
Jun 2022 (Min 354.7.5) "To Resolve to apply for match funding from North Somerset’s “Improving Play Spaces Fund”. Resolved to seek match funding from North Somerset’s “Improving Play Spaces Funds” at a level that current ERMs could be made available"
July 2022 (NB No projector used in the meeting for the public to understand what was being discussed)
(Min 355.4.14) "NS Improving Play Spaces Match Funding Cllrs. S. Garrett & G Williams confirmed that they had completed the match funding grant application in due time with North Somerset."
(Min 355.9.e) "Play Area Cllrs. Sara Garrett and Gill Williams advised the meeting of the equipment they were hoping to secure through the NS match funding and potential location in the Play Area."
August & Sept 2022 – no comment
October 2022
(Min 356.7.4) "To resolve to formally sign North Somerset’s Project Grant Agreement in respect to the Improving Play Spaces Fund. Following some discussion, it was agreed: To formally sign North Somerset’s Project Grant Agreement in respect to the Improving Play Spaces Fund. Cllr. Mrs I D Clarke voting against"
(Min 356.7.5). To resolve to accept Cllrs Garrett & Williams recommendation as to the proposed installing company. All quotes exclusive of VAT Quote A £9,992.86 B £9.975.00* C £9,249.84 Resolved to accept Quotation B as recommended by Cllrs Garrett and Williams"
November 2022
(Agenda 357.8) "Financial 1. To note the payments for the months of July August & September ... (113) Home Front Play Area - 50% Deposit £4,987.50 and £997.50"]]>
Why does Bleadon Parish Council appear to post meeting notices on its five noticeboards as an afterthought, days after it may post on its website? Why the change in public engagement?
The statement on the front of every Bleadon Parish Council agenda implies that Bleadon Parish Council is being open and transparent, yet it prefers to prioritise its website, and to delay or ignore informing residents via the its parish noticeboards. This was seen with the current November meeting notice, and recent AGAR notices from June to September. Are these the actions of an open, transparent and inclusive parish council? Does it follow best practice?
BPC agendas refer to “Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014”. The accompanying “Open and accountable local government” (detail), specifically “A guide for the press and public on attending and reporting meetings of local government” states:
”Parish and town councils ... Notice of the meeting specifying the business to be discussed must be placed in a central conspicuous place within the parish or area at least 3 clear days before the meeting (i.e. not including weekends or bank holidays) These councils are also encouraged to place copies of the agenda, meeting papers and notice of meetings at offices and on their website, if they have these facilities.”
From this guidance, for council openness and accountability to be undertaken, it appears that the noticeboards must be used, with websites only encouraged, which appears to be the opposite of current BPC practice. Parish councils do not have to have websites. This probably explains why the 'specimen job description’ for the clerk doesn’t entail any website duties (NB: BPC’s actual clerk job description has not been published, with web duties currently being undertaken by a councillor and/or an additional paid service via its web provider).
Perhaps councillors’ preference for the website may explain why noticeboards are in such a poor condition, and why the noticeboards frequently display out of date information. Saying that, the BPC website also is lacking in key information, especially with regards to meeting papers associated with both the agenda and minutes, despite best practice (ICO - Template, external auditor).
With BPC’s continued commitment to ad hoc working groups, with no TOR nor it seems published notes/minutes, the situation may only worsen - Ironic seeing as councillors set up a Communications Working group in October. It has also apparently been operating a Communication Policy since 2017, which seems to make no reference to noticeboards at all, and may explain such poor public engagement and attendance at council meetings each month. It may also explain the confusing, frustrating and unexplained meeting process for residents who wanted to speak, about their concern of the Quarry development, at the last council meeting,
---------
See also:
Government details of the 'Open and accountable local government: plain English guide'
"Transparency and openness should be the fundamental principle behind everything councils and other local government bodies do, and new rights have now been introduced by the Openness of Local Government Bodies 2014, which will enable members of the public to know how decisions are made.
These rights allow members of the public including citizens and professional journalists to:
use modern technology and communication methods such as filming, audio-recording, blogging and tweeting to report the proceedings of the meetings of their councils and other local government bodies see information relating to significant decisions made outside meetings by officers acting under a general or specific delegated power.
This guide provides practical information that will help the public to exercise their new rights under the Regulations, and what they should expect from their councils and other local government bodies." (PDF and link)]]>
Fracking Licences
in Bleadon
Gas map only.
All power production here
"The prime minister said lifting the moratorium, brought in by the Conservatives, will enable developers to seek planning permission for fracking and get gas flowing in as soon as six months"
UPDATE 22JAN24: BOB and BPC make a Local Plan submissions re: fracking.
UPDATE APR23: "At the April 2023 annual residents meeting it was raised that there was, “Concern regarding Bleadon’s Frack-free status in regard to any changes to NSC’s new Local Plan”
UPDATE 14 SEP 22: Bleadon at Risk of Fracking Again (see blog)
UPDATE 13 APR 22:Distrrict Cllr Porter following APM, "I raised the issue of Fracking at last nights council meeting, and it was confirmed that a motion to continually ban fracking in North Somerset will come forward to council. This position is fully supported, and the portfolio holder has agreed to our consultation on this motion to Council.."
UPDATE 11 APR 22: BPC Draft APM Mins (pg2)& Amendments and BOB Draft APM Mins
---
"Fracking is a technique for recovering gas and oil from shale rock by drilling into the earth. It was banned in England in 2019 after new research raised fresh fears over the risk of earthquakes."
In 2018/19 at least two Bleadon residents on Roman Road received fracking related oil and gas exploration survey letters. Concerns were raised in relation to the Bleadon fracking licences due to Hinkley Power Station being just across the water, and potential water pollution due to Bleadon being situated on interconnected limestone caves (see Bleadon Public Fracking meeting on 11 June 2019).
At this year's Annual Parish Meeting (APM) on 11 April 22, BOB raised concerns regarding BPC's lack of comment on North Somerset Council's Local Plan Consultation, especially in relation to Minerals/Fracking. Five months on, the minutes of this public meeting are still unpublished by BPC, but it did subsequently call an extra-ordinary meeting to discuss the Local Plan Consultation where BOB presented an overview and resident feedback it had received.
Also, at the April APM meeting BOB asked Cllr Porter for reassurance that North Somerset Council would continue to support residents' objection to fracking in the area. Following the meeting Cllr Porter responded,
"I raised the issue of Fracking at last nights council meeting, and it was confirmed that a motion to continually ban fracking in North Somerset will come forward to council. This position is fully supported, and the portfolio holder has agreed to our consultation on this motion to Council." (13APR22)
"Liz Truss has announced the ban on fracking will be lifted as part of plans to accelerate the UK's domestic energy supply..."Far from being dependent on the global energy market and the actions of malign actors, we will make sure that the UK is a net energy exporter by 2040," she said." (Article and PDF)
------
See also:]]>
The AGAR Notice (pg1) states, “Any person interested has the right to inspect and make copies of the accounting records for the financial year to which the audit relates and all books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers, receipts and other documents relating to those records must be made available for inspection by any person interested”. See BOB’s August viewing pre-queries awaiting answers and an Inspection date. Also, July questions & BPC official response.
The Right to Inspect the council’s records is enshrined in law (AGAR Notice pg2). In July the External Auditor stated that they had, "... written to … [Bleadon] Council about the need to restart the public rights period since the approved AGAR has not been published on the website. Members of the public will therefore have the opportunity to inspect the accounting records and ask questions of the clerk for a further 6 weeks. If any concerns remain after the Council has responded to queries, electors may wish to consider raising objections to the AGAR with the appointed auditor"
SOME AGAR RELATED DOCUMENTS EXPLAINED
DOCUMENTEXPLANATION
SOURCEAGAR Form 3BPC email July 22, “The public Inspection period can only commence once the AGAR has been approved, published and submitted to the external auditor”
There are six main parts to this document:
• Guidance Notes (pg1&2)
• Annual Internal Audit Report (pg3)
• Section 1 Annual Governance Statement (pg4)
• Section 2 Accounting Statements (pg5)
• External Auditor’s Report and Certificate (pg6)
• Associated Appendices (pg7 onwards)
BPC’s AGAR Form 3 is available on its website or here. It was agreed, approved and signed by BPC on 13 June 22 (Min 354.7.1) but was only made accessible to the public via the BPC website around 26/27 July.
NB BPC's Financial Regulations 1.13 states, "The council is not empowered by these Regulations or otherwise to delegate certain specified decisions. In particular any decision regarding:
setting the final budget or the precept (council tax requirement);approving accounting statements;approving an annual governance statement;declaring eligibility for the General Power of Competence; and addressing recommendations in any report from the internal or external auditors, shall be a matter for the full council only" AGAR NoticeThis is the official notice inviting members of the public to Inspect BPC’s records and ask questions during a strict 6 week period (BPC’s viewing period ends 07 Sept 22)
It states, all related documentation must be made available for inspection.
For maximum public engagement the AGAR Notice should ideally be published on Bleadon’s five community noticeboards as well as on the BPC website. This year BPC published four AGAR Notices, the current one is the BPC website and here.
Pages 2 and 3 of the AGAR Notice give a ‘Summary of Your Rights’ (can only be used to view BPC records before 07 Sept 22 in BPC’s case) including:
The basic positionThe right to inspect the accounting records and ask BPC questionsThe right to ask the auditor questions about the accounting recordsThe right to make objections at audit[BPC AGAR Notice V1, V2, V3, V4]
11 Oct 21 (Min 346.7.3) "To note the receipt of the 20-21 AGAR Interim Report and the posting of the right to inspect notice. Noted"?
Guidance Notes (pg1&2)Includes general guidance and an AGAR Completion Checklist
See AGAR Form 3 pg1&2 Annual Internal Audit Report (pg3)The Internal Auditor undertakes a “…Selective assessment of compliance with the relevant procedures and controls in operation.” Includes:
C – Risk Assessment/RegisterD – Precept, Budget & ReservesH – Asset RegisterL – Website Information & TransparencyO – Trustee responsibilitiesBPC councillors have decided not to publish appendices, reports or working group notes, so these Internal Auditor reports are only available on request to BPC and should be present at the AGAR viewing e.g. (The public have access to the last 5 years full Internal Audit reports?)
INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS
31MAY21 &20FEB22 (13 Feb 22?) Internal Report (Min 350.7.6 & Mar Min 351.7.5) 11 June 22 Report requested but not received yet (Min 354.7.1.a) and 14 June 21 (Min 343.7.4)
11 Oct 21 (Min 346.7.3) "To note the receipt of the 20-21 AGAR Interim Report and the posting of the right to inspect notice. Noted"?
Section 1 Annual Governance Statement (pg 4)This is where BPC officially acknowledges its “…responsibility for ensuring that there is a sound system of internal control, including arrangements for the preparation of the Accounting Statements”. Includes:
Risk Assessment/RegisterResponse to Internal Audit ReportsTrustee statementsAGAR Section 1 Approved and signed by full council 13 June (Min 354.7.1b)Section 2 Accounting Statements (pg5)States summary of BPC income, expenditure, reserves, staffing, assets and Trustee responsible for managing Trust funds or assetsAGAR Section 2 Approved and signed by full council 13 June (Min 354.7.1c) Includes current and previous precept (also see Historic Precept values)
Hows does BPC expenditure relaate to any BPC financial powers e.g. S137 and/or any General Power of Competence (GPC)? When was BPC's GPC postition last declared (e.g.20Aug19 Min 325.7 and associated BPC GPC Policy? Do GPC declarations need to be made annunally, or when gained/lost? How does GPC relate to BPC giving any grants, payments, donations, contributions, gifts, etc. to independent organisations, community groups etc? How do BPC manage the associated risk, e.g. via the Risk Register or Financial Regulations e.g. 1.13? For example payments to Trusts, or projects)
Last pulbic election was May 2015?Last assumed full re-election was 2019? Cllr appointment dates here.
Why doesn’t the ‘Total Fixed Assets’ match the published Asset Register values?
External Auditor’s Report and Certificate (pg6)External Auditors undertake a limited assurance review. The public can use the AGAR period to ask BPC questions relating to the AGAR period (this year for decisions and expenditure for Apr21-Mar22). If no clarity is received then, from the AGAR Notice, members of the public have:
“The opportunity to question the appointed auditor about the accounting records; andThe right to make an objection which concerns a matter in respect of which the appointed auditor could either make a public interest report or apply to the court for a declaration that an item of account is unlawful. Written notice of an objection must first be given to the auditor and a copy sent to the smaller authority.”The External Auditor’s Report and Certificate is published on an updated AGAR Form 3 after the AGAR period ends.
The public should have access to the last 5 years full External Audit reports? The info currently published on the BPC website for past years is only the overview information, not full reports, and some info is missing E.g. 2018/19 doesn’t contain a signed External Auditor overview report or certificate at all? Last year’s is awaiting External Audit review.
AGAR Appendices (pg7 onwards)Additional information such as Explanation of variances, Bank Reconciliation.
AGAR Form 3 Appendices are on the BPC website and here.Precept, Budget & Reserves (Internal Audit Report – D)“The precept or rates requirement resulted from an adequate budgetary process; progress against the budget was regularly monitored; and reserves were appropriate”This year BPC precept rose 8% from £50K to £54K (27 Jan 22 Min 349.4) the Budget was set at £64K (Min 349.3) See Precept Banding Info 2022/23.
For this years 2021/22 AGAR the Precept was £50K (Jan 21 Min 339.7.4) and Budget of £69K (Dec 20 Min 338.7.4)
How do BPC monitor the Budget? Why aren't the montly reports available to the public either via the minutes and/or at AGAR viewings? How does the current BPC apporach comply with the BPC Risk Register e.g. Reporting & Auditing? and Financial Reguations Section 3 Annual Estimates (Budget) and Forward Planning?
BPC do not publish an itemised budget at the time the precept and budget is set, only a budget overview.Therefore, the first public view of the itemised budget is 3 months later via the Q1 quarterly financial info published in June e.g. new format Q1 for 2022/23 or former format e.g. Q4 2021/22
See also BPC July AGAR response. BPC is yet to confirm the purpose of some of the reserves.
Risk Assessment/Register (Internal Audit Report - C)“The authority assessed the significant risks to achieving tis objectives and reviewed the adequacy of arrangements to manage these”The current BPC online Risk Assessment/Register is dated 2020 Draftv3 as seen here? (See 05 May 2021 Min 342.13.2and Jun 2020 Min 333.9.m.a.i/ii?)
All reference to the Finance & Personnel Committee were removed as compared to the 2019 version.
BPC has given no explanation as to why the quarterly Finance Committee was disbanded as the workload is still the same regardless of the number of councillors present? Nor for disbanding the monthly Planning Committee (still referenced in BPC’s current Standing Orders?), nor for disbanding the quarterly Open Spaces Committee (2021/22 Budget of £27K in Summary Receipts)?
The removal of these three committees has removed a potential 20 meetings and associated Q&A sessions from the public. It also reduces the ability for councillors to have more in depth discussion on the related topics. These disbanded committees seem to have ‘fallen off’ the agenda in July 20 (Min 334.7) compared to May 19 (Min 322.13), without any recorded explanation as to why this new approach, with less time allocated and less public interaction, would reduce BPC's governance an accountability risk rather than increase it? (See councillor appointments)
Asset Register (Internal Audit Report – H)“Asset … registers were complete and accurate and properly maintained”The current BPC online Asset Register is dated June 2020 Draft as seen here, Reviewed 05 May 21 (Min 342.13.2). Also Updated Draft 12 July 2021 Min 344.7.1, Insurance Revision - 13 Sep 21 Min 345.4.12and Hall insurance 13 Dec 21 Min 347.4.8?
How does the Asset Register relate to the Maintenance Schedule, if any, and future budget setting? How does it relate to BPC Financial Regulations e.g. 12.6?
How should Trust items be listed? e.g. The Village Halls are not noted as 'in Trust' and appear as a BPC asset of £1.1 million, yet previously residents were told it should be 'nil' value? See change in recording building assets May 21 (Min 342.13.3)? Also previous AGAR returns.
Painting of Halls £2.6K (14 Feb 22 Min 350.7.7 & 14 Mar 22 Min 351.7.11) Is this a grant from BPC to BPC as Trustee? See 23May11 (Min 233.22.1 Also see Section 2.
Various items are missing from online 2020 Asset Register e.g. 9 councillor Samsung tablets? Church Clock? Defibrilator? Coins as indicated in Sep20 (Min 335.5)?
13 Sep 21 (Min 345.12) "...revisit the Asset List to revise some of the insurance bandings" & 13 Dec 21 (Min 344.7.5) reinstatement values
On 25 Jul 21 BPC sent BOB an updated, unapproved new version of its Asset Register waiting for councillor approval (i.e. sent after AGAR first submitted to Audit see AGAR Notice v1 that ended 22Jul22? Church Clock valued at £200 but BPC has started a £12K reguidling project (BVN#121 insert last page)? What money has been raised for the Clock so far, where is this documented? How does minuted expenditure match Asset Register entries? See Reserves allocated to church.
Website Information & Transparency (Internal Audit Report – L)“The authority publishes information on a free to access website/webpage up to date at the time of the internal audit in accordance with any relevant transparency code requirement”
AGAR Box ‘L’ is Ticked as not covered – “If the response is ‘not covered’ please state when the most recent internal audit work was done in this area and when it is next planned; or, if coverage is not required, the annual internal audit report must explain why not…”
Unlike some parish councils, BPC councillors have decided that the public will not have access to their monthly meeting supporting/ decision-making documentation e.g. no monthly minute appendices, reports, working group notes, reports to council including inspection reports, detailed financial reports, etc.
See ICO Transparency Overview.. In May21 (Min 342.13.8) Councilllors reviewed BPC’s Publication Scheme see comparison with ICO Template Publication Scheme
Each BPC agenda refers to the “Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014”
AGAR Form 3 pg9 – the Internal Auditor states that BPC “… is not required to comply with the Transparency Code for Smaller Authorities 2014”?
Website duties were upwardly delegated to a councillor 14 Mar 22 (Min 351.7.9) .
Trustee responsibilities (Internal Audit Report – O)“The Parish Council is directly responsible for the … Coronation & Jubilee Halls as Custodial Trustees [Protocol]– Operated by an independent Management Committee. Youth Centre land as Custodial Trustees [see Lease] Coronation Hall Car Park … ” and “Play Area and Equipment”Each Trust appears to be run as a charity.
NB Halls changed from 'N/A Trust' 2020 AGAR pg3 Box 'M' to 'In Trust' 2021 AGAR and 2022 AGARs Box 'O'. See Asset Register Trusts.
A record of submitted annual returns, accounts and trustees' annual report (TAR) for the last five financial periods can be found on the Charity Commission website – (although there appears to be none for BPC as a Custodial Trustee of the Coronation & Jubilee Halls, Car Park or Land under Youth Club?)
- Independent Halls Management Committee (Charity No: 1042602), and related 2010 Protocol to hold quarterly public meetings? Where are these minutes published)
- The Park is managed by BPC as a Playground Charity (Charity No: 304491) who appear to have recorded/spent nothing on the park in the last 5 years but instead record this Trust expenditure in BPC accounts? Dec 21 (Min 347.10.1) “…required formal annual meeting of the Playground Charity”, Where are the last 5 years’ meetings noted in Full council? Where are the minutes published? Park AGM 14FEB22 (Dated 2020?) Minutes received via Clerk 25July22 AGAR Response
- The Youth Club is managed and financed independently by the Bleadon Youth Club (Charity No: 304492) and has a Lease with BPC, see Notes
AGAR Form 3 'O' Trustee Responsibilities statement was changed to ‘YES’ in 2021 from ‘NO’ in 2020? Which Trusteeships are included? See Trustee Responsibilities
Declaration of InterestsPecuniary Interests (Appendix A) and Other/Non-pecuniary interests (Appendix B) Commitment to the Nolan Principles via Code of ConductCouncillors’ Declarations can be found on the BPC website (at the bottom of the page), along with a short biography/statement for each councillor.
Are these declarations reviewed annually as each have different dates? Some are incomplete? Does ‘Land’ include property?
During council meetings, Cllrs appear actively discouraged to ask for clarification about potential conflicts of interest. This is indicated in BPC’s Revised 2020 Risk Register Section 4 “… it is not the responsibility of members or the Clerk to cajole the member with a potential interest to actually declare one”
MinutesMinutes should record all BPC decisions and associated income and expenditure, including precept, project budget setting, awarded and received grants, tenders & contracts, etc.
All expenditure is authorised by two councillors.
Councillors have decided that the public will not have access to their supporting/ decision-making documentation e.g. monthly minute appendices, reports, working group notes, detailed financial reports, etc. Public quarterly finance information has been reduced without explanation.
NB: Neither Income nor Reserves are noted on the monthly minutes (despite Sep21 Min 345.7.7)? Can councillors authorise their own project expenditure? What if there is expenditure/payment that has not been officially noted and authorised in the minutes, should it have been paid? (15 July BOB email to BPC)
See transparency section
StaffBPC only has one part-time staff member – the clerk, who is also the designated Proper Officer and Responsible Financial Officer (RFO)
All other services are contracted out (see Contracts)
BPC has not released any signed contract for the clerk post (confidential?), nor job specification or job description (both part of the recruitment process so should be in the public domain and also used for annual clerk performance reviews?) Does this comply with BPC's Risk Register e.g. Salaries & Associated Costsand Financial Regulations e.g. pg10-12?
BPC has not explained how this clerk post advertised 31Jan20 for 18 hrs at £24-27K (SCP 18-23) became 14 hrs at £42K (SCP 39) clerk post one month later on 09 Mar 20 (Min 332.7.5) with reduced duties (and not including homeworking/ training/ expenses/etc. nor any potential increments since)? Then an 18hr post on 14 Jun 2021 (Min 343.7.1.a), did this require a new contract and/or job description, where is this published? See Notes and National Association of Local Councils Scales SCP39
14Mar22 (Min 351.7.9) Traditional clerk website duties upwardly delegated to a councillor
Service ContractsAll services other than that of the Clerk are contracted out (see Staff)Contracts are stated to be reviewed annually by the Personnel Committee TOR, on the BPC website, yet last published minutes on the BPC website are Aug20 and here? How do contracts comply with BPC's Parish Council Risk Assessmentand Financial Regulations e.g. pg10-12?
Some contracts are available on the BPC website (at the bottom of the policies page), some are signed some are draft/unsigned:
Grass Cutting signed contract - £4K (Nov20 Min 337.7.10),
Village Ranger signed contract - £6.7K (Nov20 Min 337.7.12)
Toilets unsigned contract – £1.7K (Nov20 Min 337.7.11) See Notes
Independent Village News Editor unsigned contract – salary undeclared in minutes – now assumed to be £400 per edition/£1.6K per annum? Jul20 (Min 334.4.vi) £350 for one edition, Sep20 Min 335.7.5 Regularise Editor appointment? Nov20 (Min 337.7.2) TOR? Dec21 (Min 347.9.f) Review of Newsletter arrangements, what was the agreed/recorded outcome? See Notes
Quarterly Financial Reports - Budget by Cost CentreBPC post quarterly financial reports except Q4/Mar – this is published in June after the accounts have been finalised?All quarterly reports for the current AGAR period 2021/22 have been removed from the BPC website?
The format for Q1 for the current financial year has been changed without explanation at Full Council? It now has significantly less information, for Cllrs and residents, when compared to last year quarterly reports? How are potential reporting errors managed via the Risk Register e.g. Financial Reportingand/or Financial Regulations e.g. 2.2? (Compare Q3, Q4/Final, May22and Q1-2022/23 for this AGAR period - e.g. Platinum Jubilee Project)
Summary Receipts and Payments
Includes:
Income,Staff CostsAdministration, Grants, Open Spaces Special ProjectsAll named Ear Marked Reserves (EMRs) and their start and end balancesThe Summary Receipts and Payments document is available on request to BPC and here. BPC are yet to clarify its role and responsibilities with regards to stated grants, contributions, project funding, etc. Which categories are BPC responsibilities and which are effectively grants/public money given to other independent projects, businesses, charities and trusts? Where are grant applications minuted and published? NB BPC Grant allocation for the year only stated to be £500? How do these type of 'Grants' comply with BPC's Risk Registerand Financial Regulations e.g. 1.14?
Example: The Independent Group ‘Bleadon in Bloom’ (BIB) Project BPC Project Grant 2021-22 £10.1K (including £8,466 + £1,661 carried forward?) Compare to Open Spaces 2021/22 figure.of £8,466 + £1,653 overspend 2020/21? No grant application was submitted? (Portfolio) Did BIB apply for Heritage Lottery Funding - May 21 (Min 342.13.15)? If so, where is the outcome minuted?
Where is BPC's Platinum Jubilee Project budget publicly stated? Is it £7.8K as in Q1-2022/23 overview and 31May22 quarterly info section 250 breakdown? (Why is this info not in Q4 Final 2021-22?) Is some/all the budget held in the Village Celebrations EMR of £1K?
BPC don't produce any Working Group minutes, so how are the project decisions agreed and noted? Why is this informaton and parish recommendations not publicly available? (e.g. Jun 21 Min 343.7.3) How is the 2021/22 individual Jubilee Project expenditure identiffied in the minutes? NB 11 Oct 21 (Min 346.7.7) "... illegal under Local Government Legislation for any individual member to act in isolation." (Notes)
BPC's Reguilding Church Clock Project 14 Feb 22 (Min 350.7.5) 'Contingency EMR' to be used for any shortfall?
Itemised Expenditure per Budget Line itemThis report should indicate exactly what was spent on each project, service, etc.
Indicated by Audit to be available on request to BPC during AGAR process(Locking PC itemisted accountable budgeting)
Individual Invoices and supporting Receipts for each item of expenditureIndividual invoices and receipts should be present at the AGAR viewing.
Council PoliciesE.g. Standing Orders
Financial Regulations
Polcies on BPC website
See also:
What did Bleadon Parish Council Spend Half a Million On----
NOTES
STAFFING-CLERK
12 Feb 18 (Min 305.5) Unqualified clerk Marian appointed, no salary noted. Resigned Sept 2019 (Min 326.6)
06 July 2019 – Ad (by Marian) for 18 HOURS PER WEEK, HOME BASED SALARY: SCP 18-23 (£24,313 - £26,999 pro rata). Job Description including website duties and Job Specification publicly published.
20 Aug19 (Min 325.6) Fully qualified clerk, Naomi appointed, “Starting date 1st September, starting salary SCP21”, 09 Dec 19 (Min 329.8.1) resigned 15 Nov 2019.
09 Dec 2019 (Min 329.8.3) – Fully qualified Locum Clerk Bruce appointed, no salary or hours stated? (Later employed as clerk from 01 Mar 2020.)
13 Jan 2020 (Min 330.8.2) “To give consider a process for the appointment of a Parish Clerk. Resolved that a process for appointing a new Parish Clerk should be put into immediate effect. Agreed to place adverts with both ALCA and SLCC”
31 Jan 2020 - Ad (attributed to Marian not locum clerk Bruce?) for 18 HOURS PER WEEK, HOME BASED SALARY: SCP 18-23 (£24,313 - £26,999 pro rata). No Job Description or Job Specification published.
09 Mar 2020 (Min 332.7.5) Bruce appointed"... as the Parish Council’s Proper Officer as from the 1st March 2020. The appointment to be set at LC3 – SCP 39 at an annual salary of £41,675.00 per annum - pro-rata £17,781.00 for 18 hrs pw.” Yet councillors, “Resolved to confirm the appointment of Mr B Poole as the Parish Council’s Proper Officer and Responsible Finance Officer as from 1st March 2020. The agreed hours to 14 hrs per week set at LC3 – SCP 39”. Was this post readvertised at the higher salary? No explanation of significant increase in salary, especially as website duties removed from post? (See monthly update payments to website provider Webglu in the minutes) along with reduced admin duties due to the later removal of 3 standing committees and associated potential 20 public meetings in July 20. No official explanation has been given as to why the 3 standing committees are still removed as at Aug 2022, despite councillor requests to reinstate them. See 13 Sep 21 (Min 345.7.7).
14 Jun 2021 (Min 343.7.1.a) “…increase the Clerk’s weekly working hours from 14 pw to 18 pw backdated to the 1st March 2021” Was a new contract signed with agreed new Job Description? (Website duties still removed from post, the 3 standing committees still not reinstated?) NB: related May21 Personnel Committee Minutes still not published (yet accepted by Full Council?) No public explanation of the need for increased hours? Presumably also related somehow to Risk Register Section 1 Finance - Salaries & Associated Costs – Record of hours worked? Staff Costs were £17.6K for 2020/21 and £25.1K for 2021/22
14 Mar 22 (Min 351.7.9) The clerk’s website duties, that were being undertaken by contractor Webglu, now upwardly delegated to a councillor. “Resolved that until further notice Councillor Graham Getty be responsible for posting items on to the Parish Councils Website.”
14 Mar 22 (Min 351.7.10) “To note the recent announced salary increase for parish council employees of 1.75% backdated to the 1st April 2021 Resolved to note”
How does this approach fit with BPC’s Financial Regulations and Risk Assessment/Register?]]>
Enlarged image
What are these bridleway plans, how are they funded and when were residents consulted? Why is there no clear information on the Parish Council website or minutes?
How was this particular PROW, out of Bleadon's 20 PROWs chosen as the one to focus on and upgrade? When did this project get announced at full council or is the one line statement below the whole project statement, consultation, funding and decision making process? Will BPC have any ongoing maintenance costs or liabilities?
At the last Bleadon Parish Council meeting in July, there was an agenda item to discuss some obscurely identified footpaths, but BPC do not publish associated appendices with the agenda to residents, so it's not clear what this project was all about:
Min 355.7.2 "To resolve to receive a report submitted by Cllrs. S Garrett and G Getty with respect to Footpaths AX6/01/10 – AX6/10 – AX6/12 – AX6/18 – AX6/21 – AX6/10 (attached)".
Prior to the meeting, BOB emailled BPC asking for clarification on these footpaths (and the financial reserves), but later received the response, "I think you will now be aware from last evening’s meeting as to what the answers are to your two questions". No appendices, reports or further information were made publicly available, or sent to BOB, yet somehow a related image (presumably confidential to BPC?) was posted on a closed social media site, as seen above?
As the minutes of the July meeting will not be published by BPC until the next council meeting in September, the details of this project will remain unclear for at least another month. From BOB meeting notes, this project seems to involve funding/grant (£15K?) from Hinkley Point C, someone approached BPC regarding six footpaths (only five listed?), with BPC deciding/agreeing to develop one part (?) of the 3km bridleway across the Bleadon Levels (full length indicated in green on the map). The lead councillor in attendance indicated an urgent need for BPC(?) to accept this funding/grant now/July, although no deadline was given?
From BOB's PROW page, and in reference to NSC PROW mapping (NB tick Public Rights of Way on the left hand side of the screen):
AX6/01/10 - Toll Road to Wallborough Reserve, across Bleadon LevelsAX6/10 - Roman Road to Croquet Club, via The Dring,AX6/12 - Purn Way to Shiplate, via Pear Tree Gardens, Churchyard & Lake FarmAX6/18 - Mearcombe Lane to Christon Plantation, via Shiplett FarmAX6/21 - Hellenge to Roman Road, via AWT Hellenge HillAX6/10 - repeat of above?From BOB meeting notes, only the proposed Toll Road Bleadon Levels bridleway was discussed, but none of the other five(?) options? BPC's project lead councillors were proposing stoning the full width of part of the Toll Road bridleway path, mainly for use by walkers and cyclists. However, it was stated by other councillors at the meeting that as this is a designated bridleway, this suggestion wouldn't be good for horses who currently use the grass path between two stoned lanes (similar to image here)? Why isn't the information relating to this large-scale project published to residents in the appendices, working group notes or on the BPC website? Does the related image above accurately represent the bridleway under BPC discussion, if so when was it released to the public by BPC?
A verbal presentation regarding the bridleway was given by Phillip Hackett from the British Horse Society before the start of the council meeting. A summary of the presentation as handed to BOB at the meeting can be found here. Councllors later discussed that members of the public, and horses, should not stray outside the permitted width of the bridleway/PROW or use the verges, as it is not the official path. Therefore, the surface of this bridleway must cater for horses, not just walkers and cyclists. (NB BHS Bridleway Dimensions)
It is important to protect the different types of highway/bridleway/footpaths otherwise residents and members of the public may not be able to continue to use them as they do now. For example the Highway Code Rules About Animals states
Rule 54 "You must not take a horse onto a footpath or pavement and you should not take a horse onto a cycle track" (PDF also BHS)
The use of these PROWs as a bridleway should therefore be protected.
Public Rights of Way (PROW) are North Somerset and Landowner responsibilities. It has been asked that if Bleadon Parish Council becomes involved in the decision making and funding of this bridleway/public right of way as indicated above, will it become responsible for its future maintenance and any public liabilities by default? What are the estimated ongoing costs for Bleadon resident taxes/precept, if any?
Contrary to what was stated at the meeting, according to the government website, the Local Highway Authority (North Somerset) have responsibilities including:
"The highway authority must keep the surface of public rights of way which are maintained at public expense in a fit state for public use", i.e. not Bleadon Parish Council via taxes/precept from its residents (PDF)
Landowners have separate responsibilities(PDF)
-----
See also:]]>
The parish council's Budget includes a number of things including planned expenditure, financial reserves and expected income. This is usually discussed in publicly held and minuted meetings, e.g. Finance Committees, and then agreed by Full Council, usually around January.
Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) 2022/23 Budget was set at £64,157, with some information in the associated Appendix (Jan22 Min 349.3)
The precept is calculated as part of the parish council’s budget. It fills the gap between the parish council’s planned expenditure and its estimated income. BPC's 2022/23 Precept was set at £54,000; an 8% increase on last year's £50K precept (Jan22 Min 349.4) Previous precepts shown here.
North Somerset's Council Tax Guide 2022/23
page 11 shows where to find the precept figure on your Council Tax Bill (Band Value Calulation)Page12 shows information for each Parish and Town Council, for each Banding A-H, i.e. £54,000 for BPC.More information can be found in the NALC Good Councillor Guide to Finance and Transparency.
----
Also see:
Previous Council Tax GuidesRequirements of s49A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 Calculation of council tax requirement by authorities in England (Precept PDF Extract & Precept Chapter PDF)2022
What did Bleadon Parish Council Spend Half a Million OnParish Council Annual AccountsAmended I&E2021]]>
For a period of 30 days only, Councillors are inviting residents to view the councils' accounts, you can ask BPC to view last years accounts before Friday 22 July 22.(BPC Notice and previous Rights)
NB: The notice to view the annual accounts still has not been posted on the village noticeboards four weeks into the six week process. This process is also known and minuted as AGAR (Annual Governance & Accountability Return). The additional Public Rights information has been removed compared to the three page AGAR Notice 2019.
Despite BPC's public statements to the contrary, BPC is the Custodial Trustee of the Halls, park and the land under the Youth Club. These are managed, and financially accountable, as three different charities:
BPC are Custodial Trustees of The Coronation and Jubilee Halls, whichare managed by the independent Halls Management Committee (Charity No: 1042602), who signed a protocol agreement with BPC in 2010 to hold quarterly public meetings. Where are these meetings announced, and where are the minutes published on the BPC website?The Park is managed by BPC as a Playground Charity (Charity No: 304491), who appear to have spent nothing on the park in the last 5 years, yet the finances to date via the minutes indicate there has been money spent on monthly play area inspections, e.g. June expenditure #204?The Youth Club is managed and financed independently by the Bleadon Youth Club (Charity No: 304492)This year BPC has demanded from residents an increased £54K precept, and has given itself a budget of £64K (Jan Min 349.3), yet in 2011 BPC had financial reserves of £84K (Annual Report 2012 pg6), so what are the reserves now, as they're not published in the monthly minutes, despite previous requests and verbal agreements? Recent Minutes state,
"General Reserves were seriously depleted. Steps should be taken to reduce some of the unused Ear Marked Reserves." (May 2022 Min 353.13.1)UPDATE: "To Resolve to note the current level of Reserves - The Clerk advised the members of the current perilous level - not considering the ERMs [Ear Marked Reserves] of the General Reserve showing a deficit figure of £450.00. When asked what immediate positive steps need to be taken. The response was to formally resolve what ERMs are not required and as a result transfer them back to the General Reserve." (Jun 2022 Agenda Min 354.7.3)UPDATE: "To resolve to move the following EMRs into General Reserves" (July 2022 Agenda Min 355.7.1) NB no EMRs were stated? How is this transparent?Why is some expenditure and authorisation seemingly missing from the agenda. For example,
items 24-27 are missing from the agenda, who authorised them? Compare May Agenda Min 353.14 to May Minutes Min 353.14 Items 16-27, who authorised (May 22 Min 353.14)Items 35-47, who authorised? (Jun 22 Agenda Min 354.8)BOB has been asking BPC to be more open and transparent for many many years in its finances especially the reserves, asking it to reinstate its Finance Committee, which was abandoned after 2019. Also, to reinstate the publication of its finances in its newsletter, and fter 8 years it seems it may be about to do it! BPC is yet to publish the April 22 resident APM minutes, usually published a year later, but in its May minutes BPC wrote:
"It was noted that due to one report being unavailable it had not been possible to produce the Minutes for confirmation. Resolved that in future the Minutes of the Annual Parish Meeting (Annual Report) would be produced as a booklet and to be included in the Bleadon Village News." (May Min 353.15.12)
NB1 - These should be noted as DRAFT minutes, as Residents should confirm the April APM minutes, not BPC. Approval is made/or not by residents at the next resident APM meeting, scheduled for Apr 2023. Although, as BPC reference them in their May meeting, BOB/residents believe that residents should have access to the minutes as soon as possible.NB2 - APM minutes are not the same as BPC's Annual Report. The minutes are supposed to be the issues, questions, discussions raised by residents at the meeting. The Annual Report is what the council chooses to say at the meeting, and includes what it has been doing over the previous year, which usually dominates the residents' APM meeting time, but it should at least include a financial report.NB3 - Is the proposed booklet an additional cost, or is it included in the budget allocated for its newsletter this year, published by its independent Village News Editor?Budget: Editor for 4 Editions £1,600 + Printing last year £4,600 = £6,200?The newsletter budget for this year 2022-23 has to be guessed, as BPC seems to have reduced the quarterly financial information available to heading totals only compared to Q3-2021/22?UPDATE 11JUL22: If the 'independent' newsletter costed £6,200, it's interesting to note that BPC appears to be transferring £7,697 from the Special Reserve (purpose unknown) to the General Reserve to cover the £7,697 budget deficit created in January this year (Min 349.3). NB: This can't be confirmed until BPC publish their July minutes, which might not be until September, as they don't usually meet in August, and don't usually release their minutes until the week before the next meeting !!If BOB gets any clear answers, we'll let you know.
-------------
See also:]]>
Travel Plan Supplementary Planning Document
20 Jun 2201 Aug 22 Midday"A Travel Plan is a long-term management strategy put in place at the planning application stage to help facilitate travel by sustainable means and reduce car dependency"
See the Updated Travel Plan Supplementary Planning Document and the Executive Report
North Somerset Council state:
"We are updating the existing Travel Plans SPD and would like your views on the proposed changes.
This consultation is open to all but will be most relevant to transport consultants and developers.[BOB comments:
does this mean that access roads and associated restirctions will be decided before reaching public consultation? see NSC Proposed Rural Lane ClosuresHow is this linked to government plans? See New Petrol and Diesel Cars to be Banned within the Decade]The consultation will close on Monday 1st August 2022 at midday.
A Travel Plan is a long-term management strategy put in place at the planning application stage to help facilitate travel by sustainable means and reduce car dependency. They are required for all developments which generate significant amounts of movement, or where the location is traffic-sensitive, including residential, businesses, schools, retail and leisure facilities.
The current SPD dates back to November 2010 and is therefore in need of a comprehensive update, particularly in light of the council’s 2019 declaration of a Climate Emergency and ambition to be carbon neutral by 2030.
The updated SPD proposes a number of changes including those set out below to enable the council and developers to better manage Travel Plans and Travel Plan Statements and ensure a consistent approach across North Somerset, in line with other local authorities.
The revision of thresholds at which a Travel Plan Statement or Travel Plan is required for each type of development site.The introduction of two options for delivering Travel Plans – a council-led or developer-led approach.The revision of minimum requirements for Travel Plan measures and monitoring.The use of ‘Modeshift STARS’, an online platform where a Travel Plan can be stored, developed, managed and monitored over time.The Travel Plans SPD supports Development Management Policy DM26 Travel Plans and sets out the council’s requirements for the implementation and monitoring of Travel Plans at new developments. Benefits of the Travel Plan can include:
lower travel costsimproved health and wellbeingmore travel choices including opportunities for active travelimproved community links with reduced social isolationreduced health inequalitiesreduced traffic congestion and improved air qualityreduced demand for parkinghelping meet local, national and international climate change commitments"-----
See also:]]>
UPDATE 03JAN23: 23/P/0007/MMA - "Minor material amendment to 21/P/0527/OUT (Outline application for the erection of 14no. dwellings, with access and layout for approval and appearance, scale and landscaping reserved for subsequent approval) for the variation of condition 4 (approved plans) and condition 5 (Site Access and Visibility Splay) to allow for a revised access/visibility splay" Consultation deadline 09 Feb 2023
The outline planning application to build 14 new dwellings has been GRANTED by North Somerset.
This is in line with North Somerset Council's Local Plan Preferred Options 2038 for Proposed Residential Development (map) showing the importance of resident and Parish Council feedback to all NSC consultations that affect our community (see also Delegated Report)
See original blog and application information
------------------
See also:]]>
Full Rights as seen in the 2019 AGAR Notice p2&3 including "...If you are a local elector, your right to ask questions of the external auditor is enshrined in law."
It is interesting to note:
that the AGAR notice is not currently published on the five village noticeboards that is usual practice to bring the public's attention to the AGAR process, especially as we are now nearly three weeks into the six weeks mandatory period.the viewing dates are incorrect, i.e. commencing on Monday 13 June 2020 and ending on Friday 22 July 2020Q3-2021/22 and Q1-2022/23____
See also:]]>
What will be the future of rural Bleadon?
What will be the outcome of North Somerset Council's Consultation that ends today, 29 April 2022?
BOB's presents to BPC
26 April 2022
BOB's consultation submission to NSC
(See Note)
BPC consultation submission to NSC
(ExM 26APR22)
NSC will publish all consultation responses on 31 July 22
(see inline below)
Submit your comments to North Somerset Council ASAP, details on BOB's Local Plan Consultation blog
The NSC Local Plan timetable is as follows:
March/April 2022 - Consultation on Preferred Options (Consultation Draft)November 2022 -Consultation on pre-submission planJanuary 2023 - Submission to Secretary of StateApril 2023 - ExaminationOctober 2023 - Inspector’s ReportDecember 2023 - Adoption----
UPDATE DEC22 - "On 6 December 2022, there was an announcement of the government’s intention to make further changes to the planning system which includes a revised method of calculating housing requirement and increased protection for constrained areas including Green Belts. The Council has made the decision to await clarity on these critical issues before finalising a revised version of the local plan. Consultation on a revised local plan is now not expected to take place before Summer 2023 with submission for examination in Autumn 2023. A revised Local Development Scheme will be published in due course with a revised timetable. You can view our press release on this announcement for further information." (PDF)
NSC Policy Mapping
UPDATE 08JUL22 - The planning application to build 14 new dwellings has been GRANTED by North Somserset in line with North Somerset Council's Local Plan Preferred Options for Proposed Residential Development showing the importance of resident and Parish Council feedback to al NSC consultations
UPDATE 31JUL22 - Consultation Responses
Preferred Options Consultation Statement - Main Report"Bleadon Parish Council did not support the proposed changes to their boundary""Some of both the objecting and supporting comments included suggestions for new strategic gaps, including the following locations: ... and Bleadon/Weston-super-Mare"Appendix 1: Summary of Responses to Strategic Policies"Bleadon Parish Council recognises and wants to protect Bleadon’s Bronze Age rural farming heritage and its settlement character and culture."Appendix 2"Bleadon • Land North of Amesbury Drive (HE2051) should be included in the settlement boundary for Bleadon• Bleadon Parish Council want no changes to the existing settlement boundary
• The field opposite Catherine's Inn, behind the Fiat garage should be included in the settlement boundary. It is close to public transport, cycling and walking into the village are easy, and it would not be detrimental to the local environment.It would also contribute to the district's correctly identified need for affordable housing as defined in SP8.
• Suggested inclusion of Purn Farm and Holiday park.
• Suggested inclusion of walnut Cottage, Catherine Inn and the garage.
• Suggested inclusion of land to the east of Bleadon House."
"Weston-super-Mare: • Settlement boundary should extend around Land south of Bleadon Hill (HE2035)""a strategic gap is needed north of Bleadon to help prevent ‘encroachment’ from Weston, and protect the setting and character of Bleadon settlement"Appendix 3: Summary of Responses to the Development PoliciesAppendix 4: Summary of Responses to the SchedulesUPDATE 03AUG22 - Wind Turbine Catches Fire in Hull
UPDATE 08AUG22 - BOB asked NSC Planning Poiicy Team to take into consideration the CPRE reports regarding:
the "... call for land strategy and new planning rules to guard food security" (20 July 22 and PDF), which was published after the 29 Apr 22 deadline, andthe related Brownfield report, "New research shows space for 1.3m homes on recycled land is being ignored" (18 Nov 21 and PDF, Data and Spreadsheet).--------
Note: in the Local Plan Consulttation response to NSC BOB wrote, "On the 11 Apr at Bleadon’s Annual Parish Meeting (APM) Bleadon Parish Council stated that it was not aware of this consultation, that North Somerset Council had not informed councillors. It was not on the Chairs published agenda, nor were any other planning items". At the May 2022 full council meeting Cllr Porter stated that he had spoken with NSC officers and that they confirmed that BPC had been contacted a number of times throughout the consultation process. This was not formally minuted, nor was any reason given by BPC as to why it chose not to inform the public or to discuss the consultation until after it was raised by BOB at the APM? Nor was it clearly minuted that I stated that I was concerned about the lack of openness and transparency of BPC dicussions, actions and expenditure, which is why BOB pre-submited questions relating to the May agenda for councillors to discuss and answer..
See also:]]>
UPDATE: BOB's draft notes of the meeting and BPC's draft "Minutes above were prepared retrospectively by Liz Shayler (Locum Parish Clerk) in April 2023 in conjunction with Councillors and Members of the public present due to the absence of minutes for 2022"
-----
A reminder that the parish meeting tomorrow, Monday 11 April 2022 at 7pm, is a RESIDENT’S MEETING not a parish council meeting. We understand the council’s legal obligation is to widely inform residents 7 clear days beforehand (not including weekends), to arrange the hall booking and provide a chairman for residents to raise their views and concerns regarding the parish. It seems that councillors and the clerk are not required to attend.
It’s therefore interesting to note that the undated chairman’s agenda puts the residents ‘Open Forum’, the main legal purpose of the meeting, at the very end of her agenda, putting residents after parish councillors and her chosen speakers have spoken. The agenda appears to be a twist on the usual council meeting (where residents are not permittted to talk or question councillors during the meeting) and a 'Contact Us' meeting (where village organisations promote their services to new residents).
It’s also interesting to note that there is no update on planning development, no mention of local, district or national consultations affecting our community e.g. potential Bleadon wind & solar PV farms, and no update on roads and travel (buses) from the council? Nor is there an indication of BPC’s plans for our community, having ‘lost’ the residents’ agreed and adopted Parish Plan (£10K+?) and stalled its Neighbourhood Plan (£8K+?) pre-covid. So whose views are councillors basing their decision making and expenditure on?
Why is there no mention of North Somerset’s potential plans for Bleadon wind and solar PV farms (consultation started on 14 March ending 29 April 22, i.e. before the next BPC meeting,Why not visit one of the drop-in sessions to talk to NSC officers about how the Local Plan process will shape the future development of North Somerset up to 2038 - Wednesday 13 April from 4pm to 6pm at The Campus, Weston-super-Mare)?Considering the current energy crisis, what about an update on the existing fracking licences that cover the whole of Bleadon, WSM and into Somerset? What about the expansion of Bristol Airport 4,000 night flights, or geo-engineering in the skies over the area? With WSM stated as being the fastest growing town in Europe, where is Bleadon’s ‘Strategic Gap’ to stop urban sprawl invading our rural community? Do NSC have any plans for Bleadon's rural lanes?When NSC’s Local Plan is agreed will applications be auto-approved or will resident’s still be able to comment on individual proposals?What about the changes to Bleadon’s bus services and associated safety issues? Or an update on the A370 speed changes, central reservation, traffic lights, ‘village’ one-way system, etc.?
Bleadon is a rural village, so with global leaders indicating possible food shortages what is BPC doing to promote local food security? How is it supporting our rural farmers and workers?
The COVID elephant in the room has also been ignored, what was the £10K grant awarded to BPC in 2020. used for (COVID, Cllr ipads, church clock)? Local, district and national government policies have undoubtedly had a huge effect on all residents’ emotional, mental, physical and economic well-being. It’s also had a huge effect on local, district and national democracy with more and more meetings and decision making being made behind closed doors, resulting in an increasing lack of transparency.
This year, during the current economic crisis, Bleadon Parish Council gave itself a £64K budget financed by a £54K tax/precept demanded from Bleadon residents (£50K in 2021 makes a 8% increase), with £8K taken from reserves. If the parish council exists to democratically represent its residents, do residents feel that BPC uses its newsletter and website to inform and gather residents’ views of government activity effectively? E.g. How does it inform residents of consultations and available BPC grants? (e.g. the ‘independent’ Bleadon in Bloom group was given a grant of £8.5K+ in 2021/22 and £? in 2022)
BPC’s ‘independent’ newsletter, is subsidised up to £4.6K p/yr. It was delivered this week with an article from the clerk and one from the chairman but none attributed to councillors? Why doesn’t it mention the bus changes or the NSC Local Plan seven week consultation (ends 29 Apr 22), both affecting the whole of our community? How does BPC ensure that its newsletter is delivered in a timely manner to ensure that events aren’t missed? How does BPC ensure that it’s ‘Letter to the Editor’ is used in an appropriate and respectful manner towards other residents, business owners, developers, etc. (e.g. Page 3)? Is the newsletter balanced or generally village rather than parish focussed? Is its circulation outside Bleadon appropriate if those residents don’t pay Bleadon taxes?Do residents feel that BPC and its councillors practice transparency of its decision making and expenditure? Does it encourage its clerk (£48K+ pro rata) to ensure that its communications are clear, timely and accurate to avoid miscommunications between the council, working groups and residents as highlighted in its newsletter delivered this week, pg 3? (BPC represented Working Group minutes, actions, decisions and agreements are not generally published; monthly, annual, and ad hoc sub-committee minutes are generally only published 3 days before the next meeting, usually without appendices)It appears only councillors and invited speakers attended the Parish Meeting last year (related blog). Perhaps, if a large number of residents attend on Monday, the chair might put the residents ‘Open Forum’ first, to enable residents to have sufficient time to voice their views and concerns regarding their community. Maybe residents can reclaim their ONLY OFFICIAL ANNUAL RESIDENT’S MEETING.
--------------
Additional info:]]>
UPDATE at 10OCT23: NSC Statement (10OCT23) and Agenda for 18 October 2023 at 2:30pm Agenda Item 9
North Somerset Local Plan pre-submission version (Regulation 19) (PDF)Report of Councillor Canniford (attached)Additional documents: 09.1 Local Plan Reg 19 Executive Committee October 2023 (PDF)View the Emerging Policies Map 09.2 Policies map extract October 2023 (PDF)NB: THis meeting can be viewed via YouTube here.
UPDATE: BOB presentation and April 2022 Consultation submissions
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationNorth Somerset Local Plan 2038 Preferred Options
14 Mar 2229 Apr 22 at 5pm"The draft Local Plan sets out the councils preferred options for delivering the number of new homes and associated infrastructure such as schools, transport and other facilities that are needed in North Somerset up to 2038"North Somerset Council are inviting you to take part in the consultation (PDF)
If you wish to discuss this consultation you can raise it at the annual resident meeting, Monday 11th Apr 22, 7pm at the village Hall.[UPDATE 12APR22 - Following above meeting BOB writes to NSC Cllr Porter re: fracking, turbine and solar pv proposals for Bleadon; request for letters to/from NSC re: fracking; and hoping for BPC to call a widely publicised extra-ordinary meeting for residents before the consultation deadline (PDF)]Visit one of the drop-in sessions to talk to officers about how the Local Plan process will shape the future development of North Somerset up to 2038.Monday 14 March 12.30pm to 7pm at Banwell Village HallThursday 17 March from 3pm to 7pm at Hangstones Pavilion,YattonThursday 24 March from 3pm to 7pm atChurchill Methodist Church HallTuesday 29 March from 3pm to 7pm at St James Church Centre, WinscombeFriday 1 April from 3pm to 7pm at Tithe Barn, NailseaThursday 7 April from 3pm to 7pm at Portishead LibraryWednesday 13 April from 4pm to 6pm at The Campus, Weston-super-MareOnly the Vice-Chair of BPC attends. BOB and the councillor take the opportunity to briefly discuss the Local Plan Consultation and Neighbourhood Development Plans with a North Somerset Planning Officer.Short Guide to the Local Plan (PDF)View the Emerging Policies MapClick image
Renewable Search Areas E.g. See page 49 image for Bleadon Wind Turbines & Solar PVs
See also previous solar farm application in Bleadon BOB blog, (Energy Security Strategy, 10 point plan) and Nuclear engergy
Click image
Minerals E.g. See page 72, (incl fracking licences throughout Bleadon, WSM and towards Somerset Govt)Click image
Settlement boundaries E.g. See page 26 and page 126and page 158
See alsoSettlement BoundariesBOB blog
Click image
Proposed Residential Sites. How does this relate to the previous NSC Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)?
How does this relate to the regional Joint Spatial Plan (Blog &Blog)
"New communities in North Somerset will help deliver the housing, jobs and infrastructure we need to 2036. The Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) will set out the overall amount of new homes and business development and where it should be located across the West of England area, as well as the important schools, transport, community facilities and green spaces needed to support that growth." (PDF)
UPDATE 08JUL22: Purn Way 14 Dwellings Granted in line with NSC Proposed Residential Sites
Click image
Proposed Employment Sites. How does this relate to the Employment Land Review?Click image
Community FacilitiesClick image
See page 165 Where is Bleadon's 'Strategic Gap' similar to Hutton, Locking and Banwell? -
"Areas of land which are protected from development between particular settlements which play and an important role in helping to retain their separate identity and character"
Click image
Transport - See Rural Roads
and Active Travel Consultation & Strategy BOB blogs
How does this fit with the regional Joint Local Transport Plan (Blog &Blog)
Click image
Retail - See Quarry Application
Click image
Local Green SpaceClick image
Air Travel & Safety - See Bristol Airport Expansion BOB blog. Is there still a maintenance route over Bleadon to Cardiff? How does this fit with NSC carbon neutral and green agenda?
Click image
Green BeltWhat about Food Security?
UK Report (PDF)
Land ClassificationsSouth West Land Grades map(14Mb)Bleadon Land Classification extractDEFRA Interactive mappingDudley Stamp Bleadon extractLand UseAgricultural Grades 1-5 (extracted map)Natural England Agricultural Land Classification Iteractive MappingAgricultural Land Classification (ALC) Grades - Post 1988 Interactive mapping (England)Agricultural Land Classification: protecting the best and most versatile agricultural land (Doc)North Somerset Interative MappingBleadon Characteristics (extracted map)BatsPrevious NSC Local Plan Consultations
Nov 2020 - Local Plan 2038 Consultation Part 2 (Blog)July 2020 - North Somerset Local Plan 2038 Challenges and Choices Part 1 (Blog&Vid)Mar 2020 - Local Plan -Pre-commencement (Blog)Sep 2018 - North Somerset Local Plan 2036 - Issues and Options (Blog& Blog)Nov 2017 - Local Plan 2036 - Generating Ideas (Blog)BOB ppt(26Mb)
________________
Other info:]]>
Notice of Public Right to view Bleadon Parish Councils financially related information
There is a six week opportunity to lawfully view BPC's accounting records for last year between Monday 14 June 2021 and Friday 23 July 2021 as summarised in its unaudited AGAR
"Any person interested has the right to inspect and make copies of the accounting records for the financial year to which the audit relates and all books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers, receipts and other documents relating to those records must be made available for inspection by any person interested.
For the year ended 31 March 2021, these documents will be available on reasonable notice by application" to the parish clerk by ringing 0745 335 318 or emailling parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk (AGAR Notice)
Residents and their representatives also have:
"The opportunity to question the appointed auditor about the accounting records; andThe right to make an objection which concerns a matter in respect of which the appointed auditor could either make a public interest report or apply to the court for a declaration that an item of account is unlawful. Written notice of an objection must first be given to the auditor and a copy sent to the smaller authority."The appointed auditor can be contacted at the address in the AGAR Notice for this purpose between the above dates only.Other BPC published financial information::
Last year's Budget Detail by Centre 16DEC20This year's Budget 2021-22 (16DEC20 - under next year heading) and This year's 2021-22 Budget OverviewLast year'sDetailed Receipts & Payments 31/03/2021 by budget heading (24MAY21)Last year's Summary Receipts & Payments 30Sept20- Detailing Reserve Allocations up to 30SEP20___
See also:]]>
"The small print of the first major post-Brexit agreement – revealed by Canberra, as the UK government tried to keep it under wraps – revealed a pledge to protect farmers for 15 years has been dropped.
Instead, Australian farmers will effectively be handed tariff-free access from day one, up to a “cap” on sales that is 60 times the current level of imported beef.The detail was revealed as experts warned the overall economic boost from the deal would be “close to zero” – and the government admitted the average household would be just £1.20 a year better off.MPs are demanding the power to scrutinise the deal immediately, but ministers ... plan to deny full access until the autumn, when critics fear it will be too late" (Article and PDF)Watchdog supposed to scrutinise Australia trade deal still will not exist when deal is signed
"Liz Truss accused of ‘subverting’ commitment to parliament by blocking access to agreement until autumnA watchdog designed to ensure the Australia trade deal does not undermine UK food and animal welfare rules will not be set up until months after it is signed" (PDF)'Just don’t tell them what’s in it’: Ethics, edible insects and sustainable food choice in schools (04AUG20 - PDF) *Corresponding author. Department of Education and Childhood, Frenchay Campus, University of the West of England, Bristol BS16 1QY, UK. Email: verity6.jones@uwe.ac.uk
Schools Grub Kitchen "Try one of our popular tutored tasting sessions" (The Bug Farm - 28FEB24)Transformation of Agriculture and the use of Insects(FEB20)
"Themed collaborative R&D: we will fund collaborative projects, which will need to involve farming or agri-food businesses working with researchers, to carry out R&D focused on strategic, high-priority societal challenges with the potential to transform agricultural productivity over longer time horizons. We have identified a set of themes and will develop these to ensure that they are targeted on innovative solutions to these challenges"
"Themes include:
adaption to climate change and clean growth (e.g. best practice approaches or next generation fertilisers),integrated farm management (e.g. sustainable agronomy and integrated pest management),sustainable protein and balanced nutrition (e.g. plant based protein and sustainable livestock production),genetics and genomics for enhanced productivity (e.g. advanced breeding technology),renewable materials for the bioeconomy (e.g. biomass crops or agroforestry),and advanced sensor technologies and data driven approaches,For example, we could fund transformative collaborative projects seeking to develop insect based production systems or new farm systems with reduced environmental impacts which use integrated and advanced automation" (page 22)["By 2018, insects will be permitted in aquaculture for the first time, and novel food legislation will be ready to assess insects for human consumption (PDF) and EU Edible Insects (APR20)]"The third tier in our current proposal would be focused on delivering landscape scale land-use change projects, where such projects drive added value over and above what can be delivered through tiers 1 and 2."
"It will coordinate projects that are critical in helping us to meet ambitious environmental commitments such as our net zero target. Projects could include woodland and forest creation, peatland restoration and the creation of coastal habitats such as wetlands and salt marsh; these carbon rich habitats would also deliver additional environmental outcomes, such as biodiversity and flood mitigation" (page 10)Agricultural Productivity Working Group Report Feb20
Including case studies of:
Data Linker (Page 37)Livestock Identification Programme (Page 38)Knowledge Exchange in the Northern Ireland pig sector (Page 39)Insect biomass (Page 41)"Countries and companies at international and European levels are progressing swiftly to develop this important sector ... The Task and Finish Group identified the following actions as important to the rapid development of the industry in the UK ... Central government ... to support a national insect biomass conversion industry and global business potential (protein production, waste valorisation, novel products)."" UK position post EU Exit offers a potential opportunity to progress enabling legislation at a faster ratethan at the EU level"Robotics and autonomous systems (Page 43)Professional training (Page 45)Electricity requirements for agricultural vehicles (Page 47)Ireland: succession farm partnership tax concessions (Page 48)___
See also:]]>
Revised North Somerset
Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document Consulation
17 May 2128 Jun 21"... update the existing Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)"North Somerset Council are inviting you to take part in the consultation: (you need to have a login!!)
"The Council is proposing to update the existing Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The current standards date back to November 2013 and are in need of a comprehensive update, particularly in light of the Council’s 2019 declaration of a Climate Emergency and ambition to be carbon neutral by 2030.
The Parking Standards SPD supports Core Strategy Policy CS11: Parking and sets out the Council’s requirement for all types of parking provision (vehicle, cycle, motorcycle, etc) at new developments. It seeks to ensure that an appropriate level of parking is provided at new developments, and offers clarity for developers, officers and other stakeholders by providing clear and comprehensive guidance.
As part of this review, a variety of updates are proposed including:
The introduction of ‘Principle 19: Electric Vehicle Parking’ which sets out minimum requirements for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure at new development.The introduction of ‘Principle 20: Car Club Schemes at New Development’ to ensure the provision of Car Club vehicles at suitable locations.The introduction of a ‘Parking Needs Assessment’ to assist officers in determining a suitable level of parking in areas well served by active and public modes of transport and where car ownership and use is lower.Increases to the minimum number of cycle parking spaces to be required at new developments. Updates to Appendix A (Car and Cycle parking Standards), including introducing standards for sports halls, gyms/health clubs, cinemas and Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMO). A small increase in parking bay dimensions from 2.4m x 4.8m to 2.5m to 5m.A more detailed report on the proposed updates to the SPD was presented to the Council’s Executive Committee on 28th April 2021. You can read the Executive report here." (17MAY21)
___
See also:]]>
Baker St
Travel Improvements
12 May 2103 Jun 21"... proposed changes to Baker Street and Milton Road are intended to give more space to people using the streets""Active Travel Improvements at Baker Street and Milton Road, Weston-super-Mare
(Questionnaire - PDFpg1, pg2, pg3, pg4, pg5, pg6)
North Somerset Council are encouraging the public to have their say as part of a consultation on proposed changes to Baker Street and Milton Road in Weston-super-Mare. We are particularly interested to hear from people who live in the local area.
The proposed changes to Baker Street and Milton Road are intended to give more space to people using the streets, especially outside the primary school and will link the existing Summerlands cycle route to Weston town centre and seafront. There are opportunities to provide more seating, plants and trees and narrower junctions at side roads will make crossing safer for all.
The new proposals include [map of proposed street changes]:
A wider pavement in front of the school to allow more space for school children and parents Better crossings facilitiesMore seating, greenery and treesA 20mph speed limits will help make streets safer for allNew mandatory cycle lanes in Milton Road, with a westward cycle track in Baker Street One-way restriction on Baker Street, Glebe Road and Wooler Road, removing some through traffic and allowing more parkingThis scheme is part of the Department for Transport funded Active Travel Fund improvements aimed to help people travel more sustainably and help to assist with economic recovery following Covid-19. Further information can be found at www.n-somerset.gov.uk/activetravel" (13MAY21)
__
See also:]]>
NSC Supplementary
Planning Document (SPD)
26 Apr 21
21 July 21"Any person with sufficient interest in the decision to adopt the SPD may apply to the High Court for permission to apply for judicial review of that decision."North Somerset Council adopted its supplementary planning document (SPD) on 21 April 2021.
"The SPD [Creating Sustainable Buildings and Places SPD], adoption statement and consultation statement can be seen on the Council's website at https://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/my-services/planning-building-control/planning-policy/supplementary-plans-guidance/adopted-supplementary-plans , and copies can also be viewed during normal opening hours at the following Council office:
Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1TG
Any person with sufficient interest in the decision to adopt the SPD may apply to the High Court for permission to apply for judicial review of that decision. Any such application must be made promptly and in any event not later than 3 months after 21 July 2021.
Planning Policy Team
North Somerset Council"
"Superseded policies
Following publication of some of the above supplementary planning documents, many of the replacement local plan policies have been superseded by the Core Strategy and/or the Sites and Policies Plan part 1: development management policies.
Please refer to the below local plan policy schedule to find out which policies have been superseded, and where applicable, the relevant replacement.
Schedule of current policy position June 2018"
See also:]]>
Winterstoke Hundred Academy Expansion
31 Mar 2105 May 21"North Somerset Council would like your feedback on plans for a 900 school-place expansion of Winterstoke Hundred Academy to be located in Parklands Village.""North Somerset Council would like your feedback on plans for a 900 school-place expansion of Winterstoke Hundred Academy to be located in Parklands Village.
The Winterstoke Hundred Academy is managed by Cabot Learning Federation and based on Beaufighter Road. This proposed school expansion would see additional facilities for pupils aged 11 to 19, built nearby on the newly opened North South Link Road access to Locking Parklands, adjacent to the A371.
The expanded school facilities, which are funded through Homes England’s Housing Infrastructure Fund, will help to increase intake so that growing families from across the area can access local schooling.
The plans include modern and spacious classrooms that we hope will provide young people with opportunities to get the very best start in life. The designs are also expected to include sports facilities and playing fields and will be built to high environmental standards. You can read more about this on the right-hand side of this page.
Work is now underway on the design of the school expansion, leading up to planning submission in May 2021. Fill in our short questionnaire to tell us what you think about the plans for the school and your priorities for the project’s delivery."
Other information:
Site PlanOverview PDFQuestionnaire PDFWHAE project and principles document_____
See also:]]>
Inside Settlement Boundary (Map)
Land at Bleadon Hill
Golf Club
Dismantle underground approx
800m overhead cables, etc.
NO OBJECTION
(24MAR21)
WallflowerHouse3 Dwellings
WITHDRAWN
(18MAR21)
Rectory Garden2 New Houses
WITHDRAWN
(02MAR21)
Bleadon Quarry42 Dwelling - 189 Occupancy
GRANTED
(01MAR21)
Outside Settlement Boundary, Inside Parish (Map)
Purn Way14 Dwellings
Purn Holiday Park10 LodgesCoronation Road
5 New Dwellings
2 New Dwellings
(Previiously 3 dwellings)
REFUSED
(29APR21)
Wayacre Drove
(off Accommodation Rd)
50 Caravan Pitches
WITHDRAWN
(01FEB21)
Purn Way14 Dwellings Appeal
DISMISSED
(14JAN21)
Adjacent toMendip Racing
4 Holiday Lodges
GRANTED
(10DEC20)
AccommodationRoad
Wake Park Offices, Cafe, Storage
GRANTED
(27NOV20)
Outside Parish Boundary(Map)
Rural Lanes Active Travel Enhancement SchemeNSC Rural Roads Closures
Temporarily WITHDRAWN
(07APR21)
Devil's Bridge60 Dwellings
GRANTED
(22JUL19)
Bleadon Hill36 Dwellings
REFUSED
(08JAN21)
Overhead and Underground
Bristol AirportExpansion
Appeal
Statement of Common Ground/Case
Rule 6 awarded
Compulsory Purchase
BleadonFracking Licence
Roman Road
SUSPENDED
(02NOV19)
Government, Regional, District and Parish consultations and policies will directly influence residential and commercial development in Bleadon.You may want to respond to the consultations to ensure that your view is considered in the future of our communities.
Also see:]]>
See also:]]>
UPDATE 05MAY21: The draft minutes and any actions decided at this resident meeting are noted on the BPC agenda but have not been released to the public, only to councillors? (Min 342,13,11)
----
BOB has been told that this year's Annual Parish Meeting (APM), arranged for residents to raise issues and vote on them, was so under the radar this year, that only two non-councillors who were scheduled to present, out of over 1,000 Bleadon residents, attended last Monday's meeting!
This is unsurprising, as over the years rather than encourage, engage and respond to any public questions, Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) has highjacked these specific resident meetings and effectively turned them into council trumpet blowing events, with little to no public interaction expected, or presumably wanted. Councillors' own annual meeting, usually held in May, is confusingly called the 'Annual Meeting of the Parish Council' (APMC), where residents are only allocated up to 15 minutes to speak before the meeting starts, as is the case with usual BPC meetings.
Did anyone see a councillors' call for residents to submit agenda items, like in 2018? BPC's own councillor meetings were advertised on a non-council social media group for the last two months, so why not the meeting BPC specifically arranged for residents? BOB has been told that some residents managed to find this year's agenda in time, only to discover that the Zoom link didn't work, and so they were prevented from attending their own residents' meeting.
As far as BOB is aware, the only BPC requirement for annual resident meetings, is for the Chairman to arrange a meeting 'space' between 01 March and 01 June and to chair the meeting; no councillors or clerk required. It now seems that residents are no longer required to attend either! Conversely, Norfolk District Council states:
The National Association of Local Councils, "NALC advises that parish councils 'should endeavour to secure the largest possible turn out at a parish meeting so that the local electorate, ... can debate and democratically decide any business which legitimately features on the agenda and further decide if a poll on any question arising is required.'‟
Stratfield Mortimer Parish Council, states:
"NALC is of the view that a parish affair could be any local issue, activity, subject matter which specifically affects a particular parish and which a parish meeting may wish to discuss, debate and potentially influence."
The council's own quarterly newsletter (p4), published last month, implied that this year's annual meeting may be abandoned, despite BPC purchasing "lT equipment for each Councillor so that they might fully participate in ... Zoom Meetings (p7).', telling residents:
"... it would seem [that government restrictions will] continue for a few months yet which in itself puts the holding of the annual parish meeting into some doubt. lt would normally be held by Bleadon in the month of April - it was abandoned last April - however legally a council has until the 31- May to hold such a meeting. Watch this space!" (BVN117) Where was the council's update publicity confirming that the meeting would happen on Zoom?
Consequently, BOB was not aware that this meeting was going ahead, and so was unable to attend, but just look at the agenda, found on the BPC website after the meeting was held. Residents were 'allocated' an agenda item that came after councillors had raised and discussed their own annual reports'. How can this be called a democratic, resident focussed meeting? Why couldn't BPC publish these reports before the meeting, then encourage residents to talk about what they considered important at Monday's meeting?
If councillors are advised that they 'should endeavour to secure the largest possible turn out' at a resident's parish meeting, and 'legally a council has until the 31- May to hold such a meeting', why did councillors push through a meeting at the beginning of April, with little publicising and without a call for residents' agenda items, presumably knowing that this would lead to little to no resident attendance? How is this an open, transparent and democratic process?
Perhaps, BPC didn't want to hear the concerns that residents raise in their own meetings, unattended by councillors? Perhaps BPC didn't want to openly and transparently:
discuss the barriers BPC has put in place restricting residents attending meetings this year (non-publication of agendas, some agenda quietly posted on the BPC website but not on noticeboards and vice versa, zoom links not working, etc.);or to discuss BPC's removal of all public Finance, Planning and Open Spaces committee meetings in favour of closed, undocumented working groups;or discuss the lack of timely access to reports, contracts, etc. especially those relating to BPC's financial expenditure, contract and accounts;or discuss the funded but undocumented BPC projects that are considered 'independent', e.g. Neighbourhood Development Plan, Bleadon in Bloom, etc.?All 9 councillors live in the village which is only a small fraction of the parish, 3 councillors live next door to each other, 4 are only contactable via email. How about discussing a more representative cross section of Bleadon residents on the council, or at least allocating certain areas of Bleadon to each councillor, thereby ensuring more inclusive 'parish' rather than 'village' representation, as indicated by Weston Town Council!Perhaps BPC believes that councillors' current closed approach towards decision making and expenditure is 'for the greater good'? Thank goodness it's not Hot Fuzz Style!
___
See:]]>
UPDATE 03JAN23 - 23/P/0007/MMA "Minor material amendment to 21/P/0527/OUT (Outline application for the erection of 14no. dwellings, with access and layout for approval and appearance, scale and landscaping reserved for subsequent approval) for the variation of condition 4 (approved plans) and condition 5 (Site Access and Visibility Splay) to allow for a revised access/visibility splay" - Not on BPC 16JAN23 Agenda?
UPDATE 08JUL22 - Decision GRANTED in line with North Somerset Council's Local Plan Preferred Options
UPDATE 15MAY21 & 20DEC21: BPC submit:
"Despite having approved the previous application the Council recognised the current objections of the residents and therefore recommended refusal on the grounds that it was (a) outside the settlement boundary (b) insufficient and inadequate vehicular access thus increasing a potental risk to pedestrians (c) infringing the West Mendip Way and (d) that the area was suscepiible to flooding and abounds a SSSI" (14MAY21)
______
A new outline application at Land Off Purn Way Bleadon, BS24 0QF (Validated 26 March 21)
"Outline application for the erection of 14no. dwellings, with access and layout for approval and appearance, scale and landscaping reserved for subsequent approval." (See Affordable Housing Statement and Ecological Impact Assessment)
This is an application for 10 Single Storey Bungalows and 4 Two Storey Dwelling Houses - site plan.
Comments deadline is04 May 2021. Here is the link to the application 21/P/0527/OUT on North Somerset Council Planning website. [Agreed Expiry Date 31AUG21]
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
___
See also:]]>
North Somerset Council (NSC) live stream their meetings on their YouTube Channel, which are also accessible to the public after the meeting here. Records of NSC meeting agendas, reports and minutes are publicly available to view on their website here.
It is interesting to note how the different levels of government allow public access to meetings and associated information during COVID19 restrictions. For instance,
Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) has so far declined access to their public Zoom audio and/or video recordings since they started in June last year. Conversely, Brent Knoll parish council publishes its physical village hall and virtual Zoom recordings on Youtube.In January 2021 BPC were enthusiastic about publishing their meetings, to be seen to be open and transparent, but by the next meeting BPC minuted, " To resolve that the Council will only record the virtual meetings as a draft to the minutes and once they are approved at the next meeting the recording will be destroyed." (Min 370.7.2).BPC currently doesn't generally publish its reports and appendices prior, during or after its meetings. Conversely Brent Knoll use the zoom document sharing facility during their meetings, so that residents can understand what is being publicly discussed.BPC has also stopped its public Finance, Planning and Open Spaces open sub-committees, preferring instead to create closed, undocumented working groups, Conversely, neighbouring Locking Parish Council continue to publicly hold and publish their sub-committee meetings,BPC created a closed undocumented Budget/Finance working group. Conversely, Locking PC have a Finance Committee that discussed a 'Five Year Financial Strategic Plan' and an 'Investment Strategy for Parish Council Reserves'.Why the lack of openness and transparency in BPC discussions and decision making, especially with regards to financial matters? Why do residents have the least information about parish councillors government in our community?
___________
See also:]]>
Green Infrastructure
15 Feb 2109 Apr 21"The green infrastructure strategy will impact all aspects of life in North Somerset ..."The Overview (PDF), Executive Summary (PDF)and Strategy (PDF) and Questionnaire (PDF) can be found online. North Somerset Council states:
"The green infrastructure strategy will impact all aspects of life in North Somerset ... and will cover the period 2021-2031" ... so why wasn't this consultation on any Bleadon Parish Council agenda to publicly discuss how it will affect our rural community?
The strategy makes reference to agriculture, soil, crops, food production and food security.
"In September 2020, the Prime Minister signed the Leaders Pledge for Nature, committing to protect 30% of the UK’s land by 2030, to protect nature and boost biodiversity",how much is already protected in North Somerset and the UK?
Some Maps, 59 Projects and some GI Datasets from the proposed strategy.
"Green infrastructure is a technical term that [NSC] use as shorthand to describe how [NSC] look after ... parks, beaches, green spaces, wildlife, countryside, public rights of way and waterways .."NSC "... want to understand whether the ambition of the strategy, its content, aims and objectives are right and, if not, what we might be missing," via its very short Questionnaire (PDF)How does this strategy fit with NSC's unconfirmed ‘Rural Lanes Active Travel Enhancement Scheme', road closures and its Active Travel Strategy?
The strategy "... also draws support from the West of England Joint Green Infrastructure Strategy (JGIS) (2020-2030) [and Action Plan (2020-23)] and feeds into the North Somerset Local plan (2023-2038) (blog).
Also, NSC state that, "The NPPF requires local authorities to set out a strategic approach to green infrastructure in their Local Plans."
______
See also:]]>
The table below lists a few applications and developments currently influencing Bleadon Parish. There are alsosome policies and consultations influencing development in Bleadon..
Inside Settlement Boundary (Map)
WallflowerHouse3 Dwellings
WITHDRAWN
(18MAR21)
Rectory Garden2 New Houses
WITHDRAWN
(02MAR21)
Bleadon Quarry42 Dwelling - 189 Occupancy
GRANTED
(01MAR21)
Outside Settlement Boundary, Inside Parish (Map)
Purn Way14 Dwellings
Purn Holiday Park10 LodgesCoronation Road
5 New Dwellings
2 New Dwellings
(Previiously 3 dwellings)
Wayacre Drove
(off Accommodation Rd)
50 Caravan Pitches
WITHDRAWN
(01FEB21)
Purn Way14 Dwellings Appeal
DISMISSED
(14JAN21)
Adjacent toMendip Racing
4 Holiday Lodges
GRANTED
(10DEC20)
AccommodationRoad
Wake Park Offices, Cafe, Storage
GRANTED
(27NOV20)
Outside Parish Boundary(Map)
Rural Lanes Active Travel Enhancement SchemeNSC Rural Roads Closures
Temporarily WITHDRAWN
Devil's Bridge60 Dwellings
GRANTED
(22JUL19)
Bleadon Hill36 Dwellings
REFUSED
(08JAN21)
Overhead and Underground
Bristol AirportExpansion
Appeal
Statement of Common Ground/Case
Rule 6 awarded
Compulsory Purchase
BleadonFracking Licence
Roman Road
SUSPENDED
(02NOV19)
Government, Regional, District and Parish consultations and policies will directly influence residential and commercial development in Bleadon.You may want to respond to theconsultations to ensure that your view is considered in the future of our communities.
Also see:]]>
UPDATE 07APR21 - NSC withdraw TRO pending new drafting and consultation, stating, '... on this occasion, we’ve not provided the necessary information or context in advance of notices going up." (PDF)
___________
As the government starts to lift lockdown North Somerset Council starts to restrict freedom of movement, by turning public rural roads into restricted, access only areas.
North Somerset Council (NSC) proposes to ban motor vehicles (with exemptions) from the network of lanes between Clevedon, Yatton, Nailsea, Claverham and Backwell, including Backwell Common and Backwell Bow. Please see the list of affected roads here, along with a petition here, which already has over 3,500 signatures, and a facebook group - Save Our Access. (UPDATE 07APR21-PDF)
During the repeated lockdowns and tiered releases that have restricted everyones freedom of movement over the last year, it has become increasingly apparent how important it is to be free to choose where to visit, and how to do that, especially to support mental health and well-being. Not everyone is able to walk or cycle. Some, especially the elderly and less physically mobile, enjoy the freedom to take an accompanied calming drive through the countryside. These proposed rural shutdowns will prevent, or 'lockdown', that freedom.
What are the implications for Bleadon and the Levels as NSC rolls out its 'Rural Lanes Active Travel Enhancement Scheme'? Although mentioned in various press releases, details and future plans of this Rural scheme are not easily found? Will parts of rural areas effectively become enforced 'Park & Ride' for people wanting to experience the countryside by bike and foot? Will it potentially create 'no-go zones' (except for business & service industry access)? Will it encourage greater rural development in these 'people safe' areas? Are people given full information before giving their opinion on surveys that are used to implement policies?
NSC's Active Travel Strategy, following national policy, aims to increase the number of journeys undertaken by walking and cycling by at least 300% by 2030, by shutting down roads. They anticipate that restricting access to these rural roads will form the foundation of a wider ‘Rural Lanes Active Travel Enhancement Scheme’, encouraged by government funding via the DfT Active Travel Fund,NSC state, "In some locations, the “access only” restriction could be supported by future measures, including ... physical measures to close roads to motor vehicles." (PDF)
Full details of NSC's proposal are contained in the notice of intent, draft order, a plan of the affected area, and a Statement of the Council’s Reasons for proposing to make the Order.
Comments can be made via email to Nicholas Brain, Assistant Director Governance & Monitoring Officer, at traffic.orders@n-somerset.gov.uk, quoting the reference ATF2/RL/310321 by 5pm on 30th April 2021. Alternatively, write to Town Hall, Weston-super-Mare BS23 1UJ, Tel No (01934) 888888.
NB: NSC proposes to make the order under sections 1(1), 2(1) to (3) and 4(1) of and Part IV of Schedule 9 to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as amended.
____________________________________
See also:
Press
Weston Mercury Plan to cut traffic on rural roads(PDF)Highways News North Somerset to ban vehicles from some rural roads ...(PDF)Somerset Live Council plan to ban traffic from rural roads in North Somerset(PDF)District
NSC Noticed of intent Bundle(PDF)NSC Adopted Highways mappingNSC Public & Legal Notices 2021NSC Green Infrastructure ConsultationRegional
WECA Active TravelNational, global
Ireland (PDF) Scotland Review of Active Travel Policy Implementation 2016 Final Report (PDF)Agenda 2021/30 & Great ResetOther Govt Info]]>
"First Mask Discrimination Case Settled For £7,000
A disabled woman assisted by Kester Disability Rights has been paid £7,000 in compensation by a service provider who refused her access to a service because she was unable to wear a face mask.
The pay-out was achieved through negotiation as there was no dispute that access had been denied, or that the Claimant had a disability exemption. The only thing to be agreed was the amount of compensation, not whether it was due or not.
Refusing access to people unable to wear face coverings due to disability is direct discrimination–no different to denying access to a black or gay person for example.
Disabled people are now routinely harassed in public for not wearing face coverings–frequently given the impression that confi dential medical information must be publicly disclosed to justify exemption. The fact that shops and hospitality businesses routinely display “no mask no entry” signs shows how deeply disablist attitudes are embedded in society. If premises displayed “no blacks” or “no gays” notices there would be outrage.
Several supermarkets began vigorously challenging those exempt from wearing a face mask last month as the Johnson regime ramped up its fearmongering through compliant and unquestioning channels such as the BBC and Sky News.
Emails received back from their head offices and shared widely on social media reminded staff that it was illegal to question why someone was exempt, and refusing entry or service could well result in a prosecution and hefty fines for which staff themselves were personally liable.
Fortunately the official government position does not endorse any of this as nobody exempt from wearing a mask is expected to go around justifying themselves. Saying “I’m exempt” is enough. If the response to that can be proved to be discriminatory then compensation is due. Any such interaction, altercation and blatant discrimination should be video recorded for evidence, as the Kester case proves there is remedy in law for those who are offended against." (Re: Lytham St Annes)
Kester Disability Rights Updates: UPDATE1 and UPDATE2
_______
See also:
Kester Disability Rights (PDF)Swansea Uni - NANOPLASTICS AND OTHER HARMFUL POLLUTANTS FOUND WITHIN DISPOSABLE FACE MASKS (05MAY) and Submited article 10MAR21 published MAY21 (PDF)Bleadon COVID19 Grant and Mask Litter(08MAR21)Why are People Wearing Face Masks(26FEB21)Face Coverings Update(24SEP20)Govt Face Mask Video Montage(MAY2021)BOBCOVID1984Red Pill Blogs]]>
North Somerset Council has stated that it is the final chance to comment on the Abbots Leigh, Ham Green, Pill and Easton-in-Gordano Neighbourhood Plan that ends at 5pm on Monday 15 March
"If you haven’t already done so then you can read the Neighbourhood Plan and accompanying documents and submit your comments online at www.n-somerset.gov.uk/pillplan
The comments received will be passed tothe independent Examiner who will consider them during the Examination of the Neighbourhood Plan.
The Neighbourhood Plan has been prepared by the two Parish Councils of Abbots Leigh and Pill & Easton-in-Gordano with help from the local community. The Plan will help to shape development in the two parishes up to 2026 and help to make decisions on planning applications. (PDF of Plan)
Policies include
the improvement of Pill Precinct,support for local job opportunities,protection of the local natural and historic environment,an affordable housing site and a care home at Ham Green.The Plan promotes low energy use, walking, cycling and public transport.Support for a conservation area at Abbots LeighThis is the final chance to comment on the Neighbourhood Plan.Planning Policy Team"
--------
See also:]]>
For all of us who like to take a walk around Bleadon parish, it is increasingly noticeable that discarded masks are now being added to the plastic litter that is mounting up on the roads, rhynes and fields.
Can any of the Bleadon Parish Council £10K COVID19 Grantmoney be used to clear up the mask pollution and health hazard? What has it been used for to date?
In July 2019 Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) declared Bleadon 'plastic-free', stating in BVN113that
BPC, "... agreed to be 'plastic free' and 'frack free' - clearly, just saying it doesn't make it happen and so we will be working closely with everyone to make changes over time"
What does that mean? What has been done since this bold declaration?
In July 2020 it appears that BPC received a COVID19 Grant for £10K:
Who was the Grant from? What are the conditions?What has it been used for?It has been stated it could be used for ipads, extending the newsletter outside of the parish, and for BPC accreditation! (see links below)Can any of the COVID19 Grant money be used to clear up the mask pollution and health hazard?There is also reference to a Small Business Grant £9K and a Covid-19 Group £3K (Budget 2021-22). How much is actually allocated to COVID-19?We encourage you to ask your councillors what is being done, and let BOB know if you receive a response.
As seen below, a recent short walk found 8 disguarded masks:
_____
See also:
July 20 (Min 334.10.3) "NS Remittance Slip – Covid 19 Grant - £10,000" (Min 334.10.3)Oct 20 (Min 336.7c) ".... to resolve to use the recently received Covid Grant Monies to defray the cost of the IPads (£1931.00 - that do not Zoom?) and Additional Newsletter Print for Bleadon Hill (£175)"Oct 20 "...Once again I would wish to see the Parish Council aspire to being accredited by “The Local Council Award Scheme” ... Again I consider the expenditure a fair use of the Covid-19 Grant monies" (Clerk's Report Resolution 7)The A370 Path is Clear Again (MAR20)Working Towards a Plastic-free Bleadon (JUL19)Why are People Wearing Face Masks(26FEB21)Face Coverings Update(24SEP20)BOB Environment pageBOBCOVID1984]]>
Having reported 10+ blocked road drains, gullies, on Bleadon Hill, Roman Road and Celtic Way to North Somerset (NSC) in early February, BOB's happy to report they've now been cleared. Hopefully the cleared drains will stop the stream that is known to flow down Celtic Way, as seen in the video, and pictures below.
As you are aware both NSC and Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) collect taxes for various services, and associated work to be done, on our behalf. If you feel that 'jobs' are not being done appropriately and/or correctly, we encourage you to report the potential lapse in service provision to one of the various authorities responsible. If you get a response, like the drains, please let BOB know so that we can share it with all residents.
If people do not help the authorities manage the contracts that residents have paid for, by reporting potential lapses, then we may be expected to both pay the taxes and volunteer to do the work as well!
NB. By law, you can ask BPC to see all their contracts, grants, finances, etc. and have the opportunity to question the appointed auditor about the accounting records, as seen in BPC's annual public notice, usually published May-July,
"Any person interested has the right to inspect and make copies of the accounting records for the financial year to which the audit relates and all books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers, receipts and other documents relating to those records must be made available for inspection by any person interested" (PDF)
However, it should be noted that for unstated reasons, BPC has refused this lawful access for the last two years. Let's see what happens in May-July this year!
BlockedCleared______
See also:
North Somerset Report or Request Services]]>
The table below lists a few applications and developments currently influencing Bleadon Parish. There are alsosome policies and consultations influencing development in Bleadon..
Inside Settlement Boundary (Map)
WallflowerHouse3 Dwellings
Rectory Garden2 New Houses
Bleadon Quarry42 Dwelling - 189 Occupancy
GRANTED
(01MAR21)
Outside Settlement Boundary, Inside Parish (Map)
Purn Holiday Park10 LodgesCoronation Road/
Bridge Road/
Bleadon Road/
A370
5 New Dwellings
3 New Dwellings
Wayacre Drove
(off Accommodation Rd)
50 Caravan Pitches
WITHDRAWN
(01FEB21)
Purn Way14 Dwellings Appeal
DISMISSED
(14JAN21)
Adjacent toMendip Racing
4 Holiday Lodges
GRANTED
(10DEC20)
AccommodationRoad
Wake Park Offices, Cafe, Storage
GRANTED
(27NOV20)
Outside Parish Boundary(Map)
Devil's Bridge60 Dwellings
GRANTED
(22JUL19)
Bleadon Hill36 Dwellings
REFUSED
(08JAN21)
Overhead and Underground
Bristol AirportExpansion
Appeal
BleadonFracking Licence
Roman Road
SUSPENDED
(02NOV19)
Government, Regional, District and Parish consultations and policies will directly influence residential and commercial development in Bleadon.You may want to respond to theconsultations to ensure that your view is considered in the future of our communities.
Also see:]]>
UPDATE 11FEB21:
Graph of 'Over 90's COVID Deaths' and 'Deaths' England & Wales 1971-2020 Place of Death and Excess Mortality due to lockdown and government vaccination programmeCare Home Whistleblower interview. Link to commentary at UK Column.UPDATE 06FEB21: "Inside the care home in Bristol where residents were vaccinated 'well before' Covid-19 outbreak (PDF)
"Studies have shown it had lower efficacy for much older people, and indeed health authorities in Europe have discounted the use of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine for the over 65s"19JAN21: Moderna "UPDATE: California pauses giving out shots from one lot of coronavirus vaccine":
"The CDC considers an allergic reaction to a Covid-19 vaccine to be severe if the person needs to be treated with epinephrine or must go to the hospital ...while less data exists for Moderna's vaccine, only approximately 1 in 100,000 people experience anaphylaxis with the similar Pfizer vaccine ... Moderna said 37 different states got shipments from the lot, which included more than 1.2 million doses, and said most had likely been used.(PDF)"UPDATE: Doctors from around the world warn of great danger of teh COVID vaccine (16JAN21)
FROM Govt COVID19 Vaccination Leaflet as distributed from DEC20 onwards:
"We do not yet know whether it will stop you from catching and passing on the virus. So, it is important to follow the guidance in your local area to protect those around you. To protect yourself and your family, friends and colleagues you still need to: • practise social distancing • wear a face mask • wash your hands carefully and frequently • follow the current guidance www.gov.uk/coronavirus" (PDF)
______________
During the government's current rapid mass vaccine rollout, it seems prudent to ask your doctor questions that may concern you,before giving your consent to be vaccinated. Public Health England state that, "theneed for ‘informed consent’ is a legal requirement", and thatvaccinators must "give peopleas much information as they need and/or want to make an informed decision".
At the same time, there is a rising concern around thesafetyof the new COVID19 vaccines, and questions about,"Why is there acorrelationbetween the vaccine rollout and increased COVID-19 mortality?"
So, before you get 'jabbed', you might want to think about the questions you may want answered, such as:
What vaccine am I being given?Has it been fullytested, or is it still part of a staged trial? If it's still a trial, what stage is it at?What are the risks and side effects?Is it safe to take with my existing medication/health condition?Does it reduce my natural immunity in any way? Will I be more susceptible to viruses, colds, flu, etc.?Will the vaccine prevent me from catching COVID19? How long will it protect me?Is it safe if we're trying to have a baby/preganant/breast feeding?How many people in the UK have died within 28 days of taking this vaccine? How many in the UK since the rollout started? (Collected information is not currently released by the UK government, but other countries do release data? E.g.438 European deaths reported)How can Ireport any concerns or side effects I may have? (image)World vaccination statistics can be foundhere including graphs and maps. How are global priorities decided?
OTHER INFORMATION TO CONSIDER BEFORE BEING 'JABBED'
The UK government states, "The current legal framework already recognises that if manufacturers or healthcare professionals are asked to supply an unlicensed medicine in response to a public health threat,it is unfair also to ask them to take responsibility for the consequences of the use of that medicinein the way that they normally would." SeeCivil Liability and Immunity(Section 2PDF)03DEC20The UK Government added COVID-19to theirVaccine Damage Paymentscheme (06FEB21), See also previousblog.The UK government indicated that it is expecting a large number of side effects as indicated in theirtenderfor a new COVID19 AI system (para II.1.4),"The MHRA urgently seeks an Artificial Intelligence (AI)software tool to process the expected high volume of Covid-19 vaccine Adverse Drug Reaction(ADRs) and ensure that no details from the ADRs’ reaction text are missed". On 19OCT20MHRA paid Genpact UK Ltd £1.5millionfor the AI system (paras(paras V.2.3 & V.2.4)."The AI tool will be employed as part of the MHRA’syellow card scheme(Image)"(FT 01NOV20)Drugs go through a number of tests/phases, over many years, before being released on the public.The current UK vaccines seem to have been rushed through in a matter of months, and appear to be in Stage 2 and/or Stage 3 Trial phases, i.e. not fully tested?Do the majority UK residents know that they may already be in a mass vaccine testing programme, which has as yet unknown future health consequences?"Many countries have given emergency authorization based on preliminary evidence that they are safe and effective. China,Russiaand other countries have begun administering vaccines before detailed Phase 3 trial data has been made public. Experts have warned of serious risksfrom jumping ahead of these results"Read Public Health England's "COVID-19 Vaccination Programme - Core training slideset for healthcare practitioners 08 January 2021" (Presentatione.g. p54-64)Informed consentduring all stages of the trialsofCOVID19 is essential.___
See
Face Coverings Update - John Penrose MP Letter(Aug 20)Coronavirus Vaccine TrackerBeinvolved blogsBOB COVID1984]]>
Enlarged image
On04 February 2021(PDF)the Guardian reported:
"Speaking to LBC this week, Hancock revealed that viewing Contagion had influenced his vaccine policy. “In the film, it shows that the moment of highest stress around the vaccine programme is not before it’s rolled out – when the scientists and manufacturers work together at pace – it’s afterwards when there is a huge row about the order of priority,” he said.
To be clear, Hancock also pointed out that Contagion wasn’t his primary source of advice"
What other sources has he considered, perhaps he has also familiar with dystopian books and films (some indicated in the table below)?
Utopia by Omletto (15 mins) Hands off our children music
Book/FilmNineteen Eighty-FourFahrenheit 451Animal FarmClockwork OrangeLord of the FliesSoylent GreenLogan's RunGattacaThe MatrixBrave New WorldBrazilA Handmaid's TaleBrave New World RevisitedContagionI Am Not A NumberUtopiaThe Island___
See also:]]>
LIVE New York Times Coronavirus Vaccine Tracker - here
UPDATE 10APR21: Cochrane vaccine mapping tool. As of April 08, 2021 the Covid-19 - living NMA initiative collected 208 RCTs and 70 non-randomised studies of vaccines from the ICTRP. 129 of these trials are recruiting patients (PDF)
__________
It seems that at least three of the COVID19vaccines being used on 9.6 million UK peopleover the last few weeks are still only in phase 2 and phase 3 Trials. Are people being properly informed of the risks and side effects before receiving a dose?
"China, Russia and other countries have begun administering vaccines before detailed Phase 3 trial data has been made public.Experts have warned ofserious risksfrom jumping ahead of these results."
Trials go through a number of phases as seen below via theNew York Times Coronavirus Vaccine Tracker (05APR21, 16MAR21)
"Vaccines typically require years of research and testing before reaching the clinic, but in 2020, scientists embarked on a race to produce safe and effective coronavirus vaccines in record time. Researchers are currently testing 67 vaccines in clinical trials on humans, and 20 have reached the final stages of testing. At least 89 preclinical vaccines are under active investigation in animals." See explanation of phase below.
See also:
Why Is There A Correlation Between The Vaccine Rollout And Increased COVID–19 Mortality? (02FEB21)Specific Vaccine Warnings, Precautions & Effects InformationUK Reg 174 INFORMATION FOR UK HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS.Particularly Section 4 including 4.4 Special Warnings and Precautions for Use; through to 4.8 Undesirable effects (Astrazeneca Reg174(28JAN21),Pfizer/BioNTech Reg174(28JAN21) andModerna Reg17(28JAN21)Is the Pfizer vaccine as effective as claimed?(17MAY21)NFL Covid-19 protocols:(17JUN21)UPDATE 08APR21 COVID19 'jabs' are Black Triangle Medications and are therefore under EU Intensive COVID19 jab reaction monitoring with published product reaction information (see p3) Jansen (10APR21) Comirnaty (10APR21)UPDATE: 08APR21 See BOB blog MHRA Vaccine Side Effects Weekly ReportsUK Govt giving "civil liability and immunity"to vaccination related organisationsSEPT2020Government to addCOVID-19 to Vaccine Damage Payments Scheme(03DEC20)UK GovtVaccine Damage Payments (03DEC20)"If you’re severely disabled as a result of a vaccination against certain diseases, you could get a one-off tax-free payment of £120,000. This is called a Vaccine Damage Payment"Link to previousDistributing vaccines and treatments for COVID-19 and flu blogBOBCOVID pagesUPDATE see MHRA Vaccine Side Effects Weekly Reports ]]>
The table below lists a few applications and developments currently influencing Bleadon Parish. There are alsosome policies and consultationsinfluencing development in Bleadon.
Inside Settlement Boundary (Map)
Bleadon Quarry42 Dwelling - 189 Occupancy
WallflowerHouse3 Dwellings
Rectory Garden2 New Houses
Outside Settlement Boundary, Inside Parish (Map)
Wayacre Drove
(off Accommodation Rd)
50 Caravan PitchesPurn Holiday Park10 LodgesCoronation Road
5 New Dwellings
3 New Dwellings
Purn Way14 Dwellings Appeal
DISMISSED
(14JAN21)
Adjacent toMendip Racing
4 Holiday Lodges
APPROVED
(10DEC20)
AccommodationRoad
Wake Park Offices, Cafe, Storage
APPROVED
(27NOV20)
Outside Parish Boundary(Map)
Devil's Bridge60 Dwellings
APPROVED
(22JUL19)
Bleadon Hill36 Dwellings
REFUSED
(08JAN21)
Overhead and Underground
Bristol AirportExpansion
Appeal
BleadonFracking Licence
Roman Road
SUSPENDED
(02NOV19)
Government, Regional, District and Parish consultations andpolicies will directly influence residential and commercial development in Bleadon.You may want to respond to theconsultations to ensure that your view is considered in the future of our communities.
Also see:]]>
Consultation
Opens
ClosesInformation
Consultation
Carers Survey15 Jan 2122 Feb 21NSC "...would like to hear the views of unpaid carer so that we can shape a new Carers Strategy for North Somerset" Health and Wellbeing Strategy08 Jan 2121 Feb 21NSC "...are developing a Strategy for Health and Wellbeing which will outline our priorities and plans for improving health and reducing inequalities between 2021 and 2024" Day Care Services for Adults08 Jan 2108 Feb 21NSC"... Council currently arranges a range of day opportunities for people including those with dementia, autism, mental, physical, sensory and learning disabilities"]]>
After sevenyears of waiting, and some newer councillors arguing that it wasn't needed last December, the bus shelter is finally back in place at the top of Celtic Way. It's now ready to shelter weary, wind blown and wet walkers, cyclists and future bus users.Thank you to Cllr ID Clarke for her perseverance since July 2014.
In Spring 2014 the Parish Council Newsletter BVN98 wrote, that during
" ... the February storms ... Bus shelters were blown away, utility poles felled, roofs ripped off and drains overflowed (again). Compared to some parts of the country it looks like we got off very lightly. The old timber bus shelter at the top of Celtic Way was totally destroyed by the gale-force winds. It’s given us a good few years of service, having been moved over 12 years ago from its original location at the junction of Bridge / Bleadon Roads. The parish council has yet to decide whether to replace it" Storm damage pics by Ian Findlay RIP
Bleadon Parish Council received the insurance payment of £1,230.80 to rebuild the shelter in July 2014, over six and a half years ago. Since that time there have been five Chairmen, and many councillors, who, for various reasons,decided not to replace it until now,for the sumof £1.039.72. Perhaps the remaining £191.08 can be put towards maintaining or replacing the weather-worn bench inside the shelter?
The potted history of this saga is indicated here.]]>
UPDATE 16MAR22: North Somerset Council will not appeal Bristol Airport expansion
Council leader, Don Davies said, "The legal advice we have had is that pursuing a challenge would carry 'a high level of risk'. "Not only would it incur significant further costs but, even if successful and the inspectors' decision was quashed, it is highly likely that on redetermination planning permission would simply be granted again."
UPDATE 15MAR22: Bristol Airport expansion appeal set for High Court
"The Bristol Airport Action Network (BAAN) aims to quash plans for the airport to increase its annual passengers from 10 million to 12 million. ...The group believes a number of errors were made in the decision to grant permission, including the 'incorrect interpretation of local planning strategies and aviation policies; ignoring the importance of local carbon budgets and not adequately considering the extra non-carbon emissions that would be caused by the expansion."
UPDATE 08FEB22: Bristol Airport expansion approval 'reasoning' published
"North Somerset Council (NSC) initially refused the firm's bid to boost annual passenger numbers to 12 million following 8,900 public objections, citing the impact on the climate, green belt and residents' health. But, following a 36-day inquiry, inspectors Phillip Ware, Claire Searson and Dominic Young rejected many of the authority's arguments and found that the 'substantial' socioeconomic benefits outweighed the harm and ruled the plan could go ahead."
UPDATE: Statement of Common Ground Part 1, Statement of Cases including Appellant, NSC & PCAA, Four Rule 6 parties indicated with reference to a Compulsory Purchase Order.
______
North Somerset Council announceBristol Airport Ltd Appeal:
An appeal to enable, amongst other things,"operating within a rolling annual cap of 4,000 night-flights between the hours of 11.30pm and 6am with no seasonal restrictions" (Notice)How will this affect flights over Bleadon and any maintenance flights across Weston bay to Wales?
__
PreviousBOB Blog info
NSC Reference:18/P/5118/OUT
NSC Website:www.n-somerset.gov.uk/airportappeal
Appeal reference:APP/D0121/W/20/3259234
Appeal start date: 11 January 2021
All representations must be received by PINs by 22 February 2021
"An appeal has been made to the Planning Inspectorate (PINs) against our decision to refuse to grant planning permission.
The appeal will be determined on the basis of a public inquiry. The procedure to be followed is set out in the Town and Country Planning Appeals (Determination by Inspectors) (Inquiry Procedure) (England) Rules 2000, as amended.
The public inquiry will open on 20 July 2021 and is currently scheduled for 16 sitting days. We will write to you again nearer the time with further details of the arrangements once these are known.
For any group or organisation who wish to take an active part in the Inquiry, the opportunity is available to apply for what is known as Rule 6 status. Although unusual, there is also scope for interested individuals to take part on the same basis. Rule 6 status means that you would be able to present your evidence on a formal basis and cross examine the evidence of others. Guidance is available.
Arrangements for the Inquiry are currently being finalised by the Planning Inspectorate. These will include a pre-Inquiry conference call with the lead parties to deal with procedural and administrative matters, including how the evidence will be heard. As a Rule 6 party, it is anticipated that you would also be a part of that process. If, having read the above guidance, you wish to apply for Rule 6 status and have not already done so you should contact PINs immediately. If you are interested but are unable to access the guidance electronically, again, you should contact PINs who will try and assist.
You can find out more about the appeal and how to get involved at www.n-somerset.gov.uk/airportappeal. We will forward any comments you made on the planning application and subsequent addendum directly to PINs, as well as the appellant. These will be considered by the Planning Inspector when determining the appeal.
If you wish to make further comments, or modify/withdraw your previous representation, you can do so or email Leanne.palmer@planninginspectorate.gov.uk If you do not have access to the internet, you can send your comments to:-
Leanne Palmer
The Planning Inspectorate
Room 3/J, Temple Quay House
2 The Square
Bristol, BS1 6PN
All representations must be received by PINs by 22 February 2021. Any representations submitted after the deadline will not usually be considered and will be returned. The Planning Inspectorate does not acknowledge representations. All representations must quote the appeal reference.
Please note that any representations you submit to PINs will be copied to the appellant and this local planning authority and will be considered by the Inspector when determining the appeal.
You can get a copy of one of the Planning Inspectorate’s “Guide to taking part in planning appeals” booklets free of charge from GOV.UK or from us. The appeal documents are available for viewing on our website www.n-somerset.gov.uk via the planning application number 18/P/5118/OUT.
When made, the decision will be published online
Yours faithfully
Appeals Support Officer
North Somerset Council"
_____
Previous information on BOB:
Local Objections to Airport ExpansionDoctors Express Concern over Airport ExpansionLocal Objections to Airport ExpansionCaerdav,formerly Cardiff Aviation, andpress info(PDF)BOB's Environmental page]]>
Government breaks promise to maintain ban on bee-harmingpesticide(Jan 2021)
"Scientists have observed significant declines in some British bee species since 2007, coinciding with the introduction of thiamethoxam, which was previously widely used.Studies suggest that it weakens bees’ immune systems, harms the development of baby bees’ brains and can leave them unable to fly.Another study has found honey samples being contaminated by neonicotinoids ... (see below)
"Matt Shardlow, the chief executive of the invertebrate conservation group Buglife, said it was an “environmentally regressive”decision that would destroy wildflowers and add to an “onslaught” on insects. “In addition,no action is proposed to prevent the pollution of rivers with insecticides applied to sugar beet,"
"A pesticide believed to kill bees has been authorised for use in England despite an EU-wide ban on its use outdoors two years ago and an explicit government pledge to keep the restrictions ...
"Following lobbying from the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) and British Sugar, a product containing the neonicotinoid thiamethoxam was sanctioned for emergency use on sugar beet seeds this year because of the threat posed by a virus .."(PDF)
Honey tests reveal global contamination by bee-harming pesticides(Oct 2017)
"Neonicotinoid insecticides are found in 75% of global honey samples and half contain a cocktail of chemicals ...
"... Mitchell said: “If you look at the minimum concentration for which a significant negative impact on bees has been found, then 48% of our samples exceed this level.”The researchers said these impacts include damage to learning, behaviour and colony success."
All but two of the samples had total contamination levels below the “maximum residue level” (MRL) allowed for human consumption under EU laws. But Mitchell said there was little published research on the effect of neonicotinoids on vertebrates, though there were some indications of harm. “You can wonder if the MRLs are really good enough – I think this is an open question, ”Mitchell said.
"Bees and other pollinators are vital to three-quarters of the world’s food crops but have been in serious decline in recent decades. The destruction of wild habitats, disease and widespread pesticide use are all important factors ...
"... research showing most farmers could slash their pesticide use without losses, a UN report that denounced the “myth” that pesticides are necessary to feed the world, and a UK chief government scientist stating that the assumption by regulators it is safe to use pesticides at industrial scales across landscapes is false ...
"Contamination rates were highest in North America with 86% of samples containing one or more neonicotinoid, followed by Asia (80%) and Europe (79%). It was lowest in South America at 57%. Almost half the samples contained a cocktail of the insecticides."(PDF)
"Jean-Marc Bonmatin ... said:The use of these pesticides runs contrary to environmentally sustainable agricultural practices. It provides no real benefit to farmers, decreases soil quality, hurts biodiversity and contaminates water, air and food. There is no longer any reason to continue down this path of destruction."
See also:
Pesticides damage survival of bee colonies, landmark study shows(Jun 2017)Nerve Agents in Honey(2017).Country-specific effects of neonicotinoid pesticides on honey bees and wild bees(2017)A worldwide survey of neonicotinoids in honey (2017)UPDATE 30MAY22 Half of British butterfly species on new Red List (PDF)Flowers for Wildlife (PDF)Shrubs for Wildlife (PDF)Trees for Wildlife (PDF)________
See previous:
World Bee Day 20 May 20Bleadon Bees(July 2019)BOBEnvironment Page]]>
Bleadon Parish Council has so far declined access to the public Zoom audio and/or video recordings since theystarted in June last year.Conversely, Brent Knoll publish their 'village hall' and Zoom recordings on Youtube, and use the document sharing facility. Will BPC do the same as councillors requested, discussed and seemingly agreed, last night?
It should be noted that although there are many references to associated reports on theAgenda, these also have not been released to the public, not even on screen at the Zoom meeting..
Things to note from January Agenda/Meeting (NB timings are approximate):
Agenda - not published on the noticeboards?A370 NSC consultation has been had, another is due? - Terry Porter (6mins) Was the Nov 20 Zoom meeting called correctly? [NB: BOB has not received an acknowledgement or response from our Nov 20 email] (17mins)Councillors discussed who was invited to the November Zoom meeting, why was the Zoom link changed that excluded the majority of residents from the meeting? (19mins)Documentation - Cllrs discussed Jan 21 Agenda has incorrect 09 Nov minutes approval date (should be 16 Nov), the Dec minutes stated meeting started at 7:45pm [same as delayed Nov meeting the previous month?], also has incorrect time Cllrs rejoined the Dec meeting [at 08:15 not 7:39pm]?(21mins)It was stated that the formal council meeeting is not noted (time recorded) as started until after the public session has ended? (22mins)It was stated that a councillor needs to declare an interest on land adjacent to their property, even if they don't own it, is this correct? [Would residents need to declare an interest if their neighbours were building?] (26mins)Where is BPC's Newsletter delivered or not? (27mins)BPC acknowledge their planning response process needs attention[Why was theCaravan Park extension still not on the Agenda, despite affecting an SNCI and PROW?][Continued reference to 'village' instead of an inclusive 'parish' approach]Audit has written a report and BPC have responded (report(s) not on BPC website?)Precept will remain at £50K, the budget is , as agreed in Dec the difference will come from the reserves (56mins)New Administration System software was agreed to be purchased. BPC will be 'guinea pigs. Total price, training and ongoing costs not indicated on agenda, it appears that BPC will pay half price for the first year, £600 and £1,200 second year onwards.Where did the Small Business Grant come from and what is it for?[Although over £500, there appears to have been only one quotation (Financial Regs 10.3)?]PROW report has been updated again (but no reports on BPC website?) (1hr 13min)Roads - pavement needs fixing, and entrance to Halls Car Park (1hr 21min)BPC Newsletter - Editor hoping to bring out in March (TOR not published on BPC website?)Youth Club Lease waiting for solicitors then signaturesZoom vs physical meetings Another councillor again asks for BPC meetings/recordings to be broadcast [e.g. on Youtube] to residents to participate in and/or see what's going on (especially for those who couldn't attend physically. The clerk added, " ... I couldn't agree more ... if we want to be transparent and be out there, we should be going along that path, no question about that whatsoever" (1hr 26mins)NDP - seems that a meeting was held recently, but no working group minutes for councillors or residents? (1hr 29 mins)Bleadon in Bloom - trees, rewilding, tubs, but recent reports and current budget of 10K aren't available on BPC website, which may explain resident concerns about costs and activities? However, a £3K 2021 budget and 'Portfolio for Bleadon Pennant Entry 2019' are on the website? (1hr 44mins)Church clock - regilding of the clock is in hand (1hr 46mins)(bus) Shelter at the top of Celtic Way, work to start re-erecting at the end of the month (1hr 47mins)Concern over Bridge Road/A370 crossingChairman confirms that the A370/Coronation Road exit is illegal. Previous BPC public , allmeeting referenced, but no notes on BPC website?Meeting finished 8:55pm, next Zoom meeting 08 Feb 21 at 7pm.From many years of attending BPC meetings, it is clear that there continues to be a lack of transparency regarding BPC meetings and decision making, in particular its closed Working Group meetings. This year BPC abandoned its Finance & Personnel, Planning, and Open Spaces Committees without explanation.
Where are the Terms of Reference, and discussion/decision notes, from the following Working Groups on BPC's website: November’s Budget working group, Bleadon Rights of Way, PROW, Churchyard, A370, Children’s Playground, NDP, Bleadon COVID19 group, Open Spaces, Diamond Jubilee, all of which may havefinances associated? See BOBBudget Blog
_
SeeBleadon Developments January 2021]]>
The first table below lists a few applications and developments currently influencing Bleadon Parish. The second table lists some policies and consultations influencing development in Bleadon.
Inside Settlement Boundary (Map)
Bleadon Quarry42 Dwelling - 189 Occupancy
WallflowerHouse3 Dwellings
Rectory Garden2 New Houses
Outside Settlement Boundary, Inside Parish (Map)
Wayacre Drove
(off Accommodation Rd)
50 Caravan PitchesPurn Way14 Dwellings AppealPurn Holiday Park10 LodgesCoronation Road
5 New Dwellings
3 New Dwellings
Adjacent toMendip Racing
4 Holiday Lodges
APPROVED
(10DEC20)
AccommodationRoad
Wake Park Offices, Cafe, Storage
APPROVED
(27NOV20)
Outside Parish Boundary(Map)
Bleadon Hill36 Dwellings
REFUSED
(08JAN21)
Devil's Bridge60 Dwellings
APPROVED
(22JUL19)
Overhead and Underground
BleadonFracking Licence
Roman Road
SUSPENDED
(02NOV19)
Bristol AirportExpansion
North Somerset
REFUSED
(19MAR20)
Government, Regional, District and Parish consultations and policies will directly influence residential and commercial development in Bleadon.You may want to respond to the consultations to ensure that your view is considered in the future of our communities.
(The table below lists a few consultations and policies. The tableabovelists some applications in relation to Bleadon)
ConsultationLocal Plan 2038 Consultation Part 2
Deadline 14 Dec 20
"A Local Plan sets out where developments can and cannot take place and ensures we get the right type of development in the right place with the right services and infrastructure ..."
Including: Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) Indicating proposed sites in the Bleadon areaSee2018 SHLAA MapIncluding: Settlement BoundaryReviewWest of England Spatial Development Strategy Survey
Deadline 14 Dec 20
"The plan will make sure the development of homes, spaces for employment and transport links happens in the right places ..."
NSCActive Travel Strategy Consultation
Deadline 17 Dec 20
"Our Draft Active Travel Strategy is a 10-year plan to 2030 that aims to harness the huge rise in walking and cycling seen during 2020.
Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Plan
In 2018 & 2019 Bleadon Parish Councilinformed their grant funders, Locality, that they hadindentified 5 Sites. Their locations have not been publicly stated to residents?
Locality stated, "...under the proposals [Govt White Paper below]the principle of development may be agreed at the local plan development stage ... [NDPs]maynot be able to allocate sites for development(including housing), and...may largely not be able to include development management policies..."
Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government Aug 2020Govt White Paper Planning for the Futureand relatedConsultation
See also, BOB diagram ofPlanning Policy HeirarchyandConsultations andBleadon Parish Plan Adopted 2009andWhat is a Statutory Consultee?andRoad Safety
Addtional information at
BeInvolvedpageCurrent Development informationBleadon Developments Dec 2020Bleadon Developments Nov 2020--
NOTES:Some NSC Jan 2017 Core Strategy Policies (linkand Jan17PDF)
CS14(Jan 17) - Distribution of new housing
NSC are to build 20,986 dwellings by 2026. "Settlement boundaries define the area within which resdential development is accptable in principle ... Development outside thesettlementboundaries will only be acceptable where a site is allocated in a Local Plan or ...CS33" i.e. in areas such as Bleadon.
CS33(Jan 17) - Infill villages, smaller settlements and countryside
"Development outside the areas covered .... will be strictly controlled in order to protect the character of the rural area and prevent unsustainable development. Residential development at Infill villages. ... Affordable housing will be permitted within settlement boundaries or in the form of rural exceptions sites, adjacent to settlements."
CS17(Jan 17) - Rural exceptions schemes "Housing schemes for 100% affordable housing to meet local needs within small rural communities will be supported where: a) the development meets an identified local need demonstrated by an up-to-date needs survey or other evidence; b) the development is supported or initiated by the parish council ...; (presumably acting on the views of residents?) ...Rural exceptions schemes will be acceptable adjacent to the settlement boundaries of ... Infill Villages [e.g. Bleadon] and elsewhere adjacent to the main body of the settlement ..."]]>
UPDATE 18 JAN 21 - BPC confirms and posts aBleadon in Bloom budget of >£10K. Also, that "The Bleadon in Bloom group does receive a grant from the council but other than that it is not run by the council. A representative from the council keeps us up to date with the Bleadon in Bloom group but it is independent of the council. However they are happy for us to share their budget on the Parish Council web site as it was submitted to the Parish Council."This seems contrary to how the finances are recorded below, i.e.£8,466 (Open Spaces) +£1,406.18 (EMR) + plant sale? When was the project handed over to an 'independent goup'? When were grant applications submitted and what were the conditions?
UPDATE 07 JAN 21 - The undocumented Bleadon In Bloom Working Group requested a budget of£3,284.50as submitted to the undocumented Budget Working GroupThis was agreed and put to full council and posted on the BPC website as £3,284.50, but the budget is also rumoured to be in the order of £10K after the full council meeting in Dec 20?
___
Bleadon Parish Council has just published its 2021-22 budget information as seen below, creating a budget of £68,637, as agreed at December's full council meeting (Min 338.7.4), including detail by cost centre.There appears to be confusion between the different sets of budget information.
This budget was discussed by councillors in a closed, unminuted working group, with unknown membership (compare the range of financial information available in 2018-19 from BPC's Finance & Personnel Committee minutes, that was open to the public June, Nov, Jan).
Last year's precept/Bleadon residents tax, was£50K, but it is unclear at this point how next year's£69K budget will be financedfrom precept, reserves and/or other income (PDF). "Parish and town councils raise their money primarily from a levy called a precept. We [NSC] collect the precept on behalf of town and parish councils and pass it on to them."A list of otherprecepts within North Somerset can be seen on page 20 of the NSC Council Tax Guide 2020-21).
Previous year's budget information can be found on here.(note that BPC has not released budget information for years 2016-2019, nordo these seem to have been agreed in full council?), with previous precept information here. Summary payments for 2020 up until 30 Sept, and Reserves infromation, can be seen here.
NB: BPC has disbanded its standing committees without explanation, i.e. there are no meetings for the Finance & Personnel, Planning or Open Spaces, removing these councillor discussions and related information from residents.
BPC's next full council meeting is next Monday 11 Jan 2021 at 7pm via Zoom.
(Above table from Draft Dec 20 Mins as published 06 Jan 2021 on BPC website)]]>
UPDATE 01FEB21 - Applcation WITHDRAWN by Applicant.
________
A new application has been submitted "Land At Wayacre Drove Accommodation Road Bleadon",
"Change of use from a mixed agricultural and industrial to use as a caravan park for static and touring caravans."
The submitted Planning Statement indicates:
" It is proposed to develop 18 pitches for static caravans with the remainder of the site being utilised to provide space for 32 touring pitches"
The application was validated 11 Dec 20. The commentsdeadline is26 January 2021.Here is the link to the application20/P/2811/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
Other considerations:
This application is outside the Bleadon Settlement Boundary.Road Safety issuesat the Accommodation Road Junction and A370Current Riverside/PurnCaravan Park ExpansionAccommodation Road - BPC no comment?Current4 Lodges on Accommodation Road - BPC no objectionWake Parkdevelopment Accommondation Road - BPC no comment?Previous information 2017:
Another Caravan/Mobile Home Park planned for Bleadon?A request to NSC on 15 December 2017 for an opinion on whether an Environmental Impact Assessment is needed (this will increase application cost), can only mean that there is an intention for a future planning application on green agricultural field(s) near Summerways Bridge off Accomodation Road! The agent (Urban Design Practice) is already active in other Bleadon application areas and in comments to the planning inspector has been critical of NSC and our Infill Village status that restricts development.This proposal could bring up to another 50 spaces to our area (see letterandOS MapandNSC response)
________
See also:]]>
There are a number of significant factors affecting development in Bleadon, not just individual planning applications, including:
North Somerset's Duty to Cooperate with neighbouring authorities. The map above shows, "...the strategic area defined for the purposes of the duty to co-operate...In particular, joint working should help to determine where additional infrastructure is necessary, and whether development needs that cannot be met wholly within a particular plan area could be met elsewhere. .."Ongoing BPC Neighbourhood Development Plans, 5 undeclared sites in Bleadon as identified by BPC NDP Working GroupCurrent North Somerset Council Local Plan 2038 Consultation, two of the four questions indicate up to 500 houses in the Bleadon area,Q3&Q6, whereasQ4andQ5do not appear to do so.Current West of England Combined Authority (WECA) Survey planning to build 88,000-125,000 in the regionGovernment Aug Consultation, planning to build 300,000 new homes annually and one million homes over this ParliamentCurrent Active Travel Plan Consultation (related to where houses and businesses are built)Current development applications influencing BleadonAs far as BOB is aware Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) is aStatutory Consultee on issues such as those indicated above. How has BPC communicated these far-reaching consultations to residents? What has been our elected and co-opted representatives' official responses to these important consultations?
Residents pay BPC for a newsletter, funded via Bleadontaxes/precept and supported by advertising, with some residents in the parish receiving a copy last week.Why are these consultations not in the magazine so that residents affected can interact and influenceWhat are the unpublished 'Terms of Reference' for the new paid Editor position (annual 'salary' undeclared but in the order of £400 per edition)?BPC started its NDP project in June 2017. It has not convened a parish wide NDP meeting for Bleadon, and has yet to answer queries raised?BPC has not published any NDP Working Group minutes since before the last planning appeal in Oct last year (See Mins table)?WECA and NSC Local Plan deadlines are next Monday 14 Dec, Active Travel deadline is 17 Dec, BOB can't find any specific Agenda item or documented minute, they are not an agenda item on next Monday's 16 December Agenda, only Local Plan noted in the Correspondence Listing carried forward from last month?Govt White Paper- BPC, "Resolved not to take any action on the basis that what was being asked for was too complicated and had very little bearing on the Parish Council." Sept 20 (Min 335.7.8)NB "...under the proposals the principle of development may be agreed at the local plan development stage" (see below)Will Bleadon remain a rural community? How will it accommodate local housing need and growth? What is Bleadon Parish Council's plan for the future of our community?
If you want your voice heard, respond to the NSC and WECA consultations and surveys as soon as possible, as consultation deadlines are next week. (see additional info and links below)
________
OVERVIEW SUMMARIES
How does all this fit together, see BOB's unqualified understanding and diagram of the situation here
Neighbourhood Development Plans
Bleadon Parish Council's,BPC NDP started in June/July 2017
Ongoing BPC Neighbourhood Development Plans,5 undeclared sites in Bleadon as identified by BPC NDP Working Group(last updated draft minutes Aug 2019)Although figures aren't transparent or easily referenced, BPC has spent in the order of£8,500 to date on its NDPResidents are still waiting for a parish meeting to be called to discuss Bleadon Parish Council's NDPA meeting was minuted to be arranged October last year (Min 327.9.iii) "The Clerk to liaise with [NDP paid Planning Consultant] and the Hall Booking Clerk to find a suitable date at the end of November and publicise this date in the noticeboards the council's website and Neighbourhood Plan website, as well as in the Bleadon Village News".However, this was stated as cancelled in the Council'sNewsletter without Full Council discussion or explanation? SeeNDP blog for more info.Last minuted update was Feb 20 (Min 331.6)"The Neighbourhood Planning Hive Report: Experiences of Participants report states,
"The HIVE event involved a selected group of 35 active neighbourhood planners working on a series of key areas of concern in Neighbourhood Planning. The work was overseen and facilitated by Prof Gavin Parker with Kat Salter and Mark Dobson plus three student volunteers."NALC 'Where Next for Neighbourhood Plans?', states:
"The output was described as a “damning report on neighbourhood planning that calls for an overhaul of the system” by Mitchell Labiak,and ...Participants "... complained about too much change and lack of consistency in the planning process, widely varying modus operandi by neighbourhood planning groups, inconsistent support from principal authorities, lack of clarity concerning conflicts of interest between Parish Council and nonelected NPG members and the divisive effect on many communities of identifying sites for housing"... there is the requirement that a [NSC] must be able to demonstrate a five year supply of housing land (or, since December 2016, a three-year supply if there is an adopted neighbourhood plan which identifies specific sites for development). If it cannot, policies for the supply of housing in the development plan (including any neighbourhood plans) are considered out of date ... Making the legitimacy of neighbourhood plans contingent on the performance of housebuilders across a wider area seems to be somewhat at odds with the principles of localism."... research has shown most neighbourhood plans taking two to three years to produce, with five not being unusual, as against the 12-18 months originally envisaged. This means a plan can be in preparation, with a huge amount of community time, effort and resource poured into it, before it is given any weight in decision-taking. Meanwhile, speculative development can come forward in order to ‘beat the clock"... neighbourhood plans are at risk of being considered out of date (and therefore triggering the ‘presumption in favour’) when strategic local plans are reviewed[e.g. NSC Local Plan 2038 consultation below], or if local plans that they rely on are considered to be out of date [e.g. during previous planning appeals]."... the cases we have researched have shown evidence of considerable inconsistency ..."... there are a range of measures in the revised NPPF published in July 2018 that will cause the situation to deteriorate further by introducing more specific stipulations on neighbourhood plan groups and yet more circumstances in which neighbourhood plans can be afforded less weight or overturned.""It is unclear as to where NPs will stand in relation to spatial planning frameworks emerging from the Combined Authorities [e.g. WECA below] "Parish Plans
BPC has an adopted Parish Plan, built upon the views of residents, i.e. 60% of the people in the parish responded.
Local Government Association
"Are existing parish plans and village design statements still valid? Yes. Parish Plans, Community Plans or Market Town Action Plans remain one of the tools communities can use to use to deliver on their ambitions." (LGA)NPPF:
"Neighbourhood planning is not a legal requirement but a right which communities in England can choose to use. "Communities may decide that they could achieve the outcomes they want to see through other planning routes, such as incorporating their proposals for the neighbourhood into the local plan, or through other planning mechanisms such as Local Development Orders and supplementary planning documents or through pre-application consultation on development proposals."Communities and local planning authorities should discuss the different choices communities have to achieving their ambitions for their neighbourhood." (NPPF)North Somerset Council
Parish Plans were previously considered/referred to by NSC as a Supplementary Planning DocumentNorth Somerset Local Plan -Current Consultation 02 SEPT - 14 DEC 2020
Current North Somerset Council Local Plan 2038 Consultation, two of the fourquestions indicate up to 500 housesin the Bleadon area
NSC has a Duty to Cooperate with neighbouring authorities, i.e. help neighbouring Local Authorities fulfil their housing, employment and infrastructure needs (See previous MP responses below)
"24. Local planning authorities and county councils (in two-tier areas) are under a duty to cooperate with each other, and with other prescribed bodies, on strategic matters that cross administrative boundaries.""26. ... In particular, joint working should help to determine where additional infrastructure is necessary, and whether development needs that cannot be met wholly within a particular plan area could be met elsewhere. ""Strategic geography 12. The geography of the wider region within which North Somerset sits is shown on the ... map [see above] This shows WECA authorities to the north and Somerset authorities to the south. This is the strategic area defined for the purposes of the duty to co-operate. "How is the provision of additional requirements, such as doctors, dentists, opticians, etc., identified and supplied?How will the Duty to Cooperate continue to affect Government Lockdown policy: "... we have been placed in Tier 3 because we are regarded as "a natural travel to work area" along with Bristol and South Gloucestershire"(Penrose MP & Fox MP)The current NSC Local Plan consultation proposes 4 mapped questions, Q3 & Q6 indicate up to 500 houses in the Bleadon area, Q4 and Q5 do not appear to do so.NSC propose a 'build out' not 'build up' approach (favoured by Penrose MP), that may impact rural villagesWhat are NSC's settlement hierarchy options?Settlement Boundary Review?Is there an ability to create a Strategic Gap between Bleadon and WSM?“The Local Plan will be prepared with community and stakeholder engagement in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (2019) [including Statutory Consultees i.e. Bleadon Parish Council]. "NSC pre-Local Plan ConsultationWhy hasn't BPC publicly discussed this important consultation as it's been noted several times in their Agenda and Minutes?
Sept 20(Min 335.10) "Correspondence (1) NS Consultations – Local Plan" andOct 20(Min 336.10) "Correspondence ... (2) NS Consultations " andNov 20337.10 "Correspondence... (13) NS Local Plan – “Choices for the Future” andDec 20(Min 33.6.(2)) carried forward from last month?North Somerset Active Travel Strategy -Current Consultation 05 NOV 20 - 17 DEC 2020
"Through delivering high quality walking and cycling networks and increasing publicity and awareness of these, the strategy aims to increase walking and cycling trips by 300 per cent by 2030 ...... "Safety and perceptions of safety are addressed through improved infrastructure and supressed demand for active travel is released through reallocated road space to improved walking and cycling facilities. " (PDF)Oct 20 Min 36.10 "Correspondence ... (2) NS Consultations "?WECACurrent Spatial Development Strategy Survey 02 SEPT- 14 DEC 2020
Current West of England Combined Authority (WECA) Survey planning to build 88,000-125,000 in the region"Over the next 20 years the area covered by the Spatial Development Strategy [SDS] could need around 88,500 or as many as 125,000 homes (depending on the Government's method of calculating housing need, linked to the national housing target) ..."The SDS will cover Bath and North East Somerset, Bristol and South Gloucestershire and will be developed by those councils and the West of England Combined Authority. North Somerset will develop their Local Plan in cooperation with the WECA authorities but will not be included in the SDS ..." (PDF)This survey covers planned development for homes, employment, infrastructure capacity - travel options (e.g. roads, rail, utilities)Doesn't cover Bristol Airport as in North Somerset Authority AreaThe previousJSP comments will not be carried forward and so will need to be resubmitted if requiredIt has been stated that NSC's New Local Plan 2038 (see above) should be in alignment with this regional SDS plan asNSC has a Duty to Cooperate:GovernmentWhite Paper Consultation - 05 AUG 20 - 29 OCT 2020 (PDF)
Government Aug Consultation, planning to build 300,000 new homes annually and one million homes over this Parliament
Locality, a funder of BPC's NDP, response to the Government White Paper, stated:
"Implications on public participation in decision making: Under the current planning system the public largely have two core opportunities to shape planning:1. at the local/neighbourhood plan development stage, and2. at the planning application stage when applications for development on specific sites are put forward.Under the proposed reforms the second opportunity will largely be removed, with public participation taking place mainly at the plan development stage. This is because under the proposals the principle of development may be agreed at the local plan development stage." (Blog)Sept 20 (Min 335.7.8) BPC, "Resolved not to take any action on the basis that what was being asked for was too complicated and had very little bearing on the Parish Council."Liam Fox MP and John Penrose MP previous responses:
On 2 Nov 16 The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) posted "More than amillion homes possibleon suitablebrownfield land"
On 15 Dec 14 localMP Liam Fox spoke outin parliament (skip to 21:58 mins) on behalf of North Somerset and thehigh extrahousing development imposed by central government coming from the Bristol University court challengewanting to build on Green Belt land. NSC was subsequently asked to increase indentified sites from 14,000 to 21,000 houses. Liam Fox MP said, "..it must be made clear thatgreenfield developmentshould come only as a last resortafter all brownfieldsites are exhausted (See letter from DCLG relating to the Dec 2017Brownfield Register).Finally, theinfrastructurethat is needed to support new development, including schools, GP surgeries and, where appropriate, roads must beprovided by the developers; the cost must not fall disproportionately on local council tax payers. (See related Blog on Weston General HospitalA&E night-time closuresstarting 4 Jul 17).In North Somerset we are facing an expensive fiasco that is undemocratic and producing unsustainable outcomes. We have been very patient, and our very competent council has been extremely co-operative. Now we need answers."
Liam Fox MP also said, "We seemto be in a ridiculous position. The plan[NS Core Strategy]was put forward in 2011, agreed by the inspector and adopted in 2012, yet here we are at the end of 2014.If I am not mistaken, at theend of 2015,we will beginthe planning period in which we will look athousing allocation through to 2036.It would be the height of absurdity if we were one of only four councils in the sub-region to be asked not only to look at our 2026 housing allocation, but to start the process all over again at the end of next year and look at the 2036 allocation. Surely this is a complete waste of public resources, as well as being utterly contrary to what my hon. Friend the Minister says is the Government’s aim, which is to encourage greater localism." (current allocation of 20,985 is only up until 2026so NSC will be looking for more sites). The Minister of State,DCLGrepresentative Brandon Lewis replied "My right hon. Friend is absolutely right that we want to encourage localism. That is why wewant the decisions to be made locally...I am happy to discuss this issue with my right hon. and hon. Friends in greater detail at an appropriate point and to write to them to outline the detail behind their queries" (Link toHansard Transcriptand further information.)
On 23 Jan 17 we asked North Somerset's local MP John Penrose MP his views, in which he referred to working with others to protect itsvillages and countryside; and the importance of"Ademocratically-agreedLocal Plan".Note:In 2009BPC publiclydeclared that it hadsubmitted Bleadon'sadopted ParishPlan to NSC for inclusion/reference in anyNSCplans orpolicies;andto ensure that Bleadonresidents'views wereknown and acted upon(it appears NSC did not receive the plan in 2009 and it is now 'lost'?).Following BOB's query regarding the status of theNLUD("a countrywide source of information on brownfield land")John Penrose passed on a response to us from DCLG, stating"With effect from 16 Apr 17, each local authority is required by law to create aneasy-to-access Brownfield Registerandpublish it on its website by 31 Dec(17).However, only sites suitable for new homes are to be included."Also, "With effect from 15 Apr (17) the Town and Country Planning (Permission in Principle) Order 2017 enables local authorities to grant Permission in principle to housing-led development on suitable land entered on a brownfield Register".
_______
See also:
Local Plan 2038 Consultation Part 2Local Plan Consultation PartNew pre-Local Plan ConsultationNorth Somerset Local Plan 2036 - Issues and Options Consultation(Sept 2018)BeInvolvedSome consultations]]>
The first table below lists a few applications and developments currently influencing Bleadon Parish. The second table lists some policies and consultations influencing development in Bleadon.
Inside Settlement Boundary (Map)
Bleadon Quarry42 Dwelling - 189 Occupancy
WallflowerHouse3 DwellingsRectory Garden2 New Houses
Outside Settlement Boundary, Inside Parish (Map)
Wayacre Drove
(off Accommodation Rd)
50 Caravan PitchesPurn Way14 Dwellings AppealPurn Holiday Park10 LodgesCoronation Road
5 New Dwellings
3 New Dwellings
Adjacent toMendip Racing
4 Holiday LodgesAccommodationRoad
Wake Park Offices, Cafe, StorageOutside Parish Boundary(Map)
Bleadon Hill36 DwellingsDevil's Bridge60 DwellingsOverhead and Underground
BleadonFracking Licence
Roman RoadBristol AirportExpansion
North SomersetGovernment, Regional, District and Parish consultations and policies will directly influence residential and commercial development in Bleadon.You may want to respond to the consultations to ensure that your view is considered in the future of our communities.
(The table below lists a few consultations and policies. The tableabovelists some applications in relation to Bleadon)
ConsultationLocal Plan 2038 Consultation Part 2
Deadline 14 Dec 20
"A Local Plan sets out where developments can and cannot take place and ensures we get the right type of development in the right place with the right services and infrastructure ..."
Including: Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) Indicating proposed sites in the Bleadon areaSee2018 SHLAA MapIncluding: Settlement BoundaryReviewWest of England Spatial Development Strategy Survey
Deadline 14 Dec 20
"The plan will make sure the development of homes, spaces for employment and transport links happens in the right places ..."
NSCActive Travel Strategy Consultation
Deadline 17 Dec 20
"Our Draft Active Travel Strategy is a 10-year plan to 2030 that aims to harness the huge rise in walking and cycling seen during 2020.
Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Plan
In 2018 & 2019 Bleadon Parish Councilinformed their grant funders, Locality, that they hadindentified 5 Sites. Their locations have not been publicly stated to residents?
Locality stated, "...under the proposals [Govt White Paper below]the principle of development may be agreed at the local plan development stage ... [NDPs]maynot be able to allocate sites for development(including housing), and...may largely not be able to include development management policies..."
Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government Aug 2020Govt White Paper Planning for the Futureand relatedConsultation
See also, BOB diagram ofPlanning Policy HeirarchyandConsultations andBleadon Parish Plan Adopted 2009andWhat is a Statutory Consultee?andRoad Safety
Addtional information at
BeInvolvedpageCurrent Development informationBleadon Developments Nov 2020--
NOTES:Some NSC Jan 2017 Core Strategy Policies (linkand Jan17PDF)
CS14(Jan 17) - Distribution of new housing
NSC are to build 20,986 dwellings by 2026. "Settlement boundaries define the area within which resdential development is accptable in principle ... Development outside thesettlementboundaries will only be acceptable where a site is allocated in a Local Plan or ...CS33" i.e. in areas such as Bleadon.
CS33(Jan 17) - Infill villages, smaller settlements and countryside
"Development outside the areas covered .... will be strictly controlled in order to protect the character of the rural area and prevent unsustainable development. Residential development at Infill villages. ... Affordable housing will be permitted within settlement boundaries or in the form of rural exceptions sites, adjacent to settlements."
CS17(Jan 17) - Rural exceptions schemes "Housing schemes for 100% affordable housing to meet local needs within small rural communities will be supported where: a) the development meets an identified local need demonstrated by an up-to-date needs survey or other evidence; b) the development is supported or initiated by the parish council ...; (presumably acting on the views of residents?) ...Rural exceptions schemes will be acceptable adjacent to the settlement boundaries of ... Infill Villages [e.g. Bleadon] and elsewhere adjacent to the main body of the settlement ..."]]>
5 New Dwellings
Artist impression
Original Site Plan
Amended Site Plan
3 New Dwellings
Artist impression
Original Site Plan
Amended Site Plan
UPDATE 18FEB22 - Appeal Lodged with the Planning Inspectorate, Ref: APP/D0121/W/21/3285811
UPDATE 28JAN21 - BPC respond to both amended plans (PDF)
UPDATE 29DEC20 - BPC object to 3 dwellings (PDF) and 5 dwellings (PDF)
____
Two new applications have been submitted for Coronation Road, Bleadon
2 new dwellings - 20/P/2725/FUL- Deadline 30 December 2020
(Formerly 3 new dwellings)
"Development of 3no. dwellings and 3no. detached garages. Land Adj Junction Of Bridge Road To Coronation Road Bridge Road Bleadon"UPDATE 29APR21 REFUSED Decision Notice & Delegated Report5 new dwellings - 20/P/2726/FUL- Deadline 30 December 2020
"Erection of 5no. dwellings. Land North To A370 And South Of Bleadon Road Bleadon.UPDATE 29APR21 REFUSED Decision Notice & Delegated ReportPrevious information can be foundhere.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
________
See:]]>
Click to enlarge image
UPDATE 17 DEC 20: North Somerset now Tier 2 - See 19 DEC 20 Tier Map and COVID19 mapping(e.g 12DEC20).
GovtReview of local restriction tiers(PDF) andFull list of local restriction tiers by area(PDF). See also Govt Winter Plan(Nov 20 & 02 Dec 20) andSummary (PDF & Download)
UPDATE 16 DEC 20: Express article and Tier Mapping. See BOB Issues page for any MP facebook updates.
UPDATE 11 DEC 20:
"The Supreme Court decision to refuse to hear an appeal relating to a Judicial Review into lockdown, means that unelected Judges have set a precedent which now makes it impossible to challenge the Government’s use of the Public Health Act 1984 to trample over Civil Liberties and to emasculate Parliament in the process." (PDF)
UPDATE: 04 DEC 20 Reponse to Tier 3 Queries p1 & p2, from Penrose MP
UPDATE: 01 DEC 20 Tweet by Penrose MP and Matt Hancock Health Secetary response.
UPDATE: 26 NOV 20PCR-based COVID testing has failed and is not a proper basis to lockdown the nation, let alone decide on tiers for restrictions Briefing paper for MPs – 26 th November 2020
_________
On 27 November Local MPs Liam Fox MP (North Somerset) & John Penrose MP (Weston-super-Mare) issued a Joint Statement on social media (MP Facebook links), regarding North Somerset's Tier 3 Lockdown designation, stating:
"... we cannot agree with the way it has been applied to North Somerset""Our infection rate has fallen ... well below the Bristol Rate""... we have been placed in Tier 3 because we are regarded as "a natural travel to work area" along with Bristol and South Gloucestershire""This isn't right or fair. We hope that, at the review point in 14 days times, this methodology can be changed ...". Why wait 14 days?How many more local small businesses will go out of operation during this time, especially as the next review date is stated to be 16 December, after the majority of Christmas shopping expenditure may have been completed? How many more families will be broken due to these COVID19 policy restrictions? It is worth noting:
COVID19 Regulations Memorandum Para 12.1 "An Impact Assessment has not been prepared for .." the COVID19 Restrictions, including economic, health, education, etc.John Penrose MP confirmed, "Governments normally only produce an impact assessment if the measure in question is expected to be in force for more than a year", i.e. March next year?! (See letter Q2and Blog)The Memorandum continues, "... however, Office of National Statistics data indicates that these closures will affect 13.1% of the UK’s business units."Is this the current figure?With Para 13.1 stating, "The legislation applies to activities that are undertaken by small businesses" What does this mean? What about large businesses?SeeThe Legal Challenge to the UK Govt LockdownHow will the currentNorth Somerset Local Plan andWest of England Spatial Development Strategy consultations, that encourage joint working with Bristol, Bath & NE Somerset, and South Gloucestershire, affect future Lockdown policy designations? (Blog)
The former Supreme Court judge Lord Jonathan Sumption states, "Fear has been 'skilfully and deliberately' used by government to ensure compliance" (03NOV20 - 7mins)
Lord Sumption, " ...has criticised the government's approach to the coronavirus pandemic, saying it has employed fear as a means to justify its actions ... he warned that Downing Street could hold on to its emergency powers after there is no need for them: "The problem is that fear is the main pillar of every authoritarian government. Fear has been skilfully and I fear deliberately employed throughout this crisis."NOTE1: "As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 [was] no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK" (Public Health England June Report) . Also see John Penrose MP letter confirming this in August 2020. (Blog)NOTE2: TheCOVID19 Regulations confirm that, "... the Secretary of State is of the opinion that, by reason of urgency, it is necessary to make this instrument without a draft having been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament." (BOB)____
See also:]]>
UPDATE 20MAY21: Application REFUSED NSC Decision Notice and Delegate Report.
Despite not appearing in any published BPC agenda or minutes, BPC is noted in the Delegate Report. stating:"The Parish Council recommends refusal for the following reasons – Too close to the river – the lake previously formed part of the river years ago and has now been separated by a bank – would have a detrimental effect on the wild life – and is over development"Why didn't BPC inform residents of this large development?NSC Policy Framework -The site is affected by the following constraints:
Outside the settlement boundary for BleadonLandscape character A5 Bleadon MoorAdjoins Local Wildlife site (River Axe, includes pond)Flood zone 3A, partially 3BPROW AX6/14/10Consultation Zone C Horseshoe bats SACUPDATE: This was not on BPC's 16 Nov,14 Decor 11 Jan , 08 Feb, 08 Mar, 05 May Agenda ior minutes?
___________________
A new application on landLand At Purn Holiday Park Bridgwater Road Bleadon:
"Change of use of land from pasture to a site for timber lodges, for year round holiday use, in association with the existing holiday park" (10 Lodges)
Comments deadline is now21 Dec 20(changed from 14 Dec 20 - validated 12 Nov 20). Here is the link to the application20/P/2614/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website.If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
_____
This application involves a Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) and a Public Right of Way (PROW), see map..
Previous BPCApr 19 response: to 19/P/0427/FUL: "Application to vary condition 2 and remove condition 5 on application 17/P/1502/F ( change of use of land from camp site to the siting of 40no. static and touring caravans ) to allow a change to the approved layout" :
"...Regarding this as part of the extended holiday/caravan site off Bridgwater and Accommodation Roads, concern was raised that this seemed to be moving towards a ‘12 month residency’ site. Councillors had visited the site and viewed it from Purn Hill. The site is an eyesore – given that Bleadon is a ‘tucked-in’ village it is ironic that the static caravans/mobile homes/lodges are so visible. There are 79 units visible. It was AGREED TO OBJECT to the application. It was also AGREED TO WRITE TO NSC to express concern about the piecemeal approach to development in this area of Bleadon which is outside the settlement boundary. NSC are able to take enforcement action but need to be alerted promptly."(BPC Apr 19Min 321.6) {See BOB Note]
Previous BPC Oct 17 response to17/P/1502/F, " Change of use of land involving the siting of 90 static and touring caravans’ (as initially proposed) to 40 static and touring caravans".BPC published their 09Oct 17minutes to residents on20 Oct 17, the same day as NSC had granted consent to the application, stating:
"It was agreed that the initial decision and comments of no objection to the planning application ... still stands"(BPC Oct 17Min 300.13)
This was despite the applicatin involving a SNCI and a PROW?
NSC Descion Notice- GRANTED and Delegated Report(BPC Oct 17Min 300.13)
Previous BPC July 17 response to "17/P/1502/FLand at Purn Holiday Village, Bridgwater Road, Bleadon, BS24 0AN
Proposed change of use of land from camp site to the siting of 90no. static and touring caravans. It was unanimously resolved not to object to the planning application but for the developer to be asked to contribute to the levy for the general improvement of traffic issues likely to be caused by the development particularly at the junction of the A370." (BPC July17Min 297.8)
--
BOB Note to:CARAVAN PARK 19/P/0427/FUL
Applicationto varycondition 2 and remove condition 5i.e. theapproved 'restricted' layout, on application17/P/1502/F,... to allow achangeto the approved layout (Map withPROW) See BPC Sept 19Min 326.14'noted'?, alsooccupancy query... and to the make original siteall year round uselike the new 40 caravans extension 17/P/1520/F.
--
See previous information:]]>
UPDATE: SeeBleadon Developments Nov 2020
Also seeNew Petrol and Diesel Cars to be Banned within the Decade
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationActive Travel Strategy
05 Nov 2017 Dec20"Our Draft Active Travel Strategy is a 10-year plan to 2030 that aims to harness the huge rise in walking and cycling seen during 2020."North Somerset Council states:
"Ambitious proposals have moved a step closer to making walking, cycling and other forms of active travel a more natural transport choice for residents and visitors to North Somerset.
Active Travel Strategy consultationruns from05 November - 17 December2020comment online.
The NSC "...Draft Active Travel Strategy is a 10-year plan to 2030 that aims to harness the huge rise in walking and cycling seen during 2020. This will help us continue to increase realistic opportunities for safe, attractive and enjoyable active travel, including walking and cycling.
Through delivering high quality walking and cycling networks and increasing publicity and awareness of these, the strategy aims to increase walking and cycling trips by 300 per cent by 2030.
This will help us achieve the vision of ‘Making walking and cycling the natural choice for a cleaner, healthier and more active North Somerset’. This will be crucial in our efforts to help reduce carbon emissions to strive to become carbon neutral by 2030, tackle the climate emergency, improve public health and boost the local economy. This is all even more important than before given the year we’ve had.
A more detailed report introducing the Draft Active Travel Strategy was presented to and agreed by the Council’s Executive Committee on 21stOctober 2020. You can read the executive reporthere."
"Message from the Executive Member for Transport Councillor James Tonkin Tonkin -
We are in a climate emergency and the way we move around our area has to change to protect our future. Since the Covid-19 crisis, we have seen a huge growth in walking and cycling, showing the suppressed demand for active travel. The crisis has also shown us the importance of underlying good health, both physically and mentally. Active travel is a very easy way for people to achieve this, which many of us take up, given the opportunity. The way we build our infrastructure also has to shift. This strategy marks a fundamental refocus in our priorities that will see us putting walking and cycling at the centre of our transport planning for the next 10 years. We have outlined our proposals and ambitions, now we need the public to give us their feedback, so I urge everyone to get involved."
___
See also:
West of England LocalCycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan(PDFincludingresponse to consultation(09 June 20) held 3 February and 15 March 2020?)BOBBeinvolved pageBOBConsultation Listpage]]>
UPDATE 02MAR21 - Application WITHDRAWN, see NSC Notice of Decision and Delegated Report.
UPDATE 26NOV20 on NSC website, "The Council supported the application although it had resrvations regarding the need to dispose of one of the boundary natural stone walls."
-----
A new outline application inthe Rectory garden,17 Coronation Road Bleadon BS24 0PG
"Erection of 2 .... two storey dwellings (semi-detached)." See Design Access Statement
Comments deadline is27 November 20.Here is the link to the application20/P/2543/FULon North Somerset Council Planning website. (Previous information here)
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
___
This was on Bleadon Parish Council's19 Nov 20Agenda - no comments yet posted on NSC website, and no published BPC minutes as of Fri 20 Nov.
____
Visit:]]>
UPDATE: 10 DEC 20NSCpublished theirDecision NoticeandDelegated Officer ReportandAPPROVEthe application.
UPDATE 26 NOV 20 on NSC website, "The Council supported the application although there was some concern in as much that they not wish to see the demise of the Racing Club with possible further Lodge development"
____
A new outline application atand Adjacent Racing Club Accommodation Road Bleadon:
" Stationing of four holiday lodges"
Comments deadline is 26 November 20. Here is the link to the application 20/P/1189/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website. (Previous information here)
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
____
This application is outside the settlement boundary and the previous application andappeal for "the erection of industrial buildings for B1 and B8 use",was refused. See also the NSC Local Plan 2038 Consultation and relatedSettlement Boundary Review
This was on Bleadon Parish Council's 12 Oct 20 and 19 Nov 20 Agenda - no comments yet posted on NSC website, and no published BPC minutes as Fri 20 Nov.
_____
See previous:
Mendip Motor Appeal RefusedVisit:]]>
UPDATE 03DEC21 - Application to remove conditions APPROVED, See NSC linkand NoD
UPDATE 08OCT21 - Application for 2 dwellings APPROVED, See NSC linkand NoD plus Officer Report
UPDATE 18MAR21 - Application WITHDRAWN, see NSC Notice of Decision.
UPDATE 26 NOV 20 on NSC website, BPC "Agreed to support with reservations with regard the possible presence of dis-used fuel tanks and traffic movement to and from the site"
---
A new application at Wallflower House, 30 Coronation Road
"Retain existing dwelling, demolition of existing workshop and outbuilding and erection of 2no. new semi detached dwellings with detached garages and associated external works around the site" SeeDesign & Accessdocument
Comments deadline is 05 November 2020.Here is the link to the application20/P/0296/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
_
Although the application was validated on 05 October, this application wasn't on the 12 Oct Bleadon Parish Council Agenda, but was on the postponed Monday 09 Novand rescheduled 16 Nov meeting
Links to previous application info:
Wallflower House Four New Dwellings- Apr 2020Wallflower House Update- June 2020Visit:]]>
UPDATE: SeeBleadon Developments Nov 2020
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationThe Future of the Region: the Spatial Development Strategy
02 Nov 2014 Dec20"The plan will make sure the development of homes, spaces for employment and transport links happens in the right places ..."NB: This consultation was not noted for councillor discussion on Bleadon Parish Council's16 Nov 20 Agenda. The next Full BPC meeting is currentlyscheduled for 14 Dec 20, the day this consultation closes. The BPC Planning Committee has not met since Feb 2019, and was disbanded at the beginning of this year?
"Thesurveyruns from2 November to 14 December 2020. An engagement report and responses will be published online in early 2021."
"... The scale of the challenge The West of England's population is growing. People are attracted to move to the region and our resident population is increasing. House prices and rents are rising and, as people live longer, the amount and types of housing that are needed is changing.Over the next 20 years the area covered by the Spatial Development Strategy could need around 88,500 or as many as 125,000 homes(depending on the Government's method of calculating housing need, linked to the national housing target).""The West of England Combined Authority (WECA) and its constituent authorities are working together, along with North Somerset Council, toaddress the region’s strategic housing, planning and infrastructure needs.
Spatial Development Strategy (SDS)
"The strategy will cover the area of the West of England Combined Authority (WECA) area, which includes Bath & North East Somerset, Bristol and South Gloucestershire Councils.
We need a large-scale plan to make sure future development in the region provides the right kind of jobs, homes and transport links in the right places. The Spatial Development Strategy will set out the vision for how people will live, work and play in the West of England over the next 20 years and will help us deliver our commitment to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030. It will influence where the homes and jobs in each local area will go and will be important in shaping future decisions on development.
The strategy will cover the area of the West of England Combined Authority (WECA) area, which includes Bath & North East Somerset, Bristol and South Gloucestershire Councils."
________
See also:
Local Plan 2038 Consultation Part 2Petrol and diesel cars to be banned within the decadeStatement of Common Ground for Strategic Planning Version 1: Sept 2020WoE Shaping Our FutureIntegrated Impact Assessment for the SDS – scoping reportSome otherConsultationsVisit:]]>
UPDATE 21NOV20: SeeActive Travel Strategy Consultation
19 NOV 20 Confused.com writes,
"Petrol and diesel cars to be banned within the decade.New petrol and diesel cars won’t be sold in the UK from 2030.
The ban, originally set for 2040, was brought forward to 2035 earlier this year. Now it’s been brought forward another 5 years. If you're concerned about how the ban could affect you, read our guide.
The government is allocating £4 billion to fund the ban, using £1.3 billion of this to create more charging points for electric vehicles (EV).
What does this mean for buying petrol or diesel cars?
From 2030, you won't be able to buy a new petrol or diesel car. You'll still be able to buy them second-hand, and you won't have to scrap your existing car.
New hybrid cars may still be available until 2035.
To help drivers make the switch to EV, £582 million in grants is being made available to make them cheaper to buy.
The announcement is part of a wider scheme of measures that aim to tackle climate change. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has called this the “green industrial revolution”. He believes this will create jobs in alternative energy industries and help cut the UK’s carbon emissions. Why has the ban been brought forward?
It’s no secret that we’re living through a climate emergency, and the UK government has an ambitious target to hit zero carbon emissions by 2050. Transport accounts for about a third of the UK’s emissions, so the earlier these are cut the quicker we can reach that target.
Does this mean my next car has to be electric?
Not at all. You’ll still be able to get petrol and diesel cars second-hand after 2030. But as the UK shifts closer to a green transport network, there could be an impact on your car’s running costs."
01JUL21 - 'Pay at Pump' fury over new £99 deposit charge for drivers (PDF)
07JUL21 - Electrifying the UK and the Want of Engineering (PDF)
07JUL21 - IASTEC Letter and Position Paper
--
See related info:
Government'sClean Growth Strategy 2017/18- "To meet our 2050 target, almost every car and van will need to be zero emission by 2050. The Government has announced an end to the sale of all new conventional petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2040."Draft Joint Local Transport Plan 4 2019-2036January 2019Local Plan 2038 Consultation Part 2West of England Consultation and itsIntegrated Impact Assessment for the SDS – scoping reportVisit:]]>
UPDATE 21 DEC 20:Penrose MPblog, "Weston’s MP Welcomes Cuts To Housing Targets & Commitment to Building Up, Not Out"
"... the Government will drop proposals to increase North Somerset’s housebuilding targets from 1,365 to 1,708 a year"(PDF)UPDATE 14 DEC 20: BPC did not raise this as an agenda item, and did not respond to this consutlation (Dec 20 Mins).
___
NOTE: Don't forget to comment on theFracking Licences in Bleadon and theBristol Airport Expansion overhead.UPDATE: SeeBleadon Developments Nov 2020
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationNorth Somerset Local Plan 2038 Challenges and Choices Part 2
02 Nov 2014 Dec20"A Local Plan sets out where developments can and cannot take place and ensures we get the right type of development in the right place with the right services and infrastructure ... This document is the second stage"NB: This consultation is not noted for councillor discussion on Bleadon Parish Council's 16 Nov 20 Agenda.The next Full BPC meeting is currentlyscheduledfor14 Dec 20, the day this consultation closes. The BPC Planning Committee has not met since Feb 2019, and was disbanded at the beginning of this year?
North Somerset Council states:
"The Local Plan will need to review the approach to the role of settlements and settlement boundaries, and this will be influenced by the priorities and the overall approach identified. At this stage no specific figure has been included for small scale growth in the rural areas."
"Theconsultationruns from 2 November - 14 December 2020comment online. (PDF)
The Choices consultation is all about looking at alternative approaches for where new housing, employment and community uses might go over the next 15 years and which are the broad locations which best reflect your priorities. This is not going to be easy given the large amount of housing the government has identified for North Somerset, but we need to plan positively for the future.
To plan properly, we need your views. No decisions have been taken on where or how new homes should be built yet, but those decisions will be taken in the next year or so.
We have prepared a short questionnaire and it would be great if you could take a few minutes to complete it. You will have to register to take part which just requires an e-mail address and password - you will already have one if you've taken part in one of our previous consultations."
Supporting Documents:
Sustainability Appraisal Interim Report October 2020- BleadonStrategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)Interim Report November 2020- Sites in BleadonAlternative Approaches Methodology Paper November 2020- BleadonNorth Somerset Local Plan 2038: Choices for the Future QuestionnaireChallenges for the Future -Consultation StatementNSC Duty to Co-operate Statement of Common Ground----
Also see:
PreviousLocal Plan Consultation Part 1includingPart 1 Challenges for the Future Consultation Statement October 2020Some otherConsultationsWest of England Development SurveyVisit:]]>
The government has updated itsface mask guidance today, 24 September 2020 (PDF) and added moreexemptions as compared to the July 20 and Nov21 (Education FE and Schools) version.
With the confusion regarding whether face masks can protect people in some circumstances, but not others, our local MP, John Penrose, responded in July and August to a number of pertinent questions. For example, stating:
Q1. As of 19 March 2020 (the week before lockdown), COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK (see Blog)Q1+ The stated non-governmental explanationreferenced by the MP still doesn't explain that if the current COVID19 death toll is < 0.06% (42K/68million*100), and that if "Covid-19 does now appear to have a much lower case fatality rate than the other diseases on the HCID list. It is also now much easier to identify, with greater testing capacity than there was in January", why are there such extreme measures being taken by the government? Compare with Sweden, that didn't lockdown, and WHO statistics forSweden(graph) and the UK(Thegraphshows that the current huge rise in cases is not resulting in a corresponding huge rise in deaths)Q2. It seems that a formal medical and/or COVID19 impact assessment has not, and does not, need to be undertaken by the government until after a year has passed? (See also COVID19 Memorandum extracts, especially re: small business)Q3. Public Health England (June 20) stated the evidence for the effectiveness of mask wearing was weak? (PDF1& PDF2) Also, UNCOVER, Imperial College, DELVECOVID19 Droplets/not airborne, SPI-B individual view - has the government published risks & exit strategy?See also Rancourt mask review.
Q4. The MP response avoided answering the question regarding the harmful effects of wearing a face mask/covering, focussing on exemptions instead (See harms stated by theWorld Health Organisation)Q5. The Teaching Unions did not advocate universal wearing of masksQ6. "It's not clear on what grounds a school could actually enforce a blanket rule requiring pupils to wear face masks, short of new legislation being passed ..." (See currentFace Coverings in Education - (26 Aug PDF)Q7&8. Face coverings are not a medical device (PPE), and somask makers must meet the existing safety requirements (PDFv4), For example:"...there should be no claim to the effect that the face covering has been manufactured with the intention of offering protection (a) to users from risks to health and safety (whether COVID-19, pollution, pollen or dust) and/or (b) to people other than the wearer from risks to their health and safety." [So what is the point in wearing them?]"A safe product is one which, under normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use, does not present any risk,...""The producer will need to demonstrate it has assessed and taken action to mitigate the risks inherent in the product throughout normal or reasonably foreseeable uses." For example, hypoxia, especially if worn for long periods of time and WHO statement above.Mask wearing as a means to 'kickstart the economy back into life". Supported by the World Health Organisation (WHO) stating, "... potential social and economic benefits ... Moreover, the production of non-medical masks may offer a source of income for those able to manufacture masks ..."---
See related posts:]]>
UPDATE: 19APR21 - Govt '"Updated 'Status of COVID-19' section" (PDF)
___
Change in COVID-19 HCID designation - As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK(17JUN20). See HCID Monthly Summaries.
In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the following criteria:
acute infectious diseasetypically has a high case-fatality ratemay not have effective prophylaxis or treatmentoften difficult to recognise and detect rapidlyability to spread in the community and within healthcare settingsrequires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safelyHCID September to October 2020
(The most recently published/current document as of 01DEC20)
No COVID19?
HCID Report August 2020
(The most recently published/current document as of 29NOV20)
No COVID19?
HCID Report July 2020
COVID-19 is still removed from the HCID list
For awareness, regular reporting of MERS cases seems to have stalled, especially for Saudi Arabia, since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Status of COVID19 - 17 June 2020
As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK.
The 4 nations public health HCID group made an interim recommendation in January 2020 to classify COVID-19 as an HCID. This was based on consideration of the UK HCID criteria about the virus and the disease with information available during the early stages of the outbreak. Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.
The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) is also of the opinion that COVID-19 should no longer be classified as an HCID.
The need to have a national, coordinated response remains, but this is being met by the government’s COVID-19 response. (PDF & 10 day image)
Cases of COVID-19 are no longer managed by HCID treatment centres only. All healthcare workers managing possible and confirmed cases should follow the updated national infection and prevention (IPC) guidance for COVID-19, which supersedes all previous IPC guidance for COVID-19. This guidance includes instructions about different personal protective equipment (PPE) ensembles that are appropriate for different clinical scenarios. (Definitions of outbreaks)
HCID Report May 2020
On 9 January, WHO announced that a novel coronavirus was responsible for the outbreak of viral pneumonia first reported on 31 December 2019 in Wuhan City, Hubei Province in central China. The first case outside of mainland China was reported on 13 January in Thailand, in an individual who had recently been in Wuhan. On 30 January, the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee agreed that the outbreak meet the criteria for a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. By 31 January 2020, 9,826 cases had been confirmed globally of which 99% were in China. By 29 February, there were 85,403 cases globally, the majority (79,394) still in China. During March however, there were dramatic and widespread increases with a global total of 750,890 cases and over 36,000 deaths by the end of the month.
guidance is available in theHealth Professionals collection on GOV.UKsee also UK Surveillance reports (PDF-WK37)see features of 16,749 hospitalised UK patients with COVID-19 [pre-print article]In January 2020, the 4 UK public health agencies made a precautionary interim recommendation, based on the limited data available at the time, that COVID-19 should be considered to be an HCID, adding that a review of HCID status would take place once further information had accumulated. That review took place in March 2020 and representatives from all 4 public health agencies were unanimous in their opinion that COVID-19 should no longer be on the list of (Airborne) HCIDs. This view was supported by the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens, and the new recommendation was accepted by DHSC and NHS England and NHS Improvement.
Key changes that led to this decision were:
greater knowledge about fatality rates globally; based on international data available for cases where outcomes are known, the fatality rate is low overall, at around 1%greater clinical awareness and access to specific laboratory tests mean that it is much less difficult to recognise and detect cases rapidlyThis change in status does not detract from the seriousness of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is reflected by the fact that COVID-19 has its own separate pandemic response programme.
---
See also:
COVID19andCOVID1984informationBOBBeInvolved page]]>
The WestonMercury article "New citizens’ panel launched to give residents a voice" (Link to PDF)
NSC Citizen Panel
07 Sep
20
07 Sep 22"North Somerset Council is recruiting a group of volunteers to give regular feedback on local services and issues to help shape the future of the area."
"Residents, students and workers in North Somerset are being urged to get involved in local decision making with the launch of a new citizens’ panel.
North Somerset Council is recruiting a group of volunteers to give regular feedback on local services and issues to help shape the future of the area.
The panel will be consulted on a wide range of topics, from bins and roads to social care and planning, with feedback used to inform how services are run.
The Citizens’ Panel will not replace formal consultations but will complement them and offer another way for the people of North Somerset to have their voices heard.
Panel members will be asked to join in regular online surveys. There will also be opportunities to get involved in specific focus groups."
---
Also see other Consultations
]]>
UPDATE: Approved 05 Nov 20 Decision Notice
-----
ApplicationDeadlineInformation20/P/1878/FUL
15 Sep 20``Land Off Bleadon Road Bleadon Road Bleadon
Erection of a general purpose agricultural building"
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
From last year's Appeal Statement Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) stated that "the majority of Bleadon residents" were opposed to large scale residential development in this field. BPC supported this statement with reference to its Parish Plan/Settlement Boundary, Neighbourhood Development Plan Survey, North Somerset`s Local Plan/Core Strategy and comments from the Bleadon Acting Together (BAT) action group. In particular BPC stated,
"10. There is an acknowledged need for agricultural land and the site for the propsed development is prime agricultural land under cultivation."
This therefore implies that BPC, and the majority of residents, want this field to remain designated for agriculture use. This site already has planning permission for a barn (see below). The current resident confusion seems to be the size of this barn application and whether an additional barn is being sought.
Previous application information:
Bleadon Road Barn - 17/P/1178/F
Demolition of 2 no. existing agricultural barns and erection of 1no. new agricultural barn.
Previous NSC Decision:03 Nov 17Granted&Delegated
Previous BPC Decision:12 Jun 17No Objection (Min 296.8)
---
See also:]]>
See commentary video by UK Column
when this Govt Gudiance was released in July 2020
"These Regs give the right to take away from home and detain anyone, including children, for up to 14 days using force if necessary, if they suspect you might be infected"
Summary bySimon Dolan, whose "...challenge against the UK Government lockdown will continue to be heard after the Court of Appeal ... ruled that the case highlighted ‘fundamental’ concerns over the accountability of Government Ministers.The Judicial Review will now proceed to a rolled-up hearing expected to be held at the Court of Appeal during the week commencing the 28th September ..."
Guidance for Public Health Officers -Potentially infectious persons
Extracts from Governement Guidance by UK Column
"1.1 To manage the spread of coronavirus, the Coronavirus Act 2020 (“the Act”) provides Public Health Officers (PHO) with powers to control the spread of coronavirus in the UK. Some of these powers existed already for England in The Health Protection (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020. However, the Act replaces these regulations with a consistent, UK-wide, approach and includes certain new powers for immigration officers and constables.
1.3 The relevant powers can only be used once the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care has issued a declaration (and such declaration remains in force) that the incidence or transmission of coronavirus constitutes a serious and imminent threat to public health in England,
1.4 ... A PHO is either (i) an officer of the Secretary of State... or (ii) a registered public health consultant so designated by the Secretary of State.
1.7 Schedule 21, Parts 1 and 2, also include powers for Constables and Immigration Officers (IOs) to support the functions of PHOs.
2. [Public Health Officers]may direct, remove or request a constable to remove, an individual to a place suitable for screening and assessment."
2.3 A person is potentially infectious (Paragraph 2) if: (a) The person is or may be infected or contaminated with coronavirus AND there is a risk that the person might infect or contaminate others. OR (b) the person has been in an infected area within the 14 days preceding that time.
2.4 ‘Infected area’ refers to any country, territory or other area outside UK that the Secretary of State has declared for this purpose in a notice onwww.gov.uk
3.7 Implementation of your powers will be done at a local level, co-ordinating with local resilience partners, in accordance with local arrangements.
3.9 If the person is not willing to comply voluntarily, a PHO should first have a conversation...If the person is still not compliant, then you should invoke the powers conferred on you by the Act.
3.9(e) where will the person be taken for screening and assessment – this facility must be suitable for screening and assessment. This could be an isolation facility, an NHS facility or any other agreed facility (as long as it is suitable for screening and assessment);
6.2 [A PHO] may only exercise [their] powers with respect to screening and assessment under Paragraph 10 and imposition of requirements and restrictions under Paragraph 14, on a child in the presence of: (a) an individual who has responsibility for the child; or (b) if no such adult is present, an adult that [the Public Health Officer] consider[s] to be appropriate... having regards to the views of the child
9.1 ...Individuals should always be given the opportunity to comply voluntarily with public health advice ...
9.2 It is only at the stage where individuals do not comply with such advice that we would look to impose measures under Schedule 21, Parts 1 and 2.
----
See also
Army to help NHS deliver biggest vaccination push in British history(PDF)Never endanger our liberties or democratic processesGovt Consultation - Distributing vaccines and treatments for COVID-19 and fluCOVID19andCOVID1984information]]>
UPDATE 06JAN21: UK Government create extended roles in its COVID19 Vaccine Team -"You do not need to be a current NHS healthcare professional, as full training will be provided"
UPDATE 18DEC20: The Human Medicines Regulations Dec 2020 - Read the Explantory Note on pages 6&7 - "...without precipitating the need for a manufacturer’s licence or marketing authorisation ... used for vaccination or immunisation against coronavirus or influenza ... advertising of medicinal products"
UPDATE 16OCT20: The Human Medicines Regulations Oct 2020
UPDATE 16OCT 20: Consultation outcome
__________
The Government is asking for your response to its consultation onDistributing vaccines and treatments for COVID-19 and fluthatends Friday 18 September 2020.
"The UK government, with the Minister of Health in Northern Ireland, is seeking views on proposed changes to the Human Medicine Regulations 2012. The consultation covers:
authorising temporary supply of an unlicensed productcivil liability and immunityexpanding the workforce eligible to administer vaccinationspromoting vaccinesmaking provisions for wholesale dealing of vaccines"Documents to review:
Changes to Human Medicine Regulations to support the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines(PDF)Draft statutory instrument: the Human Medicines (Coronavirus) (Amendment) Regulations 2020(PDF)The government is "working towards short timelines, but if you miss the date and still want to make comments, contact [them] at covidvaccineconsultation@dhsc.gov.uk and [they] will try to accommodate your comment before any changes are made."
------
See also:
Army to help NHS deliver biggest vaccination push in British history(PDF)Never endanger our liberties or democratic processesMarshals and Related Public Health Officer GuidanceCOVID19andCOVID1984 informationOther Consultations
___________
UPDATES
UPDATE 06JAN21: UK Government create extended roles in its COVID19 Vaccine Team(PDF) with 3-6 month tenures:
Vaccination Programme Vaccinator(PDF)-from £10.09 - £11.19 p/hour (indicative)Health Care Professioonal (Immunisation)(PDF)- from £12.74 p/hour (indicative);RHCP Clinical Supervisor (Immunisation (Registered)(PDF)from £16.04 p/hour (indicative)"You do not need to be a current NHS healthcare professional, as full training will be provided. Please note, you will need healthcare experience for the Healthcare Professional and Clinical Supervisor roles – only vaccine specific training is provided."
UPDATE 18DEC20: The Human Medicines (Coronavirus) (Further Amendments) Regulations 2020 (PDF)
Read the Explantory Note on pages 6&7 - "... all professionally justified acts of preparation and assembly of a coronavirus vaccine may be undertaken by or under the supervision of a doctor, nurse or pharmacist, at any location, without precipitating the need for a manufacturer’s licence or marketing authorisation ... to set aside these restrictions if the PGD is for a medicinal product used for vaccination or immunisation against coronavirus or influenza ... the licencing authority under the 2012 Regulations may temporarily authorise the sale or supply of medicinal products without marketing authorisations. The Human Medicines (Coronavirus and Influenza) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 made wide ranging provision in relation to such temporary authorisations, including adapting the provisions of the 2012 Regulations relating to PGDs and the advertising of medicinal products to accommodate them."
UPDATE 16OCT20: The Human Medicines (Coronavirus and Influenza) (Amendment) Regulations 2020(PDF)
UPDATE 16OCT 20:Consultation outcome Consultation document: changes to Human Medicine Regulations to support the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines (PDF &Overview)]]>
Dwight D Eisenhower's farewell address to the nation 1961 (Start video at 8:11mins)
"... In the councils of government we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizen can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together ..."
It contiues ... how the technological revolution has influence overmilitary decision making
.... influence over research ... government contracts virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity ... prospects of domination of the nation's scholars by central governement employment project allocations and the power of money ...
... how public policy itself could become the captive of a scientific technological elite ...
... how the nation should avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate ...
What will become of England's freedoms now that the government has declared marshal rule? The government already uses its military for COVID19 testing, when will it decide to use it for martial law, or has that effectively already happened? (PDF)
----
See also
Army to help NHS deliver biggest vaccination push in British history(PDF)Govt Consultation - Distributing vaccines and treatments for COVID-19 and fluMarshals and Related Public Health Officer GuidanceCOVID19andCOVID1984informationOther Consultations]]>
North Somerset Council (NSC) are looking for your views on the Challenges facing North Somerset up to 2038, you have untilmidnight on 02 Sept 2020.
NSC has posted a video about the questions people have been asking and the themes that have emerged so far, as seen below:
For more information about the consultation seeLocal Plan Consultation Part 1
---
See also other Consultations]]>
BOB has been asked to post an appeal that has been made to the Planning Inspectorate against North Somerset's decision to refuse to grant planning permission for the"Erection of agricultural barn for livestock housing, feed store and machinery store with new access track off Purn Lane" -Land South of Purn Road, Bleadon. (See previous application information 19/P/2550/FUL).
"The appeal will be determined on the basis ofwritten representations ... This means that [NSC] and the appellant will write a statement setting out [their] cases ...
NSC will forward any comments you made on the planning application directly to the Planning Inspectorate, as well as the appeallant. These will be considered by the Planning Inspector when determining the appeal ...
If you wish to make further comments, or modify/withdraw your previous representation, you can do so on-line athttps://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ or by emailing West2@planninginspectorate.gov.uk. If you do not have access to the internet, please send thre copies to: Sarah Hardy, The Planning Inspectorate, Room 3C, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Bristol, BS1 6PN. Tel: 0303 444 5356. ...
All representations must be received by 14 September 2020 ... All representations must quote the appeal reference ..." APP/D0121/W/20/3257039
For more information read the letter from NSC, page1 and page2.
---
See also:]]>
UPDATE:North Somerset Local Plan 2038: Challenges and Choices Part 1 Challenges for the Future Consultation Statement October 2020
______________
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationNorth Somerset Local Plan 2038 Challenges and Choices Part 1
22 Jul 2002 Sep 20"A Local Plan sets out where developments can and cannot take place and ensures we get the right type of development in the right place with the right services and infrastructure ... This document is the first stage"NB: Bleadon Parish will not be meeting before the deadline of this consultation, their next meeting is planned for 14 Sept 20.
North Somerset Council states:
"A new Local Plan for North Somerset is being prepared, which will guide housing, jobs and business investment, transport, community facilities and supporting infrastructure in the area until 2038.
Thefirst stage of consultation in the new plan’s preparation focuses on the challenges and issues that need facing in North Somerset, such as the climate emergency, how and where to provide jobs and homes, our to ensure development is located in sustainable places, how to protect and enhance our green and blue space and the future role of the Green Belt.
Thisonline consultation will run for six weeks from Wednesday 22 July to Wednesday 2 September 2020
Further information about the Local Plan can also be found at www.n-somerset.gov.uk/newlocalplan
Regular questions will also be raised across the council’s social media accounts on Facebook (www.facebook.com/NorthSomersetCouncil) and Twitter (www.twitter.com/NorthSomersetC) to spark discussion and encourage feedback. All replies made on council-run social media profiles will be analysed and added to the consultation responses.
The responses received to this consultation will guide the next stage of the Local Plan, focussing on choices about the location of future development.
There will be many more opportunities to get involved and have your say in future - but now is the time to really influence the development of the new Local Plan for North Somerset."
The response is to be published 26 Oct 20.
---
PreviousPre-Local Plan Consultation]]>
Parish Council's second virtual meeting via Zoom.
Today, Monday 20 June 2020 at 7pm
InformationBPC Agenda-v2
BPC Agenda-v1
How?Zoom linkMeeting ID761 3989 7091Password1NsUUEBleadon Parish Council's latest Zoom meeting was discovered earlier this evening.
There was no notice on the parish notice boards, BOB did not receive the usual notification from the clerk, but arevised agenda was found on the BPC website, although the date of the signature was 6 July, the same as the original? (see above)
After waiting over 30 minutes into the meeting BOB was finally let into the discussions, which was attended by five counclllors, the clerk, BOB and one other resident. The meeting was stopped several times due to technical hitches where attendees were 'dropped' out, but the meeting continued to its conclusion at 9pm.
After last month's meeting some information was made available before the meeting, such as Planning Applicatiions and some Correspondence Listing. As with the last meeting, some documents werereferenced but were not accessible to the public, either prior or at the meeting.
(BOB Notes soon)
--
PreviousNotes on BPC First Zoom Meeting]]>
UPDATE: On 14 JAN 21 The Planning Inspector DISMISSED this application.
UPDATE: NSC website 10 NOV 20: The applicant has taken this to Appeal. See the NSC website18/P/5035/OUTand Planning Inspectorate website Application and letter to resident pg1 and pg2. NumberAPP/D0121/W/20/3259109andStatement of Case. The Planning Inspectorate stated to NSC on 04 Nov 20:
"You must notify any person who was notified or consulted about the application in accordance with the Act ... If they want to make any additional comments they must submit 3 copies within 5 weeks of the starting date, by 09 December 2020. If comments are submitted after the deadline, the Inspector will not normally look at them and they will be returned" (PDF)
This Appeal was not on the BPC 16 Nov 20 Agenda?The next Full BPC meeting is currentlyscheduledfor14 Dec 20, i.e. after this consultation closes.
_____
The "Outline application for the proposed erection of 14no. dwellings with matters of appearance, landscaping and scale reserved for subsequent approval"has been REFUSED- 17 July 2020 (18/P/5035/OUT)
"The proposal is not on a site allocated for development in the North Somerset Sites and Policies Plan Part 2 - Site Allocations and falls outside the settlement boundary of an infill settlement. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies CS14 and CS33 of the North Somerset Core Strategy where development is strictly controlled in order to protect the character of the rural area and prevent unsustainable development." (Decision Notice, Delegated Report)
This again shows the importance of Bleadon's Settlement Boundary and the importance of why residents should consider responding to the North Somerset Local Plan Consulation due this year.
Strangely the Delegated Report also states:
"Bleadon is an infill village and is covered by a Neighbourhood Plan which does not identify the site for development purposes"
Yet residents have only seen an initial survey?
Bleadon Parish Council seems to have placed little importance on the Settlement Boundary over the last few years (most notably unopposing the large scalecaravan park development). Considerations:
May 2009 (Min 213.27.4) Bleadon's Parish Plan was adopted.
Feb 2009 - aleafletwith a "summary of [103] key points from the Bleadon Action Plan 2009" was published, which states,"Through the Planning process vigorously question all development outside the Village Settlement … Ensure that all new development remains within the Village Settlement Boundary"
Apr APM 2017 Mins(Open Forum) states that "The Clerk confirmed once more that he could not find a copy of a [adopted] Parish Plan" and that the plan as "obsolete"?23 July 2017Settlement Boundary Update - "A Parishioner asked about North Somerset Core Strategy / Settlement Boundary and Bleadon regarded as an Infill Village. The Chairman asked Cllr Porter to provide an update on the Core Strategy. Cllr Porter provided an update on the core strategy and highlighted that remitted policies only provide limited weight and there is currently not a settlement boundary at this present time for Bleadon."(Min 297.4i)
05 Dec 2018Settlement Boundary Review Consultation- BOB has approached BPC expressing our concern at the lack of BPC public consultation and information on this issue over the last 3 months. The change or loss of this Settlement Boundary could potentially make Bleadon a Service Village, i.e. the same as Backwell, ... BPC has chosen not to raise and discuss this issue over the last 3 months, in its previous 4 publicly held meetings, but instead has decided to add it to their 10 Dec Agenda (Min 317.12), i.e. after the public deadline for comments.
02 Apr 20New pre-Local Plan Consultation-This phased consultation, aiming for implementation in January 2023, will affect the future of Bleadon as a Settlement/Infill Village, any Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Plan and the level of development that is expected to be built in Bleadon ... NB: There appears to be no submission by BPC, which is surprising seeing as it has been working on a Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) for nearly three years and proposed five unidentified anecdotal sites in their 2018-19 (pg2) and 2019-20 (Q26) NDP grant applications.
--
See also`:
PreviousPurn Way ApplicationBOBConsultations Table]]>
A member of the public kindly forwarded a document in response to the BOB blog 'Government Exemptions for using Face Masks on Public Transport'. Below is an extract from the World Health Organisations 'Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19' (05 June 20).
"Potential harms/disadvantages
The likely disadvantages of the use of mask by healthy people in the general public include:
potential increased risk of self-contamination due to the manipulation of a face mask and subsequently touching eyes with contaminated hands;potential self-contamination that can occur if non-medical masks are not changed when wet or soiled. This can create favourable conditions for microorganism to amplify;potential headache and/or breathing difficulties, depending on type of mask used;potential development of facial skin lesions, irritant dermatitis or worsening acne, when used frequently for long hours;difficulty with communicating clearly;potential discomfort;a false sense of security, leading to potentiallylower adherence to other critical preventive measures such as physical distancing and hand hygiene;poor compliance with mask wearing, in particular by young children;waste management issues; improper mask disposal leading to increased litter in public places, risk of contamination to street cleaners and environment hazard;difficulty communicating for deaf persons who rely on lip reading;disadvantages for or difficulty wearing them, especially for children, developmentally challenged persons, those with mental illness, elderly persons with cognitive impairment, those with asthmaor chronic respiratory or breathing problems, those who have had facial trauma or recent oral maxillofacial surgery, and those living in hot and humid environments"[NOTE 1: Consider those with asthma, already struggling to breathe without a mask, "There are 5.4 million people in the UK living with asthma, around 1 million have ‘difficult’ asthma which includes an estimated 200,000 adults and children in the UK with ‘severe’ asthma."That’s around one in twelve of us.
NOTE 2: Consider people who are deaf or hard of hearing thatrely on lip reading in order to 'hear', "There are 12 million people with hearing lossacross the UK, that’s around one in six of us"]
"Potential benefits/advantages
The likely advantages of the use of masks by healthy people in the general public include:
reduced potential exposure risk from infected persons before they develop symptoms;reduced potential stigmatization of individuals wearing masks to prevent infecting others (source control) or of people caring for COVID-19 patients in non-clinical settings;(70)making people feel they can play a role in contributing to stopping spread of the virus;reminding people to be compliant with other measures (e.g., hand hygiene, not touching nose and mouth). However, this can also have the reverse effect (see [above]);potential social and economic benefits. Amidst the global shortage of surgical masks and PPE, encouraging the public to create their own fabric masks may promote individual enterprise and community integration. Moreover, the production of non-medical masks may offer a source of income for those able to manufacture masks within their communities. Fabric masks can also be a form of cultural expression, encouraging public acceptance of protection measures in general. The safe re-use of fabric masks will also reduce costs and waste and contribute to sustainability."[How do these suggestions help the small businesses and high street shops that are losing customers to online large businesses due to enforced COVID19 related government policies?]"If masks are recommended for the general public, the decision-maker should:
clearly communicate the purpose of wearing a mask, where, when, how and what type of mask should be worn. Explain what wearing a mask may achieve and what it will not achieve, and communicate clearly that this is one part of a package of measures along with hand hygiene, physical distancing and other measures that are all necessary and all reinforce each other;inform/train people on when and how to use masks safely (see mask management and maintenance sections), i.e. put on, wear, remove, clean and dispose;consider the feasibility of use, supply/access issues, social and psychological acceptance (of both wearing and not wearing different types of masks in different contexts);continue gathering scientific data and evidence on the effectiveness of mask use (including different types and makes as well as other face covers such as scarves) in non-health care settings;evaluate the impact (positive, neutral or negative) of using masks in the general population (including behavioral and social sciences).""WHO encourages countries and community adopting policies on masks use in the general public to conduct good quality research to assess the effectiveness of this intervention to prevent and control transmission."Hopefully this information and research will be publicly accessilbe by the UK government ASAP.
The WHO also gives a table of examples (below) of where the general public should be encouraged to use medical and non-medical masks in areas with known or suspected community transmission. They refer to grocery stores, at work, social gatherings, closed settings, including schools, churches, mosques, social works, cashiers, servers, people >60 years, and more.
What will our society look like if the full table below isimplemented in the UK? Therehave already been tens of thousands of deaths caused by the Lockdown itself due to the polices, practices, restrictions and removal of NHS services, with many more expected as theNHS waiting expects to hit 10 million people. (NB there have been 45K COVID19 attributed deaths in the UK to date, with 66 today).
What will be the effect of this masking on the population's natural immunity? If you have information on clinical studies please send to BOB, so that it can be shared with everyone.
---
See also UK Government 'Exemptions to wearing a face covering where they are mandate' (14 July 20- (PDF)), which reiterate the exemptions previously posted on BOB at 'Government Exemptions for using Face Masks on Public Transport'.
BOBKey COVID19 Information Highlights
BOBCoronavirus Information
BOBnon-mainstream COVID1984 information
]]>
There are very real and distressing effectsof the government's NHS Test & Trace program. It has already directly led to local people being verbally, publicly, socially and emotionally 'attacked' by other members of the public, particularly through the use of social media.
In neighbouring Burnham-on-Sea an unexpected COVID19 test result closed at least 3 small businesses, locked-up an unknown number of people, and left some people and their family members victimised and emotionally scarred.
A man in Burnhamtook a COVID19 test, stating “I thought: I’ll take a test so I’d know if I got it at work”. This led to him testing 'positive' and subsequently informing the people he had met, and the places he had visited, over the previous days.
A pub landlady who was contacted broke 'protocol' andtook it uponthe business to phone up "90 peopleto warn them that a weekend customer had tested positive for coronavirus"and was subsequently seemingly praised by the community and the press.
An Indian takeaway who was contacted stated "It saddens us to tell you all that due to unforeseen circumstances, we are closing [the] ... takeaway up until Friday ... This is becauseone of the drivers has been in the same pub as the person who has tested positive to Covid-19"
A vape shop who was contacted tried to follow 'protocol' stating, “... as soon as I got the message about the positive test result on Sunday, I immediately closed the bar, locked up andspoke with the NHS and Police who informed us of the correct steps, all of which we have followed”. Sadly, having done this thewoman and her family were later "hounded, with some in the town furious that she had reopened the bar on Monday. She claims her 18-year-old daughter fled from a supermarket in the town after other shoppers yelled that she was “infected” and should be in isolation. It got so bad that Underhill resigned from her other job as an HR manager for a manufacturing company on Tuesday. “I’m having to shield my staff from abuse and look after my family. There’s no way at the moment I can do all of that while working full time,”" Later,the woman posted on social media, "So in one day I have been called skanky, vile, greedy, irresponsible, a liar, a whore, lazy, selfish, attention seeking, a fraud and a cxxx wow can't wait to see what tomorrow brings".
The man who tested positive, "...who suffers from anxiety,came off Facebook to escape what he felt was a torrent of abuse. “I couldn’t handle seeing it"" The phoning around, the contacting NHS Test & Trace, and the social media frenzy resulted in the positively tested man experiencing, ""... wild, unfounded rumours [that] were starting to spread around the town, fuelled by fear and anger on social media. Some claimed [the man] had known he was infected before heading out or that he worked in a care home. Others swore he had visited every pub in the town. His identity became an open secret, discussed in cafes, shops and street corners. Comments branding him “totally irresponsible”, “ignorant and selfish” and calling for him “to be jailed for not listening” appeared on the social media pages of the two pubs"
Health Secretary Matt Hancock subsequently publicly stated, "This is NHS Test and Trace working precisely as intended" Really, is this the anti-social, divisive and destructive behaviour that government wants! If so, why? What will be the consequential effect on local businesses, and their associated social communities, as people move their custom online through fear?
Health Secretary Matt Hancock also praised "businesses for "doing the right thing by their customers and by their communities" by closing". Has anyone heard of any large multi-national supermarkets/businesses shutting down voluntarily, or being asked/forced to close by Track & Trace?Or governmentbreakdown statistics on how many businesses have closed, what type of business, for how long, and affecting how many staff, and how many were sadly hospitalised and later died? If so, please send BOB the information.
This is the reality of the type of community that the government Lockdown(up), masks and fearmongering has created and is continuing to encourage,seemingly without regard to the consequentlal physical, mental, social and emotional health effects. The mandated and/or encouraged use of masks/face coverings will exacerbate this type of stress on our communities and local businesses, as people may, inappropriately and illegally (?), enforce the use of masks.
What type of society are we living in that thinks that this sort of 'social communication' and bullying is acceptable? What are our children seeing, hearing, thinking and feeling as they are also forced to sit 2m away from their friends? How much worse will this get when people start to shout from behind the safety of a 'mask' that obscures their face?
--
ADDITIONAL INFORMATON
Test Track and Trace Isolates 88K by Second Week of Operation
BOBKey COVID19 Information Highlights
BOBCoronavirus Information
BOB non-mainstream COVID1984 information
]]>
On 15 June 2020 it became law that you must wear a face covering when travelling via public transport in England (PDF). Strangely it seems that viruses, such as COVID19, do not affect people who offer or use "a school transport service" or "a taxi or private hire vehicle service", as they are exempt from this law? (Para 2.2)
From the government guidance "safer travel guidance for passengers...during the coronavirus outbreak -Exemptions - people who do not have to wear a face covering" :
"You ... do not need to wear a face covering if you have a good reason not to. This includes: ... if putting on, wearing or removing a face covering would cause you severe distress"(Guidance&PDF)
This raised and continues to raise so many unanswered questions:
How is this proven so as not to be fined or 'attacked' by mask-wearing members of the public? Is a doctor's appointment and written letter required?
If there are medical breathing reasons for exemptions, e.g. asthma, then surely that implies mask wearing does restrict your breathing and has an adverse effect on your health?
Why are enforcement officers considered safe from the virus and exempt from wearing masks?
Why are there blanket exemptions for some people in jobs but not others? How are these people safe from catching the virus but general public is not?
E.g. The following are exempt with regards to travel - an employee of a transport operator, any other person providing services to the transport operator, a constable or police community support officer, an emergencyresponder - paramedic or fire officer and a border force officer.
If the majority of indoor places are deemed safe, why are masks needed in shops, especially now as Lockdown is being lifted?
Will masks also be required in schools, offices, pubs, even outdoor sports areas in the future?
Is this the end of public social gatherings e.g. pubs, places of worship, sports events, etc. Will this finally kill the high street, with consequential loss of jobs, and see a cashless society as advantaged people move to online shopping?
Also see:
7 long term effects from wearing a mask,Side effetcts of wearing a maskWhat can happen from prolonged use of wearing a N95 mask(PDF)9 side effects of wearing face masks22APR21 - Face coverings: when to wear one, exemptions, and how to make your own (PDF)
24MAY21 - Face coverings in education (PDF)
---
Related postMask Wearing Notice of Conditional Acceptance]]>
The following response and approach any mandated and/or suggested use of masks is taken from a facebook postsupported by7 long term effects from wearing a mask, 9 side effects of wearing face masks,Side effetcts of wearing a mask and 'What can happen from prolonged use of wearing a N95 mask" (PDF)
"Notice of Conditional Acceptance (PDF download)
This is to notify you that I am happy to wear a mask as directed, stand two metres apart or participate in a lockdown on the condition that you provide the following:
Proof that use of such masks social distancing or lockdown can prevent the inhalation of substances or micro-organisms at the scale of “viruses”.Proof that prolonged use of such a mask will NOT cause Hypercapnia, HypercarbiaorRespiratory Acidosis in the wearer.A signed and witnessed statement from you, accepting full responsibility and full commercial liability should I be subsequently diagnosed with Hypercapnia, Hypercarbia or suffer an Asthmatic attack or any other respiratory or physical and mental health distress resulting from prolonged mask wearing, social distancing lockdown or being two metres apart.A complete list of your medical qualifications. Please use the space below to provide the requested proofs of claim and sign and date it in the appropriate boxes to accept full responsibility and full commercial liability.Failure to do so will be deemed to mean no such proof exists and that you are not medically qualified to make a determination of the effects of prolonged mask use, social distancing in lockdown or being two metres apart from others and/or you are not confident enough to take financial responsibility for my safety as a result of your mask social distancing or lockdown enforcement actions.
Please provide the requested proof and medical qualifications here: Liability Statement I, ………………………………. as the official enforcing the unlawful wearing of masks according to parliamentary preference, am fully aware that prolonged use of surgical and non-surgical masks reduces the levels of Oxygen that reach the wearer and increases the dangerous levels of Carbon Dioxide and toxins that are expelled via the breath. I am also aware that prolonged mask use increases the risk of Hypercapnia, Hypercarbia, Asthma and other forms of respiratory distress I therefore accept full responsibility and full commercial liability should the bearer experience, or be subsequently diagnosed with, any of the above conditions as a result of prolonged mask use social distancing or lockdown.
Signed in the presence of three witnesses:
Dr/Mr/Ms. ……………………………………… Signature ………………….…………….………..
Address …………………………………………….…………..………………….………………………………..… ………………..………………….………………………..………………….……………………………….………... Date ………….………….……………..........
Witness ……………………………………………. Signature ………………….……………….…………..
Address …………………………………………….…………..………………….………………………………..…"
---
See relatedGovernment exemptions for using Face Masks on public transport]]>
The government has released a NHSExperimental Statistical Report (PDF)- "Note that figures for last week’s release have been revised".Also "To ensure consistent reporting across all pillars we have paused reporting the number of people tested due to an issue with the data for pillar 2"i.e. swab testing for the wider population (Test Types - PDF 21JUN20):
"In total, since 28 May 2020: 14,045 people who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) had their case transferred to the contact tracing system, of whom 72.6% (10,192 people)were reachedand asked to provide details of their recent close contacts.87,639 people were identified as close contacts[and asked to self-isolate] and reached through the contract tracing system out of 96,746 reported (90.6%)."(BBC article 18JUN20)i.e.one anonymous person testing positive results in 9 people in lockdown.
So who are these contacts that are within the 2m social distance, for more that 15 minutes, that are not household members?
The following is from NHS Trace & Trace How it Works:(11JUN20PDF): They will ask you:
"if you have family members or other household members living with you. In line with the medical advice they must remain in self-isolation for the rest of the 14-day period from when your symptoms began["Your household doesn’t need to self-isolate with you, if you do not have symptoms, but they must take extra care to follow the guidance on social distancing and handwashing and avoid contact with you at home "]if you have had any close contact with anyone other than members of your household. We are interested in in the 48 hours before you developed symptoms and the time since you developed symptoms.Close contact means:having face-to-face contact with someone (less than 1 metre away)spending more than 15 minutes within 2 metres of someonetravelling in a car or other small vehicle with someone (even on a short journey)or close to them on a planeif you work in – or have recently visited – a setting with other people (for example, a GP surgery, a school or a workplace)We will ask you to provide, where possible, the names and contact details (for example, email address, telephone number) for the people you have had close contact with."---
See previousTest Track and Trace Isolates 27K in its First Week of Operation
See Check your mobile phone for a Track and Trace API
See Weston Hospital Closed due to COVID19
See BOBCoronavirus Informationpage]]>
In the absence of any notification of the published minutes, or any further release of information, here are BOB notes of the Bleadon Parish Council Zoom meeting on 08 June 2020:
It took several attempts to join the meetingUnfortunately, the sound quality was very poor, it was hard to hear and/or record the meeting, hence brief overview notes.My request to 'record' through the Zoom facility went unanswered.The Clerk and five councillors attended the meeting.No other members of the public attended, although BOB is aware that at least one other member of the public tried to attend but they were held in the Zoom 'waiting room' for over half an hour, and ultimately were not allowed to enter the meeting.No documents were shared on screen when they were discussed.Councillors again discussed land that didn't belong to them, showing the Asset Register was not used by councillors before making complaints against fellow councillors, or members of the public.Later in the meeting when discussing the Audit submission it was agreed that the Asset Register was 'incomplete, inaccurate and not properly maintained'- Section H on AGAR submission and was therefore ticked as 'NO'. In the absence of the document discussed at the meeting see previous 2018-19 submission. (This issue was raised at last year's Audit, with questions still remaining unanswered).The Internal Auditor also highlighted the need to review the BPC 'Risk Assessment'to ensure Internal Compliance Objective 20? (This issue was raised at last year's Audit, with questions still remaining unanswered).It was clear that budget headings were fluid, with money being transferred between projects, and that it was unclear what was precisely was being spent under each budget heading. (This issue was raised at last year's Audit, with questions still remaining unanswered).It seems the BPC Grant Policy does not need to be used if councillors/clerk call it a donation or a financial contribution?There seems to be a lack of clarity as to BPC project leadership, and internal/public feedback and accountability.Ipads - Clerk stated that they were not bought for video-conferencing ability, but for document viewing? Some councillors were not using their ipads as they did not work as expected, and so the Clerk was tasked with returning and/or reconfiguring them?More updates will be posted by BOB if and when the information is released by BPC.
---
See previousBleadon Councils First Virtual Zoom Meeting
]]>
The following extracts are from the article "GCSE results 2020: A look at the grades proposed by schools" (15 JUN 20 PDF):
"... at the top level, this year’s teacher-assessed grades are higher than those awarded in 2019 exams.In every subject we’ve looked at,the average grade proposed for 2020 is higher than the average grade awarded last year.In most subjects, the difference is between 0.3 and 0.6 grades ... Of the 24 subjects we’ve looked at, in 10 of them there’s a difference of half a grade or more between the average proposed grade for 2020 and the average grade awarded in 2019." [Example:English Language Results Comparison graph]"
"Consequently, it seems likely that Ofqual and the exam boards will have to apply statistical moderation to the grades submitted by schools, bringing them down on average."
Other extracts:
"Over the past fortnight, secondary schools in England have submitted centre assessment grades for their Year 11 pupils to the exam boards. This has happened in response to GCSEs being cancelled this year. Coming up with these grades has been a huge undertaking for teachers – one done with minimal guidance and training."
"The next step is moderation by exam boards, before grades are issued to pupils in August. But an exercise carried out by FFT gives an indication of the challenges facing Ofqual and the exam boards. Between 28 April and 1 June, FFT ran a statistical moderation service which allowed schools to submit preliminary centre assessment grades they were proposing for their pupils."
"... take a look at some of the main findings from the service, based on the data of more than 1,900 schools – over half of all state secondaries in England – which had submitted results when the service ended on 1 June. That’s the date on which the window for secondary schools to submit their proposed grades to the exam boards opened – though it’s worth saying that we don’t know if schools will have submitted the same data to the exam boards as that which we’re analysing here. They may have used the reports they were provided with to amend the mix of grades they were proposing."
"... at the top level, this year’s teacher-assessed grades are higher than those awarded in 2019 exams. In every subject we’ve looked at, the average grade proposed for 2020 is higher than the average grade awarded last year. In most subjects, the difference is between 0.3 and 0.6 grades ... Of the 24 subjects we’ve looked at, in 10 of them there’s a difference of half a grade or more between the average proposed grade for 2020 and the average grade awarded in 2019." [Example: English Language Results Comparison graph]
"Consequently, it seems likely that Ofqual and the exam boards will have to apply statistical moderation to the grades submitted by schools, bringing them down on average. This will be a hugely complex task, the likes of which have never been done before. As well as proposed grades, schools were required to submit rank orderings of their pupils, and it seems likely that these will be used to shift some pupils down from one grade to the next."
"Reflecting on the difficult task faced by schools. It’s worth taking a moment to consider the difficulty of the task that schools had, and think about why their proposed grades were higher than those awarded last year. All things said and done, then, schools have had an incredibly difficult task – albeit one matched in difficulty by that now facing the exam boards and Ofqual."
---
PreviousCOVID related Exam articles
See also BOBCoronavirus Informationpage
]]>
The following extracts are from the article "The Hydroxychloroquine Scandal" (18 JUN 20PDF):
"... It seems the [World Health Organisation] WHO, [the UK Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency] MHRA, [the French] Inserm, and public health bodies around the world have used fake science, fake data, deliberately destructive studies and what appears to be wilful ignorance to make sure hydroxychloroquine is never trialled as a preventative COVID-19 treatment.
... The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) has stated that it will continue to advocate the use of hydroxychloroquine for front line health workers as no notable adverse reactions were evident. Dr Samiran Panda, director of the ICMR-National AIDS Research Institute, reported the results of Indian trials into it use as a prophylactic treatment for health professionals:
The main conclusion that can be drawn after analysing the data is that hydroxychloroquine has beneficial effects in infection risk reduction from fourth dose onwards…….[hydoxychloroquine] will help cut the risk of infection by 80% in healthcare workers who are not already sick."
Other Extracts:
"... the UK government were quick to invest in vaccine development. In their Coronavirus Action Plan, published on 3 March, the focus was overwhelmingly on vaccines. The Action Plan noted that a vaccine may not prevent infection from SARS-Cov-2 but could rather manage symptoms of the potentially resultant syndrome COVID-19: Given that there is currently neither a vaccine against COVID-19 nor any specific, proven, antiviral medication, most treatment will therefore be towards managing symptoms … innovate responses including diagnostics, drugs and vaccines"
"... As Johnson's comments reveal, there is much more than just healthcare riding on the back of Coronavirus vaccine development. The vaccine itself sits at the centre of a web of surveillance, restricted freedom of movement and restricted access to employment and services based upon your allocated immunity status ... A whole new tech industry, combining global corporations and intelligence agencies, is springing up to monitor, control and surveil populations"
"... Since at the time of writing, COVID-19 is said to have impacted 0.1% of the global population, allegedly killing less than 0.006%, the WHO's measure of success for a global vaccine being that it protect 70% of the global population from a disease that doesn't affect 99.9% of the population, the chances of WHO approval for anything look pretty good - an inert saline solution should do the job. It is not surprising, then, that vaccine developers are so confidently looking forward to a global market and global profits."
"... A cheap, widely available off patent drug that achieves exactly the same thing as the vaccine must, therefore, be seen as a problem. [e.g. Hydroxycholoroquine] ... The persistent claim, repeated ad nauseam by the mainstream media, that hydroxychloroquine presents some sort of severe heart risk, simply isn't true ... There is virtually no cardiovascular risk at all to taking it, as recommended, for short course treatments. As you would if you took it as a prophylaxis for COVID-19."
"... for more than 50 years, the French had been able to buy hydroxychloroquine over the counter. Once demand shot through the roof, as the COVID-19 crisis unfolded, they suddenly could no longer get it without a prescription."
"...on 22 May the Lancet published a study by a team of four U.S. researchers ... authors of the study requested that the Lancet withdraw the paper, which it did on 3 June ... Yet, despite the fact that scientists from across the globe were able to spot the fake paper with ease, neither the Lancet, nor the world’s leading experts in public health, the World Health Organisation, could ... Like the WHO, the [UK] MHRA either didn't exercise any due diligence or don't care about saving lives."
"... A number of other studies have not been able to find any significant benefit from remdisivir. The WHO withdrew some of these unfavourable remdesivir studies from their trial database as they had accidentally uploaded them. Other remdisivir trials were stopped when adverse effects were observed."
"... The recommended hydroxychloroquine dose for an adult in the UK is no more than 200 - 400mg per day. In France 1800mg per day is considered to be lethal poisoning ... Across 175 UK hospitals, 1542 patient participants in the Recovery Trials were given 2400mg (six times the recommended maximum dose) in the first twenty-four hours. This was followed up by ten days at twice the recommended maximum dose at 800mg"
"... It isn't really clear what the objective was. This wasn't so much a trial of effectiveness, it looked more like an experiment in toxic poisoning. It would seem to account for the atrocious mortality rate."
-----
More info on BOB'sCOVID page
]]>
UPDATE 10 JUN 20: "In total, since 28 May 2020: (10,192 people) were reached and ...87,639 people were identified as close contacts[and asked to self-isolate] i.e. one anonymous person testing positive results in 9 people in lockdown.(See BOB post)
--
It seems having friends or going to work could seriously limit your freedom and potentially have you locked-up in self-isolation for 14 days, without warning or discussion. No chance to go on that planned holiday, attend that birth, wedding or funeral. It may also repeatedly affect your ability to earn an income, provide for your family and/or run a business. According to aBBC article(PDF):
"There were 8,117 people testing positive referred to the scheme in its first week, but just 5,407 of those provided details of recent contacts. Those people provided 31,794 contacts, 26,985 of whom were reached and agreed to self-isolate" i.e. one anonymous person testing positive results in 5 people in lockdown.
"No-one contacted as a result of you testing positive for coronavirus will be told [the originating person's] identity. A parent or guardian will need to give permission for a call with under-18s to continue"Clearly, this system may be open to incorrect reporting and unnecessary isolationof adults and chidren.
"Close contacts are: people you spend 15 minutes or more with at a distance of less than 2m; and people you have direct contact with - such as sexual partners, household members or people with whom you have had face-to-face conversations at a distance of less than 1m"NB:2m is not a rule (PDF).
Do I have to follow the instruction to self-isolate?
It's currently voluntary, but the Department for Health has said that if people don't comply "we will not hesitate to introduce tougher measures, for example making visits to check they're home or issuing fines if they are found outside the house".
What about sick pay?
If people can't work from home, the government says employers must ensure any self-isolating employee is receiving sick pay and give them the option to use their paid leave days if they prefer."
According to anotherBBC article (PDF):
The NHS Confederation has already "called forfurther assurances on the effectiveness of the Test and Trace programme".[See Weston Hospital Closure]
Asked when the government will publish data relating to England's track and trace system,[Business minister Nadhim Zahawi]said statistical experts wanted figures to be "robust" before publication. We will learn the lessons from this, I guarantee you, but we'll do itafterwe get through this challenge."[Yet decisions, guidance and potentially law is being made in relation to these statistics, including the isolation of 25K people in its first week of operation.]
----
See previousCheck your mobile phone for a Track and Trace API
See previousWeston Hospital Closed due to COVID19
See also BOBCoronavirus Informationpage
]]>
Telegraph article 03SEP22 NHS spent over £700,000 in taxpayer cash on ‘virtue-signalling’ staff magazines (PDF)
"An investigation has found that 69 NHS trusts produced stylish human resources-themed pamphlets, which had vast sections unrelated to health or patients...
Ministers have told the NHS to stamp out “wokery” amid a record-high tax burden... T
he number of people waiting for NHS care hit a record 6.73 million last month, with 355,000 people waiting more than a year for treatment."
BBC article 10JUN20 Coronavirus: NHS waiting list 'could hit 10 million this year'(PDF)
"From about 4.2 million currently ... The NHS Confederation is simply saying that an independent forecast that the waiting list for routine surgery in England might hit 10 million by the end of this year looks reasonable. Others have floated similar predictions
In a new report, the NHS Confederation said healthcare services were operating at a reduced capacity of about 60% because of infection control measures" E.g.60% fall in urgent cancer referrals[If COVID19 is here to stay how will the NHS ever recover?]
It is hard to forecast how quickly those patients who have stayed away from hospitals because of fears of the virus will return to seek urgent treatment.[Many have already died, it may already too late for others]
It also called for further assurances on the effectiveness of the Test and Trace programme and further guarantees over personal protective equipment (PPE). [Yet the Test and Trace programme has alreadylocked-up 25K people this week based on those tests?]
Asked when the government will publish data relating to England's track and trace system, [Business minister Nadhim Zahawi] said statistical experts wanted figures to be "robust" before publication. We will learn the lessons from this, I guarantee you, but we'll do it after we get through this challenge." [Yet decisions, guidance and potentially law is being made in relation to these statistics? Similar to BPC's lack of openness and transparencyin their decision making]
The NHS Confederation has asked for an extension of the government's deal with the private sector, to provide beds, equipment and staff to the NHS, until next March ... Zahawi told BBC ... the NHS could resume delivering broader services "without the private hospitals".
The NHS Confederation said challenges include a backlog of cases, maintaining social distancing, and staffing ... emergency funding and longer-term spending were needed."
--
Also see:
Weston Hospital Closed due to COVID19 Tik Tok NHS Dance Compilation (MAY 2020)See also BOBCoronavirus Informationpage
]]>
UPDATE 21 JUN 20:Notes on BPC First Zoom Meeting
----------------
Parish Council's first virtual meeting via Zoom.
Today, Monday 08 June 2020 at 7pm
InformationBPC AgendaHow?Zoom linkMeeting ID503 436 3980Password9ywZuyeIf you would like to attend you do not necessarily need to have a Zoom account. Before the meeting click on the 'Zoom link' from BPC above (as seen on their Agenda). This will download software/app onto your computer/phone/tablet. To join the meeting enter the ID and Password before 7pm.
The Agenda format has changed again with outstanding actions, correspondence listing and financial information being removed from public access. There is now an Agenda overview with all associated information placed in 13 associated appendices. These appendices were initially withheld from the public until after the meeting, i.e. after BPC made its decisions and allocated finances.BOB challenged this and now it seems that four of the 13 appendices are now currently accessible on the BPC website.
With regards the outstanding appendices, the Chairman Cllr Williams, replied today via the clerk, "Both the Parish Clerk and on behalf of myself gave what I believe was a fulsome report to your last e-mail and therefore it is not my attention to prolong this correspondence any further."
AppendixContent1March Meeting Minutes2Past Matters Report for information to the members3Grid showing the e-mailed responses to North Somerset Planning Department- inclWallflower House4Financial Statement for the year end 31st March 20205Copy of the internal Auditor’s Report6The Annual AGAR
7Public Inspection Notice8List of meeting dates for 2020-2021(butMar 2019 PDF?)9Purchase of 9 new iPads and their usage Policy10List of Council payments made by Direct Debit11List of payments for the months of March/April/May for retrospective approval12Clerk’s report to the meeting for information13List of Correspondence Items.With regards to the Agenda:
Appendix 3,Planning Application table doesn't state the'by e-mail' date that "The Parish Council recommended approval' for this application. When was this response democratically voted on and agreed by all councillors?There appears to be no information regarding any BPC responses to the six NSC consultationsending Mar-Apr? NB BPC may have been asked asStatutory Consultee to respond to other consultations.There are no agenda items relating to BPC's approach to the COVID19 Lockdown, or reference to any government or national advice they have been given.There is no reference toWeston General Hospital being closed, which put(s) the whole community at risk.There is an indirect reference to the Wallflower House application in Appendix 3--
TheInformation Commissioners Office states,"The Freedom of Information Act requires every public authority to have a publication scheme... and to publish information covered by the scheme ...The scheme must set out your commitment to make certain classes of information routinely available, such as policies and procedures, minutes of meetings, annual reports and financial information."
ICO Model Publication Scheme -BPC comparison table]]>
UPDATE 25 NOV 20: Application withdrawn by applicant NSC Decision Notice and High Court Consent Order.
UPDATE 05 OCT 20: New application forWallflower House 3 Dwellings
--
In April there appeared to be a conflict between the 'AGREED' Decision notice and its contents. BOB asked for an update and in response Bleadon Parish Council reluctantly published a table of 'Planning Applications 2020', from which the following was taken:
"APPROVED 14/05/20 Currently before the Court to correct the error"
BPCs actual planning application submission:
"Demolition of existing house workshop and outbuildings and erection of 4 new dwellings – Wallflower House 30 Coronation Road Bleadon Somerset BS24 0PG
In its present form the parish council objects to the proposed planning application.
Bleadon Parish Council acknowledges that this site requires development but in doing so the developer needs to be recognisant of the location of this site it being in the centre of the village. Due to it occupying the gradient of the hill which currently overlooks the church and surrounding cottages the development needs to be conversant and sympathetic to the local properties the majority of which are constructed of stone.
The present development does not take into account the general ambience of this part of the village and in the view of many residents the present layout is over development. Four three storey houses in this location is simply not appropriate. As previously stated the Parish Council supports development of this site as did the majority of the respondents to Neighbourhood Plan survey but it has to be in keeping to the local environment and beneficial to its surrounding environs."
Comments submitted to Mike Cole Case Officer on the 27th April 2020"
BOB subsequently asked for clarification on how planning application decisions, such as Wallflower House, were made during BPC's COVID19 Lockup period Mar-June, but this request has so far been ignored, unacknowledged and unanswered. For example,
The Planning Application table doesn't state the 'by e-mail' date that "The Parish Council recommended approval' for this application. When was this response democratically voted on and agreed by all councillors?
We note that councillors commented, "As previously stated, the Parish Council supports development of this site as did the majority of the respondents to Neighbourhood Plan survey but it has to be in keeping to the local environment and beneficial to its surrounding environs." How was this statement derived from the NDP survey results for the Wallflower specific site? When did BPC publicly state to support the comment "previously stated the Parish Council supports development of this site"?
What are the 5 development sites identified by BPC, and what are BPC's NDP proposals? "please add any comments you may have on your site allocations here ... 5 sites ... We have only anecdotal evidence of the potential availability of sites. The call for sites and initial discussion is part of this grant application and will lead to a formal process of site appraisal in the next stage of the project 2019-2020" -Taken from BPC's first and second Locality Grant applications. Is ths site one of the five?
It should be noted that in the councils Autumn 19 Newsletter-113 it states that BPC submitted the NDP survey results to the Sanders Fields Appeal Inspector quoting a 56% household response i.e. an overall majority of the parish, a similar percentage that councillors have repeated a number of times. The actual NDP Working Group minutes stated a 30% resident response, i.e. an overall minority of the parish? How is this discrepancy explained?
NDP Review:
BPC transparency issues appear to be continuing. It seems that BPC's NDP is effectively being built behind closed doors, with anonymous members stated to be influencing the group, primarily for the purpose of the 200 Houses Appeal. There appears to have been no NDP Working Group meeting since Sept 19. There have been no Bleadon NDP public meetings in the last 3 years, with concerns raised over BPC's initial Claverham NDP presentation and lack of democratic representation at the 2018 APM. The public meeting agreed to held by BPC in Nov 19 seemed to have been cancelled by the NDP WG via the Newsletter-114 with no comment, reference or noted discussion and/or agreement by full council around that time?
The recent March 20 minutes do not make the situation any clearer, noting that "The Chairman provided a verbal update" and "WebGlu Hosting – Neighbourhood Plan £60.00, £12.00". How is this showing open and transparent decision making and expenditure of this 'independent' publicly financed group?
The NDP project has been operating with an unclearBPC publicly funded budget, managed independently from BPC, with no itemised expenditure accounted or decision making by council, as stated by the previous Clerk/RFO at our Audit meeting last August. Councillors now appear to be using this document for council decision making, which is also currently being made behind closed doors without transparency.
----
Previous blog on Wallflower Houseblog
Bleadon Councils First Virtual Zoom Meeting
NDP update blog
ICO Model Publication Scheme - BPC comparison table
ICO website
]]>
UPDATE 12 JUN 20 Trace and Trace isolates 27K in its First Week of Operation:
---
Have you checked your settings?
It seems that 'test, track and trace' plans to 'control the virus' may have the potential to repeatedly take away our social contact and freedom of movement without warning or discussion.
As with every disease, COVID-19 and its secondary effects, can have devastating effects for all those involved, as we hear in the media every day. Different countries have reacted differently, some are in full lockdown some are not, some 'track and trace' and some do not. As this pandemic has not been openly discussed, mainly due to the parliamentary systems being in lockdown, how infectious and deadly is COVID-19?
As you read this blog please consider that a week before lockdown the UK government stated, "As of 19 March 2020,COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK". This statement was repeated in a Public Health England May 2020 Report, is this still the case? Also consider that we are now supposedly coming out of lockdown.
"Italy on Monday launched its COVID-19 contact tracing app based on the Apple-Google Exposure Notification API... [The] Immuni [app] ... was developed by the Italian Ministry of Health and Ministry for Innovation Technology and Digitalization ... Italy's Ministry of Health said that the app "does not (and cannot) collect any data that would identify the user," and does not use GPS or geolocation information ... [but obviously some data is collected that identifies users of the app so that 'officials' can identify you and tell you to stay at home]
... the app ... uses ... signals to track other people whom a person has come into contact with. If that person tests positive for COVID-19, those recent contacts will be alerted and told to self-isolate and get tested."
"Other countries in Europe, such as France and the U.K., have decided to forego the Apple-Google framework in favor of their own solutions. Those apps will likely face issues with Bluetooth integration, however."
So, how will this type of 'test, track and trace' approach potentially work in the UK? So many questions to consider, for example:
Will I receive a phone call from 'an official', saying that I've been in recent contact with an anonymous COVID19 infected person, and must immediately self-isolate, under house arrest again?If I'm on my way to the holiday of a lifetime, a wedding or honeymoon, my grandchild's birth, a long awaited operation or a loved one's funeral, what am I supposed to do? Go straight home and stay there for two weeks?What happens to all the people I've been in contact with? How about the people I live with in close contact, and hug, in an enclosed space called home? Does my partner also have to isolate from work? My children and their friends and family from school?Will there be any way to discuss this situation, one that could possibly irrevocably change the next few weeks of my life?Who will I get a test from? What type of test, swab or blood? How accurate is the test? How frequently will people need to be retested, especially if people in a work environment or household become infected at different times?What happens if I don't comply with the 'instruction' to self-isolate?The COVID19 law is contrary and complicated. Remember, until a few days ago it was a criminal offence, punishable by fines, to be in a gathering of more than two people. Now it is illegal to be in a gathering of more than 6 or 2 peopledepending on where you are what you are doing.Is 'test, track and trace' voluntary or mandatory? Will this status change over time without proper public debate?What if the technology doesn't work as expected? Would there be any financial or ultimately criminal consequences?How, where and by whom will any contact 'data' be held?Where are the democratic public and parliamentary discussions and debates on these issues?Have you looked at your phone settings recently? You may be surprised. You may already have the 'COVID-19 exposure notification' active on your phone, ready for a new COVID-19 app for you to voluntarily download.To check an Android device,
Go to settings Select 'Google'Select the 3 dotsSelect 'Usage and diagnostic'Slide to 'Off', if you don't want this to be active on your phoneYou may want to ask your MP,District Councillor or Parish Councillor the answers to above questions before deciding whether you want to voluntarily implement any future 'test, track and trace' app.
----------
SeeBOB's COVID19 Information]]>
Today, the government has updated its guidance for parents and carers for "Opening schools and educational settings" and "
"From the week commencing 1 June, [the government] are asking:
nurseries and other early year providers, including childminders, to begin welcoming back all childrenprimary schools and alternative provision to welcome back children in nursery (where they have them), reception, year 1 and year 6all schools and childcare providers to continue to offer places to the priority groups – vulnerable children and children of critical workers – they have been supporting since the end of March special schools, special post-16 institutions and hospital schools to work towards a phased return of more children and young people without a focus on specific year groups and informed by risk assessmentsFrom the 15 June, [the government] are asking:
secondary schools, sixth form, and further education colleges to begin offering some face-to-face support to year 10 and 12 pupils to supplement their remote education, which should remain their predominant mode of education during this termalternative provision to begin some face-to-face support with year 10 and 11 pupils (as they have no year 12)This approach aims to limit numbers within schools and further education settings while ensuring that the children and young people who can benefit from attending most are able to do so."
----
See also:]]>
"... We would like to develop an understanding about the impact that COVID 19 has had on voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations both now and as we move forward from the current crisis to recovery.."
(NB: Consulation dates previously 04 May - 21 May 2020)
"Understanding the impact of Covid-19 on voluntary, community and social enterprises in North Somerset:
North Somerset Council and Voluntary Action North Somerset (VANS) are working together to support our community’s response to the current pandemic. We would like to develop an understanding about the impact that COVID-19 has had on your organisation both now and as we move forward from the current crisis to recovery. We are aware that many organisations have rapidly changed their service delivery models to continue to meet the needs of their service users/participants/volunteers etc. It would be helpful to capture this great work but to also understand the possible challenges that the pandemic poses for your group/organisation now and for the future.
We would appreciate you taking a few minutes to share your views through our North Somerset Together survey.
Please respond to our survey by midnight on11 June 2020."
----------------------------
Previous NSCNew Local Plan Consultation
Link toBOB Consultation page]]>
UPDATE 08 JUN 20: BOB has finally got an update from BPC - This is "currently before the court to correct the error". For BPC's submission to NSC see here.
UPDATE 16 MAY 20: Permission GRANTED, yet:
"The proposal is considered to have an adverse impact on the setting of the Church of St. Peter and St. Paul ...... would constitute an overdevelopment of this site which would be out of character with surrounding area ...... would have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the nearest neighbours ...The limited depth of the proposed front gardens would not allow the proposed car parking and garage spaces ..."It is unknown whether BPC convened a meeting and/or voted on a response to this application
(NB :19 May 20: A comment on a facebook group stated, "... onthe Delegated report the comments supposedly from Bleadon Parish Council were in fact comments made by me. Bleadon Parish Cobuncil (sic) comments had been in fact been omitted (I spoke to the Bleadon Parish Clerk who confirmed this). I tried phoning Planning for clarification regarding this. Spoke to Helpdesk advisor who agreed it was confusing and gave me an email address to contact, I emailed only to receive a reply saying Planning Applications couldn't be dealt with via email. I rang the Clerk of Bleadon Counci who is contacting Richard Kent for clarification and will get back to me asap."
(Due toCOVID situation BPC is not publishing any minutes documenting their democratic decision making and/or expenditure but there appears to have been a comment made in their name in the Delegated Officer's Report (who REFUSEDthis application 15 May 20). Also NSC has made all comment submissions anonymous? How will the public know how many individual comments, as opposed to multiple submission by the same person/organisation were made?)
UPDATES: Design & Access, Historic England, Conservation & Heritage, Archeology
--
A new application at Wallflower House, 30 Coronation Road
"Demolition of existing house, workshop and outbuildings and erection of 4no. new dwellings"
Comments deadline is 30 April 2020.Here is the link to the application20/P/0285/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
NB: Due to COVID-19 restrictions Bleadon Parish Council may not be meeting publicly to discuss this application. It should also be noted that there were few objections to an application on the site opposite (18/P/4415/FUL) with BPC agreeing that, "The principle of development on the site was accepted, and the general design was in keeping with the surrounding properties" (Min 317.6).
For those who are unaware, under North Somerset Council's current Local Plan (Core Strategy), Bleadon is classed an Infill Village that permits development within a defined settlement boundary, which this site is most definitely included.
The centre of the village has been eroded over many years especially with the old shop and post office closing in mid 2000s, moving outside the village to Purn. The existing housing surrounding this site is of varying ages and styles, not all historic thatched roof stone cottages, with plenty of modern examples on show such as the very modernbuilding immediately adjacent/behind the site, theRectory & Church Rooms opposite, as well as nearby and the wider village such as Peartree Gardens, Tenterk Close, The Barton, etc.
Architectural design is of course very subjective, but IF the Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP), desired by BPC and started in 2017, had progressed beyond a simple survey, then any publicly/resident agreed design guide for NDP permitted housing development sites may have been able to control this aspect of the planning process. However, Bleadon's housing requirement has never been stated or publicly discussed. The NDP hasn't even been drafted or publicly discussed, let alone approved by NSC and residents at a referendum, or adopted for use in determination of applications.
Ultimately NSC will judge this application via their established planning policies that BPC and all residents/public are able to influence via comments and consultation. So as usual, if you do have strong opinions on this development make sure you comment via NSC and not just on local facebook groups or indeed this blog.
NB: Bleadon's Village/Settlement Boundary will be reviewed via the New Local Plan Consultation and it should be noted that Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) has already stated that a flex of the existing boundary may be acceptable, especially via its NDP sub-group, and as indicated in BPC's last review response, 10 Dec 2018 seen here.
North Somerset'sNew Local Plan Consultation states:
"To provide clarity for future neighbourhood plans, the Local Plan will identify the housing requirements on a parish basis in the strategic policies" and
"any neighbourhood development plans that are “made” in the next three years becoming out of date as soon as the new Local Plan is adopted."
Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG):
Regulations linked to the Coronavirus Act 2020mean that no elections or referendums can take place until 6 May 2021.
]]>
Information from Locality:
"There are some important changes to neighbourhood planning that we want to bring to your attention from the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG):
Regulations linked to the Coronavirus Act 2020mean that no elections or referendums can take place until 6 May 2021. This includes neighbourhood planning referendums. These provisions will be kept under review and may be amended or revoked in response to changing circumstances.
MHCLG understands this will be frustrating for communities that have dedicated significant time and effort to the neighbourhood planning process and naturally want their plans to come into force as soon as possible. With this in mind, they haveupdated current planning guidance to set out that neighbourhood plans awaiting referendums can be given significant weight in decision-making.
MHCLG recognises there will be delays in progressing neighbourhood plans due to the social distancing measures currently in place across the UK. The updated planning guidance also provides further advice on the implications for conducting publicity and consultation, and examinations."
MHCLG - FAQs on changes to neighbourhood planning in response to Coronavirus (Covid-19)
NB North Somerset'sNew Local Plan Consultation states:
"To provide clarity for future neighbourhood plans, the Local Plan will identify the housing requirements on a parish basis in the strategic policies" and
"any neighbourhood development plans that are “made” in the next three years becoming out of date as soon as the new Local Plan is adopted."
--
Full Extract:
"What changes have been introduced to neighbourhood planning in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic?
The government has been clear that all members of society are required to adhere to guidance to help combat the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19). The guidance has implications for neighbourhood planning including: the referendum process; decision-making; oral representations for examinations; and public consultation. This planning guidance supersedes any relevant aspects of current guidance on neighbourhood planning, including in paragraphs 007, 056, 057, 061 and 081 until further notice.
Referendums: All neighbourhood planning referendums that have been recently cancelled, or are scheduled to take place, between 16 March 2020 and 5 May 2021 are postponed in line with the Local Government and Police and Crime Commissioner (Coronavirus) (Postponement of Elections and Referendums) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020 until 6 May 2021.
Decision-making: Where the local planning authority has issued a decision statement (as set out under Regulation 25 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012) detailing its intention to send a neighbourhood plan to referendum, that plan can be given significant weight in decision-making, so far as the plan is material to the application.
Examinations: The general rule remains that examinations should be conducted by written representations. If an examiner considers that oral representations are necessary, these should not take place in person. Where feasible, oral representations may still take place using video conferencing or other suitable technologies.
Public consultation: Neighbourhood planning groups or local planning authorities intending to undertake public consultation and notification (as set out under Regulation 14 and Regulation 16 respectively of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012) should consider the government’s current guidance on staying at home and away from others or any superseding guidance."
Paragraph: 107 Reference ID: 41-107-20200407
Revision date: 07 04 2020]]>
UPDATE 18 MAY 20:
North Somerset hasstated that "..a new Local Plan will be prepared for North Somerset for the period 2023 – 2038" . "This presents a fresh start for the local plan and an opportunity to step back and reassess the strategic context and spatial strategy options for North Somerset."In preparation for this they released a pre-commencement consultation on 10 March 20. There were a few submissions relating specifically to Bleadon e.g. by the Church Commissioners for England re: The Veale, MendipAONB including effects oftransport & lighting and our general environment by BOB.If you'd like to continue to enjoy the diverse environment that our Parish offers, from Village life to countryside Public Rights of Way, perhaps you might want to consider engaging in NSC's newtwo-step Local Plan Consultationlater this year to protect it, before it is too late.(See all Respondents and submissionshereNB: There appears to be no submission by BPC, which is surprising seeingas it has been working on a Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) for nearly three years andproposed five unidentified anecdotal sitesin their 2018-19 (pg2) and 2019-20 (Q26) NDP grant applications, i.e. '...please give the number of sites you are proposing to allocate ... 5"?).UPDATE 16 MAY 20: Weston Mercury article -North Somerset Council to launch two-step consultation on district’s future
“There is ... a need to better understand the government’s exit strategy from the Covid-19 crisis and the longer-term economic impacts and implications for North Somerset."
"It is also unclear what impacts the Covid-19 crisis will have on the housing market and the implications this will have for North Somerset’s housing needs."
-------------
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationLocal Plan -Pre-commencement
10 Mar 2022 Apr 20"...a new Local Plan for North Somerset covering strategic and non-strategic policies whilst continuing to work with neighbouring planning authorities and other bodies under the duty to cooperate."
Thisphased consultation, aiming for implementation in January 2023,
will affect the future of Bleadon as a Settlement/Infill Village,
any Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Plan and
the level of development that is expected to be built in Bleadon.
North Somerset is consulting on the proposed scope and programme for the preparation of the new North Somerset Plan 2023-2038 via its Pre-commencement Document (Mar 20):
“The purpose of the Local Plan will be to deliver the number of homes needed for the district... [it] will “also review the policies and allocations in existing development plan documents (... including waste and minerals [fracking]).“The duty to co-operate discussions with strategic policy-making authorities ... and other prescribed bodies will identify and address the strategic issues with cross-boundary implications.“The non-strategic policies of the Local Plan will set out the more detailed policies for specific areas, neighbourhoods or types of development.“To provide clarity for future neighbourhood plans, the Local Plan will identify the housing requirements on a parish basis in the strategic policies ...It is proposed that at the start of the process there is consultation with interested parties on how the local plan and neighbourhood plans will progress in tandem.“The Local Plan will be prepared with community and stakeholder engagement in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (2019) [includingStatutory Consultees i.e. Bleadon Parish Council]. Formal consultation stages will take place over a minimum of 6 weeks. A Consultation Statement will be prepared and updated as the project progresses.”“The North Somerset Plan will fully supersede the Core Strategy (2017), Site Allocations Plan (2018) and the Development Management Policies (2016) [NSC Policies].Local Development Scheme 2020-23
“… is the starting point for residents and other stakeholders to find out what planning policies relate to their area and how these will be reviewed.“Neighbourhood plans must be in general conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan and must not promote less development than is set out in the strategic policies for the area. Whilst the new Local Plan is being prepared any new neighbourhood development plans will have to be in general conformity with the strategic policies in the Core Strategy as this is still the adopted development plan. However, this would result in any neighbourhood development plans that are “made” in the next three years becoming out of date as soon as the new Local Plan is adopted.”“The NPPF (2019) now requires local authorities to ‘maintain one or more statements of common ground, documenting the cross-boundary matters being addressed and progress in cooperating to address these’ [See Planning Practice Guidance]“Statements of Common Ground will be prepared between North Somerset Council and neighbouring authorities and relevant agencies. [NB: In July 2019 the Inspectors wrote to the four authorities stating that they did not consider the previous West of England Joint Spatial Plan to be sound. See JSP blog]Toolkit Part 1 Is NSC's Local Plan Review Assessment that states reasons for updating the policies:
“The housing requirement set out in Policy CS13 of the Core Strategy needs to be reviewed. Housing delivery and supply in recent years has fallen short of the requirement, and the reasons for this and actions to address them need to be considered. [NSC Affordable Housing Planning]“Review provides the opportunity to re-consider the aims, objectives, priorities and policies within the development plan to ensure alignment with the emerging Corporate Plan and address theclimate change challenge.[Corporate Plan 2015-19]“The scale of housing that needs to be planned for is so significant that a full review of the development plan is considered necessary – the required quantum of growth warrants a full update of the strategic policies, spatial strategy and settlement hierarchy, and ultimately additional allocations will need to be identified.[See CS14 re: Infill Villages & Settlement Boundaries]“Alongside this, a review of the non-strategic policies provides the opportunity to ensure alignment with national policy and guidance is maintained [NPPF (2019)], and take account of the climate emergency context.”Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (March 2020)
"The Sustainability Appraisal (SA) process is a process that aims to ensure that all significant plans and programmes which relate to land use issues are compatible with the aims of sustainable development. These include the documents that will form the local planning policy framework for North Somerset."‘Sustainable development’ has been defined as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. There are economic, social and environmental dimensions to this. Sustainable development is not development that balances or trades off these three aspects but development that enables the economy, society and the environment to be sustained together."TIMETABLE AND MILESTONES
DATEEVENTMarch 2020Pre-Commencement Document (Reg 18)May – June 2020Issues and Options Consultation (Reg 18)
January 2021Consultation on Draft Plan (Reg 18)September 2021Consultation on Pre-Submission Plan (Reg 19)December 2021Submission to Secretary of State (Reg 22)April 2022Examination Hearings Period (Reg 24)October 2022
Inspector’s Report (Reg 25)January 2023Adoption (Reg 26)The implementation of the objectives and policies will be monitored as part of the Authority Monitoring Report.
------------
Information about North Somerset Local Plan 2023-2038
NSC Press Release - 17 February 2020
Weston Mercury Article - 18 February 2020
Previous NSC Local Plan Consultation, includingSettlement Boundary Review - December 2018
Link toBOB Consultation page
]]>
SEEMAIN CORONAVIRUS PAGE
Beware of COVID19 scams
UPDATE 04 APR 20: Downing St COVID19 letter sent to all households with advice - "Coronavirus Stay at Home to Protect the NHS" page1, pages 2&4, pages 3&8, page 5 and pages6&7.
UPDATE 26 MAR 20: The following Legislation came into force at 1pm 26 Mar 20- The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020. "The Secretary of State must review the need for restrictions and requirements imposed by these Regulations at least once every 21 days, with the first review being carried out by 16th April 2020." UPDATE 14 APR 20: "Lockdown will stay in place until at least May 7" (16 APRTranscript &The Times)
UPDATE 23MAR 20:UK Prime Minister announcement:"... we will immediately: close all shops selling non-essential goods, including clothing and electronic stores and other premises including libraries, playgrounds and outdoor gyms, and places of worship; we will stop all gatherings of more than two people in public – excluding people you live with; and we’ll stop all social events, including weddings, baptisms and other ceremonies, but excluding funerals. Parks will remain open for exercise but gatherings will be dispersed." (Transcriptand BBC)
Can youvolunteer to help NHS? Also, here is awebsite to find local volunteer groupsbut, please take the time to read their disclaimer, there are now thousands of local groups across the country shown, however unfortunately be aware that many are only on facebook although see more advice below.
"Coronaviruses (CoV) are a large family of viruses that cause illness ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS-CoV). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a new strain that was discovered in 2019 and has not been previously identified in humans."
The following is some information on the Coronavirus (COVID19):
The World Health OrganisationCoronavirus informationThe Department of Health & Social Care and Public Health England areleading the UK government response to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak.Find out the number of cases and risk level in the UK, what to do if you have symptoms, and what the government is doing about the virus.Track coronavirus cases using a dashboard showing reported cases of coronavirus in the UK, including new cases, cases by upper tier local authority in England and number of deaths.BBCand ITV mapping also interesting global world maps,world statistics,ONS and from Real Clear Politics.For information about the virus andhow to protect yourself visit the NHS advice pageKeep up to date withNorth Somerset coronavirus outbreak news by following the Weston Mercury's live blog e.g. Reference to"UK schools closed indefinitely from Friday and exams cancelled" with UPDATE 03 APR 20& Ofqual.Beware of COVID19 scamsWikipedia pageAfter careful consideration you maydecide to volunteer to assist in your local communities, if so, please also review the approach taken byWSM Coronavirus Response Group on facebook(or see their website) with regards to your own and vulnerable people's health, safety, well-being, confidentiality and data protection issues, e.g."In order to safeguard both the vulnerable and volunteers unfortunately at this time we are only able to accept volunteers who are in possession of an in date DBS certificate and who are aged under 70 and have no underlying health condition that would mean you should be staying at home. Access to a vehicle is helpful If you are able to volunteer then please email your name, address, mobile number and a scan of your DBS towsmresponse@outlook.com All information will be held in compliance with GDPR practices.". Alternatively see alsoBleadon WI/Joint CV volunteer info hereand comments below.
Finally, some businesses are opening early for elderly customers only e.g. "...some ... stores will open an hour earlier to allow the elderly to shop when it is quieter and to get first dibs on essentials amid the coronavirus outbreak" and others offering to "... open to the elderly and vulnerable the first hour of trading ... but will open for an hour longer so other shoppers do not miss out."
NB:There may be some buying restrictions E.g. to "... stop shoppers buying more than three of any particular food item" and some online food delivery services may be suspended e.g. "This temporary closure will allow [companies] to complete essential work that will help to make sure distribution of products and delivery slots is as fair and accessible as possible for all ... customers"
NB: There has been some national confusion over gardeners and window cleaners.
]]>
Changes to Financial Assessment Processes for Adult Care
20 Feb 2019 Mar 20"Changes to Financial Assessment Processes for Adult Care Users... which will result in changes to client contributions for non-residential adult social care and support packages ..."
North Somerset Council is proposing:
"Changes to Financial Assessment Processes for Adult Care Users of adult social care and support services undergo a financial assessment in order to determine how much, if any, they should contribute to the costs of their care. We are proposing some changes to a number of procedural arrangements for financial assessments, which will result in changes to client contributions for non-residential adult social care and support packages, including both managed services such as home care and non-managed services such as Direct Payments.
The two key proposals which we are keen to hear your views on are:
a change in how we treat the enhanced rate daily living element of the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) in assessments; anda change in how we treat the Minimum Income Guarantee for adults who are part of a couple.You can read more about these proposals and our work to understand any potential impacts in our Equality Impact Assessment. We have also provided anonline questionnaire to collect your views of how these proposals may impact service users and their families."
Published report
.---
Link toBOB Consultation page]]>
North Somerset Car Parking Review
14 Feb 2031 Mar 20"...looking to understand the fairest way to manage parking in our communities and help encourage lower carbon choice..."
North Somerset Council is:
"... reviewing parking in North Somerset and are looking to understand the fairest way to manage parking in our communities and help encourage lower carbon choices ...
First, [NSC] asked town and parish councils to let [it] know the best way for [it] to gather this feedback. [How did BPC respond?]
...Some tariffs in car parks and on the roads in Weston will become cheaper, while fees will be introduced to other areas and charges will become more consistent across North Somerset [See report here]
... [NSC launched] an online questionnaire to help you think about the key issues and help [it] understand how people use the parking available now, and how and where they would like to see changes in future. Visit www.n-somerset.gov.uk/carparkingreview
...If you would like to raise concerns that you feel haven't been addressed in the questionnaires you can speak to a representative from your town or parish council or your North Somerset councillor. They will collate and share with [NSC] a combined set of comments for your area
... Once all the feedback has been collected transport teams will use it to develop detailed proposals for each area. There will then be a legal process we have to follow, which usually includes a statutory consultation. The earliest new charges are likely to be seen is the summer, but this will depend on the feedback we are given in the coming weeks.
See previous Your Neighbourhood Consultation.
Information onStatutory Consultees.
---
Full extract from NSC Consultation website 17 Feb 20:
"North Somerset Car Parking Review
We are reviewing parking in North Somerset and are looking to understand the fairest way to manage parking in our communities and help encourage lower carbon choices in line with our climate emergency declaration.
We have to:
Make sure the finite number of spaces we have allow people to park when neededEncourage turnover in our town centres to give retail businesses more potential customersConsider the safety of everyone who travels in areas where on-street car parking is allowedRaise enough money to cover operational costs, including maintenance and enforcementEncourage people to consider making sustainable travel choicesA cross-party working group of councillors from across the district have drawn up the proposals.
A detailed report outlining the proposals was presented to the councils Executive Committee in January 2020. You can read the report here.
Tell us what you think!
We invite you to respond to our questionnaires to help us develop our parking proposals. We are looking for feedback to help us decide on how new parking controls will operate in each area of North Somerset. After the consultation closes work will be undertaken to design final details. The detailed proposals will then be subject to a further statutory consultation before changes can be adopted.
If you would like to raise concerns that you feel haven't been addressed in the questionnaires you can speak to a representative from your town or parish council or your North Somerset councillor. They will collate and share with us a combined set of comments for your area. You can find the details for your town or parish council on our website atwww.n-somerset.gov.uk/parishcouncils or your North Somerset councillor atwww.n-somerset.gov.uk/findmycouncillor
Your answers to the questionnaires will be used alongside the feedback from town and parish councils to help our transport policy officers develop the details of the proposals. There will then be a legal process we have to follow, which usually includes a statutory consultation, before bringing a report back to the Executive for a final decision. The earliest new charges are likely to be seen is the summer, but this will depend on the feedback we are given."
--
Full extract from NSC Consultation website 16 Feb 20:
"About the car parking review
Changes to car parking charges are coming to North Somerset this year and we want your help to shape the plans. In January our Executive agreed to several changes to what and where people will have to pay to park.
But before the plans are finalised, we are collecting feedback from communities to help us design the best approach for each area. First, we asked town and parish councils to let us know the best way for us to gather this feedback. We planned to launch the consultation on Monday 10 February, but have put this back to Monday 17 February to make sure we are able to incorporate all the comments we have received.
The proposals were drawn up by a cross-political party working group in response to residents’ calls for a fairer approach to parking. Some tariffs in car parks and on the roads in Weston will become cheaper, while fees will be introduced to other areas and charges will become more consistent across North Somerset.
The changes aim to make sure parking is managed in the best and fairest way possible, to encourage turnover of visitors to town centres, to make sure any fees are reasonable, and to cover the costs of enforcement in paid for and free spots. In response to the climate change emergency declared by the council last year, the changes also aim to encourage people to choose different ways to travel. If you have substantial comments or concerns you should speak to a representative from your town or parish councillor, or your North Somerset councillor, so they can collect and share with us the best information for your area. You can find the details for your North Somerset councillor on our website at www.n-somerset.gov.uk/findmycouncillor
Next week we will launch an online questionnaire to help you think about the key issues and help us understand how people use the parking available now, and how and where they would like to see changes in future. Visitwww.n-somerset.gov.uk/carparkingreview on Monday to take part. It will be open until Monday 16 March.
Once all the feedback has been collected transport teams will use it to develop detailed proposals for each area. There will then be a legal process we have to follow, which usually includes a statutory consultation. The earliest new charges are likely to be seen is the summer, but this will depend on the feedback we are given in the coming weeks.
Car parks where new charges are proposed Clevedon – Great Western Road East Clevedon – Great Western Road West Clevedon – Marson Road Nailsea – Clevedon Road Nailsea – Station Road Portishead – Roath Road
Areas where new on-street charging is proposed Clevedon town centre Clevedon Hill Road area Clevedon seafront Leigh Woods area Nailsea town centre Portishead town centre"
----
Link toBOB Consultation page]]>
Your Neighbourhood
13 Feb 2007 May 20NSC are consulting on the
following services:
Garden wasteLeisure and sport centresLibrariesParks and open spacesStreet cleaning contract andNSC is "particularly interested in
yourideasaround how (it) can workbetter with you"
Note in the consultations,"not a statutory function of the council (meaning the council does not have to do it)"
Extract from NSC Consultation website:The services we are consulting on are:
Garden waste (Overview FAQ)
"Garden waste collection is not a statutory service ...
NSC "lmade the decision in January 2020 to introduce an annual £50 per bin charge"
Help us shape the new garden waste collection service and options for home and community composting.
Leisure and sport centres (Overview FAQ)
"The provision of leisure facilities is not a statutory requirement for the council ...
Some "local sports and leisure centres run by trusts"
Help us understand the way North Somerset’s leisure and sport centres are currently used and how you would like to see them used in the future."
Libraries (Overview FAQ)
Help us understand what is important to you about our library services and how we can ensure they are fit for the future.
Parks and open spaces (Overview FAQ)
"Providing and maintaining parks and open spaces is not a statutory function of the council ...
"We are considering the merits of the parks service being delivered by a Trust or similar organisation ..."
"Can I plant bulbs ... in the verges outside my house? Yes ... and please try and plant native plants. This is much better for wildlife" [Surely ONLY native species should be permitted on council owned land, otherwise people will be destroying the natural environment, not re-wilding it for native insects, etc.!]
As we review our parks and open spaces maintenance contract, help us understand which parks and open spaces you use and how you would like to see them used in the future."
As we review our street cleaning contract (Overview FAQ),
help us shape how it will look in the future.
We are particularly interested in your ideas around how we can work better with you, your local communities and stakeholders to make these valued services as efficient and sustainable as possible. For example by pooling resources, creating delivery partnerships and taking advantage of income generating opportunities.
As well as completing our survey, we are inviting you to take part in a local consultation event to share your thoughts in more detail on your neighbourhood services and your ideas on how we can make them more fit for the future."
"Have your say
We want North Somerset to be a sustainable and fair place to live, work and visit. We want to work with you to create a place where all our residents have the opportunity to access quality education, jobs and housing.
We want you to get involved and work with us to shape the future of North Somerset and harness the great opportunity we have to achieve more for our people and place.
As part of this, we are looking at how your neighbourhood services are run and how we can ensure that they are fit for the future. Over the next few months we will be seeking your views on how we deliver a number of these services and where we should focus our future priorities."
"
-----
Link toprevious NSC Consultations ending in Januaryi.e. Corporate Plan (incl. Settlement Boundary),Corporate Budget 2020/21,Rewilding in North Somerset andClimate Emergency Strategy consultations.
Information onStatutory Consultees.
Link toBOB Consultation page]]>
BOB has just become aware of a number of NSC consultations about to end this month.
ConsultationOpensClosesInformationDRAFT Corporate Plan
2019-2023
17 Dec 1917 Jan 20Corporate Plan
&
Overview
DRAFT 2020/21 Budget17 Dec 1917 Jan 20Budget
&
Overview
Rewilding in North Somerset11 Nov 1924 Jan 20Native Woodland
Tall Grass Management
Overview
Climate Emergency Strategy13 Dec 1931 Jan 20Action Plan
Strategy
Overview
Corporate Plan
"Every four years the council develops a Corporate Plan. This is the council’s overarching strategic document. Itsets out our vision and prioritiesfor the area and for the organisation.
As part ofour commitment to engagement and transparency, we would like your viewson this draft plan" UPDATE 18 Jan 20 - Corporate Plan Questionnaire.NSC Consultation Summary ResultsCorporate Budget 2020/21
"Every February the council approves a budget for the next year setting out how much money we have available to spend on the services we provide. We're consulting on our draft budget for 2020/21 and we would like to hear your views."
UPDATE 18 Jan 20 - NSC Budget Questionnaire.
How is it that NSC consult with the public on its Budget but Bleadon Parish Council held their budget and precept setting behind closed doors, in a working group with unknown members, and did not offer it for public consultation or even viewing before it was agreed at full council 13 January 2020 (Min 330.8)?
Consultation Summary Results
Rewilding in North Somerset
"Rewilding seeks to change the way open spaces are managed to allow nature to reinstate a more natural environment to benefit both biodiversity and local communities. We are committed to rewilding our parks, open spaces and verges across the district. In order to achieve this, we are planning to change some of our maintenance programmes. This will primarily include planting more trees and allowing some areas of grass to grow taller.
More information on the benefits of rewilding can be found on [NSC] website. We have identified locations to rewild and we have created an interactive map to show where these are. The map shows our amenity grass areas, which are the areas which we are proposing rewilding. These locations are where we are proposing to plant trees or let the grass grow taller. The map also shows the Ward boundaries so you can identify where your neighbourhood is located.
We want to know your opinion about our proposals and would also like to know of any further locations you think may be suitable for rewilding. As part of this project we would like to get local communities involved, therefore we are looking for volunteers who would like to help out with rewilding projects including tasks such as tree planting and monitoring areas."
Consultation Summary Results
Climate Emergency Strategy
"We have declared a Climate Emergency
In early 2019 North Somerset Council declared a Climate Emergency. Since then a draft Climate Emergency Strategy and a live Action Plan have been prepared. These documents have been endorsed by full council and now form the basis for the council's response to the climate emergency.
As well as seven key principles that outline how we will address the causes and consequences of climate change, the strategy includes an aim for North Somerset to become a carbon neutral council and a carbon neutral area by 2030.
We're interested in your views on how North Somerset has responded to the climate emergency and your views on the draft strategy. There's also an opportunity to sign up for future workshops to help develop the action plan which can also be viewed ..."
Consultation Summary Results
--
Information onStatutory Consultees.
Previous consultation blog:How Fracking Surveys and Consultations Affect Bleadon
Link toBOB Consultation page]]>
There have been three more resignations in the last two months, making 5 councillors and 2 Clerks since June 19.
Around 10 January 20 Bleadon Parish Council (BPC)posted on its website that due to the recent resignations of Cllr Hemmingway, Cllr Richardson and Cllr Sharman, there are now vacancies in BPC.
"If by 30 January, 2020 ... a request for an election to fill said vacancy is made in writing to the Returning Officer at Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ by TEN electors for the said Parish ..., an election will be held to fill the said vacancy,
otherwise the vacancy will be filled by co-option. If an election is called, it will take place not later than 2 April, 2020."
In May 2018 there were six councillor vacancies, filled with the co-option of five lead members of BAT (Bleadon Acting Together), four of whom have now resigned. Just over 18 months later BAT is asking residents to do the same again.
If residents do choose to stand as councillors they should be mindful that they will be representing the whole 'parish' not just one part of the 'village', or only their own views. Also, that residents do not have to be councillors to influence the outcome of planning applications, as explained via How it Should Work ... blog.
Regardless of how the next councillors are elected, ideally Bleadon Parish Council should consider allocating responsibility for different areas of the parish to each councillor, a similar approach to Weston Town Council. This may hopefully stop the overwhelming 'village' vs 'parish' view and decision making, created through the co-option/'friends' process, and may make local democracy more inclusive for all residents.
--
NSC has not yet published theElectoral Notices
PreviousNovember Resignations.
The last contested Parish Election was held May 2013.
]]>
Purn Way Housing Development
THIS IS NOT A NEW APPLICATION -see application & BOB comment
There appears to be much mis-communication and subsequent frustration on social media with regards this application. So to try and clarify a few things:
Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) DO NOT HAVE the power to decide(approve/reject) planning applications, but they are consulted by NSCNorth Somerset Council decide planning applications according to their adopted policies E.g.NSC Local Plan/Core Strategy & any approved NDPRESIDENTS HAVE THE POWER TO INFLUENCE NSC DECISIONS by submitting positive/negative/neutral comments on the application independentlyResidents do not have to be councillors to influence applications as NSC has the power to override/support BPC decisions based on policy.
Residents can be elected or co-opted to be BPC 'parish' councillors BUT they must follow:documented and adopted laws, policies, procedures, protocols, legal obligations, etc."Be accountable to the public for decisions and actions" [including financial expenditure]"Submit to scrutiny appropriate to the office""Be as open as possible about all decisions and actions.""Give reasons for decisions; restrict information only when the wider public interest demands."Declare "Disclosable Pecuniary Interests" and "Other Interests"Note:
Allfour current councillors live towards the Purn Way end of the 'village', none from the wider 'parish'.Four of the last fiveresigning councillors also lived towards Purn Way.To be able to make decisions, i.e. be 'quorate', BPC only need 3 councillors that have not made an associated declaration of interest.As far as BOB is aware, as a council BPC has been 'quorate' in the last few years and has been able to make decisions, except briefly for the one 200 Houses application.Over the last few years BPC has not been attending to these basic obligations or responsibilities, which BOB believes has resulted in an increase in public frustration and complaint. Let's hope that any newly elected or co-opted resident is fully aware of the commitment required to be a councillor and will represent the 'parish' and not just the 'village'.
-------
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
General Planning Process Overview
(The Applicant submits a planning application)NSC make planning application and consultation decisions NOT BPC (e.g. some current and decided applications)NSC set various application time deadlines, thenNSC asks various Statutory Consultees, including BPC, for their comments on the application, e.g. support, object, neutralNSC asks the public for their comments on the application e.g. through the NSC website, via BPC agenda, minutes, public meetings, etc.NSC makes the decision whether to Approve or Reject the application, based on documented and adopted laws, policies, etc. NOT BPC.The Applicant can appeal against a NSC decision NOT a resident(?unless on a point of process)
The Planning Inspectorate will decide the type of appealNSC will choose how to defend an Appeal NOT BPC e.g.Mendip MotorResidents can speak at an Appeal at the Inspector's discretion e.g.200 Houses and/or become aRule 6 Party e.g.Bleadon HillThe individual Inspector (not a panel) then decides the outcome of the AppealGeneral 'Parish' Councillor Roles, Responsibilities, obligations, etc.
Residents can be elected or co-opted (asked) to be a 'Parish' councillorCouncillors must then act on behalf of residents of the 'Parish' not just the 'Village'They must follow documented and adopted laws, policies, procedures, protocols, etc.E.g. BPC adopted National Code of Conduct, which is "based on the seven principles of public life"to be open and accountable for decisions and actions and financial expenditure,submit to public scrutiny, [including anyresident complaint submitted/upheld by NSC]declare pecuniary and other interests e.g. Appendix A & BBPC's adopted Code of Conduct states: "Give reasons for decisions; restrict information only when the wider public interest demands."
To achieve better openness and transparency:"TheFreedom of Information Act requires every public authority to have a publication scheme, approved by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), and to publish information covered by the scheme.The scheme … [sets out BPC's] commitment to make certain classes of information routinely available, such as policies and procedures, minutes of meetings, annual reports and financial information.""The legal commitment is to the model publication scheme, and public authorities should look to provide as much information as possible on a routine basis.Neighbourhood Plan
The fundamental creation and adoption of aNeighbourhood Development Plan (unlike Bleadon's adopted Parish Plan) prescribes that Bleadon identify sites where housing will be permitted. As well as the ongoing maintenance obligation and cost to Bleadon, BOB has always argued that identification of sites by BPC would inevitably create conflict amongst residents... Purn Way would appear to be one of them, but other sites adjacent to boundary have also already been considered for the JSP and NSC Local Plan purposes, as well as BPC's NDP as indicated in its recent grant application submission.BPC NDP Feb 19 Minutes - "The response to the survey had been magnificent – 281 questionnaires completed in total (130 online)." and "There are just under 500 houses in the village and just over 950 adults on the electoral roll ... nearly 30%.". (NB: The 200 House Appeal submission and BVN113 states " The responses equate to 56% of households in the parish")?Reference should also be made to the BPC's responses to the JSP(Joint Spatial Plan) and NSCLocal Plan 2036 consultations. E.g. Currently there is housing all along Bleadon's Settlement Boundary, except for the Quarry area.On 10 Dec 18 BPC indicated that a flex of settlement boundary may be acceptable at some point? "The current [NSC] policy should be amended to ensure that the size of any housing development adjacent to the boundary is limited in number to no more than 10% of the existing homes in the parish (currently circa 500 homes)" (Min 317.12)? What sites adjacent to the boundary did BPC have in mind? However, most of the councillors who submitted this consultation comment have since resigned!]]>
The following request is fromLittle Dandelion Australia via Amy in Brent Knoll:
"Knitters of the World - Australia needs your help. Over 1 million hectares of land have been burning in 300 fires across NSW and Queensland … There has been a call out for knitted, crocheted Joey pouches and sewn pouch liners for our beloved kangaroos, and other natives such as possums and wombats, to help in the treatment of burns."
The items most needed, and associated patterns and sizes required, can be found on various sites includingAnimal Rescue Collective Craftand Little Dandelion Australia.
If you would like to contribute 8-ply natural wool or knitted/crotched items then Corinne is kindly offering to collect the items from you and take them to the lady in Brent Knoll, who's sisterwill take them to Australia on 5th February.
Please note you can send items to Australia yourself but if you would like to use the local method of someone taking your items to Australia personally then you will need to:
contact Corinne on 07979 532 960 before 3rd February deadline.
[UPDATE 09 JAN 2020]
For more information and local updates also seeCorinnes Facebook Page
E.g. "The first flyer flew out today [9 Jan] with first batch of items made" and "There are collection points around the country and these are growing all the time ... British airways are discussing about moving crates carrying 500kg of items. Tom Ball of the Times has done a report on this all and it should be out tomorrow [9 Jan]. You can look onfb.uk crafters Australian Animal Rescue Effort and find out lots of information from here inc patterns, collection points ,carriers etc."]]>
The 09 December 2019 Bleadon Parish Council Agenda (Min 329.8) stated another two resignations,Cllr Hemingway on 21 Nov 19, and the Clerk, Naomi, on 15 Nov 19.
The December minutes have not yet been published so reasons for their resignation may not be known until the next BPC Agenda is published, around 08 Jan 20.
The end of this year therefore sees the return of Bruce as interim Clerk, from 15 Nov 19. Since his leaving in 2015 BPC has seen the departure of 13 councillors and 7 clerks, including 2 locums, as seen below.
The interim Chair, Cllr Williams, has stated on her appointment that she will be Chair up until next Apr/May 2020, so it will be interesting to see what the New Year brings.
--
Previousresignation blog
13 Resigning Councillors since May 2015:
Gibson, C.Findlay, Clarke, Edwards, Gibbon, Gutsell, Strong, Chinn, Dobson, Blezard, Selway, Baines & Hemingway
7 Clerks (2 locums) since May 2015:
Hazel, Sam, Tony, Maria, Kevin, Marian & Naomi]]>
Thisappeal has been dismissed. TheInspector concluded in his report"There are therefore no material considerations that would lead me to a decision other than in accordance with the[North Somerset]development plan."
See previous blog forprevious application and appeal information]]>
UPDATE: 13 FEB 20 Application GRANTED. Decision Notice,Delegated Report and BPC submission (03 Feb 20).
--
A new full application at the "Field To The South Of The Hillcote Estate Bleadon Hill:
"Change from agricultural to mixed use and erection of a stable" - Site Plan & Planning Statement
Comments deadline is now Thursday 30 January 2020, wasChristmas Eve, Tuesday 24 December 2019.Here is the link to the application 19/P/2777/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
---
NB: Bleadon Parish Council's has not yet commented as Statutory Consultee, nor is there any reference to this application in any published agenda or minutes either. Also see BPC's previous Corporate Policy Planning Policy Statement (Para 9)not currently published on their website.
UPDATE 13 JAN 2020: (Min 330.7) "Resolved to recommend approval with Councillor Scarisbick voting against. 19/P/2777/FUL Field to the South of the Hilcote Estate Change from agricultural use to mixed use and erecion of a stable Bleadon Hill"
This application is adjacent to the current 40 Houses outline development, see 19/P/2243/OUT
There was also a previous application related to this site in2014 for 79 houses which was subsequently turned down on Appeal.]]>
UPDATE See the current number offlights over your area, e.g. 17 Apr 20 duringCOVID-19 restrictions.
UPDATE 19 MAR 20 Decision Notice Refused
UPDATE 11 & 26 MAR 20 Committee Report and Update
UPDATE 10 FEB 20: Application REFUSED, withBBC News article stating North Somerset ``Councillors voted 18-7, with one abstention, to reject it.``
UPDATE: 07 FEB 20Parish Councils Airport Association (PCAA) rebuttal, stating that, "The PCAA considers that Officers have given undue weight to perceived benefits and policy statements that support the case for approval and far too little weight to welldocumented objections and the obvious material consideration of climate emergency.``
UPDATE: 30 JAN 20NSC Officers Report - ``It is recommended that subject to referral to the Secretary of State and the completion of a S106 legal agreement, this application be APPROVED subject to planning conditions``
--
In November 108 doctors from Culverhay Surgery, Wotton-under-Edge submitted an objection to the Bristol Airport Expansion application stating:
"Medact Bristol is a network of healthcare professionals living and working in the Bristol area. We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed expansion of Bristol Airport. We are deeply concerned that any expansion of the airport would constitute a significant threat to human health. We call on you to commit to preventing the expansion of Bristol Airport. We detail specific health concerns below.
Air QualityNoise pollutionClimate Change...In conclusion, we assert that pursuing airport expansion endangers the health and wellbeing of people in Bristol and North Somerset. We present evidence to show the threats to health caused by 3 mechanisms relating to the proposed expansion; worsening air quality, noise pollution and contributions to climate breakdown.
We also point out the significant economic costs of these health impacts. We therefore believe there is a moral obligation and duty of care to residents to act now and oppose airport expansion."
If you have something to say about this application you can can submit your comments online to North Somerset via planning application18/P/5118/OUT
NB: In October Bristol Airport Ltd submitted additional information for its latest expansion application. In November North Somerset Council sent a letter to parish councils asking for their comments, with a deadline of 01 December 2019. As published last week, on 11 Nov 19 (Min 328.12) BPC resolved not to make an additional comment but to rely on their previous May 19 submission)
Seeprevious Airport Expansion BOB blog
AlsoBOB's Environmental page
-------
BACKGROUND
Submission to North Somerset Council by "Culverhay Surgery Wotton Under Edge GL12 7LS (Objects)
Comment submitted date: Tue 12 Nov 2019
Dear Councillors,
Re: Bristol Airport, North Side Road, Felton, Wrington BS48 3DP
Planning application: 18/P/5118/OUT
Medact Bristol is a network of healthcare professionals living and working in the Bristol area. We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed expansion of Bristol Airport.We are deeply concerned that any expansion of the airport would constitute a significant threat to human health. We call on you to commit to preventing the expansion of Bristol Airport. We detail specific health concerns below.
1. Air Quality
[See Government Clean Air Strategy & Executive Summary also Clean Growth Strategy & Executive]
Increasing capacity at Bristol Airport will involve increased emissions from aeroplanes and increased emissions from vehicular transport to and from the airport. Together, these will worsen air quality in the Bristol area. We can expect that surface emissions will be increased by 9,500 additional vehicle movements per day. That is 13,000 - 28,000 private vehicle journeys per day to and from the airport.
Premature deaths, of which an estimated 16000 a year globally are attributable to aviation emissions, are mostly due to the PM and ozone released during take-off and landing (Yim et al 2013). For those populations who live within 20km of an airport an estimated 5000 people will suffer a premature death due to aviation emissions.
A recent study by Kings College London examining the Public Health Implications of air pollution from particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen dioxide found evidence of decreased life expectancy of children born and growing up in high levels of exposure (Dajnak et al 2019). In adults, exposure to these pollutants is linked to increased risk of heart and lung disease including lung cancer (Pope III 2002), obesity, stroke, asthma and diabetes (RCP & RCPCH 2019). Mental health is also at risk, with a recent meta-analysis concluding that an increase in ambient PM is strongly associated with increased depression risk in the general population (Gu et al 2019), as well as studies showing a link between poor air quality and dementia (Carey 2018).
It has been shown that exposure to air pollution in pregnancy can cause low birth weight, in particular fetal head size (Turner et al 2017). Low birth weight is associated with morbidity later in life such as coronary artery disease, type two diabetes and asthma. These health effects exert an economic toll for individuals, businesses and health services. In the UK, the costs due to poor air quality are estimated at more than £20 billion every year (RCP & RCPCH 2019).
2. Noise pollution
[See Government Airspace Change Consultation]
Under the planned expansion there would be a flight every three minutes, up to 4000 night flights and thousands of additional residents being 'flown over'.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) recognise noise as an 'underestimated threat' that has significant Public Health effects. They advise decibel (dB) levels of less than 30db(A) in a bedroom for good quality sleep, and less than 35 db(A) in a classroom for effective learning. The average dB level of an aircraft taking off is in the order of 100dB.
Noise pollution is linked to sleep disturbance and heart disease. Furthermore it has been shown to have a greater effect on the very young; the WHO states there is "consistent evidence that noise exposure harms cognitive performance; consistent association with impaired well-being and motivation to a slightly more limited extent [and] moderate evidence of effects on blood pressure and catecholamine hormone secretion."
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) list stress, annoyance, sleep disruption, and poor performance at school and work as the recognised effects of noise pollution from airports.
It is therefore clear that the additional noise pollution generated by increased capacity at Bristol Airport would cause morbidity and premature death for the residents of North Somerset and Bristol.
3. Climate Change
[See NSC Climate Emergency Update]
The negative environmental impacts of the proposed expansion of Bristol Airport are far greater, both in terms of CO2 and non-COs gases, than is stated in the planning application (Gibbs 2019) and would therefore contribute significantly to the climate emergency. The advisory Committee on Climate Change (CCC) recently stated the UK's planned increase in aviation needs to be curbed. This expansion directly contravenes this advice.
Climate change is the 'biggest global health threat of the 21st century' (Lancet, 2009). The WHO predicts that between 2030 and 2050 there will be an additional 250,000 deaths from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhoea and dehydration due to climate chaos. Climate change is also linked to more chaotic extremes of not only heat but also rain and therefore flooding. This will lead to more problems with contaminated water sources, diarrhoeal disease and vector-borne diseases such as malaria, as well as contributing to a situation where food is less abundant and more expensive.
The UN has also stated that climate change is putting 'the food security of billions of people at risk'. Furthermore, weather chaos will lead to damage and access difficulties to healthcare bases such as hospitals and GP surgeries, strangling the ability of healthcare workers to deliver efficient care and preventing good access for patients.
These wide ranging issues will have direct and tangible negative effects on local residents. Climate change threatens the health and wellbeing of people in our community on our planet and threatens the very existence of the next generation.
In conclusion, we assert that pursuing airport expansion endangers the health and wellbeing of people in Bristol and North Somerset. We present evidence to show the threats to health caused by 3 mechanisms relating to the proposed expansion; worsening air quality, noise pollution and contributions to climate breakdown. We also point out the significant economic costs of these health impacts. We therefore believe there is a moral obligation and duty of care to residents to act now and oppose airport expansion.
Many thanks for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
1. Dr Grace Thompson 2. Dr. Fiona Headley 3. Dr. Alice Gardner 4. Dr. Rose Soame 5. Dr. Martin Hartog 6. Dr. Kate Highton 7. Dr. Chris Lamb 8. Dr. Catherine Stace 9. Dr. Hattie Nicholas 10. Dr. Jasmine Schulkind 11. Dr. Kathryn McGregor 12. Miss Jessica Hawkins 13. Dr. Katherine Savage 14. Dr. Martin Hartog 15. Dr. Elaine Lunts 16. Ms. Kate Paul 17. Dr. Thomas Watkivs 18. Dr. Catriona Mellor 19. Dr. James Watson 20. Ms. Lizzie O'Brien 21. Dr. Hannh Trewin 22. Dr. Lucy Pocock 23. Dr. Charles Holme 24. Mr. Jonathan Boyne 25. Dr. Diarmuid White 26. Dr. Seamus Harrington 27. Dr. Pippa Munro 28. Dr. Thomas Brookes 29. Dr. Sandra Fenn 30. Dr. Rajeka Lazarus 31. Dr. Olivia Burke 32. Dr. Harriet Burn 33. Dr. Jenny Harper Gow 34. Dr. Harriet Aughey 35. Dr. Nicholas Watts 36. Dr. Alexandra Tate 37. Dr. Helen Leveret 38. Dr. Zoe Richmond 39. Dr. Sophie Foster 40. Dr. Miranda Cole 41. Dr. Anna Ludvigsen 42. Dr. Sarah Briggs 43. Dr. Samuel Taylor-Smith 44. Dr. Joanne Girdler 45. Dr. Angela Wilson 46. Ms. Sue Kilroe 47. Ms. Peggy Woodward 48. Ms. Sarah Creagh-Osborne 49. Dr. Lesley Black 50. Dr. Diana Warner 51. Dr. Becca Hall 52. Dr. Jack Nicholson 53. Ms. Tracy Lyons 54. Mrs. Joanna Moulton 55. Dr. Faye Harvey 56. Dr. Victoria Bowler 57. Dr. James Pickard 58. Mrs. Lizzie Gibbs 59. Mrs. Zoe Coppin 60. Dr. Anya Gopfert 61. Dr. Rosa Roberts 62. Dr. Rosie Spooner 63. Dr. Joanna Waldock 64. Ms. Abbie Festa 65. Dr. Patrick Hart 66. Professor Trevor Thompson 67. Dr. Elizabeth Ormerod 68. Ms. Eimer Kilroe 69. Ms. Lucy Shapcott 70. Dr. Connie Smith 71. Dr. Katherine Dixon 72. Dr. Charles Dixon 73. Dr. Lucy Potter 74. Dr. Amy Ashford 75. Dr. Wiliam Stableforth 76. Dr. Helen Bowers 77. Dr. Lisa Revell 78. Dr. Annabel Headdon 79. Dr. Hyunkee Kim 80. Dr. Rebecca Vanmarle 81. Dr. Becca Hall 82. Dr. Sarah Goodall 83. Dr. Meg Dillon 84. Dr. Prianka Padmanathan 85. Dr. Trevor Aughey 86. Dr. Claire Ferraro 87. Dr. Jess Elliot 88. Dr. Luke McGeoch 89. Dr Aliesje Kuur 90. Dr Jessica Watson 91. Dr Stephane Paulus 92. DrGemma Matthewman 93. Dr Ceri Lumb 94. Dr Mike Prosser 95. Dr Sam Kuok 96. Dr Mungo Morris 97. Dr Joanna Smallman 98. Dr Charlotte Jones 99. Dr Paul Maries 100 .Dr Sophia Reynolds 101 .Dr Lavan Sivagnanam 102 Dr Rebekah Gabriel 103 Dr Kirsty Brownlie 104 Dr Louise Younie 105 Dr Will Duffin 106 Dr Victoria Medland 107 Dr Sam Kuok 108 Dr Felicity Fay]]>
See a Political Map of the UK election results hereas published by the iweekend.
The BBC implies that North Somerset is in Bristol's political makeup, no wonder we are getting their housing development!
Prime Minister Boris Johnson speaks of the People's Government after UK's 12 December 2019 election. Let's hope thatclimate change will be properly considered, including the effect of theBristol Airport expansion and that thefracking licences in Bleadon and surrounding communities will now be revoked.
]]>
TheBBC reports "Somerset earthquake: Homes shaken by 3.2 magnitude tremor
An earthquake has struck in the west of England, causing homes to shake in several villages, the British Geological Survey has said.
The 3.2 magnitude quake's epicentre was recorded near the town of Bridgwater in Somerset, the BGS confirmed.
Residents reported the "whole house rattled", with another another saying there was a "big rumble and [the] house [was] given a definite shove". The quake hit at 22:49 GMT at a depth of three miles (5km), the BGS said ...
Residents in several towns and villages across Somerset including Taunton, Weston-super-Mare, Bridgwater and Cheddar said they had felt the earthquake ...
The earthquake is the latest to be felt in the UK following a series of tremors in Surrey and Lancashire."
---
For more information seeBOB'sEnvironmental pageand BOB'sFrackingpage
See previousNSC Climate Emergency and Fracking Update Blog.
See previous reports of aSomerset earthquake on 17 February 2019, oneconfirmed in the Bristol Channelon 20 February 2014 and one inHighbridge on 30 December 2012
]]>
The Weston Mercury has reported that North Somerset Council plans for "Better public transport and frack-free zone on cards to reduce carbon emissions"
In November North Somerset Council updated its Climate Emergency Strategy and Strategic Plan and councilors resolved(COU 102):
(1) that the Climate Emergency Strategy and Action Plan be agreed as the basis by which the council will respond to the Climate Emergency motion from February 2019;
(2) that Council agrees that the Strategy and Action Plan are live, and that projects and initiatives identified in the Action Plan will be developed in line with governance procedures and formal decision making as per contract standing orders and the constitution; and
(3) that the Chief Executive be asked to write to Government asking for support in respect of the items in paragraph 3.21 of the report.
Para 3.21 of the Climate Emergency Strategy & Action Plan Report states:"Nonetheless, it is appropriate for the council to communicate directly with government to demonstrate its commitment to tackling the Climate Emergency and set out expectations of government to provide support. This will include:
• Government limiting our ability to demand the highest standards of energy efficiency and use of renewable energy from new buildings
• Changes to planning guidance to encourage the use of onshore windfarms and to discourage the exploration and development of fossil fuels (including fracking)
• Identifying the significant capital and systems funding to undertake a substantial retrofitting of existing buildings to decarbonise
•A substantial investment in public transport, active travel and Mobility As A Service to provide a genuine alternative to travelling by car
• Far greater coherence and coordination across strategy, policy and financial incentives to achieve carbon neutrality across homes, workplaces and transport"
Including, to "Pass a motion declaring North Somerset a Frack Free Zone to discourage the exploration and production of shale gas"(See Strategy and Action Plan in report above)
---
For"An aspirational journey to discover what the future could look like if we simply embraced the best that exists today"see the movie 2040.
See previousGovernment Fracking Licence Moratoriumblog
See also concerns over Government openness and transparency - "Government releases heavily redacted ‘secret report’ on fracking A total of 37 out of the 48 pages in the report are fully censored and others contain significant redactions" article by Energy Live NewsandGreenpeace website articledated 02 Dec 19.
For more information seeBOB'sEnvironmental pageand BOB'sFrackingpage]]>
UPDATE See the current number offlights over your area, e.g. 17 Apr 20 duringCOVID-19 restrictions.
---
Bristol Airport Ltd has submitted additional information for its latest expansion application. North Somerset Council has sent a letter to parish councilsasking for their comments, with a deadline of 01 December 2019. Members of the public can also submit comments at 18/P/5118/OUT(UPDATE 11 Nov 19 (Min 328.12) BPC resolved not to make an additional comment but to rely on their previous May 19 submission)
The Parish Council Airport Association(PCAA), that represents 20+ local parish councils,has also been asking residents to send comments to North Somerset to protect against increased day and night-time noise, traffic, pollution and health issues. NB the current expansion application indicates "operating within a rolling annualised cap of 4,000 night flights between the hours of 23:30 and 06:00 with no seasonal restrictions" with "flights every 3 minutes", potentially over Bleadon.
(Approx 4 minute video)
Last week Bleadon Parish Council tabled an agenda item to "To approve a comment" for "Bristol Airport - Developments to increase the operational capacity of the airport". BOB is uncertain as to what was discussed and/or agreed as the minutes will probably not be published until after the comment deadline (Nov 19 Min 328.12), or whether BPC has commented beyond theirlast submission.
According to this week's Weston Mercury:
Bristol Airport (majority owned by Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, Canada)"... submitted proposals last December to boost passenger numbers to 12 million a year by the mid-2020s" [up from 8 million passengers in 2017! (page 30)]... When they declared a 'climate emergency', Bath and North East Somerset Council members ... voted to oppose the airport's expansion ... They also said there was a lack of evidence about the economic benefit ... the Parish Council Airport Association ... [also oppose, and fear] decision-makers at North Somerset Council were at risk of being 'hoodwinked' over the economic benefits".Campaign for Rural England(CPRE) Avonside and Avon Wildlife Trust (AWT) also object.
In a related Weston Mercury article:
"Weston Town Council agreed to object to the airport's proposal ... Councillors ... are against plans to expand Bristol Airport due to environmental concerns, traffic and parking issues and pollution ... Councillor Peter McAleer said supporters claim we will be 'shooting ourselves in the foot' if we oppose the expansion, but he added 'it's better than shooting ourselves in the head'"
"The application will be considered by North Somerset Council's planning and regulatory committee meeting in the new year.An exact date has not been set but scheduled are meetings on January 22, February 19 and March 18."
Any NSC decision will need to fit with its Climate Emergency Strategyand StrategicAction Plan, which currently appear to missing any direct air travel or M5 motorway references?(See July 2019Update,COU57andFeb 2019COU101minutes.)
---
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Previous Airport Application information here
Tankering- Bristol Airport (majority owned by Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, Canada), Submission to North Somerset District Council by the PCAA.
The Parish Council Airport Association Aims & Objectives.
Also, BOB'sEnvironmental Information page
In May 19 Bleadon Parish Council changed its decision on the Bristol Airport Expansion fromno response, toNEUTRALtoOBJECT (May 19Min 322.17)
"18/P/5118/OUT. Bristol Airport. Revised expansion plans to support an increase to 12 million passengers per year by the mid-2020s (currently 8 million). The council accepted the view that the Airport provides employment for many people in the area and provides local access to air transport. However, this is outweighed by concerns of climate change and pollution both local to Bleadon and globally. AGREED TO OBJECT."]]>
UPDATE 12 FEB 20: NSC REFUSE application, Decision Notice, Delegated Report and no BPC comment (see Jan Mins)?
UPDATE 14 DEC 19: BPC do not appear to have made any comment on this application in either their 11 Nov 19 (Min 328.14) or 09 Dec 19 (Min 329.7) minutes?
--
Another application has been submitted forLand South Of Purn Road, Bleadon
" Erection of agricultural barn for livestock housing, feed store and machinery store with new access track off Purn Lane."
Comments deadline is nowFriday 31 January 2020, was Wednesday 04 Dec 2019. Here is the link to the application19/P/2550/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
----
A previous application on this site wasrefused in Feb 2019 and another withdrawn in July 2018. If you made previous comments to NSC on these applications you will need to resubmit them as they are not carried forward. The applicant's new submissionstates:
"The previous application was refused for the three reasons set out in the [North Somerset]Council’s decision notice... The revised application has now addressed each of those reasons" (page 12)
Although this application has been available to Bleadon Parish Council (BPC), in particular its Planning Sub-Committee, since 30 Oct 19 BOB is uncertain as to whetherit was discussed at BPC's full council meeting last week, 11 Nov 19, as the minutes will not be published until December, i.e. after the comments to NSC deadline. NBBPC refused the previous application last year (Min 313.6).]]>
The Planning Inspectorate has dismissed/refused the outline application at Mendip Model Racing Circuit, Summerways Bridge, Accommodation Road, Bleadon, for:
"Outline application, with all matters reserved, for the erection of industrial buildings for B1 and B8 use." (APPD0121/W/19/3230061)
The application was refused/dismissed after considering Land Use (incl: brownfield), Location (incl: Bleadon's infill status, settlement hierarchy, rural location & economy/business need), Landscape Character & Appearance (incl: the countryside), Flooding vulnerability (incl: Bleadon levels) and Ecology (incl: bats). The Inspector stated:
"... neither the support for new economic development in the development plan nor NPPF is at the expense of ensuring that all development is appropriately located and integrates suitably with its environment. That would not be the case here, and there is a lack of justification for the particular location of the proposal ... I am not of the view that the benefits of the scheme, or any other material consideration, are sufficient to outweigh the harm that would result."
Oddly, although this application was outside the Settlement Boundary, contrary to Bleadon's adopted Parish Plan and NSC's Local Plan/Core Strategy, Bleadon Parish Council supported the development at both the application submission and appeal stages:
BPC Application discussion - 14 Jan 19 (Min 318.7)
"Cllrs Hemingway and Baines reported no concerns about the access to the site, the design of the buildings or the use of the site. Provision of starter units would be beneficial to economic activity in the parish. The only concern raised was to ensure that rubbish/material from the site was prevented from entering the watercourse, which is between the road and the back of the proposed buildings. It was AGREED to support the application with the concern noted."
BPCComment submitted to NSC 14 Jan 2019
"At the meeting on 14th January 2019 Bleadon Parish Council resolved to support this application. The Parish Council welcomes the provision of employment uses on this brownfield site. However, there were environmental concerns raised regarding the hedgerow and rhyne/ditch between the site and the road. Measures should be in place to prevent waste/litter/rubbish getting into the water."
BPC Appeal discussion & submission - Sept 2019 (Min 326.11)
"Application 18/P/4956/OUT had been previously supported by Bleadon Parish Council and members RESOLVED to: support the appeal (APPD0121/W/19/3230061) on the proviso that the Mendip Motor Racing Club adopt a policy with regards to providing suitable facilities to ensure litter and recycling could be disposed of appropriately without leaving a mess. ACTION: The Clerk to submit this comment on behalf of Council"
Here is the link to the original application18/P/4956/OUT to North Somerset Council Planning in Nov 2018, which was refused by NSC on 17 Apr 2019.]]>
The government has ended its support for fracking in England on the basis of new scientific analysis, published 02 Nov 19, stating that "until compelling new evidence is provided ... we should put a moratorium on fracking in England with immediate effect".
FFEQSstate,"Anti-fracking campaigners up and down the country are cautiously celebrating after the government announced a moratorium on Fracking ... We'll bekeeping a close eye on events and will continue to campaign until the licences have been revoked...", including the fracking licence for Bleadon and surrounding communities!
More locally, district councils, such asSomerset West and Taunton, andSedgemoor, along withTown and Parishcouncils such as Clevedon, Kingston Seymour and Bleadon have all made 'fracking' declarations. In Feb 19 North Somerset Council also declared aClimate Emergency.
This year AIDA reported, "Four separate countries make up the UK. Of them, England is the only nation that still allows hydraulic fracturing; Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (along with a host of other countries worldwide) have banned the controversial process", with the United Nations recommending that the UK, " ... consider introducing a comprehensive and complete ban on fracking", summarised here.
A related BBC article states, "The government has called a halt to shale gas extraction - or fracking - in England amid fears about earthquakes. The indefinite suspension comes after a report by the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA) said it wasnot possible to predict the probability or size of tremors caused by the practice."
Drill or Drop report that, "The safety regulator for the nuclear industry has no information about the risk of earth tremors from fracking near the Hinkley Point power station".It is worth noting that OGA work "... with the industry and government to maximise the economic recovery of UK oil and gas.", and that the government issued 'fracking' licences for Bleadonand surrounding communities in 2016.
In March this year the High Court ruled that the government's fracking guidelines in its National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) were unlawful. This followedindustry and public NPPF feedback,with local authorities, such as North Somerset,opposing "...any proposal for shale exploration to be allowed to bypass the authority’s planning system through permitted development."
--
For more information seeBOB fracking page and previous blogAre Earthquakes part of Bleadons Future?]]>
36 Dwellings
(Old 40 plan)
Enlarged Image
Enlarged Image
UPDATE: 08 JAN 21 NSCpublished their Decision Notice and Delegated Officer Report andREFUSEDthe application.
Reasons stated include:location within a valued landscape in close proximity to the AONB; location of site in relation to associated services/facilities; and Mendip Bats SAC.UPDATE 16 NOV 20:Amended detailsletter from NSCp1 & p2 - "Outline Planning Permission for up to 36 dwellings with all matters reserved except for access, as amended by plans received 09 November 2020 ... If you would like to send comments to us ... please do so by 30 November 2020", Comments can be made online at19/P/2243/OUTAlso, seeCorylus Reportand Affordable Housing Statement(NOV 20)
UPDATE 17 OCT 19 Although not discussed in any known documented public meeting in October,Bleadon Parish Council responds to NSCwith an objection.
----------------------
A new outline application atLand At Bleadon Hill Bleadon Hill
See Amended details above: "Outline application for up to 40 dwellings with access for approval and appearance, layout, landscaping and scale reserved for subsequent approval" -Illustrative Masterplan
Comments deadline was Thursday 07 Nov 2019, now extended to 26 December 2019.Here is the link to the application 19/P/2243/OUTon North Somerset Council Planning website. (Previous application information here)
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
---
As can be seen on the map above, although this application is not within Bleadon it is on its boundary and will therefore have an effect on residents both in Bleadon and Weston Town Council areas.
BPC Response to NSC 17 Oct 19
"Bleadon Parish Council Coronation Hall, Coronation Road Bleadon BS24 0PG (Objects) Comment submitted date: Thu 17 Oct 2019 Comments for and on behalf of Bleadon Parish Council.
The proposal effectively joins the Parish of Bleadon to Weston-Super-Mare No Strategic Gap between Weston and Bleadon No proposal to widen road. Proposed access and increased traffic perceived to be dangerous to Horse riders, cyclists, runners and walkers. Adverse impact on Flora/Bats/Birds of prey. Proposal visible from A370 many parts of Bleadon. Proposal larger than any previous single development in Bleadon."]]>
This year has seen the resignation of two councillors:
Cllr Selway (13 June Min 323.23.12) and Cllr Baines (21 Aug 19 noted Sept pre-meeting note) and aClerk, Marian (13 June Min 323.23.13working until 31 Aug19 Min 325.25 & then as joint/Interim Clerk in Sept19 Min 326.6), and sawNorth Somerset declare a councillor inbreach of Bleadon Council’s Code of Conduct with regards to Openness and Leadership.This month sees a new agenda and meeting style under the leadership of the new Chair, Cllr Williams, and new, qualified and experienced Clerk, Naomi.
It will be interesting to see how the Openness, Leadership and Transparency of councillors’ decision making and expenditure progresses over the coming months.
-----
BACKGROUND
In February this year North Somerset Council stated that a Bleadon Parish Councillor had acted in breach of its Code of Conduct, particularly with regards to Openness and Leadership. Despite this finding Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) is yet to openly acknowledge and/or discuss this outcome in a public meeting, over six months later?
Since this breach was recognised two councillors and a clerk have resigned. This week BPC published its September minutes, there was no discussion and/or explanation as to why the previous Chairman resigned (Sept Mins), no letter of resignation noted, nor any thanks for his service over the last 14 months?
Cllr Williams was elected as the new Chairman. She is also Chair of BPC’s Neighbourhood Development Plan and Play Park Projects, BPC representative on the Youth Club, member of the Parochial Church Council and its representative on the Halls Committee.
Her first proposal and expenditure as Chair of BPC was to allocate £1,200 to widen the entrance to the halls car park “by one dropped kerb” (Min 326.19) or to 'shunt' it to one side, stating 'I raised it because it was my car that was bumping over the edge'. NB Last year this proposal was rejected by councillors at both Full Council (Min 315.18) and the F&P sub-Committee (Min 54.6) stating “… the majority of drivers had no problem accessing the car park and responsibility for sensible driving lay with the driver”, so what has changed this time? Is this really a good use of public money?
BPC also has a new qualified and experienced Clerk (BVN 113) who has already started to improve public access to information with the introduction of an Agenda Pack. This automatically offers information to the public in a more transparent manner and is more in line with government and best practice guidelines (e.g. ICO Model Publication Schemevs BPC's current version).
It will be interesting to see how the Openness, Leadership and Transparency of councillors’ decision making and expenditure progresses over the next few months.]]>
FFEQS postthat Sedgemoor District Council unanimously resolved to be a Frack Free Zone!
North Somerset Council declared a Climate Emergency in Feb 2019. Let's hope they will listen to parish, town and district communities that have declared 'frack-free if a 'fracking' application is submitted in the future.
For previous Sedgemoor posts see here.
For communities that have gone frack-free in our licenced area, and more information, see here.
----
Previous fracking related blog -Are Earthquakes part of Bleadons Future]]>
The planning appeal for the Bridge Road housing development restarts next Tuesday 15 October 19.
The developers have submitted a revisedindicative site planto the Planning Inspector with new green space, two ponds and less housing.
If you have any comments please send them to:
thePlanning Inspectorquoting - APP/D0121/W/18/3211789North Somerset Council at dmappeals@n-somerset.gov.uk quoting - 17/P/5545/OUTand/or Bleadon Parish Council -parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.ukNB Any comments posted on this blog may not be seen by the Inspector.For more Appeal information seeprevious blog.
]]>
UPDATE 23 Dec 19: This appeal has been dismissed. The Inspector concluded in his report "There are therefore no material considerations that would lead me to a decision other than in accordance with the[North Somerset] development plan."
UPDATE: 18 OCT 19 The 7 day Inquiry has now concluded. The Inspector hopes to give his decision by Christmas but, as this reconvened Inquiry has been slotted back into his workload, the result may not be known until the New Year. For BOB's draft Inquiry notes see here,alsoChronological Appeal updates.
UPDATE: 09 OCT 19:The developers have submitted arevised indicative site plan to the Planning Inspector with new green space, two ponds and less housing.
UPDATE: 17 Sept 19 Some residents receive letters,"If you want to you can attend the Inquiry. You can also ask the Planning Inspector to allow you to give your views..."
--
The Planning Inspectorate has set the date to resume the Appeal for the 200 Houses development on Bridge Road. It will be forfour days starting 15 October 2019 over two different venues:
Tuesday 15 Oct 19 - Town Hall, Walliscote Road, WSM, BS23 1UJWed-Fri 16-18 Oct - Royal Hotel, 1 South Parade, WSM BS23 1JPPrevious informationregarding this Appeal including:]]>
UPDATE: "A dairy farmer said there was concern about fracking’s potential impact on food producers in the are... worried the tremors would cause damage to underground aquifers and local watercourses could become contaminated... The EU has said that if we have contamination in our area they could restrict food access up to a 30-mile radius. That is massive... Who is going to want to eat food that is coming from a polluted area?”
-------
Bleadon is in a 'fracking' licence area, just the same as the site in Blackpool, Lancashire where earthquakes are happening.
Bleadon landowners have already been approachedwith the intention to start exploratory drilling. Will regular earthquakes be part of Bleadon and surrounding communities future too?
Blackpool Earthquake Monday 26August -Article byMetro:
"Drilling for shale gas is still at an exploratory phase. However, reserves of shale gas have been identified across large swathes of the UK... More than 100 licences have been awarded by the government, allowing firms to pursue a range of oil and gas exploration activities in certain areas ..." including that of Bleadon and surrounding area.
"Hundreds of people are believed to have felt the quake that was big enough to wake people up... it was just like someone dropping a whole supermarket and all the shoppers’ bags of groceries on Blackpool ... It was quite a large shudder. It felt like someone had driven into the house or dropped a wardrobe down the stairs!The walls of my house shook, there was a really deep, guttural roar. For a moment, I really thought my house was going to fall down"
Blackpool Earthquake Sunday 25 August -Article byMetro:
"Pausing work for 18 hours is the routine response for any tremor over 0.5. Environmental campaign group Friends of the Earth saidin 60 days of fracking last year there were 57 tremors in Lancashireand that it cannot be carried out without triggering earthquakes. Jamie Peters, a campaigner for the organisation, said: ‘Even small vibrations at ground level can be the sign of far more damaging impacts deep underground.’"
"The UK’s fracking site in Blackpool has been hit by the largest ever tremor recorded at the facility – the third earthquake at the site in just four days ... to hit the shale gas exploration site ... ...The British Geological Survey said the tremor had a depth of 2km (1.2 miles) and was felt by residents in Great Plumpton, Blackpool and Lytham St Annes ..".
The Government has said the extraction of shale gas through fracking could support the UK’s transition to net zero greenhouse gas emissions."
Although North Somerset Council is responsible for permitting any development this ability for local decision making may change in the future. In the meantimeBleadon Parish Council has declaredBleadon Frack Free.
---
Link to previous blogHow Fracking Surveys and Consultations Affect Bleadon
Link tomapping and information on BOB's Fracking page
]]>
Neighbouring Somerset Wildlife Trust has:
" ...a once in a lifetime chance to transform Westhay Moor National Nature Reserve by purchasing 11 acres of land next to the reserve, where peat extraction has just ended - and where we're currently losing precious water that keeps fragile habitats wet and secure for our wildlife.
Buy the land and we can raise the boundaries of the reserve, hold water on a wider scale and end the reliance on diesel pumps. BUT WE NEED YOUR HELP! We have £68,000 already but need to raise £60,000 by October to complete the purchase.
If you love Westhay, love wetlands, love wildlife .."
Please watch their video below and visit their website
]]>
Bleadon BOB has been informed that residents in the Bleadon Hill area have received the following letter from Corylus for a 40 houses development,diagonally opposite Hillicote. (The letter isre-typed for clarity at the end of this blog.)
Bleadon Parish Council has received correspondence from "Corylus (planning consultancy) – request to discuss planning application in Weston but adjacent to Bleadon". (July 19 Min 324.24.9)BPC has stated that it will discuss this pre-application at their 20 August BPC meeting in a closed session where members of the public will be asked to leave the room, not sure why?
"Min 325.29-To Discuss a confidential pre-application notification. Corylus (planning consultancy) are preparing a pre-app in Weston but adjacent to Bleadon."
Be aware that any concerns informally raised by residents at this stage may be mitigated by the developers before they submit their actual application to North Somerset for formal public consultation.
There was a previous application related to this site in2014 for 79 houses which was subsequently turned down on Appeal.
5th August 2019
Dear Sir Madam,
Proposed Residential Development, Land at Bleadon Hill, Weston-super-Mare.
Corylus Planning and Environmental Limited have been instructed by Innova Consulting Services Limited to prepare and submit a planning application to North Somerset Council for a development of up to 40 houses at Bleadon Hill. We are writing to you as the application site adjoins the boundary of your property or is very close to it.
The application will be an outline planning application, which means that the layout and landscaping of the development, along wth the scale, desing and material of the proposed houses will be determined at a later stage should outline planning permission be granted. However, the access into the site will be considered as part of the outline planning application.
We have sought technical advice from transport, ecological and drainage consultant to inform the proposal. We have also studied the previous appeal decision and designed the development to overcome the concerns raised in relation to the landscape impact.
An indicative masterplan will accompany the planning application which will demonstrate to the Council that the site can adequately accommodate up 40 houses, along with internal roads, car parking and public open space. An extract of the masterplan is shown overleaf.
Two parameter plans will also accompany the planning application and they will fix the parameters for Green Infrastructure and building heights, providing a framework which will inform the subsequent detailed planning applications. The former parameter plan will ensure that the proposed public open space will be delivered. The latter parameter plan will fix maximum height limits for buildings across the site and will ensure that the developmetn will be predominately dormer (or "chalet") style bungalows.
There will also be affordable homes within the developement to meet a local need and the proportion will be agreed withthe Council during the consideration of the planning application.
--
Corylus Planning & Environmental Ltd. Registered in England ......
Link to the previous 79 Houses applicationand appeal involving this site.
]]>
Below are various updates on Fracking:
UK National Survey of Public Attitudes Towards Shale Gas (July 2019) FFEQS ".. the most comprehensive and rigorous study to date on public attitudes to shale gas extraction in the UK was published. Opposition to fracking is stronger than ever."
Environment Agency public consultation - An indication of the types of licence that will be requested for a site like Bleadon if it were to go ahead can be seen by this (now closed) consultation.FFEQS response, concerns include ".. cold venting of methane, climate change targets and health risks due to benzene emissions" (05 Aug 19)
Boris Johnson on Fracking- "Glorious News, Stop pussy-footing around, Give Bristish peope their mineral rights, Leave no stone unturned" (23 July 19)
The Ecologist Article: Boris Johnson's cabinet. Re: local decision making - "Sajid Javid (Chancellor of the Exchequer) decided to use his power .. to overrule Lancashire County Council’s decision to block fracking"... Liz "Truss (International Trade Secretary) replaces Liam Fox (N Somerset MP) … A former Shell manager and vocal supporter of Heathrow expansion … also backs fracking." (05 Aug 19)
Guardian Article "How the world’s dirtiest industries have learned to pollute our politics" by George Monbiot. "The fossil-fuel lobby is threatened by public concern over the climate crisis. So it’s buying influence to get the results it wants" (07 Aug 19)
Previous blogSedgemoor Frack Free Motion Amendment
BOB Fracking page]]>
UPDATE 12 OCT 19: Sedgemoor District goes 'frack-free'
UPDATE 31 JULY 19 FFEQS - "... I have been advised that amendments to the motion were proposed by the Conservative representatives and that this now needs to go back to the 'Scrutiny Committee' who will report back to the Full Council in the Autumn ..."
General Info against fracking: Scotland, Ireland and Wales and the United Nations;Town and Parish councils including Bleadon; Local residents; NSC declare a climate emergency; earthquakes, potential water pollution.
General Info pro-fracking: English government re: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) but a paragraph was removed following High Court ruling that it was 'unlawful'; planning 'permitted development'; New government leader up until his appointment - seequotes at end of this article.
------
As you may be aware properties and land in Bleadon and the surrounding areas, from Clevedon to Cossington and out to Exmoor National Park, are in 'fracking' licence zones.
On Wednesday 31 July 19, Sedgemoor District Council, whose licence is adjacent to Bleadon's, is being asked to declare its area 'frack-free'. Residents in the affected villages are being asked to email Conservative Sedgemoor councillors asking them to support the motion. See the Frack-free EQS post below that states:
You can find [a Conservative] councillor ... and their email contact detail here:
Dear Cllr XXXX
I am a resident of XXXX and I am writing to you, as my District Councillor, to request that you support the motion being proposed at the Full Council Meeting on 31th July to Make Sedgemoor District a Frack Free Zone.
Yours sincerely,
(Your Name & Date)
If you have friends and family in Sedgemoor please forward this message onto them. If you want to protect your neighbouring community too you may also want to support the motion.
You can find related maps and further information on BOB's 'fracking' page.
---- Original Frack-free EQS Post
Frack Free EQS - Exmoor Quantocks Sedgemoor 23 July
Calling all Sedgemoor residents.
Do you believe in the value of local democracy and would like to make your voice heard on the issue of fracking in your community?
On Wednesday 31th July, Sedgemoor District Councillors will be voting on a motion to make Sedgemoor a Frack Free Zone.
Significant areas of Sedgemoor have been licensed by central government for onshore unconventional shale oil and shale gas development (PEDL 320, 321 and 344, OS Map grid squares ST24, ST25, ST34, ST35), which could include hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” for short. Main settlements affected: Combwich, Cannington, Nether Stowey, Fiddington, Wembdon, Chilton Trinity, Pawlett. Berrow, Brean, Burnham-on-Sea, Highbridge, Burtle, Edington, Puriton, Woolavington, Cossington, Chilton Polden, East Huntspill, West Huntspill, East Brent, Brent Knoll, Mark, Biddisham, Rooksbridge.
The success of this motion will depend wholly on gaining the support of a few Conservative Councillors. These Councillors do not need to tow their party line. They represent you. If you live in the Sedgemoor area please write to your District Councillors asking them to support the motion.
We don’t have much time. It will only take a couple of minutes to do this and it could make all the difference. Also, if you have friends or family that live in the Sedgemoor area please ask them to do the same.
You can find out who your councillor is and their email contact detail here:
Dear Cllr XXXX
I am a resident of XXXX and I am writing to you, as my District Councillor, to request that you support the motion being proposed at the Full Council Meeting on 31th July to Make Sedgemoor District a Frack Free Zone.
Yours sincerely,
(Your Name & Date)]]>
UPDATE: 19APR23 23/P/0821/AOC -"Discharge of Condition No.4 (Detailed Drawings) on application 22/P/1956/LBC. Devil's Bridge Bleadon Hill Weston-super-Mare North Somerset"
UPDATE: 23FEB23 22/P/1956/LBC "Listed building consent for alterations to the existing parapet walls, including drilling holes in existing coping stones to install new railings to raise the height of the parapet | Devil's Bridge Bleadon Hill Weston-Super-Mare North Somerset" GRANTS CONSENTNotice of Decision
---
On 22 July 2019 North Somerset Council posted its Decision Notice to GRANT outline planning permission with S106 (M3) for 17/P/1138/O:
"Site: Land At The Junction Of Bleadon Hill And Bridgwater Road, Weston-SuperMare
Description: Outline application for the erection of up to 60 dwellings with associated public open space. All matters reserved for subsequent approval except highway and pedestrian access"
See previous application information]]>
See Appeal daily UPDATE on bloghere
PDATE (25 July 19)Unfortunately this Appeal has been adjourneddue to the illness of a key witness. It will be rescheduled as soon as possible but August/September doesn't look promising. However, the Inspector will facilitate reconvening the Appeal as soon as possible
UPDATE (22 July 19) Posted on Facebook by a resident, "Can you let people know that you don't have to attend this week's hearing for the whole time/whole day as some people apparently think. We can pop in at any time between 10am and 4pm on the six days, and stay for as long as convenient. I met a lovely mum today who is going to pop in with her child (for as long as the child can stand it) to prove that there are young people in the village, but they are mostly at work. PLEASE SHARE!"
------------
Posted today (17 July 19) on Facebook byBleadon Acting Together (BAT) re: Appeal representation and documentationposted on NSC website 08 MAY 19.
"As you know the Hearing starts at 10am in the Old Town Hall next Tuesday 23rd July. As it could run for 6 days it is important that as many people attend as possible over the course of the week to show community interest/concern. If you need help to get there please let us know.
If you feel passionate about something then it is important to speak. You don’t have to be an expert. Please go to the first day to register and be given a time slot. There will be speakers from BAT under the four main headings in the document attached – they are Ecology (Kirsten Hemingway will cover this with expert help), Landscape (Joanne Richardson or Pete Richardson will be speaking on this), Social Cohesion (this will be covered by Jim Baines) and Character of the village is where you come in and can speak about the character of Bleadon or a characteristic that you feel will suffer from the development.
The Parish Council have crafted an excellent statement and they will deliver that and be open to questioning. It is still important for others to speak and give an individual viewpoint if you feel you are going to repeat something that someone else has covered you can just make your turn develop the argument.
It has been suggested that all the people opposed to the development bring a piece of paper, A4 size with the word No on it in big letters.
Please continue to support this last push to protect Bleadon. It is well worth fighting. It is not a foregone conclusion! Your presence at the Hearing is vital to impress the Inspector with the passion of our community for the protection of our village."
----
RELATED INFORMATION
Third Party Representations submitted to the Appeal posted on NSC website 18 JUN 19
NSC Statement of Caseposted on NSC website 30 DEC 18
PreviousSanders Appeal Dates Confirmed]]>
Posted today on Facebook byFrack Free EQS- Exmoor Quantocks & Sedgemour
"Breaking news: Somerset West & Taunton District Council resolve to be Frack Free.
We have just left the Full Council Meeting of the newly merged District Council who have just voted to oppose fracking in the region.
We would like to thank Cllr Caroline Ellis (proposer) and Cllr Dixie Darch (seconder) for the tireless effort they put into the proposed motion, the councillor's briefing paper and their heartfelt and sincere speeches at the meeting this evening.
The following motion was resolved by an overwhelming majority. It was encouraging to see the sea of hands raised in support (see photo). There was only one councillor opposed and two abstentions. These were, unsurprisingly, Conservatives.
Here is the motion:
This Council therefore resolves-
1. To declare Somerset West and Taunton a Frack Free zone.
2. To oppose unconventional onshore oil and gas exploration and development activities on any land that we own or have an interest in.
3. Not to invest in any companies which are involved in fracking, including other methods of unconventional onshore oil and gas production.
4. To call on Somerset County Council and Exmoor National Park Authority to pass similar motions and to put planning policies in place to implement a presumption against all applications for unconventional oil and gas exploration and production in Somerset, including fracking, following the example of the ten borough councils in Greater Manchester and the new draft London Plan .
5. To write to our district’s MPs to convey the Council’s concerns about and opposition to fracking, to urge them to lobby Government to ban unconventional onshore oil and gas development permanently and to request that they write back indicating whether they are supporting the Council in this matter.
We felt this was an accumulation of three years of campaigning and raising awareness that led to this result. Without the clear message sent from local communities via their Parish and Town Council’s Frack Free resolutions, this is unlikely to have happened.
Not here, not in Somerset, not anywhere. In the words of Cllr Caroline Ellis “South Western Energy can frack off.” Next ….Somerset County Council: Presumption against onshore oil and gas development in the Minerals Plan. Let's make it happen."
--
What can people do now?The more that developers, shareholders and public representatives hear comments against fracking the less likely it will happen, so:
Encourage your Town or Parish Council to pass a motion to either be'Frack Free' or 'Let Communities Decide' (SeeBleadondeclared 'frack-free')Write to your parish and district councillors and MP eitherdirectlyor via"They Work for You/Write to Them"which will track responses. (John Penrose MP has indicated that he will represent the community's decision). E.g. North Somerset CouncilPersonally visit and speak to your elected representatives, let them hear your views on thislocal 'fracking' issue.LetFFNSknow if you, or your neighbours, receive a request tosurveyyour land for 'fracking'ContactFFNSand/orFFEQSif you're interested in being involved in a local Committee/Action Group to tackle this issue and/or would like another public meeting on this issue to be held.Write to local newspapers-----------------------
RELATED LINKS
Overview summary videos
Bleadon's Fracking Meeting(11 June 2019)
Previous United Nations -United Nations Recommends a Ban on Fracking-Effects of Fracking on Women and Girls
PreviousWest Somerset Fracking Free Proposal
Further information can be found on BOB'sFracking page]]>
The chemicals involved in fracking affect the health and well-being of every man, woman, child and animal. Although the following United Nations report, and recommendation for a "comprehensive and completeban on fracking" was written for the'Convention on the Eliminationof All Forms of Discriminationagainst Women', it applies to everyone. (Seemap of fracking areas.)
DATEARTICLE26 Feb 19UN urged to ban fracking to safeguard UK women
"...argued that women’s rights were compromised because they said: There was evidence that fracking was linked to higher rates of cancer and nervous, immune and cardiovascular problems in women ...found that pregnant women living near active fracking operations ... had a 40% increased risk of giving birth prematurely and 30% had obstetrician-labelled ‘high-risk pregnancies. Fertility and menstrual problems in women could be caused from exposure to chemicals associated with fracking, including benzene, toluene and xylene (BTX chemicals). Miscarriages and still births could be caused by the heavy metals found in fracking waste water."
14 Mar 19United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women ...the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
para 53 "... concerned that women in rural areas in other territories of the State party are disproportionately affected by the harmful effects of fracking, including exposure to hazardous and toxic chemicals, environmental pollution and the effects of climate change."
para 54b "Review its policy on fracking and its impact on the rights of women and girls and consider introducing a comprehensive and complete ban on fracking;"
20 May 19Is the UN finally turning against fracking?
"Four separate countries make up the UK. Of them, England is the only nation that still allows hydraulic fracturing; Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (along with a host of other countries worldwide) have banned the controversial process"
What can people do?The more that developers, shareholders and public representatives hear comments against fracking the less likely it will happen, so:
Encourage your Town or Parish Council to pass a motion to either be'Frack Free' or 'Let Communities Decide' (See Bleadondeclared 'frack-free')Write to your parish and district councillors and MP eitherdirectlyor via"They Work for You/Write to Them"which will track responses. (John Penrose MP has indicated that he will represent the community's decision)Personally visit and speak to your elected representatives, let them hear your views on thislocal 'fracking' issue.LetFFNSknow if you, or your neighbours, receive a request tosurveyyour land for 'fracking'ContactFFNSand/orFFEQSif you're interested in being involved in a local Committee/Action Group to tackle this issue and/or would like another public meeting on this issue to be held.Write to local newspapers-----------------------
RELATED LINKS
Overview summary videos
Bleadon's Fracking Meeting (11 June 2019)
PreviousBleadon declared 'frack-free'(09 July 2019)
Further information can be found on BOB'sFracking page]]>
On Monday 08 July 2019 Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) "AGREED to declare Bleadon Parish Council to be "Working Towards a Plastic-free Bleadon". Cllrs Sharman and Hemmingway agreed to lead the project" (July 19 Min 324.11).
For those of you who would like the food industry to hear about their concern and frustation regarding plastic packaging you may want to take part in the#ourplasticfeedbackinitiative as promoted by the BBC (see video below - 2 mins).
Plastic is a derivative of fracking, which is an imminent issue for Bleadon and the surrounding area. At the meeting BPC also declared "Bleadon parish to be Frack-free"and "AGREED that the Clerk write to the Leader [of NSC] and copy it to ALCA and DEFRA"
RELATED LINKS
BOB'sFracking page
BOB'sPlastics page
BOB'sEnvironmental page
]]>
UPDATE 14SEP22 - 22/P/2108/NMA " Non material amendment to application 19/P/0835/OUT (outline application with details of access (matters of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping are reserved) for the demolition of all industrial buildings, plant and machinery, the erection of up to 42 dwellings and 500 sqm of flexible Use Class A2/B1/D1 floor space, open space, landscaping, new vehicle and pedestrian access, and associated works) to allow the removal of Condition 4 (plans) and the amendment to the wording of Condition 19 (footpaths) | Bleadon Quarry Bridge Road Bleadon BS24 0AU" - No response from BPC as Statutory Consultee?- Despite resident concerns, statements & discussions with Full Council Oct Min 356.3 or Planning Update 356.6 or Dec22 Min 367.6 or Planning Page see below
Deletion of Condition 4 - relating to agreed plansAmend Condition 19 - Mulberry Lane Footpath and removal of hillside footpathSee Agent Letter, Redacted Application Form and Site Plan.UPDATE 31AUG22 - 22/P/2113/RM-" Reserved matters application for appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the erection of 42no. dwellings and office building pursuant to outline permission 19/P/0835/OUT (outline application with details of access (matters of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping are reserved) for the demolition of all industrial buildings, plant and machinery, the erection of up to 42 dwellings and 500 sqm of flexible Use Class A2/B1/D1 floor space, open space, landscaping, new vehicle and pedestrian access, and associated works)" - No response from BPC as Statutory Consultee? - Despite resident concerns, statements & discussions with Full Council Oct Min 356.3 or Planning Update 356.6 or Dec22 Min 367.6 or Planning Page see below
UPDATE 08AUG22 - Application to "Discharge of condition No. 43 (programme of archaeological works)" Application number 22/P/1923/AOC. Documents submitted include Cover Letter, Application and Written Scheme of Investigation for an Archaeological Watching Brief, See also UPDATE 24MAR21 below for previous Archaeological Information - No response from BPC as Statutory Consultee?
- Despite resident concerns, statements & discussions with Full Council Oct Min 356.3 or Planning Update 356.6 or Dec22 Min 367.6 or Planning Page see below
"The Chairman suspended Standing Orders to allow public participation in respect to the following item: 22/P/2113/RM Resolved that the Parish Council’s response would include residents’ concerns regarding potential light pollution and the likely dangers that would ensue with having the footpath from the Quarry into Mulberry Lane opened."??
DEC22 Min 367.6 " The Council agreed not to support" yet not submitted to NSC?
APPROVED 23JAN23 - Decision Notice
UPDATE 16JUL22 - Bleadon Quarry Bought
UPDATE 24MAR21 - Historic letter sent to BOB stating, "There are likely to be some safety concerns regarding any new buildings or construction, both structural and possible pollution of the water course." See also previous NSC Archaeological Report in 2014 re: caves; and Marshalls Archaeological Report.(The same 2011 report seems to have been used for both 2014 & 2019 applications).
UPDATE 01MAR21 - NSC GRANTED OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION subject to conditions, see Decision Notice and Delegated Officer Report.
APPLICATION UPDATES
A new outline application atBleadon Quarry, Bridge Road,Bleadon
"Outline application with details of access (matters of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping are reserved) for the demolition of all industrial buildings, plant and machinery, the erection of up to 42 dwellings and 500 sqm of flexible Use Class A2/B1/D1 floor space, open space, landscaping, new vehicle and pedestrian access, and associated works."
Comments deadline is01 Aug 2019. Here is the link to the application19/P/0835/OUTon North Somerset Council Planning website. (Previous informationhere)
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
---
It's surprising to note that this application was validated on last week's North SomersetWeekly List(w/c 01 July 2019) and went topress 08 July but wasn't on the July Agenda and didn't get a mention at Bleadon Parish Council's meeting on 08 July 2019.
However, it became indirectly noted in the minutes in the 08JUL19 minutes Min 342.7, "19/P/0835/OUT – for information: earlier this year Marshalls advised BPC that they would be renewing their application for homes on their site although they did not have firm plans to cease operation any time soon. The outline application has now been lodged and will be on the next BPC agenda." NB: BPC's next meeting is currently scheduled for 09 Sept 2019.It was noted in 20AUG19 Extraordinary Meeting Min 325.11 "19/P/0835/OUT Bleadon Quarry, Bridge Road. Outline application with details of access (matters of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping are reserved) for the demolition of all industrial buildings, plant and machinery, the erection of up to 42 dwellings and 500 2 sqm of flexible Use Class A2/B1/D1 floor space, open space, landscaping, new vehicle and pedestrian access, and associated works"UPDATE: Some residents have received a letter, dated 05 July 19, asking them for comments on this application by 26 July 2019.
NB: The original outline applicationDecision Notice, dated 08 Aug 2016 stated, "1.Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiry of three years from the date of this permission."and "2.The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission, or before the expiry of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later"
Forbackground on this application andupdates please see below.
Previous Quarry 14/P/0687/Oat NSC planning website and associatedprevious BOB Quarry Blog
----
UPDATES
Posted 25 Jan 2021
Proposed Pedestrian Refuge Island - Plan
Posted17 Aug& 07 Sep 2020 - Highways responses:
"To ensure that access to bus stops is safe and attractive to pedestrians, the developer will be required to provide footway linking Bridge Road to the bus stop on the north east side of the A370 and a pedestrian crossing refuge on the A370 between the stops."17 Aug 20NB This is currently a 60mph road!!!
"Addendum (28/07/2020) This addendum has been provided in response to further information and plans from the applicant. Recommendation Subject to the comments and conditions required below, there is now no Highway Authority objection to this application. The applicant has provided the following plan:
Pedestrian crossing, footway and agricultural access plan SK006 P2. Subject to the carrying out of a Stage 2 Road Safety Audit (RSA), and the requirements of that audit being incorporated and approved by our Road Safety Engineer, the proposal for the pedestrian crossing and footway is considered acceptable. Please condition."07 Sep 20
27 Sept 19 -Highways Second Response
Recommend refusal, RICS data to be updated, 20mph along Bridge Road, S106 TRO yellow lines (£3600), Road Safety Assessment, S278 Trief kerbed speed table, S38 Adopotion of highways and street lighting, footway and refuge to A370 bus stops, potential Mulberry Lane pedestrian and cycle access with associated S106 to upgrade street name plates and signs (£1000), S106 for the purpose of promoting and enabling the use of sustainable methods of transport by residents of the site (£5040)... Consideration of ‘Pedestrian Priority Zones’, S106 for school transport, to support the Joint Local Transport Plan’s goal with upgrades to the existing two stops near Bridge Road (approximately £28,196 plus £800 maintenance per annum not including upgrades/extension to the footway from Bridge Road) ... should benefit from the provision of public transport real-time information, necessary to update the TRICs data as the application contains data from 2014.Use Class A2/B1/D1 (Financial and professional services, Business, Non-residential institutions) under provision of 31 parking spaces with very limited on-street parking available in the vicinity of the site, and additional parking on Bridge Road is likely to make it more hazardous for pedestrians and cause delays for vehicles. Inclusion of Electric Vehicle charging points. Taking into account the local highway network and the volume of material they may need to be removed / brought to site, Highways would request that a construction management plan (Extract)
21 Aug 19 - BPC submitted response to NSC 20 days after deadline re: Min 325.11.
"At the meeting on 20th August Bleadon Parish Council agreed to support this application again. Councillors had visited the site and discussed the proposed development with the applicant. In particular the council noted that it is a brownfield site, within the settlement boundary, and fits well with the requirements of the emerging Neighbourhood Development Plan to provide some housing for the parish. The provision of some affordable housing and a small amount of employment space is welcomed. Removal of the daily lorry movements is to be welcomed although somewhat offset by the increase in traffic from new housing."
19 Aug 19 - Highways Response -
"... on the grounds of lack of clarity on business use class ... no choice but to offer a recommendation for refusal on the grounds of insufficient parking ... Traffic Generation ... equates to 1 additional vehicle every 2.5 minutes in the morning peak and 1 additional vehicle every 1.5 minutes in the evening peak period ... Access ... to berelocated 15m south of theexisting access ... along Bridge Road ... Section 106 agreement for the sum of £3000 for a traffic regulation order (TRO) imposing a 20mph speed limit along Bridge Road and for a TRO for yellow line parking restrictions at the proposed site access ... to provide aTrief kerb for the length of the speed table ... secured through a S278 agreement ... the existing access ... stopped up and its use permanently abandoned" (Extract)
03 July 2019 Marshalls Planning & Affordable Housing Statement
"Affordable Housing - 30% affordable housing provision (i.e. 13 units[marked with a black dot on the plan]) ... with 82% of the units being for social rent and the remaining 18% being for intermediate housing ... The proposal is therefore in accordance with the relevant Development Plan policies." (Extract)
UPDATE 01 AUG 19 Deadline for comments today.
Why only 4 weeks public consultation time? How did this one site, the Quarry, grow from being suitable for 25 dwellings plus mixed use in 2013, to today's NSC Sites Allocations Plan stating 42 dwellings,and this associated application proposalwith occupancy for up to 189 people plus five 2-storey buildings for employment use, possibly via a settlement boundary change? Why has BPC decided not to respond by the deadline? (SeeProposal Site MapandPolicy Background below)
UPDATE 19 JULY 19: Weston Mercury publish "Housing plans for stone quarry put forward again"
UPDATE post-08 JULY 19: Why was this application not on the BPC 08 July agenda (324.7)
... even though it was on the NSC weekly list? Why was this application subsequently noted on the minutes (Min 324.7) even though it wasn't discussed at the meeting at this point? Why and when did BPC decide to put this application for review on their next agenda, currently 09 September, over5 weeks after the consultation deadline? Why did BPC not ask for an extension for their response as they have for other applications?
"(July 19 Min 324.7)19/P/0835/OUT – for information: earlier this year Marshalls advised BPC that they would be renewing their application for homes on their site although they did not have firm plans to cease operation any time soon. The outline application has now been lodged and will be on the next BPC agenda."
POLICY BACKGROUND
How did this one site, the Quarry, grow from being suitable for 25 dwellingsplus mixed use in 2013, to today's NSC Sites Allocation Policy stating 42 dwellings, and this associated application for occupancy of up to 189 people plus five 2-storey buildings for employment use, possibly via a settlement boundary change.
NSC's Replacement Local Plan Written Statement adopted 2007 stated:
"4.7 The primary function of the settlement boundary is to prevent sprawl and concentrate development appropriate to the scale and needs of that community. Settlement boundaries define the limit of development that is necessary to preserve and maintain the character and separate identity of many of the towns and villages in North Somerset, including the protection of important ‘rural gaps’ between settlements.
4.8 The settlement boundaries have been tightly drawn except where there are proposals for development that justify including currently undeveloped land. They were most recently confirmed in the adopted North Somerset Local Plan in June 2000. Given that only limited development is envisaged outside the towns it is considered that there is no justification for a general review of settlement boundaries. Exceptions have been made at ... Bleadon ..., where settlement boundaries have been extended to encompass recent development commitments ..."
NSC's Feb 2013 Site Allocation Plan Consultation Draft
"...Policy DM33: Settlement boundaries... Bleadon: An adjustment to the settlement boundary at Bleadon Quarry ... Policy BL1 Bleadon Quarry, Bleadon ... Policy Intentions: To deliver a positive reuse for the site which reflects local community objectives. To secure an appropriate balance of land uses including residential, employment and community uses on this existing site ...
Background: Bleadon is an infill village where Core Strategy Policy CS33 permits small scale residential redevelopment where the proposal is community led with clear community and environmental benefits. Bleadon Quarry is a former limestone quarry located within the settlement boundary, used for the production of concrete products since the late 1980s, but this use is coming to the end of its economic life. It is a brownfield site located within the village, but well enclosed and screened by quarry walls. Bleadon Parish Council supports the mixed use redevelopment of the site where this results in community benefits. The proposed allocation is for 25 dwellings but this figure is subject to further investigation and depends to a large extent on the precise balance ofuses eventually proposed on the site, and factors such as the identification of areas of rock fall risk and the extent of shadowing from the quarry walls ...
Policy BL1: Bleadon Quarry, Bleadon. The development of land at the former quarry, Bleadon as shown on the Proposals Map for mixed use will be supported. Proposals must include: l residential development (25 dwellings); l employment use; l community use; l measures to identify the areas of rock fall risk and stabilise the quarry walls; and l protection of living conditions of existing residents and future occupants. Development proposals should meet relevant development management policies, including those relating to biodiversity, in respect of the adjoining Wildlife Site."
Sept 2013 Mercury article
"“We [Marshalls] confirm that we have worked closely with Bleadon Parish Council for a number of years now and that we shall continue to do so. “We have always made it clear that the sensitive redevelopment of the Marshalls site shall be our legacy to the village. In this way, we wish to ensure that our future proposals for the site are indeed community-led.”
The [NSC] council’s sites and policies document states that the area could be used for around 20 residential properties, but Marshalls believe this could be more. It is expected a planning application for the quarry could be submitted by the end of this year."
NSC's 2018 Site Allocation Plan
INFILL VILLAGES Bleadon Quarry, Bleadon* 14/P/0687/OOutline planning consent 42 New allocation for a mixed use scheme. 500 sq metres of employment floorspace at entrance of the site. Traffic calming measures on Bridge Road. Pedestrian link along Mulberry Lane. Higher standard of surface water attenuation required.
BLOG EXTENDED UPDATE NOTES:
27 Sept 19 - HIGHWAYS SECOND RESPONSE
"Recommendation ... refusal until it is demonstrated that the site can be safely accessed and there will not be an unacceptable impact on the local highway network (DM24 Highway Safety of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 (2016)) ... RICS data to be updated and uplifted, Road Safety Audit (RSA) to be updated and uplifted, Vehicle Tracking Assessment for the proposed access ... ensure a 20mph speed limit ... along Bridge Road and visibility distances at the site access remain appropriate, the applicant is proposing to provide a speed table at the proposed site access ... Section 106 agreement for the sum of £3600 for a traffic regulation order (TRO) for yellow line parking restrictions at the proposed site access. As a result of the statutory consultation procedures associated with a TRO, its delivery cannot be secured at this time although it is considered unlikely that insurmountable objections will be received.Design Manual for Roads and Bridges states that stage 1 and stage 2 RSAs [Road Safety Audit] shall be repeated if the previous RSA for the relevant stage is more than 5 years old. The applicant should therefore commission a new RSA for this application ... provide a Trief kerb for the length of the speed table ... secured through a S278 agreement ... Section 38 Adoption ... includes highways and street lighting which may be offered for adoption as public highways ... The applicant has not provided a vehicle tracking assessment (to include refuse and emergency vehicles) ... Highways seek ... conditions to ensure that the proposed development is served by a safe and adequate means of access.To ensure that access to bus stops is safe and attractive to pedestrians, the developer will be required to provide footway linking Bridge Road to the bus stop on the north east side of the A370 and a pedestrian crossing refuge on the A370 between the stops ... The applicant suggests there is 'potential' for pedestrian and cycle access to Mulberry Lane, and pedestrian access to join a public footpath to the north east of the site ... indicating that Mulberry Lane is a no through road ... Highways requires the developer to enter into a S106 agreement for the sum of £5040 (£120 per dwelling) for the purpose of promoting and enabling the use of sustainable methods of transport by residents of the site ... Consideration needs to be given to ‘Pedestrian Priority ZonesNorth Somerset Council will seek recompense to mitigate the need for school transport through a Section 106 agreement ... [Section 106 agreement at reserved matters stage] to support the Joint Local Transport Plan’s goal to promote accessibility and the requirement to meet equality and diversity legislation, upgrades to the existing two stops near Bridge Road are required ... For indicative purposes, the bus stop upgrades and shelters will cost approximately £28,196 plus £800 maintenance per annum. This does not include upgrades/extension to the footway from Bridge Road ... Highways would recommend that a development of this size should benefit from the provision of public transport real-time information ... it is necessary to update the TRICs data as the application contains data from 2014.proposed 500 sqm of flexibleUse Class A2/B1/D1 ... under provision of 31 parking spaces ... very limited on-street parking available in the vicinity of the site, and additional parking on Bridge Road is likely to make it more hazardous for pedestrians and cause delays for vehicles ... Highways would welcome the inclusion of Electric Vehicle charging pointsTaking into account the local highway network and the volume of material they may need to be removed / brought to site, Highways would request that a construction management plan is submitted to the LPA for approval prior to the commencement of development on site. This should include but not be limited to, HGV routing, provision for staff car parking, times of site operation, volume of HGV movements throughout the day, highway safety measures such as wheel washing facilities and mitigation measures for any remedial works required. Please condition."19 Aug 19 - HIGHWAYS RESPONSE
"Recommendation ... Highways are unable to offer a favourable recommendation on the grounds of lack of clarity on business use class. In the absence of this, Highways would have no choice but to offer a recommendation for refusal on the grounds of insufficient parking Traffic Generation ... Compared to the existing peak hour traffic generation of the site recorded by surveys undertaken in January 2014, this results in an additional 24 morning peak hour movements (15 arrivals and 9 departures) and an additional 41 evening peak hour movements (18 arrivals and 23 departures). This equates to 1 additional vehicle every 2.5 minutes in the morning peak and 1 additional vehicle every 1.5 minutes in the evening peak period.Access ... The vehicular access to the proposed development is to berelocated15m south of theexistingaccessvia a simple priority access with Bridge Road comprising a raised table with vehicle restraint measures ... In order to ensure a 20mph speed limit can be achieved along Bridge Road and visibility distances at the site access remain appropriate, the applicant is proposing to provide a speed table at the proposed site access ... Whilst this level of additional traffic is not considered significant or severe in traffic volume terms, the nature of Bridge Road as a village access road which operates informally as shared space, means that the additional traffic movements may be perceptible to residents and other road users. Notwithstanding this, traffic route assignment and junction capacity assessments outlined below indicate that the highway should continue to operate satisfactorily ... Highways requires the developer to enter into a Section 106 agreement for the sum of £3000 for a traffic regulation order (TRO) imposing a 20mph speed limit along Bridge Road and for a TRO for yellow line parking restrictions at the proposed site access. .... A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit (RSA) of the proposed access has been undertaken and highlights a concern relating to vehicles emerging from the proposed access potentially entering the adjacent ditch as a result of the raising of the carriageway to create a speed table. It makes the recommendation that a vehicle restraint system should be implemented in this area to reduce the potential risk of vehicles entering the ditch associated with the increase in user numbers associated with the development. The designer’s response rejects this recommendation, but in the interest of providing a safe access Highways requires the developer to provide aTrief kerb for the length of the speed table. If the planning authority is minded to approve the application, this will be secured through a S278 agreement ... The development shall not commence until the existing access has been stopped up and its use permanently abandoned concurrently with the provision of the new access, in a manner to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority."03 July 2019- MARSHALLS PLANNING & AFFORDABLE HOUSING STATEMENT
"Affordable Housing]]>
('Fracking' Licence (PEDL) map)
UPDATE 01 AUG 19 - BPC send a Frack Free notification letter to Cllr Don Davies Leader of North Somerset Council cc. NSC Cllrs Porter & Solomon; Deborah White (ALCA); Theresa Villiers MP (Sec of State DEFRA); John Penrose (MP Weston-super-Mare); Commissioner, Shale Gas, but strangely not to the developer? BOB has reqeuested a copy of the letter and NSC's subsequent response, but no receipt as yet.
--------------
After a long campaign by BOB, supported by Frack Free North Somerset (FFNS) and Frack Free Exmoor, Quantocks & Sedgemoor (FFEQS) Bleadon Parish Council has declared Bleadon 'frack free' (Min 324.11).
What does this mean?
Bleadon Parish Council's declaration that Bleadon is now 'frack free' sends a clear statement topotential Developersand their Shareholders, North Somerset Council, and Central Government that this type of development is not welcome in our community.NB: Seven Petroleum Exploration and Development Licences (PEDL) have been signed in the region (see map) with Bleadon located within one of those licences i.e. PEDL320.Any property contained within a PEDL area may now be revealed on some environmental reports as being in a potential fracking zone as was recently stated by a new Bleadon resident, "... having moving into Bleadon at the end of May, I/we were aware of the potential for fracking in this area from the Fracking Report we got with the rest of the information regarding the house"What can residents do now?
As stated at the recentpublic talk in Bleadon held by FFNS:Write to your district councillors and MP either directly or via "They Work for You/Write to Them" which will track responses. (John Penrose MP has indicated that he will represent the community's decision)Personally visit and speak to your elected representatives, let them hear your views on this local 'fracking' issue.Let FFNS know if you, or your neighbours, receive a request to survey your land for 'fracking'Contact FFNS and/or FFEQS if you're interested in being involved in a Bleadon Committee/Action Group to tackle this issue and/or would like another public meeting on this issue to be held.Write to local newspapersPreviousOverview summary videosandfurther information can be found on BOB'sFracking page
RELATED BLOGS
FFNS showing of theBentley Effect Film at Axbridge Cinema- 15 July 2019
Public Campaigns do influence Government Policy- fracking group plannning development success
NSC Statement of Community Involvement Consultation- ends 16 July 2019
West Somerset Fracking Free Proposal- decision meeting 16 July 2019
BOB'sPlastics page
BOB'sEnvironmental page]]>
UPDATE post 08 July 19 - BPC didn't discuss the target of spending £22K by April 2020. It was stated that this item was for information only and skipped to the next agenda item? It was subsequently minuted as 'NOTED' (Min 324.14)?
-----
The spending of the parish Reserve fund is on Monday's8 July Agenda but BOB is confused as to how the Reserves were built up, for what purpose and why they are being spent now.
On top of the £45K BPC has received this tax year, from Bleadon residents via its precept, councillors now appear to want to spend an additional £22K from Reserves by the end of this financial year?
July 2019 Min 324.14To Note the Reserves Schedule.
01 April 1901 July 19Target 01 Apr 2020Reserve Amount£66.5K
£58.5K£44KCompare with lastlast July 2018:Min 311.11To Approve the allocation of Reserves.
[TOTAL] £56,600.00
------
DETAILED INFORMATION
July 2019
Min 324.13 To Note the bank balances at 30 June 2019
Deposit = £76,348.54. Current = £2,144.60
Min 324.14 To Note the Reserves Schedule.
Reserves at 1.4.19 = £66,518.09
Allocated from Special Reserve 10.4.19
Road safety signs -1,650
Car Park one way - 910
Bleadon in Bloom -1,750
BIB addition (Hall) - 480 (--Bleadon in Bloom?)
Seating planter - 300
CCTV -2,000
Total allocation -7,090
Allocated from Special Reserve 13.5.19
Defib cabinet etc -1,000
Total allocation -1,000
Reserves Schedule at 1.7.19 = £58,428.09
TARGET reserves 1 April 2020: £44,100
Min 324.15 To Consider allocations from Reserves, including:
1. Inspection of trees required on BPC land at the junction of Celtic Way and Roman Road. The beech trees are protected by Tree Preservation Orders but are encroaching on neighbouring land and some surgery may be warranted.
2. Public Toilets: there is a duty of care under HSE legislation regarding Legionella testing.
3. VE Day celebrations: preparation in this financial year.
Compare with last July 2018:
Min 311.11 To Approve the allocation of Reserves.
RESERVES
Staff contingency £ 3,500.00
Staff gratuity/pension £ 1,000.00
Election expenses £ 3,100.00
Special reserve* £21,000.00 restricted specifically for improvements in the parish.
General reserve £25,000.00
Church Grounds £ 3,000.00
[TOTAL] £56,600.00
For years BPC has had one of the highest precepts per capita in North Somerset, currently £45K - so why is it kept so high and what do Bleadon councillors spend it on? As BOB previously made new councillors aware, this type of information used to be published in a BPC Annual Report (e.g.2013Summary Receipts & Payments, separate to the annual resident's (APM) meeting minutes (E.g. 2013-14APM Precept Presentation), and also annually in BPC's Newsletter (E.g.BVN96 in 2013 p3-7Reports, finances, elections, Cllr info, etc.), but this seems to have stopped over the last few years, why? In 2015 BPC produced theirAnnual Budget by Cost Centre, do BPC still do this, is the information publicly accessible?
Also, residents have previously been told that a high Reserve fund is needed for 'unforseen circumstances'. Over the last three years BPC councillors have raised BPC income/tax/precept from Bleadon residents from £38K(Min 280.5) to£39K(Min 291.11) to £45K(Min 315.18), seeming to accrue an additional £14K in taxes over the 2016 budget of £38K in that time (£1K+£6K+£7K)? So why is BPC now appearing to spend significantly more than that amount (£22K) in one year? What did councillors collect and save these taxes/Reserves from Bleadon residents for? The question has been asked before but there has been no clear answer and/or information published (e.g. Min 315.3)
As BPC councillors are aware the 'Good Councillor's Guide to Finance & Transparency' on Reserves states:
"Local councils need to hold an amount in reserves to meet unexpected expenditure, otherwise they could run A council should typically hold between 3 and 12 months expenditure as a general reserve. If the general reserve is too low then it may not be enough to cover unexpected expenditure or emergencies, whilst if the general reserve is too high then local electors have paid a tax which is not being used for the benefit of the local community.
Local councils have no legal powers to hold revenue reserves other than for reasonable working capital or for specifically earmarked purposes, therefore the year-end general reserve should not be significantly higher than the annual precept.
[Note above that BPC state: "Reserves at 1.4.19 = £66,518.09" vs this years precept of £45,344, in BPC's case 47% higher?]
The council may have ‘earmarked reserves’ for specific projects, where money is allocated for a specific purpose but may not be spent in that financial year. This may include reserves to purchase or renovate a building, develop a sports facility or community centre.
Many councils also hold an ‘election reserve’, as all reasonable costs of holding local council elections can be fully recharged by the district or unitary council to the local council. In the case of contested elections for a council with several wards then these costs can be relatively high.
If the amount of reserves at the year-end are above a certain level in relation to the annual precept then the council must advise the external auditor of why this level of reserves is required."
[Note: What reason, if any, was given to the auditor?]
So what was the Reserve amount for each of the last four years, what were they collected/allocated for, and what were they spent on? Why were the reserves increased?
With regard to residents' ability to hear, read and understand what is happening to Bleadon finances (i.e. openness and transparency of councllors' decision making ) it was decided in
June 2018 (Min 310.3) "To invite public participation ... A member of the public asked that ... reserves ... should not be held in camera. Cllr Hemingway proposed, Cllr Baines seconded, that the items be discussed in public – all agreed."
Nov 2018 (Min 316.3) "To invite public participation ... BPC Reserves should be spent on items for which BPC is responsible ... BPC could better use its reserves for raising awareness and communicating with residents ... "
In July 2018 (Min 311.7) BPC amended the previous and adopted the current Terms of Reference for its Finance & Personnel (F&P) sub-committee:
"2.1 To meet quarterly in public in a properly convened meeting as required by law, with no public participation permitted except at the discretion of the Committee Chairman."
So why has there been no F&P publicly held meetings this Financial year (Apr 19-date) and only three meetings held last financial year, withno 2018 minutes or agenda currently published on the BPC website? (SeeBOB archive for some missing minutes)?
NB: From national guidance and BPC's Code of Conduct adopted March 2019:
"Accountability Be accountable to the public for decisions and actions; submit to scrutiny appropriate to the office.
Openness Be be as open as possible about all decisions and actions. Give reasons for decisions; restrict information only when the wider public interest demands.
Honesty Observe the duty to declare any private interests relating to public duties; take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest."
--
WHAT IS A PRECEPT:
North Somerset Council states: "Parish ... councils raise their money primarily from a levy called a precept. We collect the precept on behalf of ... parish councils and pass it on to them."
i.e BPC decide how much they want to spend for the year and this amount is added to the NSC Council Tax bill (see NSC CTax guide 2019-20e.g. p14-15)]]>
(Click map toenlargefracking licences image)
UPDATE 08 July 19: BPC declare Bleadon frack-free.
---
Following the public meeting held by Frack Free North Somerset (FFNS) in Bleadon last month, and BOB's subsequentemailre: fracking,Bleadon Parish Council has added a 'fracking' item to their July public meeting agenda onMonday 08 July 2019, at 7pm,at the Coronation Hall, Bleadon.
"BPC July Agenda (Min 324.11) To Consider any legislation (new, amended, or potential) affecting the parish. Concern has been raised regarding potential oil/gas exploration being decided at national rather than local level. It has been suggested that the parish be declared ‘plastic free’ and ‘frack free’."
Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall discovers how the fracking boom in the USA is supercharging plastic production in the UK [1]
(11 minutes)
Doreen Stopforth and her husband John talk about living half a mile from an exploratory shale gas well in Lancashire [2]
(7 minutes)
GP's submission to an Australian Tribunal into the human rights impacts of unconvential gas [3]
(14 minutes)
NB: There is an update on the'risk of drilling in Bleadon'at the Extinction Rebellion public meeting next week. (Seeextract of p31 of "Table 2: Potential resources of unconventional oil in Somerset")
See also previous West Somerset Fracking Free Proposal and how Public Campaigns do influence Government Policy
For more information visit BOB's Fracking pageandEnvironmental Information table
Related July agenda item Parish Reserves to be Spent. Perhaps "...BPC could better use its reserves for raising awareness and communicating with residents"
---------------------------
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Note [1](June 2019)
BBC documentary posted by FFFrodsham & Helsby - "Ineos imports fracked gas from the USA to produce plastic at its Grangemouth manufacturing complex. The fracked gas it plans to extract in the UK will be used to produce plastic.
Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall discovers how the fracking boom in the USA is supercharging plastic production in the UK. He visits the Ineos manufacturing complex at Grangemouth which uses the equivalent electricity as Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen combined to produce a staggering 60-70 billion plastic pellets every day, contributing a third of the 1.8 million tonnes of plastic produced in the UK every year.
He also meets Ineos director Tom Crotty who boasts of already doubling plastic production, with grandiose plans to expand further. If plastic production continues to grow as predicted, it'll be responsible for 15% of global carbon emissions by 2050."
Note [2](28 July 2013)
"Doreen Stopforth and her husband John live half a mile from an exploratory shale gas well in Lancashire. [see p31 Shareholder letter extract below]The well is likely to be the location of the next use of hydraulic fracturing in the UK. Cuadrilla the operators of the well are seeking to extend their planning permission for the site.
Doreen & John have experienced at first hand the behavior and tactics of the industry when dealing with local residents. Despite their concerns about health risks and pollution Doreen and John have decided not to move away from the area. They along with others formed one of the UK's first anti-fracking groups, Ribble Estuary Against Fracking (REAF) with the sole purpose of informing and warning their community of the dangers of fracking."
Note [3](03 Feb 2018)
"Dr Geralyn McCarron is a GP who practices in Brisbane. Her primary medical degrees are from the Queens University of Belfast in Northern Ireland; she is a Fellow of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, member of the National Toxics Network, and member of Doctors for the Environment Australia."
Dr McCarron has spent more than five years intimately involved in the experiences of those living in the gasfields of Australia, which places her in a unique position among her peers and certainly well respected by the impacted communities. This experience has led Dr McCarron to provide testimony both nationally and internationally regarding the health impacts of the industry and most recently authoring and publishing a peer reviewed paper.
Extract from p31 of the Infinity Energy S.A to Shareholders 20 March 2019
Page 15 of the Circular states "Available on display at ... [an office in London] ...until 17:00 on 25th April 2019" !
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy 'Beware of the Leopard' springs to mind again.]]>
UPDATE 07 APR 2020: "On 7th April 2020 the four councils wrote to the Inspectors to confirm the withdrawal of the Joint Spatial Plan from examination"
UPDATE 11 SEP 19:JSP Hearing Documentation, InspectorLetter 1&Letter 2in relation to "West of England Joint Spatial Plan Towards the Emerging Spatial Strategy Document"
In summary the Hearing found "... that an enormous amount of work in relation to these issues alone is needed to produce a plan for the West of England which is likely to be capable of being found sound ...We anticipate that the changes necessary would amount to the virtual rewriting of the JSP ... we remain of the view that withdrawal of the plan from examination is likely to be the most appropriate option"
Reference also to"NSC Statement of Community Involvement".See also"Joint Spatial PlanWider Bristol HMA Strategic Housing MarketAssessment Volume Two"andHelen Wilson Consultancy Website
--
The following are extracts from the Bristol Live artile "Where 105,000 houses will be built in Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire"
"Home builders are calling for the housing target to be boosted to 140,000, while opponents say the councils’ target overestimates demand.
Others have questioned why the councils chose the 12 “strategic development locations” and questioned if the decision was politically motivated.
Critics said the approach across the West of England was inconsistent - three authorities chose sites within the green belt but North Somerset Council did not. Representing the Churchill and Langford Residents Action Group (CALRAG), Hashi Mohamed said the council’s decision to “leapfrog” the green belt and propose SDLs in Churchill and Banwell was the “elephant in the room” ... Mr Rivett acknowledged residents’ concerns about the "stark contrast" in the approaches the councils had taken to the green belt ... Numerous submissions to the JSP called for the green belt to be reviewed.
TRAPP’D co-chairman Colin Gardner said the SDLs had been chosen for “political convenience”. He criticised the consultation process, which he said was either impenetrable or "like talking to a brick wall", adding: "The authorities knew what they wanted to do.” They said: “If the unitary authorities had truly engaged with local people, in the beginning ... we could have constructively moved forward with contributing to plans to achieve the aims. Unfortunately, they didn’t and still are not doing so.”
JSP Hearing Schedule
The first two days will look at legal compliance and the scope of the plan.
Thursday, July 4, will consider the housing requirement.
Next week the focus will be spent looking at the strategic development locations, or SDLs, the exceptional circumstances for building in the green belt, and the spatial strategy.
Further hearings are planned in September and October.
A decision is not expected before the end of this year."
Link to previous JSP BOB Blog Unprecedented Public Participation for JSP Local Plan Examination
General JSP Information]]>
('Fracking' Licence (PEDL) map)
UPDATE 16 JULY 19:Somerset West and Taunton District Council resolve to be Frack Free
--------
See the Frack Free Exmoor, Quantocks and Sedgemoor(FEQS) post includingthe West Somerset Free Press article on 21 June, "Lib Dems aiming to make W Somerset 'fracking-free'":
"We have been chomping the bit to post this news!
The Lib Dem held Somerset West & Taunton District Council will propose a Frack Free Zone motion at the full council meeting scheduled to take place on 16th July. Check out the MENU option on the left-hand side of our Facebook page to read the full briefing document[BOB note:See Bleadon reference on page 4/5]
Whilst the Lib Dems are in the majority on the council it is not a 'done deal' so we cannot sit back and assume this motion will be resolved.
Please write to your local district councillor, regardless of their political affiliation, and ask them to support the motion:
Dear Cllr XXXX
I am a resident of XXXX and I am writing to you, as my District Councillor, to request that you carefully read the Lib Dem Briefing paper on making Somerset West and Taunton a 'Frack Free Zone' and that you support the motion being proposed at the Full Council Meeting on 16th July.
Yours sincerely,
(Your Name & Date)
You can find their email contact details here"
--
RELATED POSTS:
See previousPublic Campaigns do influence Government Policy
See alsoNSC Statement of Community Involvement
Bleadon BOB'sFracking page
]]>
The following extracts are taken from “The slow death of my English Village", by Robin Page, as published in the Daily Mail Online, 29 June 2019, with BOB comments in [brackets].
“I've lived in the village of Barton, just outside Cambridge, all my life and first wrote about it 45 years ago in my book The Decline Of An English Village. Sadly, I've been unlucky enough to see Barton and the countryside around it changed ...” [Similar to villages like Bleadon, just outside of Weston-super-Mare, said to be one of the fastest growing towns in Europe!]“But above all they have been decades of political betrayal, in which village and country life have taken second place and third place to the superficial gods of 'progress', 'efficiency' and 'development'. When I wrote the book 45 years ago, these threats posed were mere 'plans'. Now they have arrived in the countryside like a tsunami – houses, development and people on a scale never before seen.” [Bleadon's political and statutory representatives record of poorcurrent andhistoric consultation; pooropenness and transparency of decision making and policy changes; along with poor public communication of potential developments and their associated economic, social and environmental changes]The village itself has 'growth' threatening it from many sides – a sea of houses plus the roads and street lamps that go with them is getting nearer, blighting the horizon, filling the area with traffic, the schools and the doctors' surgeries with people" [Bleadon’s associated development offers, increased commuting, light pollution, problems with access to hospital and doctors appointments, etc.]“The toll on wildlife of all this traffic is enormous, but who counts and who cares? I've seen dead cats, birds, foxes, badgers and at least one otter on the road … One bright summer's day I was puzzled. Something was missing – a familiar part of my landscape was gone. And then it came to me, shocking, wounding me: I could not hear a lark. The anthem of an English summer had been silenced." [Is this what residents want for Bleadon?]
“I once believed in the decency of people, including politicians, and I had faith in our system of democracy that has so failed the countryside. I am told by those who want to improve me that my standard of living has increased, that I have the benefit of new roads, runways, street lights, wheelie-bins, health centres, houses and cars, as well as access to more gadgets and electronic wonders than apples on a tree. But as my 'standard of living' has increased, so the quality of my life has dramatically decreased."
"One of the few old villagers in the High Street bemoans the loss of simple neighbourliness … Over the years the post office-cum-village shop has migrated to the far end of the High Street … I played football for many years on the recreation ground ... But there is no village team now.... the whole team and club disappeared to another village several miles away [skittle alleys] ... the structure of the village changed. Local people from ordinary backgrounds have been priced out … Much of the development is not based on 'rural planning' but on construction figures demanded by central Government … What, then, is the long-term future of the countryside? A countryside that has been ignored for years, whose people are ignored?" [What is planned for Bleadon's future in Bleadon Parish Council’smissing adopted Parish Plan and it's Neighbourhood Development Plan, North Somerset’s Local Plan, the regionalJoint Spatial Plan and the many overriding (sometimes unlawful) government directives?]
If you are concerned about your community’s future please feel free to make a comment below, but to ensure your voice is heard by your official ‘representatives’ please also inform your Parish Councillors, North Somerset Council and your local MPs.
See also NSC Statement of Community Involvement]]>
UPDATE SEPT 2019: Also referenced in theJSPLocal PlanHearing
---
"North Somerset Council's Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) was first adopted in 2007 and revised in 2015.
The SCI sets out how the Council will involve people in the preparation of planning policy documents such as the local plan, supplementary planning documents like the residential design guides and planning applications.
Recent changes in procedure and legislation mean that the SCI has become out of date in a number of respects. A small number of changes are therefore proposed to aid clarity, update references and in the case of section 3 on planning applicationsmake a number of revisions in relation to consultation procedures."
The consultation runs from 04 June untilnoon on Tuesday 16 July. You can comment onlineto North Somerset District Councilre: theStatement of Community Involvement andTable of Changes
NSC List of responses to consultation (12 August 2019)
NSC FinalStatement of Community Involvement (September 2019)
-----
See related BOB posts:
Unprecedented Public Participation for JSP Local Plan Examination,
Public Campaigns do influence Government Policy and
Beware of the Leopard
The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012
Article:The slow death of my English Village
]]>
UPDATE: JSP Inquiry Documentation, Inspector Letter 1 & Letter 2in relation to "West of England Joint Spatial Plan Towards the Emerging Spatial Strategy Document"reference also to "NSC Statement of Community Involvement". See also "Joint Spatial Plan Wider Bristol HMA Strategic Housing Market Assessment Volume Two"
---
NB: The regional Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) directly influences North Somerset Council's (NSC) Local Plan and Bleadon's development future as written in NSC'sIssues and Options Consultation Statement(March 2019):
"... (JSP) provides the new development context to 2036. This will roll-forward the existing proposals contained in all four West of England Core Strategies and identify the additional housing and infrastructure needed to 2036.Itwill identify the new housing requirement for North Somerset and new strategic growth areas and infrastructure requirementsbut will not contain specific allocations. This will be the role of the North Somerset Local Plan 2036."
---
The Examination of the West of England Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) Programme Officer letter, 07 June 2019:
"I write further to my letter of 11 April 2019.
The number of requests to participate in many of the hearing sessions has been even higher than anticipated and they are possibly unprecedented for a local plan examination. In the light of this it has been necessary to alter the venue and draft hearings programme from those previously announced. Full details are enclosed but, in summary, the July hearingswill now take place at The Guildhall, High Street, Bath BA1 5AW.
The hearing sessions for Matters 3b, 5 and 6 have been postponed until September/October 2019 and further details about this, and the venue for these hearing sessions, will be announced following theJuly hearings[2,3,4 and 9.10.11 & 12 July 2019]...
The Inspectors would like to apologise for any inconvenience these changes cause, but trust that participants appreciate that this has been unavoidable, in order to ensure that all those with a right and a wish to participate in the hearings can do so."
Participants include:
Parish Councils: Wrington, Backwell, Burrington, Iron Acton, Cromhall, Wraxhall & Failand, Westerleigh, Flax Bourton
Town & District Councils: Nailsea, Yale and Stroud, West of England Joint Councils
Various Village & Resident Groups: Churchill & Langford, Wrington, Backwell & Thornbury, Whitchurch & Pensford et al,
Various individuals, landowners, businesses and groups
Bleadon Parish Council's presumed related Joint Local Transport Plan response on behalf of Bleadon residents, 11 March 2019Min 320.10:
"To Consider a response to the Draft Joint Local Transport Plan - The Council considered that there was insufficient time to respond as a council but that individuals were encouraged to respond." NBThe Joint Local Transport Plan consultation ran from 6 February through to 20 March, 2019.
Also,the unknown BPC response to JSP consultation in 08 January 2018 (Min 304.14)
"To Consider a Response to the Final Draft of the West of England Joint Spatial Plan. Agreed thatCouncillor Dobson prepare a response on behalf of the Council in consultation with the Chairman[Cllr Hartree]for submission by the deadline of 10th January."NB This consultation ran from22th November 2017 – 10th January 2018 withno public discussion,with unknown BPC response?
And 06 November 2017 (Min P68.14)
"To consider and agree a response to the final draft of the West of England Joint Spatial Plan (JSP). Cllr provided a summary of the JSP documentation. A Cllr highlighted that there isno green belt in our areaand the green belt refers to the area around Bristol, Clevedon and Portishead. The area forBleadon is referenced as AONB. It was unanimouslyresolved not to respond and comment at this stageand to review after the proposed public engagement from22th November 2017 – 10th January 2018 is available and to add this onto the December Planning Committee Meeting agenda[Min 303.14i.e. to add to next full council agenda in Jan 18]."]]>
('Fracking' Licence (PEDL) map)
UPDATE: For other public involvement blogs see:Unprecedented Public Participation for JSP Local Plan Examination,andNSC Statement of Community Involvement.
-----
ThisConsultation Institute articleindicates how public opinion and related campaign groups can directly influence government policy that is affecting their community:
"The government has removed a paragraph from the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) intended to support the extraction of “unconventional hydrocarbons” following a High Court ruling earlier this year which found that a public consultation on the policy was flawed ...
... The paragraph was added to the NPPF as part of revisions to the document published last year.But inMarch, environmentalcampaign groupTalk Frackingsuccessfully challengedthe new paragraph at the High Court."
"What does theTalk Fracking judgement meanfor my community and current/future fracking applications?On the 14 May 2019, High Court judge,Mr Justice Dove, issued a judgementwhich declared that the ... newly-added paragraph of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (... relating to onshore oil and gas development, including fracking) was in fact,unlawful. ...The inclusion of [this] paragraph... directly manoeuvred councils towards accepting fracking simply because policy said so ...
The judgement from the Talk Fracking case means that anyone objecting to fracking applications will be able to do so on grounds of climate change “by referring to the latest scientific evidence” and other technical points of objection and evidence ... An authority who is considering a fracking applicationcould refuse it on solid, scientific evidence and arguments based on climate change grounds." (Legal briefing)
----
For more information on how the NPPF and other goverment policy affects Bleadon seehere.
Also, some othernewspaper articlesand BOB'sfracking page.
Link to previous BOB fracking post onBleadon's first public fracking meetingheld 11 June 2019.]]>
UPDATE:NSC Statement of Community Involvement
-----
Do you ever feel that planning development activity, consultations and information is not as forthcoming, transparent and accessible as it could be from our 'elected' reprentatives, with clearly defined possible effects for our community e.g.Bristol Airport,Fracking,Local Plan/Settlement BoundaryNeighbourhood Development Plan,JSP, NPPF, etc.?
Amember of the public sent us this extract, "Beware of the Leopard" from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams (1978):
"... MISTER PROSSER: But Mister Dent the plans have been available in the planning office for the last nine months!
ARTHUR DENT: Yes! I went round to find them yesterday afternoon. You'd hadn't exactly gone out of your way to pull much attention to them have you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything.
MISTER PROSSER: The plans were on display.
ARTHUR DENT: Ah! And how many members of the public are in the habit of casually dropping around the local planning office of an evening?
MISTER PROSSER: Er - ah!
ARTHUR DENT: It's not exactly a noted social venue is it? And even if you had popped in on the off chance that some raving bureaucrat wanted to knock your house down, the plans weren't immediately obvious to the eye were they?
MISTER PROSSER: That depends where you were looking.
ARTHUR DENT: I eventually had to go down to the cellar!
MISTER PROSSER: That's the display department.
ARTHUR DENT: With a torch!
MISTER PROSSER: The lights, had… probably gone.
ARTHUR DENT: So had the stairs!
MISTER PROSSER:
Well you found the notice didn’t you?
ARTHUR DENT: Yes. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”. Ever thought of going into advertising?
MISTER PROSSER:
It’s not as if it is a particularly nice house anyway.
ARTHUR DENT:I happen rather to like it! ..."
(Taken from the websitehere)
Openness and transparency are now usually part of all council'sCode of Conduct, to ensure that residents are made aware of issues and consulted appropriately.For example,
"OPENNESS - Holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing."
With the advent of websites this should be easy to achieve, sowhy is it so difficultfor Bleadon's legal representatives?]]>
UPDATE 16 SEPT 19:New Inquiry dates set
------
JUMP TO BOB's DAILY UPDATES FROM APPEAL
Jump toChronological Appeal Updates - inlcuding BAT, BOB & BPC
UPDATE 25 JULY 19Unfortunately thisAppeal has been adjourneddue to the illness of a key witness. It will be rescheduled as soon as possible but August/September doesn't look promising. However, the Inspector will facilitate reconvening the Appeal as soon as possible
UPDATE 23 JULY 19: Weston Mercury publish "'Alien' looking housing plan to go before inquiry this week"
UPDATE17 JULY 19200 Houses Appeal Update (BAT)
UPDATE 19 JUN 19: BristolLive pubish"Six-day planning inquiry on plans for 200 homes in north Somerset village"
UPDATE12 JUN 19 "BPC 200 Houses Public Meeting Update"
------
North Somerset Council has sent out aletter to all interested parties in the appeal of the Land Off Bleadon Road- "Outline planning permission for the erection of up to 200 dwellings, a Health Centre, a Doctors Surgery, retail outlets and office/employment space with all matters reserved for subsequent approval."Application Information
"The Inquiry will commence at10 o'clock on 23 July 2019and will be held at:Town Hall, New Council Chamber (Old Town Hall Entrance), Walliscote Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.
The Inquiry isscheduled for 6 days (23 to 26 and 30 and 31 July).If you want to, you can attend the inquiry. You can also ask the Planing Inspector to allow you to give your views ..."
Below isa video guide that gives an overview of what happens and how to take part.
"If you are disabled, or anyone you know who wants to attend the appeal is disabled, please let ... [NSC,Rob Worgan, Appeals Officer] know. ... [he] will then make arrangements to ensure that access is provided.
Copies of statement and other appeal documents submitted by ... [NSC] and the appellant, as well as any further comments submitted, are available for viewing ... [on the NSC website]. You may also inspect the planning file at ... [their] offices (08:45 - 17:00 Mondays to Thursdays, 08:45 - 16:30 Fridays). Due to the volume of work, it is advisable to make prior arrangements.
If you require further information about the process of an appeal the Planning Inspectorate has a booklet entitled "Guide to taking part in planning appeals"..."
More information can also be found here. Information about Bleadon Action Group (BAT), BPC, and their Appeal/Rule 6 activitiessummarised here.
NBOpenness and transparency (Appeal&Rule 6 Guides)"Inquiries are open to journalists and the wider public, as well as interested people. Provided that it does not disrupt proceedings, anyone will be allowed to report, record and film proceedings including the use of digital and social media. Inspectors will advise people present at the start of the event that the proceedings may be recorded and/or filmed, and that anyone using social media during or after the end of the proceedings should do so responsibly"
-----------------
CHRONOLOGICAL APPEAL UPDATES
DateUpdate By:Comment11 Nov 19BPC(Min 328.5)"To receive the Chair’s Announcements, including update on recent Appeal (Ref18/00054/AT02). The Chair gave a brief synopsis of the Inspector’s various visits to the village in respect to the appeal. She thought it pertinent to note that the Inspector had on a number of occasions referred to the Village Plan in his summaries. A question was asked as to who had penned the submission allegedly from the Parish Council as clearly it had not been discussed at a previous council meeting. The answer given certainly not anyone currently on the parish council." So how wasa route submitted to the Appeal in BPC's name and go unchallenged by BPC when the BPC Chairman added to the route, also with the same header and footer as BPC's unminuted Revised Appeal submission?NB: theNDP survey results were referenced not the Adopted Village/Parish Plan, which BPC stated it lost in Apr 2017(Open Forum)?Nov 2019BPC(BVN114)"Second Part of the Hearing about the Houses on the Fields" including the link between the Appeal Submission and BPC's Neighbourhood Plan and related working group in the Newsletter Introduction page (Unminuted submission deadline stated to be 06 Nov 19)18 Oct 19BOBThe 7 day Inquiry concluded. The Inspector hopes to give his decision by Christmas but, as this reconvened Inquiry has been slotted back into his workload, the result may not be known until the New Year.BOB's draft Inquiry notes were posted.18 Oct 19BATBATcomments on the new Ecology Note17 Oct 19BPCBPC Chairman submits residentwalking route additions to the Inspector - although not discussed and/or no minuted as approved by BPC full council?14 Oct 19BPCNo documented discussion or comment on 15-18 Oct 200+ Houses Appeal?10 Oct 19BATBAT reposts BOB Facebook postre: amended site plan and Appeal start dates.09 Oct 19BOBThe developers submit a revised indicative site planto the Planning Inspector with new green space, two ponds and less housing.17 Sept 19BOBSome residents receive letters, "If you want to you can attend the Inquiry. You can also ask the Planning Inspector to allow you to give your views..."16 Sept 19BPCBPC website home page states, "The Inquiry started on 23rd July and Cllr Gill Williams read out the parish council's statement - you can read it here. The Inquiry was adjourned and will now resume for one day on 18th October." -i.e. the revised unminuted as approved version.16 Sept 19BOBNewSanders Appeal Dates Confirmed-four days starting 15 October 2019 over two different venues09 Sept 19BPC(Min 326.14) "17/P/5545/OUT 200 homes, off Bleadon Road (appeal Inquiry adjourned)"03 Sept 19BPC(BVN113) BPC publish revised Appeal Statement including incorrect response rate.20 Aug 19BPCAppeal not on Extraordinary Meeting Agenda (Ex-Min 325.13)? Added as after-thought to the minutes"17/P/5545/OUT 200 homes, off Bleadon Road (appeal Inquiry adjourned) NOTED" Noted?26 July 19BPCBPC website home page states, "The Inquiry has now been adjourned with no date set, although it is likely to be at least three months away"25 July 19BOBBPC submit an unminuted Revised Appeal Statement to the Inspector on the morning it was read out at the Appeal(See08 July 19 below and BOB Appeal Notes)17 July 19BATBAT200 Houses. Facebook Appeal Update -BAT speakers and topic areas.08 July 19BPC(Min 324.3 & Min 324.10) "To Approve the Parish Council’s statement regarding the Planning Appeal (200 homes off Bleadon Road) and To Appoint a councillor to attend. The proposed statement was circulated. The aim is for BPC to categorise BPC’s stance and to not contradict or duplicate what BAT have submitted.AGREEDthatCllr Williams will attend to read the statement.AGREEDthat the statement will have appendices: the Survey Responses, BPC’s original objection, and a few pertinent photos.AGREEDthat Cllr Williams and Clerk will finalise the documents and liaise with NSC regarding how many copies are needed, and for whom"(Original version unpublished by BPC? See unminuted Revised version submitted to Inspector 25 July 19above?)19 June 19BOBSandersAppeal Dates Confirmed18 June 19BOBThird Party Representations submitted to the AppealindicatesBAT has stated that it"will continue as an interested party and not a Rule 6 party" as dated 28 Dec 2018.No BPC subsequent update on this change of status despite 5 Cllrs on Council? (See28 Dec 19 below)12 June 19BOBBPC 200 HousesPublic Meeting Update06 June 19Public/
BPC
Minutesof BPC 200 houses Public Meeting.NB: BPC Clerk informed BOB that, "The meeting on 6 June was not a council meeting and there is no formal record of who attended. Some people signed an attendance sheet but not all. Any councillors present were there as residents. I attended in order to make notes for my benefit, and the meeting agreed that I could capture key points; the meeting agreed the points I read out as captured. It is not on BPC head paper in order to ensure that people do not think it is a formal BPC meeting. I know that is stated in the note but I think a visual clue helps to distinguish between the two sorts of meeting. "(See 11 Feb 19 below?)May 19BATBAT 200 Houses public meeting in Bleadon Coronation Hall03 June at 7:30pm12 Mar 19BOB via NSC
app
website
Planning Inspectorate Screening Letter"... the proposal would not be likely to have significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: The development is relatively small in scale and there would be no likely significant impacts in terms of noise, water, contamination, flooding, traffic, ecology or archaeology Given the nature and scale of the proposed development and the nature of the receiving environment it is considered that while there may be some impact on the surrounding area as a result of this development, it would not be of a scale and nature likely to result in significant environmental impact. EIA is not required ... (This direction does not affect any duties of the appellant under other legislation, including The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.)"11 Feb 19BPC(Min 319.7)BPC to "a) to a arrange a public meeting on 6th June (7pm, Coronation Hall) to let residents know the process regarding the Appeal (200 homes off Bleadon Road) and to seek their views in order to craft the Parish Council’s response, and to include documented statements. b) Nominate one councillor to speak at the Appeal on behalf of the parish. c) BAT and BPC to co-ordinate regarding their responses, in order not to duplicate" (See 06 June 19 note above)24 Jan 19BOBAppeal date set 23 July 201914 Jan 19BPC(Min 318.10)"The Appeal is in July 2019 and it was AGREED to defer the discussion to aPlanning Committee meetingin the near future in order to have time for a full debate. Clerk to arrange".(28 Dec 19)BOBNot publicly declared but viaThird Party Representations,submitted to the Appeal posted on NSC 18 June 19, as of 28 Dec 18BAT withdraw as a Rule 6 partybut submit an Interested Party Statement of CaseNo BPC or BAT subsequent update on this change of status despite 5 BAT members sitting as Cllrs on Bleadon Council?(10 Dec 18)BPCNB: "... the Parish Council cannot provide finance for any campaign against a developer in relation to planning applications." (Chairman, Finance and Personnel Committee verbally stated but undocumented until BPC08 Apr 19 APM).10 Dec 18BPC(Min 317.9 & 317.10)BPC meet BAT & NSC on 6 Dec. BPC Rule 6 involvement put on hold seeking advice. (28 Dec 18 BAT send NSC letter withdrawing as Rule 6 Party, see above? No subsequent BPC update on this change of status despite 5 Cllrs on Council?)23 Nov 18BPCBleadon Parish Council (BPC) call an extra-ordinary meeting onFriday 23 Nov 18toconsiderRule 6 Statusand to use the Parish Reserves for the Appeal. Also confirmed that"BAT has obtained Rule 6 status" (Min 316.3) (See 28 Dec above)14 Nov 18BOBSanders Lodge anAppeal22 May 18BATBAT public meeting update at the Youth Club. Group renamed to Bleadon Acting Together (BAT)15 May 18BATBATsubmit an objectionto NSC re: 200 houses application via a professional consultant.10 Apr 18BOBOutline Application for 200 Housesand other facilities with deadline for comment 03 May 18.14 Nov 18BOBNSC Decision on Sanders Fields Housing Appealed17 Sept 18BOBNSC Refuses 200 Houses in Bleadon08 May 18BPCBPC agree to object (Min 308.6) to application and submit a response to NSC06 Sept 17BOBSchool and 250 Houses Planned - Update]]>
At the end of the July Parish Council meeting the Clerk announced that Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) had received the following correspondence (not on the agenda) :
(Min 323.12) The Clerk Resignation letter from Cllr Anne Selway (effective 13th June). Chairman to write on behalf of the council.
(Min 323.13) Resignation letter from Clerk Marian (effective 31st August). Chairman to write on behalf of the council.
Reasons for their resignations were not minuted.
If you are interested in becoming the new Parish Council Clerk the advert is here,also the Job Description, Person Spec and Application Form.
There are now also two parish councillor vacancies, if you are interested please contact BPC, who will decide if you aresuitable and/or acceptable for co-option onto the council.
(NB current councillor topic responsibilitiesupdated 13 June 2019)]]>
(Click map toenlarge image)
MAIN FRACKING BLOG
UPDATE 14 SEP 22: Bleadon at Risk of Fracking Again (see blog)
UPDATE 13 APR 22:Distrrict Cllr Porter following APM, "I raised the issue of Fracking at last nights council meeting, and it was confirmed that a motion to continually ban fracking in North Somerset will come forward to council. This position is fully supported, and the portfolio holder has agreed to our consultation on this motion to Council.."
UPDATE 11 APR 22: BPC Draft APM Mins (pg2)& Amendments and BOB Draft APM Mins
UPDATE 09 SEP 19: Min 326.28 "Members noted that John Penrose's secretrary had confirmed receipt of the Parish Council's letter regarding Bleadon being frack free" (Image)
UPDATE 07 AUG 19: Clevedon Town Councildeclare opposition to any fracking in Clevedon(Min 19/1107)
UPDATE 08 JULY 19: Councillors declare Bleadon 'Frack-free', agreeing "... that Clerk would write to the Leader (of NSC, Cllr Don Davies) and copy it to ALCA and DEFRA" (Min 324.11)
UPDATE 04 JULY 19:Bleadon Parish Council added a 'fracking' item to their July public meeting agenda.
--
The following are my draft notes on the Frack Free North Somerset (FFNS) public meeting held on the 11 June 2019 at the Coronation Hall in Bleadon.
About 40 people attended the open meeting. There was an interesting, calm and informative discussion about potential 'fracking' in Bleadon. This was followed by a number of questions raised by the public and discussed withFFNS, Frack Free Exmoor, Quantocks & Sedgemoor (FFEQS) and by a local caver from Axbridge Caving Group.
Some points covered included:
A mapof the 7 current Petroleum Exploration & Development Licences (PEDL) in the area, including Bleadon.Information that at least two Bleadon residents on Roman Road had already received oil and gas exploration survey lettersBroad explanation about the process of 'fracking', tight oil, acidification, and associated issues that a 'fracking' site could create e.g. the number of potential drilling rigs and chemicals used, drilled well integrity issues, HGV traffic, etc.Information about Gerwyn Williams(PDF) his companies, offshore company in Luxembourg, imminent stockmarket activity and shareholders financing this potential fracking project (See table of "Potential resources of unconvential oil in Somerset"p31 of the Infinity Energy Circular)Suggestion that residents watch a 6 minute video calledDon't Frack Our Future (also Doreen's youtube comments on her experience of fracking coming to her community).Results of the FFNS survey in Hutton- 87% of people surveyed wereopposed to fracking in their parish.Some of the known effects of fracking e.g. visual and audible effects, community safety, health issues, earthquakes, contribution to climate change, carbon dioxide emmissions,Use of water in the 'fracking' process, where it may come from, polluted/contaminated waste, the need for water extraction licences. (See also Bristol Water)The planning process and current concern over proposedpermitted development (See alsoNPPFand potential Neighbourhood Plan influence)Developer insurance and end of contract/decommissioning concerns(including potential land owner cleanupissues)Alternative solutions, renewable energy, need for energy storageGeological and palentological significances of thecaves in and surrounding Bleadon, an explanation of international importance of these sites including registration as an SSSI. E.g. Upper Canada Cave (PDF), Canada Coombe, Bleadon. NB A local landowner has left land to Avon Wildlife Trust with certain permissions for caving.Potential forcontaminated water seepage through limestone and any connected caves affecting Bleadon and surrounding villages (water usage diagram) (PDF)The importance of bats in the area.A resident commented, and posted, "...having moving into Bleadon at the end of May, I/we were aware of the potential for fracking in this area from the Fracking Report we got with the rest of the information regarding the house" (See comments section below)What can people do? The more that developers, shareholders and public representatives hear comments against fracking the less likely it will happen, so:
Encourage Bleadon Parish Council to pass a motion to either be 'Frack Free' or 'Let Communities Decide' (PDF)Write to your parish and district councillors and MP either directlyor via "They Work for You/Write to Them"which will track responses. (John Penrose MP has indicated that he will represent the community's decision)Personally visit and speak to your elected representatives, let them hear your views on thislocal 'fracking' issue.LetFFNS know if you, or your neighbours, receive a request tosurveyyour land for 'fracking'Contact FFNS and/orFFEQS if you're interested in being involved in a Bleadon Committee/Action Group to tackle this issue and/or would like another public meeting on this issue to be held.Write to local newspapersTwo councillors attended as residents:
Cllr Mary Sheppard, Bleadon Parish Council Vice Chair, attended the whole meeting. At the end she thanked FFNS for hosting the meeting and presenters for sharing information with the community.Cllr Gill Williams, Chair of BPC's Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP), attended part way through the meeting and confirmed, when asked by an attendee, that BPC had not yet received a letter from the developerGerwyn Williams regarding potential fracking in Bleadon.Hopefully BPC, and its Neighbourhood Development Plan sub-group, will now reconsider its stance on frackingto protect Bleadon's future, and decide to be 'Frack Free' or 'Let Communities Decide'
------------------
NB:Kingston Seymour Council, near Clevedon, declared its Parish a'frack free zone'in September 2018 and Weston Town Council in November 2018.
For more information visit BOB's fracking pageandtable of articles
Previousfracking blog
]]>
UPDATE 23 DEC 2019: Appeal Dismissed.
UPDATE: 25 July 19 BPC submit an unapproved Revised Appeal Statementto Inspector on the morning it was read out at the Appeal.
UPDATE 16 JULY 19: Email response from BPC Clerk after BOB requested the official Public Meeting Agenda and Minutes:
"The meeting on 6 June was not a council meeting and there is no formal record of who attended. Some people signed an attendance sheet but not all. Any councillors present were there as residents. I attended in order to make notes for my benefit, and the meeting agreed that I could capture key points; the meeting agreed the points I read out as captured. It is not on BPC head paper in order to ensure that people do not think it is a formal BPC meeting. I know that is stated in the note but I think a visual clue helps to distinguish between the two sorts of meeting."
Confusing reponse seeing both BPC Full Council (Min 319.7) and Planning Sub-committee (Min P70.6) agreed to call the meeting in Feb 2019 ? See below for BPC/Clerk minutes as briefly published on their website front page in July.
UPDATE: 08 July 19 (Min 324.10)
"To Approve the Parish Council’s statement regarding the Planning Appeal (200 homes off Bleadon Road) and To Appoint a councillor to attend. The proposed statement was circulated. The aim is for BPC to categorise BPC’s stance and to not contradict or duplicate what BAT have submitted. AGREED that Cllr Williams will attend to read the statement. AGREED that the statement will have appendices: the Survey Responses, BPC’s original objection, and a few pertinent photos. AGREED that Cllr Williams and Clerk will finalise the documents and liaise with NSC regarding how many copies are needed, and for whom."
-----------------
On the 11 Feb 2019 (Min 319.7) Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) resolvedto "
a) to a arrange a public meeting on 6th June (7pm, Coronation Hall) to let residents know the process regarding the Appeal (200 homes off Bleadon Road) and to seek their views in order to craft the Parish Council’s response, and to include documented statements.
UPDATE: BPC have published minutesof the 06 June 19 public meeting. NB: It is not recordedwhich parish councillor officially convened and/or chaired this BPC meeting or whether any other councillors attended, onlynaming one lead resident.b) Nominate one councillor to speak at the Appeal on behalf of the parish.
UPDATE: At BPC's 10 June 2019 council meeting (Min 323.15) councillors deferred this decision making until the July BPC meeting.c) BAT and BPC to co-ordinate regarding their responses, in order not to duplicate"
UPDATE: BPC are yet to inform residents how they will interact in the appeal process with Bleadon Acting Together (BAT) as a Rule 6 party (Min 316.3). At BPC's 10 June 2019 council meeting councillors reiterated the decision to work with BAT.--
Link to 200 Houses Planning Appeal
Link to Bleadon Acting Together
]]>
UPDATE 12 June 2019:Meeting notes
Frack Free North Somerset are holding a meeting in Bleadon Coronation Hall, B24 OPG, on
Tuesday 11 June 2019 at 7:30pm.
Incredible though it sounds South Western Energy LImited is planning to drill for oil in Bleadon.
Come and find out about fracking, tight oil and extreme energy. A short film, open discussion and action.
Warning, fracking licences have been issued covering North Somerset.
--
PreviousFracking and how it could effect Bleadon
Link to BOB fracking information page
John Penrose letter to a member of the public re: fracking]]>
UPDATE See the current number offlights over your area, e.g. 17 Apr 20 duringCOVID-19 restrictions.
UPDATE 24 NOV 19Objections to Airport Expansion Blog.
UPDATE 17 OCT 19:Weston mayor says opportunities created by airport expansion important to the town.
UPDATE 12 JUL 19: Just plane wrong: Bristol Airport’s expansion application
UPDATE 19 JUN 19:Extinction Rebellionprotests against airport expansion plans
UPDATE 03 JUN 19:Students strike at WSM Town Hall to demand action on climate change
UPDATE 19 FEB 19: Deputy Leader of NSC Cllr Mike Bell tweets " Absolutely delighted that North Somerset Council has unanimously backed our call to target zero carbon by 2030 and declare aClimate Emergency" (Feb 19COU101) (July 19COU57).
See also GovernmentClean Growth Strategy paper (where is the mention of airports?)
---
Bleadon Parish Council has changed its decision on the Bristol Airport Expansion from no response, toNEUTRAL toOBJECT (May 19 Min 322.17)
"18/P/5118/OUT. Bristol Airport. Revised expansion plans to support an increase to 12 million passengers per year by the mid-2020s (currently 8 million). The council accepted the view that the Airport provides employment for many people in the area and provides local access to air transport. However, this is outweighed by concerns of climate change and pollution both local to Bleadon and globally. AGREED TO OBJECT."
Bristol Airport Plan Background
"In 2011, Bristol Airport Limited was granted outline planning permission by North Somerset Council to expand its capacity to handle 10 million passengers per annum.In 2017, Bristol Airport handled over 8.2 million passengers, making it the ninth busiest airport in the UK and the third largest regional airport in England. Passenger demand is forecast to reach 10 million passengers per year by 2021, beyond this passenger numbers are projected to rise further to 15 million passengers per year by the mid-2030s and 20 million passengers per year by the mid-2040s.
... As part of the approach set out in recent Master Plan documentation published in 2018, Bristol Airport Limited are seeking permission for an initial phase of growth beyond 10 million passengers per year to 12 million passengers per year. This would allow for growth in passenger numbers up to at least 2026."
Other information:
Bristol Youth 4 Climate Rally 24 May 2019
World Map of Pollution
"UK flights: Number of planes using British skies to reach all-time high. The number of flights using British skies on one day is set to reach an all-time high of 9,000 on Friday. More than than six per minute are expected, exceeding the previous record of 8,854 set on 25 May 2018."
---
Link to previousAirport Expansion blog
Se also BOBEnvironmental Information andFracking page]]>
(Click on map to enlarge image)
Frack Free North Somerset (FFNS)are currently leading the public awareness of the potential of fracking in and around Bleadon.
This month, May 2019, FFNS published an article in the Bleadon Village News#112, page 12,"Fracking and how it could effect Bleadon", inviting residents to a village meeting in Bleadon Coronation Hall at 7:30 pm on Tuesday,11th of June.
FFNS hasdeliveredletters to residentson Roman Road and hasasked Bleadon Parish Council to post notices on the village notice boards asking for information regardingenergy company land surveys.
"FRACKING AND HOW IT COULD EFFECT BLEADON
Petroleum Exploration and Development Licences (PEDLS) have been granted for the whole of the coastal area of Somerset (see map). ln 2012 an application to drill in Keynsham was withdrawn after geologists said that it was almost certain to contaminate the Roman Baths. Now the company is looking to do the same thing at the end of the Mendips.
At least two Bleadon landowners have been approached by Infinity Energy for permission to do a walk-over survey. lf the results of this are favourable, it will be followed by an exploratory drill, which currently needs planning permission but this layer of authority may be removed. There have been objections to this proposal from many local authorities, including North Somerset but the oil industry can be very influential. Finally a planning application for extraction would be made to North Somerset Council. lf NSC objects, the Government may override local democracy, as it has done in the North of England.
One of the problems for the Mendips is the high probability of pollution of the interlinked cave system from chemicals and the hydrocarbon product. The pristine environment of the caves might lose unique flora and fauna, including bats. Caving itself might become prohibitively dangerous if large amounts of gas (associated with the oil) mix with the air.
And then there is the matter of climate change. lt is counter intelligent that Government can be considering opening up new and dirty ways of extractingyet more fossil fuel when scientists and concerned people are pleading with them to leave fossil carbon in the ground.
This battle is winnable. Weston's MP, John Penrose, has said that if local communities are against fracking, he will oppose it, and a sample survey in neighbouring Hutton showed 87% of residents are against the threat of fracking. Our MP, District and Parish Councillors need to know what localfeeling is like.
There will be avillage meeting in Coronation Hall at 7:30 pm on the 11th of Juneto bring us all up to speed on this serious, but solvable, issue.
FFNS contact details:
Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/frackfreenorthsomerset
Email: FFNSomerset@gmail.com
Website:FFNS.co.uk"
---
PreviousBleadon Frackingblog
Link to BOB fracking information page
John Penrose letter to a member of the public re: fracking
]]>
UPDATE 16 JULY 19: 2019 APM Minutes. Also, email response from BPC Clerk regarding BOB asking why BPC had approved last year's APM Minutes knowing that the Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) resolution #2 was incorrectly minuted:
"The Council approved the APM 2018 minutes as correct because they viewed them to be correct. The council had received only two written representations suggesting the draft was not accurate regarding the Neighbourhood Plan – one from you and one from the resident whose copy letter you attached – and no verbal representation." - from Clerk email
Interesting to note that a BPC CllrNDP member and the NDP Chair recommended their approval despite knowing the ongoing issue of NDP misrepresentation, i.e. "Andy Scarisbrick proposed that the minutes be approved as published; seconded by Gill Williams ..." - from 2019 APM Minutes
"Should any planning application be made in respect of the land between the A370 and Bleadon Road, then a response will be made in accord with the views of the majority of parishioners. As you will be aware, the Parish Council is the only body that has astatutory and constitutional right to be consulted with regard to planning matters." - from 2018 APM Minutes
Interesting to note that BPC received the A370/Bleadon Rd/Sander's Fields planning application 3 weeks before this public statement was made, and that councillors had met twice without mentioning this to the public, i.e. 12 Mar & 28 Mar 18? The public were not informed of this application until the 04 May (Min 308.6) nearly 7 weeks/49 days after the application was made?
Also interesting to note, "Where a parish council ... is notified of a planning application, they must make any representations within 21 days" - from the Government's Consultation and pre-decision matters guidance. Once informed the public can make their own comments directly to NSC regarding an appliction, so even if BPC decide they aren't going to submit a comment, or aren't quorate, there is no reason not to inform the public ASAP.
Despite the way in which the 2018 APM minutes were written BPC also resolved not to respond to the Mendip Bats Consultaton, a protected species in our environment? (P68.15 & 301.8) - from 2018 APM Minutes
---
The APM, by law, is supposed to be aresident'smeeting, not a Council meeting. For example a council's interpretation of the National Association of Local Councils (NALC) guidance,
"An Annual Parish Meeting is an effective forum for parish councils to engage with the local electorate. Even if the Parish Council disagrees with the issues raised, or related arguments, the council members’ attendance and involvement in the Annual Parish Meeting would demonstrate that the council is prepared to take account of local residents’ views, which they must hold strongly if they have gone to the trouble attend the Annual Parish Meeting in the first place."Last year BPC ran the APM as a council meeting with residents' questions remaining unanswered, we hope that with new councillors that this will be corrected this year. Questions that you may wish to raise at the meeting:
2019 APM incorrect minutes re: resolution and outcomeWhat is happening to the Settlement Boundary and BPC councillor`s 10% expansion suggestion?Resident complaint to NSC re: Openness and Leadership upheld - will residents now have more open access to BPC decision making and expenditure?How are Bleadon'sbrownfields and potentialfracking in Bleadon being considered in BPC's Neighbourhood Development Plan, why the lack of public discussion over the last 21 months?NDPHow do BPC inform residents of any NSC and other public consultations that they may wish to respond to?How will the agreed Bristol Airport expansion and Joint Spatial Planconsultations affect Bleadon e.g Joint Local Transport Plan March 2019 Min 320.10---
Link to previousAPM 2018 Blog]]>
Do Bleadon's green field sites really need to be built on? How are NSC's Local Plan and BPC's proposed Neighbourhood Development Plan identifying and considering any brownfield sites in Bleadon? According to a CPRE 2019 report, which is based on analysis of council's brownfield registers ...
"- Every local planning authority now has a brownfield register recording brownfield land considered to be suitable for housing led development.
- Brownfield registers continue to show enough suitable brownfield land is available for more than 1 million homes across over 18,000 sites and over 26,000 hectares."
Also Inside Housing article states:
"England has enough derelict or vacant land to build more than one million new homes – two-thirds of which are ready to start immediately, new research has found"
More Brownfield and sustainability anddark sky information can be found on BOB
----]]>
UPDATE: Appeal DISMISSED/refused on 31 MAR 20
UPDATE: Appeal started 15 OCT 2019 ReferenceAPP/D0121/W/19/3237546
UPDATE: ApplicationREFUSED by NSC on 01 AUG 2019.
-----------
"Change of use of land from agricultural use to use as a woodland pre-school. Erection of pre-school storage building with sedum roof, compost toilets and associated car parking and access arrangements "
Comments deadline is15 Apr 2019. Here is the link to the application 19/P/0525/FUL on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
---
Related information onWentwood Drive 60 Houses
]]>
UPDATE 11 MAR 2019: BPC were less than open when discussing this issue in their public meeting i.e. not mentioning that this complaint was upheld by NSC re: a breach of the Code of Conduct in respect of Openness and Leadership (Mar 19 Min 320.23)
---
As many of you are aware BOB has been scrutinising and campaigning for many years for residents to have full transparent access to information regarding our Parish Council’s decision making and public tax/precept expenditure. On 5 Feb 19 North Somerset'sStandards Committeeconsidered a complaint from a member of the public (not BOB):
“The Sub-Committee considered the complaint, together with the response from the Councillor concerned and received the views of the Independent Lay Person and Independent Parish Councillor. In considering the key issues, theSub-Committee concluded that the Councillor’s actions had breached Bleadon Parish Council’sCode of Conduct, in particular; Openness and Leadership.” (Min SSC 18 highlighted)
Councillors will be discussing this breach at the end of their next meeting on 11 Mar 19 (Min 320.23). Despite the lower priortiy in their agenda, item #23, we hope councillorswill now more openly consult residents on major issues that may affect our community, and publish their ‘closed’ council and project group Terms of Reference, Agenda, Minutes, Reports, expentiture, etc. (especially as BPC is our Statutory Consultee!). BOB has also written to NSC in support of the residentincluding areference documentre: previous 2017/18 lack of openness and transparency.
Example 1: For over two yearsBOB has been making Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) aware of the potential of ‘fracking’ in our community, and surrounding neighbours, yet it has consistently refused to raise this issue in a public forum. Last year BOB again asked BPC to inform residents and ask their views, including asking BPC’s Neighbourhood Development Plan Working Group to add a question in their January Survey (BOB Blogand Feb 19Min 319.11). Each time councillors, and working group, decided not to inform residents, why?
At the last BPC public meeting, February, the Chairman of Frack Free North Somerset presented the outline `fracking` issues (Min 319.3i & ii). BPC listened but didn’t discuss the issue as it was not an agenda item. BPC has since decided not to add it to theircurrent agenda, or to ask for a subsequent presentation as offered. This is despite someresidents already receiving requestsfrom an energy company to survey their land for potential development. Why isn’t BPC making information on this issue available so that residents can make informed decisions?
Even if councillors support fracking, in our, and surrounding neighbourhoods, surely residents and landowners have the right to be made aware of what the energy companies are planning to do? Surely residents have the right to make informed decisions about any future development that may occur and any potential health and safety hazards?
----
SeeBleadon Fracking blogandBOB's fracking page.andnewspaper articles
Also, link toWe are not Alone blogre:Brent Knoll residentsconcern about how local councillors are respresenting and/or misrepresentingthem.]]>
UPDATE 12 Mar 19: BPC didn't raise the issue of fracking at their 11 Mar meeting, why is BPC still avoiding informing residents of this issue, despite being made aware of it over 3 years ago?
---
Petroleum Exploration & Development (aka fracking) may be coming to Bleadon as minuted in Bleadon Parish Council's (BPC) 11 Feb 19 minutes (319.3i & 319.3ii)
"i). The Chairman ofFrack Free North Somerset commented that landowners in Bleadon had been approached for exploration re fracking. He stated that fracking impacts greatly on traffic, health and most importantly on water quality. Drilling for fossil fuels in Bleadon would be foolish due to the number of aquifers in the fissured limestone of the Mendips. Plans to drill in Keynsham were halted when it was realised that it would taint the purity of the Roman Baths. He offered to bring a presentation to another meeting. A second member of the public supported these statements and asked whether the council had been approached. The Government is looking to take away the right for local councils to be consulted on mineral extractions. The company looking at Bleadon (South Western Energy) are going for oil production, not just exploration"
ii) Cllr Terry Porter referred to the fracking – NSC has beenstrongly against the change to permitted development rights regarding minerals, as have most other councils"
As always residents and landowners need quick, simple access to timely and accurate information to be able to make informed decisions. We can all learn from other communites e.g. in the UK (Lancashire) and America (Dryden). We all need to know what may happen to our environment, health, etc. both in short and long term e.g. who is responsible for anyclean up should developers walk away, or decommission sites, etc.
We therefore assume Bleadon Parish Council will put this highly important issue on their next agenda to further public understanding and discussion, i.e. Monday 11th March 2019 at 7pm in the Coronation Hall.
See alsoBleadon Fracking blog and BOB's fracking page.andnewspaper articles]]>
Plans to introduce a new 40mph speed limit along the A38 between the Edithmead roundabout and East Brent have been unveiled this week in a bid to make the busy route safer.
Somerset County Council has this week published a Speed Limit Order proposal to introduce a 40mph limit for the stretch of road highlighted in red on the above map. It includes Brent Knoll’s Fox and Goose junction, which is a well-known accident blackspot.
For more information seeBurnham-on-Sea.com]]>
(See Letter below)
UPDATE 26 MAY 19: Frack Free North Somerset (FFNS) call apublic Fracking Meeting in Bleadon 11 June at 7:30pm
UPDATE 11 MAR 19: Residentcomplaint upheld by NSC re: councillor breach ofBleadon Parish Council’sCode of Conduct, in particular; Openness and Leadership
UPDATE: 12 FEB 19 email from Bleadon Parish Council's Clerk following Monday's public meeting, "I am responding in my role as Clerk to the parish council and support to the NPGroup ...Fracking – no discussion at council, not mentioned by any resident on any of the surveys I have seen (which is only about 100 of the 281). You ask ‘why’ fracking was not on the survey – well, your email requesting it be put on the survey was noted but the issue was not considered relevant to this early stage survey. The [Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Planning Working]Group decided the questions – you were not on the group. No other resident requested any particular question."
UPDATE: 11 Feb 19 (Mins 319.3 & 319.11) Frack Free North Somerset speak at BPC public meeting and BPC's response.
----
BOB has been informed that a landowner on Roman Road, Bleadon, has received a fracking related letter as seen on theFrack Free EQSfacebook post (see copy below). It seems that Oil and Gas Exploration Survey letters are being sent to various North Somerset landowners.
On 8 Feb 19Drill or Drop?wrote: "Frack Free North Somerset has established that at least two landowners in the parish of Bleadon had been contacted by the company. The group said both had declined the rental offer. A large, but unspecified rental fee had been mentioned, the group said.The issue is likely to be discussed next week at the meeting of Bleadon parish council (Monday 11 February 2019) and by Frack Free North Somerset at its planning meeting (Tuesday 12 February 2019) ..."
"... Richard Lawson from Frack Free North Somerset said, “The central thing that will, or should, kill this attempt to extract is that it is actually on the Mendip Hills, which are fissured limestone.So any drilling, particularly fracking, will inevitably contaminate the interconnected waterways that run through the limestone, importantly to Banwell, where Weston super Mare derives much of its water, and to the tourist areas of Cheddar, Wookey and Wells.A plan to frack in Keynsham, on the other end of the Mendips, was abandoned because it would contaminate the Roman Baths at Bath.”
More information can be found on the BOB Fracking pageincluding information onNorth Somerset and Bleadon Parish Councillors' view on this topic.
BOB has been raising the fracking issue with Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) since 2016, e.g. Nov 18, and requested a question(s) in the recent Jan 2019 BPC Neighbourhood Development Plan survey, as reflected in a recent BOB NDP blog. So, hopefully BPC are prepared to answer any residents concerns.
The next Parish Council meeting is on Monday 11 Feb 2019, 7pm, at the Coronation Hall, but please note that this is not on the published agenda.
-----------------
Frack Free EQS - Facebook Post 07 Feb 2019
Oil and Gas Exploration Survey letters sent to North Somerset landowners!
South Western Energy has finally shown their hand with exploration plans for Bleadon in North Somerset. Bleadon is just a few miles south of Weston-super-Mare and lies within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).
If you are a farmer or landowner please thoroughly research this contentious issue before making any decisions on whether to allow access to your land, or to lease or sell land to the oil and gas industry. Your long-term health and livelihood may be at stake. Please let us know if you have been approached.
In the event that you might be opposed to the possibility of oil and gas production activities despoiling this area, and further contributing to the climate crisis, please note that the next meeting to be held by Bleadon Parish Council will take place on Monday 11th Feb at Coronation Hall, Bleadon, 7pm. Or write to the parish Clerk at parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk and ask that they put oil and gas exploration/development on their agenda and allow the public to participate at the meeting.
Let's support them and get the message out there that this area is potentially under threat from fracking.
Attached is a letter from Gerwyn Williams, CEO of South Western Energy, to a resident of Bleadon. We can confirm that the letter is genuine and that other landowners have been contacted to request access to their land for the purposes of undertaking pre-drilling application surveys. The image quality of theattached photo is poor so for your convenience this is what can be deciphered:
5th December 2018
(Name & partial address withheld)
Roman Road
Bleadon
Dear Madam Re: HYDROCARBON EXPLORATION - Bleadon, Weston-super-Mare
Our company, South Western Energy Limited, holds Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence xxx (xxxxx) which was granted by the Oil and Gas Authority in the 14th Onshore Licensing Round and is exclusive in terms of hydrocarbon exploration. We would like to carry out exploration work for hydrocarbons on your land near Bleadon, Weston-Super-Mare. This limited exploration process(?) does not include any drilling or fracking but a walkover xxx using a small team that can carry equipment over the land, is a non-intrusive and would take around 3(?) hours to complete. Following the results of this test we would have a much clearer picture in terms of the presence of hydrocarbons or otherwise. This work does not need planning permission. There is xxxx from this xxx xxxxx xxxxx to agree the best location for the exploration work. Please see attached the following location plan: xxxxxx Location Plan [Ref: xxxxxxx] From our initial geological modelling the site shows good potential for the production of hydrocarbons. Initially we would like to gain a temporary licence from you to carry out a walkover test. If this test xxxx positive, we would like to reach an agreement with you to drill a well and negotiate a long term production related rent payable to you which will represent a long term, stable income for you if production is successful.
Signed by Gerwyn Williams
---
Previous fracking blogNSC Councillors Vote to Determine Local Fracking Bids
BOBFracking page]]>
We have been informed by a resident that "The relevant council committee are meeting on 13th Feb to consider the Devils Bridge planning application. The planning officer's recommendation is that it GOES AHEAD. Would ... anyone ... be willing to address the meeting on behalf of those who are opposed? Three minutes are allowed for this"
Previous application informationand some resident feedback
If you can help please contact usor sendan email to bob@bleadon.org.uk and we will pass your feedback onto the resident concerned.
]]>
"TAKE PART: 2 February - 23 February
Help us reclaim our dark skies
Dark, starry skies are one of the most magical sights the countryside can offer. But light pollution means many of us can’t see the stars.We want to reconnect people with the wonder of our glorious night skies.
You can take part in #StarCount2019 and help us find our darkest skies, to ensure more of us can experience this natural wonder.
Our Star Count will take place this February, with support from theBritish Astronomical Association, and we’ll be asking you to look up at the night sky and tell us how many you can see in Orion. You can do this from anywhere in England.
Your results will help us to create a map showing the best places to enjoy the stars. And it will also support our work to combat light pollution and reclaim our dark skies.
How to take part in Star Count 2019:Try to pick a clear night for your count, with no haze or clouds, then wait until after 7pm so the sky is really dark.We’ll be accepting results taken from Saturday 2 February until Saturday 23 February, but the best time to do the count is from 2-9 February, when the moon is smallest, so the skies are darkest!"
More information on how to count the stars with the naked eye for the2019 count surveyand to submit your count.
Current CPRE Map for North Somerset Light Pollution
Other Information:]]>
UPDATE 11 Mar 18 BPCResident Complaint Upheld
---
Bleadon residents are not the only ones concerned with how local councillors are respresenting and/or misrepresenting them. Below is an open letter from a Sedgemoor resident who has "...lodged a complaint about the Sedgemoor decision to allow that appalling application ...to build 18 houses so close to the A38."
OPEN LETTER TO JAMES HEAPPEY, MP
Dear James,
You are the MP for the residents of Brent Knoll, and we need your help.
We need you to ask the Secretary of State for Housing & Local Government to call in the application by Coln Residential to develop 18 houses at 2 Brent Street – a wholly inappropriate site for development of any kind.
We have demonstrated, at every one of the three attempts by Coln Residential to secure planning consent for this site, that we are united in our opposition to their plans to build houses at the junction of Brent Street and the A38.
We live here, so we know that this location (outside the approved development zone) is wholly inappropriate for house-building.
The access to this site is perilously close to the already dangerous junction between Brent Street and the hugely busy A38. Indeed, the Parish Council supported an earlier application (having previously discounted this site for development) solely on the basis that the developer was offering a traffic-lights solution to that dangerous junction.
That application proved too costly, so the developer (Coln Residential) went back to the drawing board and came up with this P4 application, on the basis of delivering 7 “affordable homes”. Our Parish Council was, for the third time, split down the middle, so sent a message to Sedgemoor District Council of “No Observations” – which belied the true picture.
On every one of the three occasions that Coln Residential submitted a planning application, the Parish Council was split in two. The defining issue is that one councilor, who happens to be our District Councilor, our County Councilor, and the Chair of Sedgemoor’s Development Committee, chose to abandon his long-held policy of absenting himself from planning matters at the Parish Council.
[The counillor]chose, for some reason, to remain in those Parish Council meetings, to speak, and to vote, in favour of every one of Coln Residential’s applications.
This meant that we, the objectors, were limited to just one speaker and just three minutes when Sedgemoor’s Development Committee met to decide the matter last Tuesday.
[His]actions meant three things:
• He steered the Brent Knoll Parish Council to back this disastrous application, ignoring the overwhelming opposition of the residents;
• He engineered the “No observation” response from the Parish Council that the Sedgemoor Development Committee told us would be interpreted as acceptance of the application;
• He robbed us of our right to have our District and County councilor to speak for us: he had to absent himself from the Sedgemoor meeting because he had taken part in the Parish Council discussions.
This is outrageous.
What is worse, the planning officers at Sedgemoor District Council chose to promote this application – in order to tick the box of having provided “affordable housing” in Brent Knoll – and twisted the rules in order to do so.
They were minded to have this application dealt with (and approved) under delegated powers, until your predecessor (Tessa Munt) introduced us to another County Councilor (Bill Revans), who insisted that it be brought before the Development Committee, having seen and agreed with our deep concerns.
Indeed, every one of the Development Committee members who spoke (we have an audio-record of that meeting) voiced many of the concerns that we have for that site.
They were batted aside by the two planning officers, who were not restricted to a three-minute time limit. They spoke for ages!
When it came to the crucial issue of this being a P4 application, that must be community-led or supported, those planning officers decided to change the rules and say that they were treating this application under the yet-to-be approved T5 formula, that will (if approved) reduce community engagement from vital to “be encouraged”!
This application was opposed by more than 80 detailed objections submitted to Sedgemoor’s own planning consultation website, and more than 100 signatures on a petition. Just six people supported the application.
We have now submitted a complaint to the Local Authority Ombudsman, and hope that you will recognise the need for you to ask the Secretary of State for Housing & Local Government to call in this application.
Very best wishes
David]]>
Appeal date set as 23 July 2019
The decision will now be made by a planning inspector following a public inquiry. Planning Inspectorate webpage link to appeal reference hereAPP/D0121/W/18/3211789and NSC application number17/P5545/OUT
SeeBAT (Bleadon Acting Together) pagefor links to futher information on the appeal process.
Also, previous blog posts below for more background information:
NSC Decision on Sanders Fields Housing AppealedNSC Refuses 200 Houses in BleadonBridge/Bleadon Road 200 Houses plus other facilitesSchool and 250 Houses Planned]]>
UPDATE 10 OCT 22 (Min 356.7.11 After £8K+BPC "To resolve to replace the Bleadon Neighbourhood Plan with a Bleadon Village Plan [shouldn't this be a Parish Plan?] Resolved to take the stated action" Also, Min 356.4.19 "Neighbourhood Plan Group – Return of Grant? The Clerk advised the meeting that any unspent monies would be required to be returned".
NB: The original Parish Plan was a 20 year plan adopted by full council in 2009. So although it's still vailid it also appear to be still lost!
UPDATE 11 JUL 22 (Min 355.9.k) "Neighbourhood Plan Group Clerk waiting to hear whether or not the unused funds can be subsumed into the parish council accounts in order to assist with match funding"But BPC has not declared that the NDP project has been closed yet, and still has never had a public meeting?
UPDATE 09 MAY 22 (Min 353.7.c) BPC confirm new, "Neighbourhood Plan Group Cllrs. H Boyce S Garrett and G Williams"
UPDATE 16 NOV 20: Still no update with regards to NDP Working Group since Feb 20 (Min 331.6),nor any annoucement of a public meeting since the project started June/July 2017, following thepublic meetingcancellation in Dec 2019, inBVN114.
UPDATE: 26 AUG 20 "Planning Reform Summaryfrom Locality
"Without details, it is difficult to be definitive, but based on [Locality's] interpretation of the [government'sWhite Paper - Planning for the Future(Aug 20)] , the following could be potential implications:
Neighbourhood plans would be able to continue to include detailed design guidance and codes... to shape development ...Neighbourhood plans may not be able to allocate sites for development (including housing), and it is not clear if they will/will not be able to categorise land under the categories of growth, renewal and protected..Neighbourhood plans may largely not be able to include development management policies, i.e. policies that planning officers normally take into account when deciding on planning applications ...Implications on public participation in decision making: Under the current planning system the public largely have two core opportunities to shape planning:
1. at the local/neighbourhood plan development stage, and2. at the planning application stage when applications for development on specific sites are put forward.Under the proposed reforms the second opportunity will largely be removed, with public participation taking place mainly at the plan development stage. This is because under the proposals the principle of development may be agreed at the local plan development stage."[How are the NDP and NSC Local Plans related?]
UPDATE:06 AUG 2020 "Affordable housing 'will diminish due to UK planning changes'. National Housing Federation criticises idea of developer levy replacing obligation to provide social housing" (PDF)
UPDATE: March 2020: By the end of the financial year, over a year after the survey was undertaken, BPC has still had not convened a public meeting, nor declared the five 'anecedotal sites' it hadindicated in its twogrant submissions, norprogressed the NDP in public. No NDP working group has beenpublicly documented since prior to the 200 Houses Appeal in October 2020, but was referred to in the Mar 20 Min 331.6 & Min 332.5. NB: On 26 March 20 the country went into COVID19 Lockdownand BPC stopped publicly documenting any of its subsequent decision making and/or expenditure.
UPDATE Winter/Nov 19:BVN-114 - "The Neighbourhood Planning group has not met for the last 2months. We are waiting for the resultof the appeal againstthe 200 houses before we call a villagemeeting in January to decide, what we have to do next.". When was the cancellation of the November public meeting discussed and agreed by BPC Full council, not in the 11 Nov 19 meeting?
UPDATE OCT 2019 (Min 327.9.iii) "The Clerk to liaise with Mr Quick and the Hall Booking Clerk to find a suitable date at the end of November and publicise this date in the noticeboards the council's website and Neighbourhood Plan website, as well as in the Bleadon Village News" -NB BPC Newsletter deadline was stated but not minuted to be the first week Nov 19.
UPDATE Autumn 19:BVN-113 - BPC submit the survey results to the Sanders Fields Appeal Inspector, quoting a 56% household response compared with the NDP Working Group minutes stating a30% resident response?
" The response to the survey had been magnificent – 281 questionnaires completed in total (130 online) ...There are just under 500 houses in the village and just over 950 adults on the electoral roll, so 281 was a very good number – nearly 30%. It was noted that some people from outside the village may have completed surveys but, given the local delivery of the survey and the local issues it questioned, the number is likely to be small."(20 FEB 19)
UPDATE: 08 JULY 19 (Min 324.18) "...TheFirst Survey Results document has now been delivered to most homes in the parish" . Residents have been asking how much is this project costing? Clear simple figures are hard to find but at least £3,766 as been spent so far, not including BPC Clerk meeting attendance and subsequent action time (i.e. £1,733 grant and £2,033 BPC resident precept/taxes). A further £2Kis planned for the coming year.
UPDATE: 10 JUN19: (Min 323.19) "...The final survey will be printed within two weeks."
UPDATE: 13 MAY 10 (Min 322.27) "...Survey results to be circulated to households soon."
UPDATE:12 FEB 19 [A NDP should cover all aspects of Bleadon, i.e. the land, underground (including water tables), sky above, etc. So why were these aspects purposely excluded from the Survey/Questionnaire without any BPC or NDP WG public or minuted discussions, especially with Bleadon's 'fracking licence' and ongoing expansion of Bristol Airport?] email from Bleadon Parish Council's Clerk following Monday's public meeting,
"I am responding in my role as Clerk to the parish council and support to the NPGroup...Fracking – no discussion at council, not mentioned by any resident on any of the surveys I have seen (which is only about 100 of the 281). You ask ‘why’ fracking was not on the survey – well, your email requesting it be put on the survey was noted but the issue was not considered relevant to this early stage survey. The[Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Planning Working]Group decided the questions – you were not on the group. No other resident requested any particular question."
UPDATE:11 Feb 19 (Mins 319.3 & 319.11) Frack Free North Somerset speak at BPC public meeting and BPC's response. [Fracking/mineral extraction is part of NSC's Local Plan Policies. Bleadon has 'fracking' licences in the parish and therefore the public's view on this topic should be addressed in its final NDP, ifBPC creates one. NB: FFNS subsequently hold a public meeting on 11 June 2019.]
-----
There are over 1000 residents in Bleadon living in approximately 500 dwellings, with approximately 325 houses within in the village Settlement Boundary and an additional 175+ throughout the remaining parish. As of 10 Jan 2019 all residents within the parish should be recieving a copy of the Bleadon Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) 'Questionnaire Survey'' in paper format, but they can also fill out the survey online.
This is aBPC project undertaken by a working group and we assume that BPC will be publishing itsproject information soon, answeringresident's questions and ensuring that they are fully informed as to the project intentions and progression.
Residents only have three weeks to respond to this NDP Survey i.e. by 31 Jan 2019. You may wish to consider the following topics in your response:
BPCs ongoing long-term projects e.g. A370, Play Park, Public/Bleadon Rights Of Way, Bleadon in Bloom, etc.; and of course the NDP project itself which may need to be repeated every2 yearslocal projects, developments and potential business expansions/applications e.g. fracking, the Quarry, leisure expansion on the levels - Wake Park, Caravan Parks, etc,, Sewage Treatment Works and Bleadon Level's Nature Reserveregional projects e.g.Bristol Airport expansion.consultations that will affect Bleadon's NDP e.g.NSC Local Plan 2036, (Settlement Boundary Review) and JSP, which directly influences NSC's Local Plan and this NDPcleanup projects to help rid our environment from litter and plasticalong with anypotential project funding questions and other suggestions you may haveThe NDP is primarily a development plan, as compared to Bleadon's adopted Parish Plan, and consultation will "engage and consult those living and working in the neighbourhood area and those with an interest in or affected by the proposals (eg service providers), and talk to land owners and the development industry ...". There aremany stages to the NDP process, which should be an open and transparent process ending with a Bleadon electorate vote/referendum on the final document.
This Questionnaire Survey is your opportunity to indicate what you DO and DO NOT want to happen in the future of Bleadon
-------------
BOBNeighbourhood Development Plan page
First and only BPC public meeting, referring to Claverham NDP.
BlogBPC, NDP and BOB ...- Dec 2017
]]>
UPDATE See the current number offlights over your area, e.g. 17 Apr 20 duringCOVID-19 restrictions.
UPDATE 24 MAY 2019Bristol Airport Expansion Update
UPDATE 14 JAN 2018: BPC "AGREED to submit a neutral response, with the comments noted." Jan 19 (Min 318.7)
--------------
A large-scale application "operating within a rolling annualised cap of 4,000 night flights between the hours of 23:30 and 06:00 with no seasonal restrictions;" How will this affect Bleadon if it is on any known or proposed flight paths, either for general flights or maintenance flights said to be in Wales?
"Outline planning application (with reserved matters details for some elements included and some elements reserved for subsequent approval) for the development of Bristol Airport to enable a throughput of 12 million terminal passengers in any 12 month calendar period, comprising: 2no. extensions to the terminal building and canopies over the forecourt of the main terminal building; erection of new east walkway and pier with vertical circulation cores and pre-board zones; 5m high acoustic timber fence; construction of a new service yard directly north of the western walkway; erection of a multi-storey car park north west of the terminal building with five levels providing approximately 2,150 spaces and wind turbines atop; enhancement to the internal road system including gyratory road with internal surface car parking and layout changes; enhancements to airside infrastructure including construction of new eastern taxiway link and taxiway widening (and fillets) to the southern edge of Taxiway GOLF; the year-round use of the existing Silver Zone car park extension (Phase 1) with associated permanent (fixed) lighting and CCTV; extension to the Silver Zone car park to provide approximately 2,700 spaces (Phase 2); improvements to the A38; operating within a rolling annualised cap of 4,000 night flights between the hours of 23:30 and 06:00 with no seasonal restrictions; revision to the operation of Stands 38 and 39; and landscaping and associated works."
Comments deadline is Sat 26 Jan 2019 . Here is the link to the application18/P/5118/OUT on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
-----------
Unfortunately, BPC do not appear to have submitted comments for the Local Plan Consultation Section 7 after their 10 Dec 2018 (Min 317.12) meeting, or the two previous Airport Consultations for Stage 1 (Jan 2018) or Stage 2 (July 2018).
See NSC Local Plan 2036 Consultation Section 7 - Bristol Airport -"The Airport wants to double permitted air traffic to 20 mppa by the 2040s. In the short-term it seeks a relaxation of existing limits to allow for growth to 12 mppa. Its longer-term ambitions for growth will be set out in a new Airport Master Plan. Through the JSP, North Somerset Council recognises the existence of additional growth opportunities at the Airport but many detailed local issues remain to be resolved."
Unfortunately, BPC do not appear to have submitted comments for the Local Plan Consultation Section 7, or the two previous Airport Consultations for Stage 1 (Jan 2018) or Stage 2 (July 2018). Also BPC made no reference to their views on this issue in their 10 Dec 2018 (Min 317.12) Local Plan 2036 response to NSC. BPC's expansion response to NSC Jan 19 (Min 318.7):
"18/P/5118/OUT – Bristol Airport – expansion. Cllr Hemingway attended a presentation about the expansion and Cllr Baines had reviewed a considerable number of the 270+ documents on the website. This phase is to add 2 million passengers per year to the current permitted 10 million per year. NSC is working with the airport to develop the operational plan to 2036. Current plan is to relocate the DHL unit and staff buildings; and to add two storeys to the existing multi-storey carpark. The current restriction on flights between midnight and 6am will remain. The airport is ensuring that small and local business / contractors are able to win contracts for the various project elements.Concerns raised by Councillors were that traffic would increase on the A38 and there would be ‘rat-running’ through the village; air pollution may increase due to the traffic and also due to more flights going over the village.Positives raised were that Bleadon residents use the airport and/or are employed there; and an increase in employment opportunities is welcomed. It was AGREED to submit a neutral response, with the comments noted."RESIDENT COMMENT 26 JAN 19]]>
There are a number of "Planning Applications/Appeals/Enforcement not yet decided" on BPC's Jan 2019 Agenda (Min 318.9)]]>
UPDATE 15 JAN 20 - SeeBOB comment below re:mis-communication and subsequent frustration on social media with regards this application.
UPDATE 13 JAN 20 - SeeBAT comment belowwho want "... to find 10 people who want to see an election for the remaining seats on the Parish Council ..." in order to represent the 'village'.
UPDATE POSTED by NSC Highways 06 JAN 20 - "ADDENDUM Dated 30.12.19 ... The application is therefore now for 14 properties with revisions to the internal road layout ... no highways objection to the application"
--
UPDATE 14 JAN 19 Bleadon Parish CouncilMin 318.7
"18/P/5035/OUT - Land Off Purn Way. Proposed erection of 16no. dwellings.
Cllrs Williams and Sheppard visited the site. The site is between the settlement boundary and the allotment gardens. The density appeared to be appropriate for the site and should include affordable units. Bearing in mind that the village has limited options for sites for growth, the application was recommended for approval.
Councillors noted that BPC objected to the previous application and it was suggested that BPC should do so again to be consistent, using the same comments because the application did not address those original concerns. It was noted that NSC has approved applications outside settlement boundaries. Concerns were raised regarding ecology protection, traffic and flooding. It was AGREED to object to the application (3 [BAT] votes for object, 2 votes for neutral).
Standing Orders suspended: Cllr Porter advised that objections needed to cite planning reasons rather than simply dislike of the application. Standing Orders resumed."See currentandprevious submissions.
UPDATE: 08JAN 19 Bleadon Acting Together (BAT) sumbitted a commissioned independent Ecology Report to NSC.
--
A new "Outline application for the proposed erection of 16no. dwellings with matters of appearance, landscaping and scale reserved for subsequent approval", outside the Settlement Boundary. As of Jan 2020 the application is for 14 dwellings.
Comments deadline is now Friday 08 February 2019, was Monday 14 Jan 2019. Here is the link to the application18/P/5035/OUT on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
Archaeology Report
Link to previous application.
-------------
BPC Submitted Obection
Coronation Hall Coronation Road Bleadon BS24 0PG (Objects)
Comment submitted date: Mon 14 Jan 2019
"At the meeting on 14th January 2019 Bleadon Parish Council resolved to object to this application. The Parish Council objected to the previous application on this site and the primary objections remain, namely that the site is outside the settlement boundary of this infill village, that the roads in the immediate vicinity are inadequate and additional traffic will put unacceptable strain on the existing roads, and that the ecology of the site will be damaged.
In addition, the current village infrastructure is not fit to support this size of housing development. Parking of vehicles is currently an issue on Purn Way for residents and visitors to the meeting rooms at the Post Office. The A370 Road junctions are currently dangerous and additional traffic will exacerbate the problem.
The sewerage system is currently at capacity and additional dwellings will add additional pressure to the system. An increase in flooding to the bottom of the village may occur as the field has no proper drainage. The development does not contribute to sustainability in the village - there are no schools or doctors and only one shop in Bleadon."
UPDATE 06 JAN 20 - NSC HIGHWAYS - ADDENDUM Dated 30.12.19
"The applicant has submitted revised plans for the site layout as there is a need for an ecological buffer along the northern and eastern site boundaries. This has resulted in a new layout with two fewer dwellings on the site. The application is therefore now for 14 properties with revisions to the internal road layout. The site now being served by a simple T junction with spur roads from each side. For the number of properties proposed the revised site layout is acceptable to highways.
Additional Note: Home to School Travel. New housing developments must be mindful of proximity to local primary and secondary schools. In the event of a development being unable to provide a safe walking route or exceeding the statutory walking distances, North Somerset Council may seek recompense to mitigate the need for school transport. Details of the Council’s home to school transport policy can be found on the North Somerset Council’s website.
There is currently home to school transport provided for the dwellings in the areas surrounding the proposal site due to these dwellings exceeding statutory walking distances and because there are no safe walking routes. The applicant should be aware that S106 contributions for home to school transport would be required.
Recommendation Subject to the above there are no highways objection to the application."
BOB Comment
There has been a lot of social media activity regarding this site since Monday night's (13/1/20) Bleadon Parish Council meeting (see below).
This application is not new, just undetermined as it is still being processed by NSC, therefore the comments previously submitted will be considered by North Somerset Council. Bleadon Parish Council was asked by attending residents to rediscuss this application at yesterday's BPC meeting, 13 Jan 20 (NB. BPC will probably not publish their associated minutes and comment submission until next month's meeting!). As the recent Sanders Appeal has clearly shown, NSC Local Plan policies, and any fully adopted Neighbourhood Plan, dictate planning decisions. However theNPPF will override North Somerset Council (NSC) if built housing is under the prescribed government quota.
It should be noted that NSC Core Strategy CS17 (Rural Exceptions Scheme) allows for settlement boundaries to be 'flexed' in an CS33 infill village like Bleadon, if the housing proposed is affordable. (See current NSC policy documents).
Reference should also be made to the BPC's responses to the JSP(Joint Spatial Plan) and NSCLocal Plan 2036 consultations. E.g. Currently there is housing all along Bleadon's Settlement Boundary, except for the Quarry area. On 10 Dec 18 BPC indicated that a flex of settlement boundary may be acceptable at some point? "The current [NSC] policy should be amended to ensure that the size of any housing development adjacent to the boundary is limited in number to no more than 10% of the existing homes in the parish (currently circa 500 homes)"? However, most of the councillors who submitted this consultation comment have since resigned!
The fundamental creation and adoption of a Neighbourhood Development Plan (unlike a Parish Plan) prescribes that Bleadon identify sites where housing will be permitted. As well as the ongoing maintenance obligation and cost to Bleadon, BOB has always argued that identification of sites by BPC would inevitably create conflict amongst residents... Purn Way would appear to be one of them, but other sites adjacent to boundary have also already been considered for the JSP and NSC Local Plan purposes, as well as BPC's NDP as indicated in its recent grant application submission.
Which development sites are acceptable to residents is the question yet to be asked in the next phase of NDP creation by BPC? NB. Residents have been waiting for a fully informed pros/cons public debate on the Neighbourhood Development Plan project since it was started by BPC in July 2017.
BAT Comments 13 JAN 20 including former parish councillor comments (post)
"Bleadon Acting Together - BAT 13 January at 21:32 ·
To the parishioners of Bleadon- your depleted parish council has just voted 3-1 to support a planning application for a substantial building development outside the village fence. This is in direct contrast to the wishes of 71 of the immediate residents and in contradiction to the councils own objection lodged less than one year ago. To do this they have ignored the survey results collated in the neighbourhood plan where the overwhelming response was not to breach the settlement boundary. They have set a dangerous precedent for any future building at scale in our parish. We believe that this action constitutes a flagrant disregard of the wishes of the people of Bleadon and calls in the question their capability to represent us."
"Author Bleadon Acting Together - BAT
I suppose the only thing we can do is object to the planning application ourselves. https://planning.n-somerset.gov.uk/.../applicationDetails... Then we need to find 10 people who want to see an election for the remaining seats on the Parish Council - there are 5 seats left. The 10 ask the PC for an election before they can co-opt their friends and family on and continue to work against the village. Then we need people who will go on to the Parish Council - opened eyed and work together. This way the 5 will be able to represent the best interests of the village and will have 6 votes to 3. From all we have looked at this seems to be the only way - unless anyone else knows anything further."
Also seeHow it Should Work ... BOB Blog.]]>
Also see BOB'sEnvironmental Tableof articles and updates.
UPDATE BVN113 Autumn 2019 - Message from the BPC Chairman, "The council agreed to be 'plastic free' and 'frack free' - clearly, just saying it doesn't make it happen and so we will be working closely with everyone to make changes over time'
UPDATE JULY 2019: Bleadon Parish Council has added a 'litter' item to their July 2019 agenda (Min 324.11) "To Consider any legislation (new, amended, or potential) affecting the parish ... It has been suggested that the parish be declared ‘plastic free’ and 'frack free'." ..."AGREED".
UPDATE DEC 2018: NB: BOB again made NSC and BPC aware of the verge and litter issues in Dec 2018, and was informed that "An order will be passed to the contractor to litter pick the verge at this location. The vegetation will be monitored until the summer". We are yet to receive a response as to when and how the verges, rhynes and associated safety issues will addressed.
----
Bleadon Parish seems to be suffering from a litter epidemic, just look at the A370 and surrounding rhynes. Our community is not alone asDefra joins forces with Keep Britain Tidy to launch the ‘Keep it, Bin it’ campaign.
"Shocking images are at the centre of a new campaign unveiled today (30 November 2018) to crack down on littering in England ... supported by some of the biggest names in retail, travel and entertainment, the campaign features poignant images of wildlife eating and getting tangled in litter, contrasted against typical excuses for people give for dropping litter"DEFRA's Summary of Targets in their 25 year environment plan states,
"We want to improve the UK’s air and water quality and protect our many threatened plants, trees and wildlife species. Our environment plan sets out our goals for improving the environment within a generation and leaving it in a better state than we found it. It details how we in government will work with communities and businesses to do this."Environmentalist Mario Du Preez wrote this week in the Western Daily Press,
"Plastic pollution has now spread to our guts ...This puts a different spin on the plastic pollution question. Now, we no longer ask questions about how plastic pollution affects our oceans, our wildlife and our skies, but how it affects our own health."North Somerset advertises its South West in Bloom Award on the edge of Bleadon/Uphill on the polluted A370. How can the initial enthusiasm and community effort put into projects such as these be sustained to protect our environment after any award incentive? Let's hope the Bleadon in Bloom project by BPC (£2.4K resident precept Min 317.17), its Neighbourhood Plan (£2.5K resident precept + Grants F&P min 54.7), and its Parish Ranger can help tackle this problem for the whole parish not just the village!
How does BPC's Park/Play Area plans fit into this (£2.5K resident precept)? i.e. "Suggestions for Play Area included rubberised surfacing for the whole area (reducing costs from grass cutting and bark management) which would facilitate all uses" (Dec 18 F&P Min 54.7). Howdo BPC's projects and related decisions fit with their Environmental Policy, which is not currently published on their website? (Sept 18 Min 313.19)
The A370 is the key footpath from/to WSM, where nature andlitter currently compete to cover this path again, which can only get worse with additional housing and traffic! NSC needs to make its contractors perform better and take some accountability (e.g. street sweeping, recycling, refuse, highway maintenance, etc.)
----------
SOME KEY UPDATES
Also see BOB'sEnvironmental Tableof articles and updates.
17 JUN 19:G20Environment Ministers Agree toTackle Marine Plastic Waste.
22 MAY 19: England to Ban Sale of Plastic Straws, Stirrers and Cotton Buds by April 2020
29 MAR 19:EU Parliament Bans Plastics Responsible for 70% of Ocean Trash
18 FEB 19:UK Waste System ‘Overhaul’Would Make Plastic Polluters Pay
13 JAN 19:BOB NDP Survey blog asking residentsto include "cleanup projectto help rid our environment from litter and plastic" in their response
2018 -NSC Litter Picking Information
]]>
The map above was taken from the NSC E.g. SHLAA 2018 Interactive Map
(?offline Jan19 replaced with Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment HELAA 2014).
seeNSC SHLAA 2018 reportfor further information
inlcuding Appendix A 2018and Appendix B 2018
UPDATE 02 NOV 20:Local Plan 2038 Consultation Part 2
UPDATE: NSC "sharedfive videos during the consultation period": Video1, Video2, Video3, Video4, Video5. Were these shared with Parish Councils, e.g. as Statutory Consultees, during the consultation process, and if so, why were they not shared by BPC with residents so that they could make their own iinformed responses to the consultation?
UPDATE: MAR 2019:NSC'sIssues and Options Consultation Statement,the JSP"... will identify the new housing requirement for North Somerset and new strategic growth areas and infrastructure requirementsbut will not contain specific allocations. This will be the role of the North Somerset Local Plan"
UPDATE: 10 DEC 2018 (Min 317.12) - BPC agree aresponse re: Settlement Boundary, and submit to NSC (see introduction, Section 3, Q8 & Q9). Also see theChurch Commissioners for England's response.
----
The North Somerset 'Local Plan 2036 Issues and Options' consultationis due to close at noon, Monday 10 Dec 2018.
This NSC consultation is considering a range of issues that will directly affect development in Bleadon, e.g.Bleadon's Settlement Boundary Mapcontained within its Parish Boundary Map,
"Which settlements will have their boundaries reviewed? A review of the settlement boundaries will assess all settlements which have an existing boundary identified through the Core Strategy and Site Allocations Plan … Table 1 shows which settlements will be part of the settlement boundary review and their current status in the existing settlement hierarchy. Table 1: Settlements to be assessed through a settlement boundary review … Infill village Bleadon … Q9. What are your views on the options for revised settlement boundaries?" (Section 3.2 Settlement Boundaries, pg 24-27)BOB has approached BPC expressing our concern at the lack of BPC public consultation and information on this issue over the last 3 months. The change or loss of this Settlement Boundary could potentially make Bleadon a Service Village, i.e. the same as Backwell, Banwell, Churchill, Congresbury, Easton-in-Gordano/Pill, Long Ashton, Winscombe, Wrington and Yatton, potentially opening Bleadon up to the same level of development. BOB has also reminded councillors that Bleadon's adopted Parish Plan, documenting resident's views, states,
"Through the Planning process vigorously question all development outside the Village Settlement …Ensure that all new development remains within the Village Settlement Boundary"BPC has chosen not to raise and discuss this issue over the last 3 months, in its previous 4 publicly held meetings, but instead has decided to add it to their 10 Dec Agenda (Min 317.12), i.e. after the public deadline for comments.
The NSC Issues and Options document:
"...does not propose specific sites for new development at this stage. An indication of the potential opportunities which may be available is undertaken through the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)... You can see which sites have already been submitted for our consideration in the SHLAA which can be viewed on ourLocal Plan 2036 Evidence Base webpage." Also, visit the NSC interactive map. "...The next stage of the Local Plan will identify potential sites using the SHLAA and other evidence, taking account of the wider issues relating to settlement policy and the location of development to deliver a sustainable future pattern of development."Government guidanceon Neighbourhood Development Plans states:
"National planning policy states that it should support the strategic development needs set out in the Local Plan, plan positively to support local development and should not promote less development than set out in the Local Plan or undermine its strategic policies ...Nor should it be used to constrain the delivery of a strategic site allocated for development in the Local Plan."If you want to protect this boundary please make your comments directly to NSC.
I'm afraid they have made it complex but there are a series of topics with questions on all the aspects of the new plan, that can be seen and answered online in full or part by registering with NSC, also comments can be made by email.
In particular see 'Local Housing Growth' section and sub questions.
Hope that helps...
Alternatively you can: Email: planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.uk or Post: Planning Policy Team, Post point 15, Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ
Previous Settlement Boundary blog
Other Settlement Boundary information]]>
UPDATE 23 Nov 2018 -BAT has obtained Rule 6 status (ExMins 23 Nov 18)
-----
Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) has called an extra-ordinary meeting Friday 23 Nov 18 at 7pmto consider using the Parish Reserves for the Appeal for 200 houses on Bridge Road:
(Min 316.5) To Consider how to respond to the Planning Appeal regarding the proposed development of 200 homes on land between Bleadon Road and the A370. Comments to date will be taken into account by the Inquiry Inspector, who will also ask those present if they wish to speak. However, the Parish Council could request Rule 6 Status, putting it on the same footing as the Appellant and the Planning Authority. For Rule 6 it is recommended that a planning expert be briefed as cross-examination by the Appellant will take place.(Min 316.6) To Consider using Parish Council reserves to appoint a planning expert for Rule 6 Status.General Reserve £25,000.00,Special Reserve* £16,585.00 *this is a restricted reserve specifically for improvements in the parish.The first reason North Somerset Council (NSC) gave for the refusal of the 200 houses in itsDecision Notice was:
This unallocated rural site is in an unsustainable location outside the settlement boundaries of Bleadon and fails to have regard to the requirement that residential development needs, at least, to be within the boundary of the village …On 03 Sept 18 NSC opened a 3 month consultation, Local Plan 2036 Issues and Options, whichis due to close at noon on 10 Dec 18. It is considering:
"Which settlements will have their boundaries reviewed? A review of the settlement boundaries will assess all settlements which have an existing boundary identified through the Core Strategy and Site Allocations Plan … Table 1 shows which settlements will be part of the settlement boundary review and their current status in the existing settlement hierarchy. Table 1: Settlements to be assessed through a settlement boundary review … Infill village Bleadon … Q9. What are your views on the options for revised settlement boundaries?" (Section 3.2 Settlement Boundaries)By the end last week, 18 Nov 18, BPC had still not raised or discussed this consultation in an open forum, in any of their three BPC meetings (10 Sept, 08 Oct, 12 Nov), so:
BOB asked BPC to "... add the North Somerset 'Local Plan 2036 Issues and Options' consultation to the next BPC agenda".Today, after the ExM had been called on 20 Nov 18, BPC responded stating, "The agenda for the ordinary Parish Council meeting of 10th December is in preparation and NSC’s Local Plan 2036 consultation is already an item. They will accept the Parish Council’s comments on 11th December.", but will residents be allowed to submit their comments late too?What is the role of our Statutory Consultee if not to make residents of aware of issues or requests for public comments on highly influential consultations such as this, and give residents time to review the information and respond to BPC and/or NSC, before the deadline? Is it fair that BPC has been given 3 months and an extension to read and discuss a 96 page document, whereas some residents may only be aware of the consultation after the deadline?On Tuesday, 20 Nov 18, BPC posted notice of this extra-ordinary meeting for Friday 23 Nov 18.Bleadon's Infill status and Settlement Boundary could potentially be removed in the future, with Bleadon reclassified as a Service Village the same as Backwell, Banwell, Churchill, Congresbury, Easton-in-Gordano/Pill, Long Ashton, Winscombe, Wrington and Yatton.This will potentially affect the three fields at Bridge Road, whether the appeal is won or lost. Looking to the future of these fields we felt that the NSC consultation was relevant to this extra-ordinary meeting, i.e. to confirm that BPC would respond to it, and to give residents the opportunity to hear councillors views before responding too. BOB has therefore asked BPC to give a full response to the following at tomorrow's public meeting:
"Please can you tell me/residents why BPC has chosen to call an emergency meeting to protect three fields in Bleadon but have chosen for the fourth time not to publicly discuss the current NSC Local Plan 2036 consultation, which may potentially be used to protect all fields in Bleadon, not just these three, against large scale development and fracking; andwhy BPC has chosen not to make residents aware of the importance of this consultation,through its agenda, minutes and recent newsletter, e.g. informing them of the potential review of Bleadon's Settlement Boundary and their right to respond before the deadline on midday on the 10 Dec 2018, regardless of BPC's decision to discuss or respond, [itself]?"Other Settlement Boundary information]]>
UPDATE: 10 DEC 2018 (Min 317.12) - BPC agree aresponse re: Q51 Minerals and submit to NSC (related to fracking as indicatedin NSC Development Management Policies DM14 - DM19)
---
Mercury article, 15 Nov 2018, "Cllr Tom Leimdorfer proposed a motion at a North Somerset Council meeting on Tuesday stating shale gas development of any type should not be classed as a permitted development.
Central Government has been carrying out consultation on whether to make non-hydraulic fracking, which is the exploratory drilling process, a permitted development and therefore not subject to the normal planning process.
[NSC] Councillors overwhelmingly agreed to oppose any proposal for shale exploration to be allowed to bypass the authority’s planning system through permitted development.
Cllr Leimdorfer said: “This is not about the pros and cons of fracking, it is about how decisions are made in a democratic society" ... "
"... Frack Free North Somerset carried out a survey in Hutton, which could be affected as company Infinity Energy holds PEDLs across the Somerset coast.
Of the 181 people who responded, 87 per cent were opposed to fracking in the parish, nine per cent were undecided while only four per cent were in favour.
The group’s chairman Richard Lawson said: “Our survey shows clearly there is no social licence whatsoever to frack in the parish of Hutton.", i.e. the same Petroleum Exploration & Development Licence (PEDL) as Bleadon, see map.
-----
Previous fracking blogFracking Concerns Continue
Also, BOB Fracking page]]>
UPDATE 24 JAN 19: Appeal date set as 23 July 2019
---------------
As anticipated, on instruction by C Sanders, Sutherland PLC (the agent) has appealed against NSC decision to refuse outline permission for 200 houses and additional facilities. Citing the reason of 'non-determination' by NSC within the prescribed decision making time from the original application. This opens the door to the application to be determined by NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) criteria not just NSC Local Plan policies.
For your information and action please see key documents below obtained from theapplication webpage on NSC website:
Appeal Application Form (PDF copy)Planning Inspectorate 'start' letter to NSC (PDF copy)Appelants Statement of Case(PDF copy)The decision will now be made by a planning inspector following a public inquiry, date held yet to be determined but probably early in 2019. So as per letter above, any further comments should be made to the inspector by the deadline stated of 20 Decenber 2018. Planning Inspectorate webpage link to appeal reference hereAPP/D0121/W/18/3211789(NSC application number17/P5545/OUT)
SeeBAT (Bleadon Acting Together) page for links to futher information on the appeal process.
Also, previous blog posts below for more background information:
NSC Refuses 200 Houses in BleadonBridge/Bleadon Road 200 Houses plus other facilitesSchool and 250 Houses Planned]]>
One of our local two MP's, John Penrose, has written a new policy paper, where he shares his views on house-building in our communities.An extract can be seen in the New Statesman article, 09 Oct 2018, e.g.
"... we’d stop big developers from building where the local plans say they shouldn’t, by including the newly-created sites in the local five-year housing supply.""... it would be greener, reducing both commuting (because people can live closer to their jobs) and urban sprawl by cutting the pressure from builders to concrete over green fields and green belts at the edge of towns and cities across the country.""Cheaper homes are one of the most important ways of raising living standards for everyone and improving economic productivity. Building up, not out can go a long way to achieving it."The full policy paper can be seen here.]]>
UPDATE: 02 Nov 2018 - Independent, "Conservatives line up to criticise government's ‘downright bonkers’ fracking plans ... The government recently closed its consultation on whether new shale exploration sites should be treated as permitted developments ... There are reportedly up to 20 Conservative MPs ready to rebel over the government’s plan, which critics say would effectively strip local people of the ability to block fracking applications"
Fracking concerns continue for Bleadon's 2016 Petroleum Exploration & Development Licence as drilling restarts in Blackpool and earthquakes in the UK increase.
22 Oct 2018 - Mirror, "Blackpool hit byFIVE earthquake in three days after fracking started again in the area. The British Geological Society says there has been an upturn in seismic activity after the energy firm Cuardrilla recommenced operations last Monday"
20 Oct 2018 - Daily Mail, "Blackpool suffersFOUR earthquakes in just two days after fracking restarts in the area despite protests
Fracking for shale gas was banned in UK in 2011 after it caused two earthquakesProcess restarted last week at Lancashire site despite court battles and protestsDavid Smythe, professor of geophysics at University of Glasgow, warned more quakes were to come if work continues"02 Nov 2011 - Telegraph, "Cuadrilla admits drilling caused Blackpool earthquakes. Private company Cuadrilla Resources has admitted that its activities probably caused two "siemic events" that occured in Blackpool earlier this year".
---
See previousFracking Concerns
See also: NPPF Review in relation to frackingJuly 2018.]]>
For their next newsletter Bleadon Parish Council are inviting article contributions for publication from residents and local groups and also the potential for advertising from local businesses. If you are interested please contact Bleadon Parish Council Clerk.
As always, you can alsoContact BOB to advertise too.]]>
NSC has supported its Local Plan policies and refused outline permission for 200 houses in Bleadon (see previous blog). The developer may yet take this to appeal at which point all those that commented should be informed by NSC in due course and their comments sent to the Planning Inspector.
Things to consider if an appeal goes ahead:
NSC's reasons for refusal as stated in the Decison Notice(PDFcopy), and the Officer's Report(PDFcopy).Research previous appeals and Planning Inspector outcome reports, e.g. as seen on this BOB page.Refer to the revised NPPFand stakeholder views as indicated in the July NPPF Blog.Be aware of, and respond to, NSC's current Local Plan Consultation, which went out for consultation 3 Sept-10 Dec 2018. Athough this was not put on BPC's Sept Agenda, hopefully it will be raised and responded to in the near future.As far as BOB is aware if this goes to appeal NSC should/will defend their policies at their cost, It may all come down to NSC housing build numbers for government quota targets and Bleadon's sustainability and environmental impact, but ultimately the Planning Inspector will then decide final outcome.]]>
UPDATE: MAR 2019:NSC'sIssues and Options Consultation Statement,the JSP"... will identify the new housing requirement for North Somerset and new strategic growth areas and infrastructure requirementsbut will not contain specific allocations. This will be the role of the North Somerset Local Plan"Also seeConsultation replies and Sustainability comments.
UPDATE: 10 DEC 2018 (Min 317.12) - BPC response to NSC. Other public responses includetheChurch Commissioners for Englandandresponse 1 and response 2.
UPDATE: 05 DEC 2018: BOB BlogSettlement Boundary Review
----
North Somerset Council are inviting your views on their Local Plan 2036 – Issues and Options Document. The 3 month consultation will end at midday on 10 December 2018.
To respond to the consultation please visit www.n-somerset.gov.uk/localplan2036
The North Somerset Local Plan is a planning policy document which identifies where new housing, jobs,and infrastructure such as roads, schools, parks and health services will be built over the next 20 years. About 25,000 new homes are needed by 2036. Just under 14,000 are already earmarked, so just over 11,000 still need to be allocated. Two new villages north of Banwell and Langford and extensions to Nailsea and Backwell are proposed. Brownfield land, especially in Weston, will be used for new houses and apartments. Sites for a further 1,000 houses will also need to be found elsewhere in North Somerset.
This is an early stage in the plan-making process. The purpose of the Issues and Options document is to identify the issues which need to be addressed and to receive initial feedback on a range of proposed alternatives. It is not a draft plan and does not contain detailed policies or site allocations. Detailed draft policies will be consulted upon at a later date, taking into account the results of this consultation.
There will also be discussion forums on different topics throughout the consultation period which can be accessed from our website. You can make comments via theonline versionof the document. This is the most effective way to view the document and comment. Alternatively you can; Email your comments to: planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.uk orPost your comments to: Planning Policy Team, Post Point 15, Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-Super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.
You can also look at a paper copy of the document at your local library, atthe Town Hall, Weston-Super-Mare or at Castlewood, Clevedon by asking at reception.
--
PreviousNSC Local Plan 2036 - Generating Ideas Consultation]]>
UPDATE 07 FEB 19: Application refused by NSC.
UPDATE Bleadon Parish Council 10 Sept 2018 Min 313.6
"To Consider new Planning Applications 18/P/4105/FUL - South Hill Farm. Proposed storage barn - access off Purn Lane, Bleadon Hill. Councillors discussed whether it was necessary to have a site visit given that the application was the same as the withdrawn one, which had been visited. On the one hand consistency was important and the council should object again in this case without further visit or discussion; on the other hand it would be useful to hear from the landowner. PROPOSAL: Object to the application today, on environmental grounds as before, without a further site visit. Proposed: Cllr Hartree. Seconded: Cllr Selway. In favour – four. Against – three. CARRIED"
----
A revised planning Application for a Big Storage Barn and new access road on Bleadon Hill near Purn Hill Nature reserve off Purn Lane / Purn Road has been submitted to NSC.
Deadline for comments is Wednesday 19 Sept 2018. North Somerset Council Reference is: 18/P/4105/FUL
BPC have raised this on their agenda for next week Monday 10th Sept 2018. If you want to speak about this at the meeting then: "In order for the Parish Council to provide a full response where appropriate a Member of the Public may only speak if prior notification has been given to the Clerk by noon on Friday, 7 September 2018"
BOB has been informed that although the original application is referenced to the new one previous comments and objections will not be considered with regards to the new application! This is because it is a new application and has to be considered on its own merits!NSC will still consult the relevant parties, as before, but letters have again only gone out to a few households affected. Therefore if you want your previous comments to be taken into consideration then you will need to resubmit your comments ASAP.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
Previous applications and information can be seenhere.]]>
UPDATE 16 JULY 19: Email response from BPC Clerk after BOB requested the official BPC Public meeting agenda and minutes:
"The A370 meeting was a public meeting called by a resident. It was not a BPC meeting and I believe did not have an agenda beyond what was put on the poster. Again, I attended for interest as it is a key issue relating to my job. Any councillor present was there as a resident. I captured comments and received an email (to the Parish Clerk email address) subsequently from an attendee."
Confusing response seeing as BPC called the meeting(Min 311.8) and is quite clearly involved in the A370 project (Min 310.9)? Also see additional references below.
-----
UPDATE: BOB NOTES FOLLOWING BAT & BPC MEETINGS 13 AUG 18
Residents voted to reject the current BPC proposals and asked for more considered options and costs, hoping the new proposals will include the whole Bleadon road and junction network e.g. Accomodatation Rd, Bridge Rd, Bleadon Mill, Devil's Bridge, Celtic Way, Shiplate Road, etc. as issues at one junction have a knock-on effect on all others.BPC's following extra-ordinary meeting agreed with resident outcome and decide not to commit any Bleadon Reserve fund at this time (Aug 18 Min 312.7 & 312.8) No indication of what this £46K Reserve was collected for, or what projects may be affected if it was used for the A370 project.The resident meeting was chaired by BAT.These proposals for a traffic island and speed reduction were put forward by District Cllr App-Rees in consultation with BPC & a group of residents - not by NSC although they have costed the project.It was stated by Cllr App-Rees that "NSC would not be funding any of these options as the officers were not in support of the scheme" (Aug 18 Min 312.7). Costs stated varied from £10K for speed reduction to £200K for traffic lights? [The BPCgreen leafletsent to some residents was therefore considered misleading]BPC are investigating a loan option from the Public Works Loan Board (Aug 18 Min 312.7)There has been no information published by BPC on any potential S106 funding for Bleadon (May 18 Min 309.19).BPC's following extra-ordinary meeting acknowledged that attending residents had put forward some interesting alternative ideas - to be typed up, shared and considered by councillors in a sub-commitee. to come back with costed options, fund raising ideas, etc. (Aug Min 312.7 - not yet publicly shared with residents?). Will all residents get asked by BPC to input their ideas, as discussed by councillors in May?[Note: BPC A370 project decisions/actions May Min 309.19 including payment for leaflet (Aug Min 312.12 - £85), hall and newsletter article?]BVN109the Chairman's address states,"Now to the future, your Councillors represent a wide range of both age and background and wish to maintain, improve and innovate. We are actively seeking to resolve the Road Traffic problems on the A370 through the village with a Public Meeting arranged for Monday August 13th in the Coronation Hall at which we are promised North somerset councillors and hopefully the Police will attend. This will be a great opportunity for att Parishioners to have their say."----------------
Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) has convened a resident consultation meeting for Monday 13 August 2018 at 7pm to discuss A370 road safety improvements. Some of you may have received a green leaflet inviting you to attendand discuss parishioners’ proposals. NB This green leaflet was not on BPC headed paper, nor was it posted with an agenda on the parish notice boards, nor was information posted on the BPC website or in their parish newsletter
No one wants to see any more road accidents or deaths, as we have sadly experienced, but this project needs to have input from ALL residents in relation to all projects and aspirations in the parish. Things to consider for this project include:
Why do residents need to pay up to £32K for a NSC statutory duty?What happened to any Section 106 and CIL funding from existing developments (Riverside Caravans, Old Boot Sale Site, Wake Park, Quarry)?Would any proposed developments pay for this project if applications went ahead (e.g. Sanders Fields, Devil’s Bridge)?Why the lack of prior access to project information, reports and resident inclusion?Why the urgency of an immediate BPC full council decision following limited consultation?Will the use of Bleadon’s Reserve fundsaffectother projects that this money was perhaps saved for?Some accident statistics June 18 Min 310.9
13 accidents with 27 injuries (1 fatal) at Accommodation Road and 4 accidents with 8 injuries (1 fatal) at Bridge Road.The new A370 project costs are as follows (Aug Agenda item 312.8):40mph Speed Limit Only - £10,515.97Crossing Point by Bridge Rd Junction Only £28,015.07Both - £31,582.16 [£7K discount??]It is good to see that some items raised in the adopted 2009 Parish Plan process are being considered by new councillors but, as BOB has frequently said, surely this should involve a more open, transparent and inclusive approach involving ALL residents not just a select few that are informed or able to physically attend BPC meetings?
For more information see May Min 309.19, Jun Min 310.09, July Min 311.18, see also 1972 LG Act and parish polls e.g. Yatton, and notes below.
--
NOTES:
1. NSC Duty: The green leaflet and BPC website indicated that North Somerset Council (NSC) has drawn up a plan for improving road safety that may require residents to fund up to £32K. If NSC has a statutory duty for highways, and this is a NSC plan, why are residents being asked to fund this potential £32K project? Why no access to reports before now e.g. Feb 18 Min 305.12?
2. S106/CIL: There have been several major planning and development projects in Bleadon in the last few years but none of these has addressed the speed limit or crossing issues to date, why? What has happened to S106 and CIL funding in Bleadon, did BPC receive S106 information from NSC in May, if so why hasn't any information been published yet? (May 18 Min 309.19)
3. New Developments: It should be noted that if the Sanders Fields development is approved it may be conditioned to pay for road improvements through Section106/CIL thus negating NSC/BPC to pay at all. Precept reserves could then be kept for other parish projects. So could we wait for that decision?
4. Access to Information: Consequently residents will now only be given 2 hours access to this A370 project information, costs and safety statistics. Attending residents (not all parishioners) who have been informed will then be asked their views, suggestions and any other options BPC could consider. Why hasn’t this information been released to all residents prior to this BPC convened meeting? (May 18 Min 309.19.2) Surely ALL the parish households should be consulted, perhaps by a referendum of multi choice like a mini 2005-9 plan questionnaire? After all BPC has twice managed to get green leaflets out to some residents, they could also have included information and a return slip of ideas.
5. Urgent Meeting?: Immediately after this consultation meeting BPC is holding a full council extraordinary meeting, at 9pm, to decide whether to spend resident’s money on this project and if so how much. Residents may only speak at the full council meeting if prior notification has been given to the Clerk by noon on Friday, 10 August 2018, yet residents will not have access to the project information until 2 hours prior to the council meeting on 13th August 2018? (Aug 18 Agenda). Why the urgency of the A370 project without inclusive consultation and full information? What is NSC’s deadline for BPC’s decision and why?
6. Affected Projects?: At the Aug 18 meeting BPC are "To Consider the use of Parish council reserves [both?] for A370 road safety improvements (Agenda Item 312.8).
General Reserve £25,000.00 Special Reserve* £21,000.00 *this is a restricted reserve specifically for improvements in the parish."What is the difference between BPC's General Reserve and its Special Reserve, what are they reserved for? Especially in relation to the guidance?
The Good Councillor's Guide to Finance and Transparency on Reserves states, "A council should typically hold between 3 and 12 months expenditure as a general reserve. If the general reserve is too low then it may not be enough to cover unexpected expenditure or emergencies, whilst if the general reserve is too high then local electors have paid a tax which is not being used for the benefit of the local community.
Local councils have no legal powers to hold revenue reserves other than for reasonable working capital or for specifically earmarked purposes, therefore the year-end general reserve should not be significantly higher than the annual precept."
So what projects were the reserves being held for, and what will happen to those projects now? How will this affect the precept next year?
7. Accident Statistics: The original 2009 Parish Action Planplanned to resolve pedestrian safety, traffic management at junctions and reduce speeds throughout the village, involving Accommodation Road, Bridge Road and the A370 but manyother areas were also identified. June 18 Min 310.9Accident Statistics: "Clerk has received the accident statistics for the two junctions from 2008 to March 2018 showing:
13 accidents with 27 injuries (1 fatal) at Accommodation Road and 4 accidents with 8 injuries (1 fatal) at Bridge Road."8. Project Costs/Payment: There is a lack of clarity with regards to Bleadon’s financial reserves, and the costs and funding approach to projects to date but BPC appear to be currently holding a total of £56,600 of resident money in reserve (July 18 Min 311.11 vs 311.9 vs May 18 309.19). Councillors appear to be considering using either or both the General (£25K) and Special (£21K) allocations of the reserve for the A370 project (Aug 18 Agenda item 312.7) but it is not clear whether this is paying the full cost of the project or 50% as indicated in Feb 18 Min 305.12, nor is it clear what residents may have agreed to at the April APM (Resolution 1). The new A370 project costs are as follows (Aug Agenda item 312.8):
40mph Speed Limit Only - £10,515.97Crossing Point Only - £28,015.07Both - £31,582.16 [£7K discount??]NB There is indicating that it is good practice to only hold 3–12 months of the £44K precept. BPC appear to have protected the current reserves by increasing this year's precept demand from residents by £13.44% (Nov 17 Min F&P Min 52.5). So what projects were the reserves being held for, and what will happen to those projects now? How will this affect the precept next year?
09 July 18 Min 311.11To Approve the allocation of Reserves. RESERVESStaff contingency £ 3,500.00Staff gratuity/pension £ 1,000.00Election expenses £ 3,100.00Special reserve* £21,000.00 restricted specifically for improvements in the parish.General reserve £25,000.00Church Grounds £ 3,000.00TOTAL £56,600.009. OTHER: A Parish Poll is a (seldom used) democratic tool which allows for a ballot of local government electors in the parish to be called on any question arising at a parish meeting. Although non-binding, meaning that the results of the poll do not have to be followed by BPC/NSC, the poll will provide an indication of support, which should guide the Council(s). See also 'Ask Your Council' website.]]>
The government has released its revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 24 July 2018) with mixed reaction as seen below:
Local Government: "Whitehall has ‘not listened’ to the concerns of local authorities when it comes to national housing targets... introduces a Housing Delivery Test, which will come into force in November this year. This measures the number of homes delivered rather than just planned for … this test would punish councils when private developers fail to build."Property: "'Fundamental to building the homes our country needs is ensuring that our planning system is fit for the future. This revised planning framework sets out our vision of a planning system that delivers the homes we need,' said Secretary of State for Housing"Legal: "The old paragraph 14 presumption in favour of sustainable development is now replaced with a new and revised paragraph 11 presumption which includes reference to a new "housing delivery test. This will cause concern to local planning authorities that have underperformed on housing delivery as it places greater responsibility on them to deliver target housing numbers and includes sanctions for failing to meet housebuilding targets in local plans. This will effectively render its adopted local plan policies as out-of-date"Wildlife Trusts: "The good news is that Local Wildlife Sites have been reinstated in the document released today ... local councils will need to identify, map and safeguard components of the local ecological networks … The bad news is that the wording doesn’t go quite as far as we would like – we would have preferred an explicit recommendation against development of these sites."Construction: "Builders' representatives said the new document was a missed opportunity but the quarrying sector welcomed it ... The Mineral Products Association (MPA) ... has welcomed the new document"Environmental: "By requiring planning authorities to plan positively for shale extraction, the approach gives the go-ahead for fracking and will make it virtually impossible for councils to refuse schemes they and their communities do not want or consider right for their area".See also BOB's Fracking page.Politics: "The government has made changes to national planning policy on onshore oil and gas even though most of the people who took part in a consultation disagreed with them."It is indicated that Neighbourhood Development Plans will need to comply with this revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), see Policy Heirarchy diagram on BOB.
Were local parish councils consulted? What was Bleadon Parish Council's response?
See also previous blogFracking Concerns]]>
UPDATE 24 JULY 2018:Sum of Us create a petition stating, "Secretary Greg Clarke has just announced plans tofast track planning applications for fracking developments ...they'dnot need planning permission at all.Local councils would also lose any right to have their say in the matter."
Reference: Revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 24 July 2018 e.g. Section 17 Facilitating the sustainable use of minerals, page 58 (mineral extraction) and Section 14. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change. Also, see BOB Revised Planning Policy blog.
NB: It is indicated that all Neighbourhood Development Plans will need to comply with the NPPF (directly or indirectly), seepolicy heirarchy diagram.
For more information on how this may affect Bleadon see BOB'sFracking page.
]]>
UPDATE: 11 JAN 2019 - Did aJSP consultation slip through the public net, which ran fromMonday 12th November 2018 untilMonday 7th January 2019
---
BPC are residents' Statutory Consultee and so are automatically informed of any consultations that may affect our community. Since April 2016, BPC decided to remove the Correspondence section from their published Agenda, so residents can no longer see who is requesting information and/or consultation from BPC on our/residents' behalf.
The following public consultations will be finishing soon:
Bristol Airport Expansion consultation Stage 2 deadline is 06 July 2018. BOB can find no reference to this consultation in BPC published information, so is unsure whether BPC was requested to comment on our behalf. Previous Stage 1 consultation ended Jan 2018Celtic Way Appeal has been lodge for the conversion of a stable to a dwelling. Deadline for additional comments is Friday 13 July 18.BPC's next public meeting is MondayMonday 9th July. NB. Members of the public may request to speak and ask questions in the Public Participation section of the meeting. Presubmission of your query to the BPC Clerk is advised.]]>
The Applicant of the Celtic Way application forconversion of a stable to a dwelling is taking the NSC decision to refuse this application to appeal. Appeal Reference: APP/D0121/W/18/3200632 on the Planning Inspectorate website states the details including contact details of the Case Officer and phone number. Deadline for additional comments is Friday 13 July 18.
As BOB understands the process all the original comments will be seen by the Planning Inspector. It is unfortunate (to say the least) that Bleadon Parish Council did not object (although NSC did), despite this site being outside the Settlement Boundary. Yet conversely BPCdid object to the Rivermead application, also outside boundary, but NSC approved it! Both the NSC Local Plan and BPC adopted Parish Plan state that development in Bleadon should be constrained within the Settlement Boundary. The applicant has cited these anomalies in theirAppeal Statement as reasons for overturning NSC decision.
We do not know whether BPC is reconsidering their previous decision or whether they will nowbe urgentlywriting to the inspector, as it does not appear to be on their agenda for the BPC meeting on Monday 9th July. (NB. Members of the public may request to speak and ask questions in the public participation section of the meeting.)
STOP PRESS: 6 July 2018 - BPC have convened a planning meeting for 12th July 2018 (day before deadline for additional comment to Planning Inspector) where they will discuss thisAgenda here
2 Aug 2018 - NSC Appeal StatementandAppelant Response as per 13 July deadline to Planning Inspectorate.NB: In their meeting of12 July (P69.6), BPC changed their mind and resolved to write to Inspector with objections, but this is not shown on NSC or PI websites.]]>
Sadly there has been yet another serious roadtraffic accident on the A370 Bleadon.
Although very little has been published on BPC's Bridge Road/A370 Project to date, in May BPC stated they will be sending out some information, requesting residents' suggestions and holding a meeting in August re: Road Safety Proposals:
FYI, BOB has summarised some background information from large scale developments in Bleadon since 2014 including someS106 information from:
Wake Park S106, Jan 2018Riverside Caravan Park, Oct 2017Old Boot Sale Site Accommodation Road, May 2016 & 2017Quarry, Aug 2014Also some BPC minutes:
May 2018 (Min 309.19) - re: Bridge Rd Junction "It would be possible to include it later on in this financial year if fully funded from non-NSC budgets. Otherwise it will be put on the programming list for 2019/2020." Also comment on Traffic Lights, one-way system, S106Feb 2018 (Min 305.12)- "The Chairman read a report from Councillor Dobson ... The early estimate of cost is over £21,000. Mr Bailey explained that NSC funds are restricted and a contribution form Bleadon PC and Marshalls would help to raise the priority of the scheme ... An overall 50% contribution would give the scheme a good chance."Oct 2016 (Min 288.4) - re: A370, Traffic Lights Speed Limit, Bridge Rd JunctionIt seems that although road improvements have been agreed with the Wake Park and Quarry developments these will not happen until they start to be built. Conversely, the £12 million Caravan Park development that has gone ahead has not been required to contribute to any road traffic improvements? Does this mean that Bleadon residents will be expected to pay the tens of thousands of pounds to create them instead? If so, will there be any ongoing repair and maintenance costs for Bleadon residents? When those developments do happen will their Section 106 obligation be spent elsewhere in North Somerset?
Whatever improvements NSC may or may not take we can only hope that drivers take much more care when driving, and police enforce traffic laws.]]>
UPDATE March 2019: Resident complaint (not BOB) upheld by NSC - "Sub-Committee concluded that the Councillor’s actions had breached Bleadon Parish Council’s Code of Conduct,in particular; Openness and Leadership"
---
UPDATE Summer 2018 BVN 109: "Bleadon Acting Together started as a small group of people concerned about a planning application in Purn Way ...Then we heard that there was going to be an application for 250 houses and a school on the fields at the front of the vitlage ... Jim Baines, Anne Selway, Joanne Richardson, Andy Scarisbrick and Kirsten Hemingway-Arnold all agreed to apply for co-option. Kirsten was initially rejected by the sitting parish council but was elected at the next meeting. With five of the team now part of both organisations and with pubtic opinion that our name implied we were rebels or activists we decided to change the name of Bleadon Action Group to Bleadon Acting Together ..."
--
BPC has published its minutes confirming that the council is now running at its full capacity of 9 councillors. Four councillors wereco-optedand one rejected (with no explanation) at the 04 May18 (Min 308.5) and another two co-opted at the 14 May 18 meeting (Min 309.5). Five of the six new councillors are members of theBleadon Acting Together group (formerly known as Bleadon Action Group). Bleadon’s six new councillors are:
Cllr Jim Baines (Chair)Cllr Kirsten HemingwayCllr Jo RichardsonCllr Andy ScarisbrickCllr Anne SelwayCllr Gill WilliamsCouncillors’ individual and groupresponsibilities can be seen here as published by BPC.
With such an influx of new councillors BOB is looking forward to a more open, honest and transparent approach by BPC, with better access to timely and accurate information regarding the decisions and activities undertaken on behalf of residents by BPC. We will keep you posted ...]]>
7.00pm Monday 14th May2018, Coronation Hall.
This will be the Annual Meeting of the Parish Council. The first items on the agenda are to elect the Chairman and the vice-Chairman.You are reminded that there are 6 vacancies on the Council and applications are welcomed!!
Click here to view Agenda and Minute documents
NOTICE OF VACANCY - 5th April 2018
Due to the resignations of Richard Dobson andDavidChinn there are two vacancies on the Parish Council.
If by 25 April, 2018 (14 working days after the date of thenotice) a request for an election to fill the vacancies is made in writing to the Returning Officer at Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ by TEN electors for the Parish then an election will be held to fill the vacancies, otherwise the vacancies will be filled by co-option.If an election is called, it will take place not later than 29 June, 2018.Click herefor the formal notice which was posted on thenoticeboards on 5th April 2018.Click herefor eligibility criteria.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information above as kindly provided by BPC website on 19 April 2018.
Co-option information from CPALC
It`s been done beforeandan Election was calledNSC infohere]]>
---
A Planning Application for Big Storage Barn and new access road on Bleadon Hill near Purn Hill Nature reserve off Purn Lane / Purn Road. Notice on gate to field. A resident spoke to the council but letters were only received by residents on 16th April. Deadline for comments is Thursday 3rd May. North Somerset Council Reference is:18/P/2709/FUL Looks an odd application due to Nature reserve / wood vicinity, blot on landscape (size) and access road (transport issues with farm vehicles)!
This would appear to be another top access road and additional barn to the same land as the 2015 'Blackstones'Agricultural Building Applications15/P/1952/PDAand15/P/1571/PDAthat has access at bottom via Facum/Fakenham Lane (the old original Bridgwater Road, adjacent to A370 along from Coombe Farm, bottom of Purn Lane).
Google Maps Location of ApplicationIf you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.]]>
Enlarged Image
UPDATE:NSC Refuse see blog here
UPDATE: 04 MAY 18 BPC Comment (Min 308.6) "To Consider the following Planning Applications: ... 17/P/5545/OUT - Land Off Bleadon Road. Outline planning permission for the erection of up to 200 dwellings etc. It was noted that 200 homes added to a village of just over 500 homes would alter the status of the village each household is likely to have at least one car. It was noted that additional finance from council tax, potential younger families and perhaps new services could be considered benefits but not at such a scale. A comprehensive and well-research presentation was read out by a councillor, detailing how the application was against NSC’s Core Strategy. AGREED that councillors will refine the presentation and submit as a comment objecting to the application.Cllr Sheppard returned to the room. For her benefit the Chairman confirmed that the council had agreed to object based primarily on the presentation paper (?)"
BPC Actual submission to NSCon 08 May 2018.
Outline planning permission for the erection of up to 200 dwellings, a Health Centre, a Doctors Surgery, retail outlets and office/employment space with all matters reserved for subsequent approval. Land Off Bleadon Road Bleadon North Somerset.
Comments deadline is 03 May 2018. Here is the link to the application 17/P/5545/OUT on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC. Please also remind your neighbours too.
The Bleadon Acting Together Group is also happy to help and hear from you if you would like some further information.UPDATE (15 may 2018): The groupsubmit an objection to NSC re: 200 houses application via a proffesional consultant.
-------------------------
Important Dates
Application Received DateFri 15 Dec 2017Application Validated DateTue 20 Mar 2018NB: Press AdvertMon 9 Apr 2018Expiry Date (comments)Thu 03 May 2018NB: BPC ExtraOrdinary Public Meeting
Fri 04 May 2018Statutory Expiry DateTue 19 Jun 2018Determination DeadlineTue 19 Jun 2018NB: When did NSC officers, and or District Councillors, notify BPC about this application? This application was published on the NSC Planning Weekly & Monthly Lists, validated week beginning 19 Mar 18, accessible to Parish Councils? BPC met on 12 Mar & 28 Mar 18, and APM on 09 Apr 18. There was no BPC Full Council meeting scheduled in April and there is none scheduled until 14 May 18 (as of 10 Apr 18).
A few notes:
Bleadon is an Infill Village (NSC CS33) with development defined in relation to a Settlement Boundary.This large scale application is outside the settlement boundary.The Bleadon Parish Planstated that residents are against development if it affects the character of Bleadon and/or affects its environment Residents rejected aproposal in 2011 for playing fields and a potential Doctors Surgery if it came with large scale housing developmentResidents rejected aproposal in 2017 for a school and 250 houses and submitted a petition signed by residents to the landowners.Additonal informationon this potential development site can be found on BOB.Just becausehealth facilities/doctor's surgery is offered doesn't mean that it will be built and/or staffed. NSC do not manage this service (NHS England/Central Government do).Worst case scenario, 200 houses are built but no health/doctors services.If you would like toeffectively object to this application, information on how to do so can be found on BOB. Also a resident has asked BOB to post these objection notes.
What policies and plans can be used to protect Bleadon?
Bleadon Parish Plan
In the adopted 2009-29 Parish Plan, as seen in the 103 Improvements, residents of Bleadon made it quite clear that they wanted to retain the character of Bleadon "Ensure that new development remain the scale and style of our Somerset village . Ensure that all new development remains within the Village Settlement Boundary" Also, "Through the Planning process vigorously question all development outside the Village Settlement . Protect and enhance bio-diversity and the rural landscape through the District Council's Planning and Environmental policies"
Bleadon Neighbourhood Plan
In Dec 2012 BPC originally investigated a Neighbourhood Plan but ultimately decided against one (Min 249.5.5). In Aug 2017 BPC "Estimated two years to complete the full plan, however highlighted that if there is an emerging plan it is something that will be considered in local planning decisions."(Min 298.25). In Feb 2018 stated "The initial urgency [for a NDP] was due to grant funding ending in March 2018" ; acknowledged that the"opportunity to limit current over-development has [already] been lost" and then "Agreed that theNeighbourhood Plan Process be suspended." (Min 305.10). In Apr 18, at the Annual Parish Meeting, BPC were asked to update 'all' residents on their NDP Project to date. Hopefully BPC will release the project information, and state whether there is an 'emerging plan' from their project work since July 2017, that can help Bleadon with this application, ASAP.
NSC Local Plan
"The Core Strategy is the main planning document which guides development choices and decisions in North Somerset.The strategy was adopted on 10 April 2012.Following a high court challenge nine policies were remitted for re-examination".Hopefully BPC can update residents on this and how it can help Bleadon with this application ASAP., Policies that may help include:
North Somerset Core Strategy E,g, CS14, CS17 & CS33North Somerset Sites & Policies Development Plan (SAP)SAP Part 1 Development Management Policies e,g, DM11(ANOB), DM44,45,46,51,53,54(CS33)SAP Part 2 Sites Allocations Plan examination: further residential sites timetableNSC New Local Plan. "Work has now commenced on the new Local Plan which will provide detailed policies and additional housing, employment and other land allocations up to 2036. It will review and roll-forward policies and allocations in existing development plan documents and plan for the housing, jobs and infrastructure set out in the Joint Spatial Plan(JSP)" Hopefully BPC can give residentsan update on these projects and how they can help Bleadon with this application ASAP.
NSC Sites & Policies Plan
In Jan 2018 District Councillor Porter stated "... With regard to NSC’s Sites and Policies Plan, he was hopeful that the Inspector would sign it off as acceptable in the not too distant future and this would put the planning authority in a much stronger position." (Min 304.4) Hopefully BPC can give residents an update on this and how it can help Bleadon with this application ASAP.
Settlement Boundary
In Aug 2017 BPC "To review and discuss the correspondence regarding North Somerset Local Plan 2018-2036 - Bleadon Settlement Profile." (Min 298.7)Hopefully BPC can give residents an update on this and how it can help Bleadon with this application ASAP.
Related Weston Mercury Reports18 May 2018
Residents Oppose Application
30 April 2018
200 Houses and Services - Outline Application
17 Dec 2017Boundaries concern24 Nov 2017School Plan scrapped03 Nov 2017Residents Petition10 Oct 2017Prettiest Village22 Sep 2017250 houses and School25 July 201716 Houses in Purn Way24 Jun 201770 Houses Bleadon Hill]]>
UPDATE 08 APR 2019 - BPC again approve the incorrect 2018 APM minutes via councillor members of the NDP working group despite being fully aware of residents issues, concerns and requests regarding their NDP (Apr APM 2019)
UPDATE 13 JAN 2019 - BPC distribute a NDP survey. See also BOB NDP page.
UPDATE: 14 MAY 2018: New six councillors approve the resident'sAPM minutes including resolution 2 despiteconcern over misinformation in the minutes regarding the resolution and outcome (Min 309.9)
UPDATE: 10 Apr 18: We're not sure what precise resolution was voted on, or indeed what the outcome was, as we've received conflicting feedback with some people saying they needed further information in order to vote, and BPC publishing "the resolution to continue the Neighbourhood Plan process was carried with none against. Full minutes will be published ... within the week"? One thing's for sureclarity is needed to help with thelatest development application in Bleadon.
------------
BPC hascalled a meeting for Monday, 9 Apr 18, at 7pm. This should be residents' first opportunity to openly discuss all issues surrounding a Neighbourhood (Development) Planwith BPC, District Councillors and others since BPCsuspended the project in Feb 18.BOB can not find any BPC policies relating to Annual Parish Meetings, like Stratfield Mortimer, but theLocal Government Act may help.
Unfortunately, there appears tobeno presentationby NSC or BPCon Bleadon's NDP project to date. Also, the two key councillors involved in the project, Cllr Dobson and Cllr Chinnresigned with immediate effect, in Mar 18after this first open public meeting was announced, so which of the three remaining councillors will be leading this project? There is no NDP project page on the BPC website with FAQs, reports, TOR, minutes, etc.; no Spring Newsletter, and no NDP information for this debate despite BOB and residents asking since the project began in July 2017. There is no alternative view of NDPs presentation from a parish that has decided not to implement a NDP, e.g. Locking.
We feel that BPC has mis-represented BOB's request forresidents to be givenaccess to NDP informationbeforeundertakinga votewiththe public and have asked them to post and discuss the original version. Our submittedresident questions (later annotated) and associated agenda/resolution item (later annotated) was:
Do you (residents present at the meeting) feel fully informed by BPC about Neighbourhood (Development) Plans and fully understand the process, its financial, environmental and community implications, and are happy for BPC to continue to spend an undeclared amount of public/resident money in developing a NDP (i.e. potentially tens of thousands of pounds);ORdo you think that, as this project is already 9 months old, BPC should fully inform and ask ‘all’ residentsbeforethey continue with the NDP project?Did all 3 remaining councillors agree the wording of BPC'sposted agenda item for resolution? i.e.:
The electors present at this meeting support Bleadon Parish Council continuing to pursue the Neighbourhood Plan process to the point of a referendum.Clearly BPC do not want all residents to have equal access to information throughout the NDP project. How can less than 150 residents vote for or against this resolution, on behalf of all 1000+ residents, if they do not have access to BPC project information beforehand? If they do have access to the information then why don't 'all' residents have the same access via the BPC website?NB only 9 members of the public attended last years' Annual Parish Meeting where BPC declared the adopted 2009-2029 Parish Plan 'lost and obsolete` yet made reference to it in theirNDP submissionto NSC and its 'invaluable' use in the NDP creation process? What about the thousands of pounds spent on the PP? Why did BPC decidenot to implment a NDP in 2012? Other BPC NDP references can be found here.
BPC's other agenda item for resolution is:
The electors present at this meeting seek the continuing support of the Parish Council to sort out the A370/Bridge Road junction.FYI, there wereBPC updates on this subject in Jan 18 (Min 304.12) and Feb18 (Min 305.12).
NB: SLCC APM Guidance]]>
The last 12 months has seen 7 councillor and 2 clerk resignations. The key persistent theme seems to be very poor openness, honesty, transparency and respect both within BPC between councillors, and towards the public.
May 17 - Cllr Gutsell, Cllr Gibbon, Cllr Edwards, Cllr Clarke and the Clerk Tony Jay(Min 295.14)Nov 17 - Two offers: Cllr Dobson (offered resignation then withdrew it), Cllr Hartree resigned as Chair (then reaccepted it) and the Clerk Maria Bird(Min 301.26)Dec 17 - Cllr StrongMar 17 -Cllr Chinn and Cllr DobsonBOB is pro-resident access to information relating to BPC decision making, to ensure residents have equal information, inclusion and engagement in all issues, as is a resident's right. If this is considered by some as anti-Parish Council then democracy in Bleadon is in serious trouble. See Nolan Principles of Public Office that welcomes public scrutiny, which BPC include in their ownCode of Conduct; especially accountabiity, scrutiny and openness!
There has been an increasing trend towards closed undocumented meetings with little public access to information on decision making. Consequently some of these decisions have been contrary to the majority of residents' views as indicated in Bleadon's currently adopted 2009-29 Parish Plan. BOB has offered several times to discuss and resolve issues and residents' concerns with BPC but they have declined to meet since the'Meeting of common ground.' in 2016, so issues and concerns remain unresolved several years on.
Things seem to have come to a crisis point with the resignation of two more councillors, resigning after the announcement of the Annual Parish Meeting where residents should be able to ask questions ofparish and district councillors directly without having to presubmit a question to BPC. Unfortunately, this year there appears to be no presentation by NSC or BPC regarding their NDP project or progress to date? Also, BPC has mis-represented BOB's request forresidentaccess to informationbeforeundertaking a votewith the public.
The council is now down to its minimum of three councillors. We believe that until BPC's current secretive and undemocratic culture changes residents will continue to be reluctant to join this closed 'group' of people.]]>
Hi,
Are you fed up with Developers and Land Speculators trying to destroy our lovely Towns and villages with inappropriate developments that lack infrastructure where nobody wants them on green fields?
Developers and Land speculators actively boast how they can get planning permission, on any unsuitable site on green fields or even the green belt, by using the National Planning Policy Framework against our Councils when they refuse planning permission for their planning applications.
We have had enough of this, so we have created a petition on the Government website, to send a clear message to Parliament that we want this to stop and give our elected Councils and residents the final say where developments go.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/212794
Please sign our Petition and support it on your website to send a loud and clear message to Parliament that “We have had enough of this and we want it to stop”.
Many Thanks,
Colin George]]>
It seems that the pantomime (or is it a farce) came early to Bleadon this year with BPC calling three meetings in one month, leading to four resignations offered… oh yes they did... , oh no they didn't..., oh yes they did.
More informationis availablebut, in summary, we now have:
5 parish councillors, after
4 resignations offered (Cllrs Hartree, Dobson and Strong & the Clerk), at
3 council meetings, leading to
2 confirmed resignations (Cllr Strong & the Clerk), leaving
1 council in disarray!!
.. not one partridge or a pear tree in sight, although BPC did finally get around to ordering a Xmas tree.
Be assured that BOB will continue to ask BPC to be open, honest and transparent in its actions and to ask them publish timely, accurate and accessible documentation to support their decision making process. We'll all have to wait and see what else the New Year brings (apart from the recently agreed 13% increase in BPC preceptand who knows, even perhaps a Neighbourhood Plan).
Have a great Christmas, Chris & Jo
-----
BACKGROUND NOTES
At the beginning of November Cllr Hartree resigned as Chair (for the second time since his co-option Sept 15), the new Clerk resigned after 7 months (the fourth clerk resignation in three years) and Cllr Dobson offered his resignation (for the second time, after 6 months) (Min 301.26.4). By mid-November Cllr Hartree was again Chair (Min 302., Cllr Dobson had withdrawn his resignation but the Clerk unfortunately stuck to her word and had resigned (Min 302.8). This was all on top of various rumours of discord amongst councilors. By the beginning of December Cllr Strong hadresigned (after 8 months) with reference to BPC's secret meetings, bullying and lack of transparency, these comments were not however minuted. (Min 303.6)
What is going on?
For the best local governance Councillors should be elected by members of the public. This process happens every four years with all BPC councilors up for election in 2019. In the interim BPC councillors can choose who to co-opt onto the council (as seen last month), and can also refuse to accept those that they do not feel would represent residents or compliment their BPC role and views (as seen in previous BPC minutes). Unfortunately, co-option can lead to reduced representation of residents, without diverse views and opinions being discussed or represented (e.g. the exclusion of residents concerns and views via BOB for over a year, until at least Feb 2018).
BPC seem unclear on their duties and powers, needing to result to legal advice (Min 301.10) discovering that “The Council cannot request any office holder to vacate office” and that if they submit a vote of no confidence to the Clerk they have “no authority to act” on the proposal. NB Councillors should be elected/not elected by residents via a democratic vote. BPC then proceeded to agree to exclude but then include an amendment to the BPC Standing Orders, perhaps we’ll find out if/when they publicly publish the documentation (Min 302.9). BOB will continue to ask BPC to state and clarify their powers, duties, roles and responsibilities.
BPC have informed residents many times that “the only opportunity during the meeting to speak regarding items on the agenda” (Min 296.4) is at the start of the meeting and that “it must be remembered that these are not public meetings, but are meetings which are held in public” (Min 295.2). This means that residents cannot interact with councilors in BPC meetings to clarify information and/or misinformation being discussed. The Chair/councilors can choose at their discretion to “suspend standing orders to allow further public participation” but they can also choose not to allow public discussion/interaction if they do not want to openly discuss a particular issue.
Currently BPC seems to be delegatingto the closed Management Working Group, which in itself is not a problem except that its Terms of Reference, membership, decision making processes, etc. are undeclared and unminuted. This means that residents do not know who is influencing the decision making processes, when or how e.g. the undeclared projects (Min 301.14) including the Neighbourhood Plan.
NB Government guidance states"The relationship between any group and the formal functions of the town or parish council should betransparentto the wider public ... The terms of reference for a steering group or other body should bepublishedand the minutes of meetings made available to the public". From recent minutes it's not clear whether we now have a Steering Group and another Working Group, none of these groups have published Terms of Reference or membership e.g. whether the influtential groups contain householders, landowners, developers, etc.
Also, rather than holding announced two-way public discussion meetings BPC seem to be using the village market as a means of unannounced consultation with residents, as indicated by councilors referring to Road Safety on the A370 (Min 302.8) and the Neighbourhood Plan. “A Parishioner [not BOB] asked which meeting a request to discuss the Neighbourhood Plan in the public session should be addressed. The Chairman highlighted it should be addressed to the Planning Committee Meeting Agenda” (Min 302.7). The day after submitting the request BPC informed the resident that it had cancelled the Monday Planning sub-committee meeting “due to the lack of planning applications to be considered”, with no further planning date announced. Why is a Neighbourhood Development Plan discussion subordinate/dependent upon ad hoc developer’s application to NSC?
BPC's preference for a closed and unminuted approach to their public duties was again confirmed in Cllr Strong's resignation statement with her reference to BPC's secret meetings, bullying and lack of transparency (these comments were not however minuted).
Hopefully the pantomime will finish at the end of the Christmas season but be assured that BOB will continue to ask BPC to be open, honest and transparent in its actions and to ask them publish timely, accurate and accessible documentation to support their decision making process.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BELOW is BOB and BPC email correspondence regarding Cllr. Strong public resignation statement and Cllr. Chinn reponse, consequently BPC decision of 14 February 2018 was to extend their 'Vexatious Policy' against BOB for a further year. See here.
From:Parish Clerk <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk>Dear Mr Butler
Thank you for your email, the contents of which are noted.
I will be writing to you shortly.
Kind regards
Marian Barber
Parish Clerk
Bleadon Parish Council
Coronation Hall
Coronation Road
Bleadon
BS24 0PG
Email:parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk
Tel: 07453 358 318
Website:www.bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. It may contain unclassified but sensitive or protectively marked material and should be handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately.
From:Bleadon BOB Community Website [mailto:bleadon@live.co.uk]
Sent:13 February 2018 03:51
To:Bleadon Parish Clerk
Subject:Re: Publicly available response
Dear [BPC Interim Clerk],
Apologies for my delay in reply due to other circumstances but many belated thanks, avery interesting response considering BPC's approach toaccess to information over the last few years, hopefully access to crucial decision makinginformationwill now finally be accessible.
Please can you thereforesend us, orpoint us to the place on the BPCwebsite whereallthe Terms of Reference, Membership,Agenda and Minutes forall the workinggroup meetings and sub-committeescan be found, includingthose referred to by Cllr Chinn?
You may recall allthe Parish Plan working and steeringgroups documentationwas originallyhostedon theBPC website(quite rightly),so it follows thatresidentswouldexpect to also see similar documentation for ALL BPC working groups, that by Cllr. Chinn's statement,seem to clearly influence andsteer BPCfull council's decisions for thestrategicdirection, resourcing and finance of Bleadon.
For example, as far as we are aware there is no publicly accessible information onthe Council's proposedNeighbourhood (Development) Plan despite beingasked several times in June/July 2017 when the BPCproject started. We have previously askedfor ALLinformation on theNeighbourhood Plan Steering Group and Management Working Group(s) to be made available to the publicfromtheir inception,not just that produced from now onwards. This is particularly important asBPC's consultation strategy seems based onpresumptionthat all of theBleadon electorate(1000+ residents)attend the market,a localsocial interestgroup and/or BPC meeting (where the average attendance is less than 10 residents) whichis clearly false. It has been noted that the whole of Bleadon Parish was asked about a Parish Plan, yetthe NDP process appears to only beasking a subset of residents, why? BPC ultimately, incorrectly and inappropriatelyignored the adoptedParish Plan and so manyresidentsbecame disengaged;thesecretiveBPCapproach tocommunicationasvoiced by Cllr Strong to date has not improvedthe situation,has not beeninclusive and isnot democratic.
People with extensive government experience, including us, know that public representatives should act in a fullyopen, honest and transparent manner in relation to their decision making and that alsoincludestheparties involved in that decision making process, especially if they want public support. Unfortunatelydespite BPCstating that information is available,our requests for resident access toithave beendeemed vexatious for over a yearand ultimatelythe public stillhavehadno access or information.
With this current BPC statement inmindwetherefore lookforward tothissituation being rectifiedandpromptaccess to the documentation and informationgivenaccordingly to all via the BPC website.As recommended for ALL Parish Councilsby the InformationCommissionersOffice 'Model Publication Scheme'.
Kind regards, Chris Butleremail:bob@bleadon.org.ukweb:www.bleadon.org.uktwitter: @bleadonfacebook: BleadonBOBlatest news:http://www.bleadon.org.uk/news.htmlFrom:Parish Clerk <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk>Sent:24 January 2018 09:39
To:'Bleadon BOB Community Website'
Subject:RE: Publicly available response
This is the statement made by Cllr Chinn at the last meeting.
“Comments were made at the Parish Council meeting in December 2017 that require a response.
The comments related to:
Meetings
Decision making
Failure to utilise the local knowledge of long standing Councillors
The operation of the Council is not transparent to the public
Bleadon Parish Council holds regular public monthly meetings. Parish Council Committees also meet on a less regular basis. All meetings are subject to the setting of an Agenda which is publicised on the Council website, noticeboards and some village social media, in advance of the meeting. “The Parish Council welcomes and encourages public participation during a part of the meeting specified for that purpose. In order for the Parish Council to provide a full response where appropriate, a member of the public may only speak if prior notification has been given to the Clerk by noon on the Friday preceding the meeting. However, the Chairman has discretion to allow members of the public to speak without prior notification, if felt appropriate”.
This invitation is printed on all Agendas so that members of the public know ahead of the meeting how to bring questions. It is my experience, that the Chairman always allows discretion at each meeting to allow questions not previously notified. Furthermore, the Chairman frequently allows for a suspension of standing orders to allow for public comment and participation after the public session has ceased. Members of the public have a time limit to speak during the allotted section of the meeting of three minutes. Again, the Chairman is usually happy to allow more time than standing orders permits. This is in the interest of public inclusion and participation.
The meetings are all minuted and these minutes made available to the public for them to see what has been on the Agenda, discussed and agreed upon. The public can view the Minutes on the Council website or request a copy by email or mail.
There are some areas of Parish Council business that are not open to the public at meetings. They form part of the agenda. Examples of such business are:
Discussions connected with employees of the Parish Council. Discussions connected with Confidential matters.
Councillors do meet outside of public meetings to work on specific projects or matters affecting the Parish, District and National matters, either in pairs or larger groups. They report back to committees or full Parish Council. Such meetings can involve just Councillors, members of the public, local businesses and professional advisors.Any recommendations that require Parish Council or committee decisions are taken back to those bodies.
Some examples are:
A group which meets with management representatives of a local business - Marshalls, Bridge Road, Bleadon. The review of planning applications and to make some site visits ahead of planning committee or full Council meetings. To review publicly available consultation documentation upon which the Parish Council has been required to comment. Working groups to research subjects and to bring recommendations and proposals to committees or full Council meetings. E.g Neighbourhood Plan Attending advisory sessions arranged by the District Council or ALCA to provide training, specialist knowledge and briefings. Councillors then bring that information to committee and full Council meetings to advise before any decisions are made. These Committee and full Council meetings are publicly advertised, publicly open and minuted. Visits by Councillors who attend locations for fact finding and inspections. Examples include Access to footpaths and conditions of gates, stiles or stairways. Verification of unauthorised planning activity in support of referral to the relevant authority. General reporting of matters affecting the Parish which come under the responsibility of other agencies or District Council departments. Confidential meetings – Examples can include a) short listing of job applicants; b) Councillor or Staff welfare or personal matters. Councillors can be pre-authorised by decisions made by full Council when attending meetings An example would include site visits at the Church Yard when work was needed on the crumbling wall.
In respect or taking into consideration Councillor’s local knowledge, there are currently two eminent Parish Council members who have many years living and working in the village. The remaining Councillors may have limited time as residents in the Parish but they have come forward in answer to public appeals of assistance to help as Parish Councillors. When decisions are made at Committee or full Council meetings, all Councillors present at the meetings provide guidance and points of view irrespective of their background. Members of the public also contribute either directly to Parish Clerk or Councillors before or at the meetings. All views are taken into consideration when decisions are made.
The Parish Council does acknowledge that the website should have better content. This would assist in improving the public view that more information should be made available.
The Parish Council also provides information during the year in a free magazine called the Village News. This media also has contribution from parishioners, local groups and businesses.
The Parish Council should have an operating strength of nine Councillors, in order to carry out the work needed by the Parish. Currently there are only five. This means that the Councillors have to undertake a greater responsibility each to try and keep on top of Council business. We do our very best under difficult pressures. We seek to become knowledgeable in the various aspects that affect the community and Parish. We do take into consideration advice and comments from Parishioners and groups that meet in the village and other agencies such as Police, District and neighbouring Parish Councils. Councillors have regularly attended the monthly village market to canvass views and pass on information.
During the course of each month Councillors make contact by email, telephone and personal visits in pursuit of these activities. The Chairman Steve Hartree reminds us that such contact is acceptable but that any decision making will be made by committee or full Parish Council. The Chairman has extensive experience in local Government and is the best person currently to lead the Parish Council. He is devoted to the Parish. He has my full support.”
Regards
Interim Parish Clerk
Bleadon Parish Council
Coronation Hall
Coronation Road
Bleadon
BS24 0PG
Email:parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk
Tel: 07453 358 318
Website:www.bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. It may contain unclassified but sensitive or protectively marked material and should be handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately.
From:Bleadon BOB Community Website [mailto:bleadon@live.co.uk]
Sent:23 January 2018 19:24
To:parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.co.uk
Subject:Publicly available response
Hi [BPC Interim Clerk],
As per the BPC January minute 304.6, please can you send me a copy of the publicly available response given by Cllr Chinn to Cllr Strong's resignationstatements.
Kind regards,
Chris Butler
email:bob@bleadon.org.uk
web:www.bleadon.org.uk
twitter: @bleadon
facebook: BleadonBOB
latest news:http://www.bleadon.org.uk/news.html
]]>
As anotheryear of actively campaigning for access to public information draws to an endBOB would like to clarify a few things regarding therumours about Bleadon Parish Council's duties, powers & responsibilities, both in general and more topicly in relation to the Neighbourhood Development Plan, and BOB's view of them.
It would help if people keep the following in mind when reading any correspondence from BPC and/or BOB: BPC is residents' elected/co-opted representative and Statutory Consultee. In order to carry out these roles they need to activelycommunicate and engagewith allresidents, including access to documented information. The Government has produced best practice guidance documents and modeladvice to advise all councils how best todo this, which BOB is asking BPC to follow and deliver.Government has reiterated, especiallyin relation to the NDP process, "Therelationshipbetween any group and the formal functions of the town or parish council should betransparentto the wider public ...The terms of reference for a steering group or other body should bepublishedand the minutes of meetings made available to the public" (e.g. BPC Management Working Group, Steering Group, etc.).On average,97% of residentsdo not regularly attend BPC meetings. This makes access to documented information regarding councillors' actions and decisions, taken on behalf of residents, essential if BPC truly want to represent residents.BPC demand an annual precept, stated to be £44k (an increase of over 13%)for 2018/19. Access to information is required for the public to understand how this is being spent on their behalf whether through the purchase of assets or employing staff, etc. Also, whether money is coming from precept or reserves, and why.Residents are aware of how, at times,BPC negativelyspeak about each other and the public,and so some peopleask BOB to raise their concerns and questions indirectly. In response BPC has invoked a policy stating they will not answer anycommunications from residents via BOB for over a year,until Feb 2018. Therefore BPC has a communication issue with all concerned residents, not just BOB.BPC started the NDP process in July 17, yetthere is no publicly accessible information.BPC "look to hold"the first public discussion meeting "early next year", i.e. 6 months after the project began. They are currently discussing whether to take money from BPC financial reserves to start financing a NDP, without anyNDP costs yetbeing publicly declared. BOB is not asking for any special treatment. BOBhas been asking for many years, on behalf of residents, for BPC to be open, honest and transparent in its actions and decision making (Nolan Principles of public office); asking for simpleaccess to timely and accurate public information; and for BPC to hold interactive public meetings on large projects such as NDP. BOB hasbeen asking BPC to actively communicate and engage with allresidents not just a select chosen few.. So, to reiterate,BOB is not necessarily against a Neighbourhood Plan but with no/little publicly accessible information from BPC, nor its aims or its decision making processes, it will be very difficult for residents to make any informed decisions of their own on the matter.]]>
Please see below a message BOB received regarding the very bright Quarry lights affecting our wonderful dark skies:
"I have contacted North Somerset Council about this issue with the quarry lights and have today received a call from a local environmental officer. It seems there's little we can do ourselves as the legal position seems to be based around intrusive light into the home. As we in our location ... don't have these terrible lights beaming directly into our house then our hands are tied somewhat. Do you know if anyone else in the village nearer to the quarry has raised the issue? If so, if we can get further calls into NSC to complain then I think there's a decent chance of getting a result based on what I've been told today."
These lights can also affect our wildlife like Bats too, so is your environment/home/garden adversely affected at all by the bright quarry lights and if so, would you be willing to complain to NSC directlyor alternatively, for BOBto pass on your name and details to becontacted with further details?
Residents in the immediately vicinity have already started to respond to NSC but would like your support, so please reply and I will pass on the message as appropriate, it would also be very helpful if you could also inform your friends and neighbours too.
-------------- Further related information below --------------
BOB 08/12/2017 email to NSC Development and Environment Department:
We have been passed your contact details with regard to the above issue.
As you maybe aware many Bleadon residents have noticedthat theBridge Road, Bleadon (Marshalls) Quarry 'yard lights'are nowverymuchnoticeably brighter, possibly because they have been 'upgraded' to LED lamps. Apart from the increased intrusive 'light pollution'into neighbouring properties (I understand some residents have alreadymade complaints), and the loss of our valued 'dark skies',many other Bleadonnature loversare alsoconcerned about the effect on wildlife, particularlynocturnal mammals like Bats.
We believe that the Quarryis within aknown feedinghabitat range oflegallyprotected species of Bats. Seehttp://jncc.defra.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/sac.asp?EUCode=UK0030052
Alsosee attached information from Bat Conservation Trustand according to North Somerset Council Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Management Policy DM8"Development proposals should ensure that, where appropriate, provision is made for:any lighting scheme to avoid adverse impacts on light averse wildlife"
Please can you confirm that the originalquarrylighting scheme was approved under relevant past and presentNSC Local Planpoliciesand alsoif the Quarry lighting'system' has subsequently been upgraded or changed, and whether this shouldalso need NSCapproval?
If this is not a responsibility orconcern of Environmental Protection, please can you forward/advise to whomthis shouldbe referred E.g: Planning Policy Enforcement or perhapsanother relevant NSC or public servicedepartment?
For reference: North Somerset Council Local Plan (Core Strategy) Development Management Policy DM8 is here https://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Sites-and-Policies-Plan-Part-1-Development-Management-Policies-July-2016.pdf
Below is information received from Bat Conservation Trust.
Thank you for contacting the Bat Conservation Trust about bats and lighting. We are a small charity and regrettably cannot get involved in individual cases. We therefore rely on concerned residents like yourself to help us protect bats by bringing matters such as this to the attention of relevant authorities.
Bats are amazing animals that are important to ecosystems in the UK and worldwide. As natural roosting sites have become scarce so the number of artificial roost sites has increased in the form of houses, bridges, barns etc. We have 18 species of bat in the UK, all of which are protected under UK and European law such that it is illegal to damage, destroy or disturb any bats or roosts. A roost is defined as any place that a wild bat uses for shelter or protection, and the roost is protected whether bats are present in it or not. The ‘Supporting Legislation’ section in ‘The planning system’ leaflet attached provides a more in-depth overview of bats and the legal system.
Bats and lighting
Bats are nocturnal animals that have adapted to low light conditions. Therefore the artificial lighting of bat roosts, access points and foraging pathways can be disturbing to bats and should always be avoided as much as possible. Artificial light falling on or close to a bat roost can delay or prevent the bats’ emergence, resulting in reduced foraging time and missing the peak time of insect abundance (just after dusk). As all bats in the UK feed on insects this missed opportunity can have a serious impact on their survival.
Artificial light falling onto roost access points can in some cases lead to bats abandoning the roost, which is likely to be considered a breach of legislation as both bats and their roosts are protected by law.
Artificial lighting has also been found to affect the feeding behaviour of bats away from the roost. Slower flying species (lesser horseshoe, greater horseshoe and the 6 Myotis species) avoid illuminated areas and therefore lose foraging grounds if they are lit. This results in slower flying species having to use poorer quality foraging sites and losing out on prey, which are attracted to the surrounding lit areas. Unfortunately these light-avoiding species include all of the UK’s rarest bat species. However, even our faster flying species recorded more widely (noctule, Leisler’s, serotine and pipistrelle bats) can be impacted by artificial lighting. Some may feed under streetlamps, as insects are attracted to the short wave length light they emit (UV), but suitable commuting and foraging routes have been shown to be avoided if there is artificial light spill onto these areas.
It is very important to take bats into account when planning to light an area they are known or suspected to use. There are a number of factors that will need to be considered under expert guidance, such as:
Which species are present?How are they using the habitat – roosting, commuting, foraging, etc.?What are the existing light levels?Have the principles outlined in the attached lighting guidance been applied? (e.g. Minimising spread of light, considering height of lighting columns, using appropriate lighting sources, minimising amount of space and time lit, using fencing to protect dark areas etc.)In the first instance we would recommend that the owner of the property is informed of the presence of bats and the potential for lighting to affect them. As bats and their roosts are protected by law if bats are known or suspected to roost in an area that needs to be illuminated a survey will need to be completed prior to work being carried out. The owner is welcome to contact our helpline on 0345 1300 228 for more information and help ensuring the bats are not affected.
If the council is involved (e.g. if planning permission is required) we would suggest that you contact the local council planning authorities and alert them to the presence of bats and the need for a survey before works proceed. The most effective way to contact your local authority is in writing, but we advise that you follow this up with a phone call to ensure your enquiry is on record. Where possible we would also encourage you to send the letter to the applicant making them aware of possible bat presence.
To ensure your letter is taken seriously we recommend you:
· Don’t include hearsay or information you are unsure about.
· Don’t include unsubstantiated criticism of the property owner, e.g. personal circumstances or character.
· Don’t exaggerate your claims.
· Don’t include information unrelated to the issue of the lighting.
· Don’t make reference to the effect of the lighting on property values.
If your enquiry relates to pre-existing lighting you may be directed to Environmental Health (who deal with disturbance to people). In that case, you will need to make it clear that your enquiry relates to the impact on wildlife and needs to be directed to the appropriate person.
If you witness an offence being committed (e.g. bats being disturbed or a roost entrance being illuminated) please inform the Police Wildlife Crime Officer in your local area by calling 101 or calling the local Police Force directly, mentioning ‘Operation Bat’ and request an incident number.(If the Wildlife Crime Officer is not available it should not affect the reporting of the incident, please do so anyway). Please also report this incident along with the incident number obtained from the Police to the Bat Conservation Trust so we can follow this up. If you are aware of a licence breach in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland this should also be reported to the police in the same way. If the licence breach is in England however, then the matter should be reported to Natural England’s Wildlife Enforcement Specialist on 0300 060 1099.
The documents attached (Artificial Lighting Wildlife,Helping to Protect Bats and Living with Bats) provide more information on bats and lighting in the UK. I also recommend visiting the lighting section of our website: http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/bats_and_lighting.html
You can also find information from our 2014 Artificial Light and Wildlife Symposium, including video clips of talks on our website: http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/artificial_light_and_wildlife_symposium_determining_solutions_for_practitioners.html
I hope this information is helpful for you. If you have any further questions please contact the National Bat Helpline on 0345 1300 228.
Kind regards,
Bat Advice Officer
Out of Hours project coordinator
Lot coordinator for East Midlands and Yorkshire
National Bat Helpline, Bat Conservation Trust, Quadrant House, 250 Kennington Lane, London SE11 5RD
Helpline: 0345 1300 228 - Please note that the helpline number has changed
Office (9am – 5:30pm): 020 7735 6663
Fax: 020 7820 7198
-----------------------------
Above response to email below from BOB 15/12/2017
I hope you can advise me, our local quarry (Marshalls inBridge Road, Bleadon adjacentto South HillSNCI)has recentlychanged it's 'yard' lights to LEDand now, in the dark longernights, locals have noticed that they are nowextremely bright and seeminglyon 24/7. Some neighbourshave alreadycomplained to North Somerset Council Environmental Protection due to the intrusion of lightinto their homes and some have complained abouttheaffect on their astronomy hobbies. However, my furtherconcern is the effect onour wildlife. Iknow the quarry is located in a North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC 5km 'bat habitat'consultation area, forany lighting scheme designs on 'new' development,but Ialsowondered if there was any legislation for existing development and management oftheeffect of their (new)lighting schemes? I have readhttp://www.bats.org.uk/pages/bats_and_lighting.htmland North Somerset Council policy DM8 fromhttps://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Sites-and-Policies-Plan-Part-1-Development-Management-Policies-July-2016.pdfbut wewould appreciate some further specializedguidanceon who best to contact for 'pressure' in this regard toreduce/remove the light pollution and rectify the situation?
]]>
BPC are residents' Statutory Consultee and so are automatically informed of any consultations that may affect our community. Since April 2016, BPC decided to remove the Correspondence section from their published Agenda, so residents can no longer see who is requesting information and/or consultation from BPC on our/residents' behalf.
The following public consultations will be running over the Christmas and New Year period and are due to close in January 2018, is this deliberate?:
Bristol Airport Expansion consultation Stage 1 is open to the public 16 Nov 17 - 28 Jan 2018. Additional information can be seen on the Kingston Seymour Parish Council website. BOB can find no reference to this consultation in BPC published information, so is unsure whether BPC was requested to comment on our behalf. [UPDATE 30 Apr 18 Direct link nowhttps://www.bristolairportfuture.com/ ]The West of England Joint Spatial Plan is open to public consultation from 22 Nov 2017 - 10 Jan 2018. References to the JSP in BPC published information include Dec 15 (Corresp Min 279.14), Feb 16 (Corresp Min 281.10), Nov 17 (Cllr Porter 301.4), Dec 17 (Agenda 303.16).The NSC Local Plan 2036 - Generating Ideas is open to public consultation from 21 Nov 2017 - 10 Jan 2018. BOB can find no reference to this consultation in BPC published information, so is unsure whether BPC was requested to comment on our behalf.To see the relationship between some of thepolicies above see the Planning Policy Heirarchy page on BOB.]]>
UPDATE 14 Jan 19Bleadon Parish CouncilMin 318.7
"18/P/5070/FUL - Land Adjacent Rivermead, Purn Way. Councillors reported that this full application is one third bigger than the outline application and the garage is not in front of the building line; it is also very large. The installation of woodburners was questioned as they are not needed in a well-designed house, contribute to air pollution, and are likely to be banned in the near future. The development of one large house was also questioned, as the village has a need for more and smaller housing. It was AGREED to object to the application, commenting that the garage behind the building is better visually, the building line should be kept, and a single large house was not beneficial to the village. (3 votes for object, 1 for neutral, 1 abstention)."
UPDATE 06 Nov 17 Bleadon Parish Council F&P P68.9
"To consider the following planning applications:
17/P/2278/O Land Adjacent to RIVERMEAD, Purn Way, Bleadon, Weston-super-Mare, BS24 0QF Outline application for the erection of a single dwelling house and garage, with matters of access and layout to be considered. Matters of appearance, landscaping, and scale reserved for subsequent approval.
Cllrs provided a summary of their visit and findings and highlighted the NSC Highways Consultation Reply and online comments from the NSC Planning Website.
Cllr requested that an extension be asked from NSC to allow both the council and parishioners to respond. The Clerk highlighted that an extension had been provided to Bleadon Parish Council to after the November Parish Council meeting on Monday 13th November.
It was unanimously resolved to object to this planning application for the following reasons:
Access - The current layout and plan would not accommodate refuse collection vehicles and fire appliances. The block plan layout does not indicate a satisfactory layout to accommodate three vehicles. High visual impact to the area - Public footpath is enjoyed by Parishioners and visitors to the village, the views from within the village will be spoiled and lose its attraction for walkers and visitors. Wildlife and ecology impact - Detrimental effect on the flora/fauna and wildlife within the area.Safety - There is a single track/pathway of which there is public right of way for pedestrians via the footpath which links one end of the village to the other. This is a popular and highly used footpath. An increase in road traffic would be hazardous / dangerous for users. Settlement Boundary – this application is outside of the settlement boundary."---
A new application on land adjacent to Rivermead, Purn Way, Bleadon. "Outline application for the erection of a single dwellinghouse and garage, with matters of access and layout to be considered. Matters of appearance, landscaping, and scale reserved for subsequent approval". Another application on a green field site outside the Settlement Boundary.
Comments deadline is24 Oct 2017. Here is the link to the application17/P/2278/Oon North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
Major Developments in and around Bleadon
Other InformationThe NSC Planning Application website states that theConsultation Expiry datefor this applicationis24 Oct 17butBPC have just published their 9 Oct 17minutes to residents on21 Oct 27, stating:
(Min 300.11)"It was agreed for the Clerk to contact North Somerset Council Planning Department, to inform them that the Parish Council has been unable to discuss the application at the meeting as relevant documentation was not placed onto the NSC Planning portal for Cllrs to review. TheClerk to request an extension to the submission datesto after the next parish council / planning committee meetingto allow Cllrs to reviewthe application in detail"Can the residents/public also have an extension, as they too could not access the informationfor the fullconsultation period?Thisshows the importance of timely public minutes as the majority of non-attending residents will only justbe receiving this information and may want to comment.
]]>
The applicant originally put in a high number of units, 90, then subsequentlyreduced the numberto 40, and NSC Granted Consenton 20 Oct 17. See BOB for previous site information.
BPC published their 9Oct 17minutes to residents on20 Oct 17, the same day as NSC had granted consent to the application, stating: "It was agreed that the initial decision and comments of no objection to the planning application ...still stands" (Min 300.13). Thisshows the importance of timely public minutes as the majority of non-attending residents will only justbe receiving these disappointing BPC and NSC decisions.
The application for an expansion of 40no. static and touring caravans to the existing sitewasstill on a green field site, outside the Settlement Boundary, affecting a Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) andcontrary to residents' views as indicated in the 2009-2029Parish Plan;so residents would have expected BPC to have 'objected' or at least stated why it was not objecting.
NSC'sDelegated Reportmakes reference to "Reasons for Over-riding comments from Bleadon Parish Council"regardingtheir comment that " the developer should contribute to the general improvement of traffic issues likely to be caused by the development, particularly at the junction of the A370".How does this now affect any traffic improvements in Bleadon in that area, especially as the Wake Park S106 payment for traffic improvements was asked to be delayed?
The report also makes reference to transport and parking; and 'A5 Bleadon Moor', anyone heard of this before?
Although the NSC Delegated Report makes reference to the 'pond' it doesn't mention the fact that its owndesignated SNCIseems to have disappeared with no public disussion or consultation, even though this issue was raised during the consultation and asked of BPC and NSC last year, 2016, when pond works were being undertaken (which was initially highlighted by a BPC Councillor, supplemented by photos from BOB as seen on the original wildlife blog?) The Site History section of thereport indicated from the applicant that "this area comprised a pond for many years." The collated correspondence on this site from September 2016, but not yet answered, can be seenhere.
See Google MapsSatellite Imageryof the site before it was a pond (apparently last updated by Google August 2016). It can clearly be seen as an 'inlet' from the River Axe, which was said to be from ancient times when the River Axe was navigable to Glastonbury and then silted and overgrown over the years and used as a haven for wildlife. Hence presume its NSC designation as a SNCI. The 'withies' site certainly looks very different now as a 'balancing pond' for housing development!
So it seems that the apparent destruction of this Site of Nature & Conservation Interest is not important enough for NSC or BPC to protect or explain to residents.What was the purpose of this SNCI, was it to provide a marshy habitat to wildlife, if so, why is it not being reinstated? The SNCI is still visible on NSC online mapping, but if it was removed, what was the reason? Whatever the reason it seems that it has been destroyed and has been currently replaced by a commercial balancing pond, plumbed straight into the River Axe.
The reason we feel SNCI and PROW issues are important is that if residents are going to try and protect and defend our rural environment, identity and community on environmental issues (one of the three sustainability strands the others being economic and social) NSC/BPC need to support their own policies and not allow economic/commercial/tourism development to take priority on these sites. Other sites that are 'protected' by environmental policies include:
South Hill - SNCI with PROWs (PROWs have previously been re-directed and a route lost with little/no complaint from BPC/NSC)Purn Hill - SNCI, SSSI PROWs,Wildlife TrustHellenge - AONB, SSSI, SNCI and PROWs,Wildlife TrustShiplate Slate SNCI, SSSI, ANOBCoombe Farm - SNCIBleadon Hill Fields - SNCISNCI Before balancing pond
Aug 16
During Pond Construction & connection to River Axe
Nov 16
Afterwards/Now Oct 17--
Link to previous BOB Blog - Is Bleadon set to be the next Brean Tourist and Leisure Area?]]>
UPDATE 17 Nov 17 - Revised proposal received from Sutherlands Plc
NB: Residents have asked us to reiterate their previouscomment belowincluding it would be worth everyone who wants to, commenting back to Amanda Sutherland, and the developers, with the same objections as before. Just to reinforce the point and make it clear to the developers how unhappy everyone is. Also inform North Somersetelfan.ap.rees@n-somerset.gov.uk,terry.porter@n-somerset.gov.uk
Email from Amanda Sutherland 17 Nov 17. NB Sutherland's. NB The resident petition ofover 500 signatures has been ignored in favourofother feedback/comments made directlyto them that theyhave not yetshared.(Sutherlands did previously say they would share them with our Parish Council. However, BPC appear to have withdrawn from the informal public consultation process at present as the email appears not to have been copied to them). NB: Just because a health centre is proposed and potentially granted, it does not mean the government (NHS) will support and fund it. It is possible to end up with the houses but no facilities as has happened with other housing developments.
"Dear All
Following the well attended community consultation event at the Parish Hall, we have received over a hundred sets of comment and feedback about our proposed redevelopment scheme.
Although the key matter raised was a refusal in principle to see growth in the village, there were some other more proposal specific comments and we have had a substantive rethink of the scheme.
We had considered that the provision of a school in the village to meet an already identified need would be a positive contribution to the community through close provision and the opportunities for shared community sport facilities. However, there was only one supporter of this approach. The majority of residents do not want a local school as it would mean they lose the choice to place their children out of county in what are perceived as better schools than those available within the North Somerset catchment.This was a surprise to us.
However, what residents did want to see if development goes ahead are;
- highways improvements to the main A road accesses
- highways safety and improved bus services to the village
- a health centre / doctor surgery
- a local shop that stays open longer hours than the current farm shop in the village
As a result, we have significantly redrawn the proposed scheme, reducing it in size, removing the proposed school and adding health centre, shops and offices for start up businesses. The scheme will have a reduced housing number and the highway arrangement will link through the village providing a safe alternative to existing access ways. Although further detail of the revised scheme will need to be considered, we felt it would be useful to gain feedback from the community as to the principle revision = removing the school, reducing the scheme size and introducing health centre / shops and office space.
I attach a draft of the revised proposal for your review. As before, please send any comments you have to admin@sutherlandpls.com. We look forward to hearing your thoughts.
kind regards
Amanda Sutherland LLb(Hons) PG Dip LPC"
---------------------------------------------------
Original School & 250 houses Proposal below
NEW DEVELOPMENT PLANNED COME AND HAVE YOUR SAY We are proposing providing a primary school for the Village and a large scale residential scheme of up to 250 houses to facilitate it. OPEN DAY WEDNESDAY 13TH SEPTEMBER 2017 at Jubilee Hall, Bleadon 11am to 6pm We invite all members of the community to come along and find out more. There will be a feedback form available on the day, but if you are unable to attend and would like to know more, please contact us at admin@sutherlandpls.com
or use feedback form here (Word) (PDF)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who areSutherland Property and Legal ServicesandUrban Design Practice?
Although not currently on their agenda, you may also wish to attendBleadon Parish Council meeting on 11 Septemberto make your views known. BPC is aware of BOB's initial comments. Other site information includes theSanders Consultation (May 2011)in BVN89, and the Sites & Policies (SAP)Hearing (Apr 2017)andSupplementary Hearing (May 2017)documentation referring to this site as a school.
When making any feedback to the developer, please remember that these 'consultation'events are primarilyan intelligence gathering exercise for the developer to see how well their proposal will bereceived andas a pre-cursor before making a finalapplication to the planning authority. Information and views given by residents are often used tomodify their applicationto make it more 'acceptable' to North Somerset, Bleadon Parish Council and/or residents. It is not unknown for comments to be selectively chosen and/or modified by developers to make residents feedback seemmorepositive,representative and supportiveof the overallproposal which are thensubsequently used in their final application submission(and even appealsafter initialrefusal).BOB has also been asked to circulateadvice on commentingon consultationsfrom someone who works in planning.
10SEP 17 BOB asked BPC:
"... please can you publish/send a response to us as to what BPC understands will happen to the comments made by residents directly/indirectly to the developers? Will they subsequently be anonymously published to residents to discuss, like the last consultation; or arecomments for the developers 'eyes only' to support and improve their application to NSC?" No response received as yet.
Despite BPC's previous statements regarding the lack of a school being a concern for Bleadon residents (Dec 16 mins) and the current SAP designation we hope that BPC will listen to residents' views as indicated in the Parish Plan and other consultations.
BOB has asked the currentdeveloper's agent iftheywill be releasing a summary of all comments received during this public consultation (publishedanonymously), both positive and negative. Theresponse from their representative to date:
07 SEP 17The agent responded:
"Following the open day we would usually allow a couple of weeks for feedback by forms or email to reach us and then draft a summary of the responses and any action we have taken to address them to accompany the application when submitted.If the feedback reveals the need for a significant rethink or amendments it may be that we then carry out a further consultation exercise on any revisions proposed.We hold all responses and acknowledge receipt and where possible will try to personally respond to each. However, as you will appreciate, where there are large numbers of similar comments it is not practical to respond to individuals.
I think there may be some confusion re publication. We would never publish private correspondence. Once an application is submitted, comments made to the council are all published as they are a statutory body but we are bound not to disclose without the consent of the consultee under data protection ( hence creating a summary)".
UPDATE 15 SEPT 17 The agent replied after the Open Day at the Village Hall:
"It was certainly an interesting day in terms of residents thoughts and comments.
Please find attached the site layout plan exhibited at the event and the feedback form for residents to use to contact us with comments.
I would stress that this is the initial consultation with the community and I recognise that there is objection to development in the village but we are seeking feedback that enables us to consider residents concerns and wherever possible address them in subsequent iterations of the proposed layout. Some members of the public mentioned that in previous developer consultation processes there had been a lack of clarity over the community consultation process and concerns were raised about transparency. For clarification, we intend to keep individual copies of all feedback received but will not be publishing those comments due to data protection. We will provide copies to the Parish Council of all of the feedback received and will present a summary of that feedback as well as an explanation of how we have considered feedback received and whether changes have been made to the scheme as a result.
This will be presented to the Parish Council at the relevant PC meeting where residents will be able to attend and comment.
Following submission of the scheme to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) for a determination of the outline application, the LPA will then carry out their statutory consultation providing a further opportunity for comment within the statutory process."
UPDATE 16 OCT 2017 from developer's agent to BPC copied to BOB:
"It is disappointing that the Parish Council do not wish to hear from us about the amendments made to our scheme following the first round of consultation but of course, that is their decision. As a statutory consultee, you need only hear from us once the scheme is referred to you for discussion and comment but we were surprised at your response given we had agreed how to proceed with community consultation being led by the PC as the community representative.
We had agreed an approach to community consultation that the PC have now determined they will not follow and it is always a concern when the representatives of the local community do not wish to engage. However, we have to respect your position. Once the application is submitted, we will attend the relevant meeting as interested parties.
In the meantime, we will have to refer the PC decision to the wider community through press and website engagement and trust that the community will still have the opportunity to make their comments. Copied to Bleadon Bob to ensure that his online community can spread the word."
More details on other applications here]]>
UPDATE 7 Oct 17 - Application changed to "Proposed change of use of land from camp site to the siting of 40 no. static and touring caravans"Deadline for comments changed to 9 Oct 17.
The Mercury has published anarticle on the£5 million Riverside Holiday Village/Purn Caravan Park expansionstatingthat"The park has a currentcapacity of up to 400 people, across the campsite and in static and touring caravans." The site has"seen £7million invested into its facilities in the past few years, including the construction of a new bar, restaurant and swimming pool complex."West Country Parks,who own 9 caravan parks in North Somersetarea, arenow looking to expand the 163 unitsite at Bleadonby a further 90 units taking two years to complete. So, if 163 units represents 400 people what will the additional 90 units plus additionalvisitors to the siterepresent with regards to people, cars, traffic, noise and light pollution in Bleadon? This doesn't include potentialissues relating tothe additonal 57 unitsor the Wake Park approved next door to the site. Current views of the site, surrounding fields and developments can be seen on the main BOB Blog.
This is a multi-million pounddevelopment by a regional companyaffecting our community in many ways.Bleadon Parish Council(BPC)has submitted 'no objection'to this andvarious applications making up the all year round300+ caravans and Wake Parkproposed at thisAccommodation Road/A370 location. They seemunconcerned that the green field sites are being covered with hardstanding and that public rights of way (PROW) andSites of Nature & Conservation Interest (SNCI)are being destroyed, and wildlife disturbed, to make it happen.We feel that the Bleadon's adoptedParish Plan 2009-2029, representing the views of 60% of residents, has a different view ofthe future of Bleadon than the onesubmitted by councillors (For replies to the Parish Plan Questionnaire and associated statistics seehttp://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishplan).For example:
Question 14 'Should Tourism development/attractions be encouraged in and around Bleadon?' Out of 461 responses only 22% were in favour. [Strongly in favour 8.242% (38), In Favour 13.88% (64), No strong opinion 14.09% (65), Have Reservations 26.24% (121), Definitely Not 37.52% (173)]. We feel that this clearly shows a lack of public support for any expansion.Question44:'How important is it to you that countryside is maintained between Weston and Bleadon? Out of 572 responses 97% thought it was highly significant to maintain the countryside (Very important 87.06% (498) Important 10.31% (59) Not important 1.048% (6) No opinion 1.573% (9)).From BOB feedback someresidents areunaware of the extent of this application andthe developers intention topromoteit asa large tourist destination in WSM and the widerNorth Somerset area.As far as weknowthere has not been any localconsultation on this significantapplicationput out by BPC that shows whether the majority of residents now support this application, nor has there been aspecificagenda item, Parish Newsletter information or other public awareness regarding BPC's'vision' of Bleadon at theAccommodation Road/A370 area, or indeed anywhere else in Bleadon. So, how are councillorsdeciding the majority view of residents when submitting responses to these types ofdevelopmentson our behalf?
What is BPC/NSC's plan for the otherfields in the area, especiallyalong the A370? Is Bleadon to become acountryside version of Brean as a busy tourist and leisure destination? Thedevelopersapplication support information can be seen herebut below aresome extracts:
(7.00) "Conclusion. The proposal to extend Purn Holiday Park to include a further 90 pitches withassociated leisure facilities is a massive vote of confidence in the holiday industry in North Somerset. The development will be a huge investment for the applicant which will boost the local economy during construction and perpetuity. This assessment demonstrates that in flooding termsthere is no bettersite for this developmentand that the proposals will be safe from flooding both for visitors and property and will not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere". If there is 'no better site' other than the ones in the Accommodation Rd/A370 areawhat will happento the adjacent fieldsin the future if this becomes a highlypopular tourist destination?(6.00) "The development includes a number of leisure facilities that will foster a stay on site holiday experience." How does this equate to"boosting the local economy"? What does 'local economy'mean Bleadon's, WSM's, North Somerset's, Sedgemoor's?(It has been stated that this developmentwill potentially createshorttermconstruction jobs and9 full time jobs subsequently).(4.06 & 6.00) The applicant proposes theuse of Bleadon Hillas a place of safety and a route of escape should flooding occur!! How would this physically happen?(6.00) "Easy access to the A370 and M5. This will reduce travelling time to and from the site and associated congestion. it will also accommodate overnight visits from holiday makers travelling down the M5 to Devon and Cornwall."(5.00) It suggests that thesite can used as a base for tourist attractions in WSM, Burnham-on-Sea and Brean and is therefore ideal fortourism industry of this size, especially as the extended park will be close to the new water park. This would greatly change the characterof our rural community.(5.00) It states that the 'search area principle' being used in this application was accepted for the 57 caravans at Accomodation Road. Using thisreasoningwhat will happen to the green fields next to Purn Holiday park in the future, how long before the next development?(6.00) "The development incorporatessignificant landscape improvements that will improve viewsacrossthe siteas well as support wildlife".This is a green field site that seems to have destroyed the existingSNCIandwill remove the PROW and cover the land inhardstanding and vehicles, how does this improve the views towards the Mendip Hills ANOB,Brent Knolland across the Bleadon Levels?(4.02) There will beVisitor Parkingfor additional cars and people to the site affecting traffic, pollution, etc.As this application is outside the current Settlement Boundary/Village Fence and contrary to resident's feedback to the adopted Parish Plan, only8 years into a 20 year plan,we feel that itshould not be approved.TheBPC Village Plan Meeting Leaftlet distributed to all residents stated"Your views are very important, please don't complain about the future direction the village takes if you couldn't be bothered to let people know how you feel about things that are important to you!"60% of residents responded with their views subsequentlyincorporated into the 2009-2029 BleadonParish Plan. The leaflet also stated, "Everyone who lives or works in Bleadon will soon be asked how they want Bleadon to evolve in the future. This will form the Bleadon Village Plan, which will become a template for future Bleadon Parish Councils to refer to when making decisions. It will also provide guidance to North Somerset Council on how we would like to see the parish develop over the coming decades. This will be your chance to influence the decision-makers to let them know what you hold dear and the things yound like changed. We are lucky enough to live in one of the more beautiful parts of the country, with a community, which has proven itself to be very supportive to local causes. We need to protect and enhance that important village spirit."
Who are BPC,our elected/co-opted councillors, currentlyrepresenting? BPCstatedin December 2016, during the Bleadon Hill Inquiry,that they"...have been clearly told that national planning policies, driven by central government, insist that massive housing developments must be approved regardless of the wishes of any local plans that may be in place."In July 2017, foranotherapplication outside the Settlement Boundary, it was minuted "Both Cllr Porter and the Chairman informed parishioners to make individual representatives on the North Somerset Planning website and objections /comments to be based on planning reasons". It seems that it is up to residents to support our rural community status. Although the deadline for comments for the Purn Caravan ParkExpansionwas 7 August 2017the NSC websitestates"The 'Consultation expiry date' may be extended. Relevant comments received after this date are considered and taken into account so long as they are received in good time before the final decision is made."So,ifyou want your viewsto be heard byNSCcommenton their websitehere. AdditionalBOB information on this site can be found hereincluding additionalextracted statistics from the Parish Plan Questionnaire in the comments section. The deadline for comments has been extended to 9 October 2017.
BPC's Monday 14August 2017Agendahas relateditems reviewing and discussingwhere new building, large and small scale, will be permitted in Bleadon. (There is noindication as to whether these are public consultations or any associated feedback deadlines).
298.7To review/discuss the NSCLocal Plan 2018-2036 - Bleadon Settlement Profile (Settlement Boundary/Village Fence review?)298.8 To discuss theNSCSite Allocations Plan: Further Assessment of Residential Sites. (developers/NSC view ofwhere newbuilding will bepermitted).298.9 To discuss Planning Consultancy.If residents' views inthe adoptedParish Plan feedback are not taken into consideration during BPC decision making processes as confirmed by BPC this allraises the question astowhose mainbenefit (resident/business), and from what perspective (local/regional/national), will BPCbe replying to NSC and hiring a Planning Consultant?BOB has asked BPC questionsregarding items ontheirAugust Agenda.
For some background as to why developers continue to pressure NSC Planning please see themapping on theMajor Developmentpage andassociated tableof information on BOB, includingGreen Beltmapping andpolicies/documentation. Alsocurrent developmentsin and around Bleadon.
--
Previous BOB Blog - 90 Caravans at Purn/Riverside Park Update.]]>
BPC have published their14 August 2017 Agenda. Below are the BOB comments made to BPC regarding their August agenda items.
Firstly, regarding July minute 297.4.iiBleadon's bus service. It is our understanding that the4abus service is to be significantly reducedto only three buses a day as from September 2017and by a different provider. Is this the updateCllr Porter gave regarding the local bus service? For the majority ofresidentsunable to attend meetings, it would be helpful please that BPC minutes indicate more fully what was discussed.298.7To review and discuss the correspondence regarding North SomersetLocal Plan 2018-2036 - Bleadon Settlement Profile.Please can you send usa copy of this correspondence andmake itavailable via BPC website?Also for those unable to attend, can the minutes please indicatewhat is discussed andagreed in relation to this correspondence?We assume any proposed change to our 'settlement boundary/profile' willsurely be a public consultation. If this item does refer to a publicconsultation, please can you inform us/allresidents how toreview this 'profile'and whether there is anydeadline for comments?Clearly this would appear relevant to the 'Vexatious Policy' implementationagainst usregarding themissingParish Plan and ourunansweredquestions raised during the Public Inquiry, includingthe Settlement Boundary, last December 2016.298.8 To discuss the North Somerset Council Planning correspondence regarding theSite Allocations Plan: Further Assessment of Residential Sites.Please can you send us a copy of this correspondence andmake it available via BPC website?We presumethis is BPC's/Bleadon's opportunity to feedback into NSC's plan for where futuredevelopment will be permittedin and around Bleadon.For those residentsunable to attend, can the minutes please detail whatisdiscussed in relation to this correspondence? Is this a public consultation, if so, please can you inform us/allresidentshow to access/review the documentation, and anydeadline for comments?Please can BPC tell us/allresidentshow it came to submit'no objection' to the multi-million pound expansion ofPurn Caravan siteapplication on behalf of itsresidents? Regardless ofwhether the adopted 2009-2029 Parish Plan has currentlybeen physically'misplaced' byBPCthisdecisionseems contrary to the Parish Plan Questionnaire feedback seen at the bottom of this correspondenceand atwww.bleadon.org.uk/parishplan. TheBPC Village Plan Meeting Leaftletdistributed to all residentsstated"Your views are very important, please don't complain about the future direction the village takes if you couldn't be bothered to let people know how you feel about things that are important to you!"The leaflet also stated,"Everyone who lives or works in Bleadon will soon be asked how they want Bleadon to evolve in the future. This will form the Bleadon Village Plan, which will become a template for future Bleadon Parish Councils to refer to when making decisions. It will also provide guidance to North Somerset Council on how we would like to see the parish develop over the coming decades. This will be your chance to influence the decision-makers to let them know what you hold dear and the things yound like changed. We are lucky enough to live in one of the more beautiful parts of the country, with a community, which has proven itself to be very supportive to local causes. We need to protect and enhance that important village spirit." Where is the currentpublic debate on these applications that will irrevocably change Bleadon's character andlandscape forever?On thecurrentBPCwebsite, we completely agree with the statement by BPC ChairmanCllr Hartree who says"I believe that it is the duty of the Parish Council to protect and promote the aspirations of parishioners."; Also,Cllr Chinn says"I would like to see Bleadon preserve it’s village identity, part of which is to resist urban sprawl from Weston super Mare." andCllr Dobson says"I believe that the Parish Council has a key role to play in working actively with all sections of the community and I am keen to get involved and make a difference.".BPCstatedin December 2016, during the Bleadon Hill Inquiry,that they"...have been clearly told that national planning policies, driven by central government, insist that massive housing developments must be approved regardless of the wishes of any local plans that may be in place."May 2017 minutes state "The Chairman emphasised that although members of the public are always welcome to attend Parish Council meetings, it must be remembered that these are not public meetings, but are meetings which are held in public".In June 2017, at the being of the meeting, the"Chairman reminded members of the Public and Parishioners that this is the only opportunity during the meeting to speak regarding items on the agenda"i.e. no direct debatewill be held on agenda items.So, on behalf of all residents we/BOB urgentlyask again where are BPCcouncillors leading ourrural Bleadoncommunity? Please canBPC inform us/all residentswhat mechanismit is using to gain/listentofeedback from all residentsto make their decisionson behalf of our community, and how they areprotecting and preserving Bleadon's rural identity, especiallyif they are not using residents'Parish Plan feedback?Considering the agendadiscussion items 298.7 and 298.8, and the fact thatBPC seems to have 'misplaced/lost'our adopted 2009-2029Parish Plan,would it not also be appropriate to publiclydiscusswhat BPC intend to do aboutthe Plan,and the use of thepublicfeedbackthat formed it in relation to their decision making? BPC have alsoyet to publish their 'vision' statement of the future of Bleadon as indicated in May 2017 minutes. (As councillors are aware all related documentation, includingquestionnaire responsesand draft Parish Plan,is available on BOB if the planneeds to be redrafted and finalised again). To our knowledgeParish Plans can exist alongside any other plans such as a Neighbourhood Plan, andpreviouslyNSC (and CPRE)suggested that the Bleadon'sParish Plan couldbe submitted as a 'supplementary planning document' to the NSCLocal Plan/Core Strategy, is this BPC's intention?Please canBPC's inform us/allresidents what itsvision of the future of Bleadon is,as it seems to have 'no objection' to turning a third of it intocaravan parks or wake park for tourism purposes despite it'sresident feedback through the plan process?298.9Planning Consultancy.From recent statements and planning application responsesBPC seem to becurrentlyignoring the Parish Plan and associatedfeedback that represents 60% of residents' views, so withopenness and transparency in mind,please can you thereforetell us/allresidentswhat BPCwould bespecificallydiscussingwith aPlanning Consultant,andon whose behalf (residents/businesses)and from what perspective (local/regional/national)?According to our understanding fromCPALCBPC is a statutory planning applicationconsultee who is elected/co-opted torepresent residents and as such has the same rights as any member of the public, withno powers to approve or reject planning applications, they can only commentor not on applications.So like any resident, BPC has access tothe public information easily and freelyprovided by our planning authority, NSC, who makes the actual decisions locally on these matters.IsBPC suggesting it uses our precept to pay for this planningconsultancy or is this free expert/NSC advice? Is this consultancy for councillors' guidance and understanding of the planningprocess, specific applications and/or understandingthe use of Parish and other Plans on behalf of residents? Will BPC subsequentlypubliclyshare this consultancyinformationwith residents? From our understanding the whole purpose of the ParishPlan was to represent the community views in the NSCLocal Plan/Core Strategy process. BPC would then subsequently use it to feed into/guide BPC's responses and freediscussions withqualified andexperiencedNSC Planning and otherOfficers on behalf of residentse.g. on matters such asplanningapplications andwider issues. Please can BPC therefore inform us/allresidents as to the purpose and cost of this 'planning consultancy'?298.11Planning Decisions. Please can youtell us/all residents why BPCaregranting, with no objection, development outside thesettlement boundary in opposition to the Parish Plan feedbacke.g. on South Hill Farm, Fern Court, Purn Caravan Park, Celtic Way (but not Purn Way)? Please can you inform us/allresidents as to why BPC cannotrepresent residents' viewsas indicated in the Parish Plan feedbackandjust say 'NO'until thismatter of how BPC represents residents, settlement boundary, Core Strategy, etc.is openly and appropriatelydiscussed andconcluded; leaving the legalities andfiner points forNSC todebateand potentially addresswiththeir planning consultants at a higher level if in conflict with residents' views?BPC have repeatedly ignored our request to publicly detail its duties,roles andresponsibilities. As you may recall we last asked BPC to confirmitsduties/role with regardspublic rights of way(PROW) in June 2017, which still remains unanswered. If BPC instructs its/Bleadon's Village Ranger tomaintainthese footpaths with Bleadon precept funding,please can you tell us/allresidents why BPC made no comment to NSC regarding the PROWs affected by the caravan park and Celtic Way applications, and the apparentdestruction of the SNCI on the caravan park land, especially as replies to the Parish Plan questionnaire indicate that residents highly value our green space environment and associated wildlife?298.10Updating theasset register. We were informed by the previous clerk in November 2016that the asset register was being updated and that we could have a copy when it was completed. We have also been previously told by BPC that it needs updating each year for insurance purposes and when employees leave. As we have not yet received anything please can you send us acopy of the current assetregister, or is this action still outstanding?Bleadon Parish Plan Questionnaire Statistical Feedback(available viahttp://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishplan.html) ------TOURISM------Residents' response to Bleadon's Parish Plan QuestionnaireQuestion 14 'Should Tourism development/attractions be encouraged in and around Bleadon?' Out of 461 responses only 22%, 102 people,were in favour. [Strongly in favour 8.242% (38), In Favour 13.88% (64), No strong opinion 14.09% (65), Have Reservations 26.24% (121), Definitely Not 37.52% (173)]. We feel that this clearly shows a lack of public support for any tourist expansion whether caravan or leisure/wake park.------ OUR ENVIRONMENT
------Q44:'How important is it to you that countryside is maintained between Weston and Bleadon?Out of 572 responses 97% thought it was highly significant to maintain the countryside (Very important 87.06% (498) Important 10.31% (59) Not important 1.048% (6) No opinion 1.573% (9)).------Q45:Our local environment is under threat, with economic and development pressures possible accelerating future change, yet it is generally accepted that a high quality built and natural environment provides the foundation for a healthy local economy and a basis for a good quality of life. Some features of the built environment are protected by law, others rely on individuals accepting responsibility for the impact of their actions.How important are the following to you?'Impact of development on the visible landscape?Out of 476 replies residents stated that it was Very Important = 83.82% (399), Important = 14.49% (69) Not important = 1.680% (8);'A place of scenery and the natural world?' (484 replies) V Important 80.37% (389) Important 17.76% (86) Not important 1.859% (9);'Design, scale and 'fit' of new developments?'(461 replies) V Important 79.39% (366), Important 18.00% (83) Not important 2.603% (12);------Q46:The parish is largely rural with most of the land in agricultural use. Changing agricultural policies and practices, illustrated by the trend away from pasture to arable farming and farm diversification initiatives, will affect the natural environment.How crucial are the following issues to you? 1-Most 5-Least, 6-No Opinion.'Conservation of the parish landscape character(514 replies) 1 = 85.60% (440) 2 = 9.533% (49) 3 = 3.307% (17) 4 = 0.389% (2) 5 = 0% (0) 6 = 1.167% (6);'Woodland retention & replanting?' (502 replies) 1 = 79.28% (398) 2 = 13.94% (70) 3 = 3.187% (16) 4 = 2.390% (12) 5 = 0% (0) 6 = 1.195% (6);'Preservation of hedges and trees?' (504 replies) 1 = 80.95% (408) 2 = 12.10% (61) 3 = 4.563% (23) 4 = 1.190% (6) 5 = 0.595% (3) 6 = 0.595% (3); 'Wildlife conservation?' (488 replies) 1 = 84.63% (413) 2 = 9.221% (45) 3 = 2.868% (14) 4 = 1.434% (7) 5 = 1.229% (6) 6 = 0.614% (3);------Q47 'How important is the quality of the countryside around Bleadon to you?' (550 replies) Very important = 87.81% (483) Important = 10.54% (58) Not very important = 0.909% (5) No opinion = 0.727% (4).------Q48: 'Which elements of the countryside around Bleadon do you value?'Tranquility= 77.18% (494 replies)Openness= 67.5% (432)A place which provides my living= 10.93% (70)A place for walking or rambling= 55.46% (355)A place to ride or walk the dog= 39.68% (254)A place for fishing or shooting= 11.25% (72)A place of scenery and the natural world= 68.59% (439).------Q49: What do you think could be done to improve the environment of Bleadon? 1-Very Important, 2-Worth Doing, 3-Not Necessary, 4-Dont Know.'Plant more trees?'(412) 1 = 26.21% (108) 2 = 47.57% (196) 3 = 22.33% (92) 4 = 3.883% (16);'Cut down some trees?' (367) 1 = 1.907% (7) 2 = 10.08% (37) 3 = 81.19% (298) 4 = 6.811% (25);'Look after woodlands(437) 1 = 55.14% (241) 2 = 41.87% (183) 3 = 0.228% (1) 4 = 2.745% (12);'Keep hedges short and tidy on footpaths(463) 1 = 48.38% (224) 2 = 39.95% 185) 3 = 9.935% (46) 4 = 1.727% (8);'Let hedges in fieldsgrow naturally(394) 1 = 26.64% (105) 2 = 37.05% (146) 3 = 26.90% (106) 4 = 9.390% (37);Develop the river for leisure activities(421) 1 = 7.363% (31) 2 = 42.99% (181) 3 = 41.80% (176) 4 = 7.838% (33);'Develop the river and Levels as a wildlife sanctuary?' (453) 1 = 32.89% (149) 2 = 55.40% (251) 3 = 7.947% (36) 4 = 3.752% (17);'Develop the Coombe quarry as a wildlife sanctuary?' (465 replies) 1 = 21.07% (98) 2 = 57.20% (266) 3 = 14.62% (68) 4 = 7.096% (33).------Q50: 'Does Bleadon suffer from any of the following types of disturbance?' Traffic noise= 31.25% (200)Farm animals in gardens/onroads= 3.593% (23)Noisy visitors / residents= 10% (64)Low-flying aircraft= 17.81% (114)Noise pollution= 8.281% (53)Light pollution= 7.656% (49); 'Street Lighting outside residential areas?' (384) 1 = 26.30% (101) 2 = 16.14% (62) 3 = 15.88% (61) 4 = 7.031% (27) 5 = 34.63% (133).------Q: 57Artificial lighting of premises and recreation facilities allows for increasing hours of use and improved night-time security, yet it contributes to 'light pollution'.How concerned are you about these lighting issues? Rate as 1 = most concerned to 5 = least concerned.'Street Lighting outside residential areas?'(384) 1 = 26.30% (101) 2 = 16.14% (62) 3 = 15.88% (61) 4 = 7.031% (27) 5 = 34.63% (133);'Urbanisation of rural areas?' (350) 1 = 53.14% (186) 2 = 16.57% (58) 3 = 16% (56) 4 = 4.285% (15) 5 = 10% (35);'Security lighting?' (361) 1 = 26.31% (95) 2 = 13.29% (48) 3 = 29.08% (105) 4 = 10.52% (38) 5 = 20.77%;'Light pollution (glare/flow)?' (358) 1 = 36.87% (132) 2 = 20.39% (73) 3 = 18.43% (66) 4 = 8.938% (32) 5 = 15.36% (55);'Night working under lights?'(328) 1 = 25.91% (85) 2 = 11.89% (39) 3 = 21.95% (72) 4 = 6.402% (21) 5 = 33.84% (111);'Illuminated signs?'(342) 1 = 24.85% (85) 2 = 16.66% (57) 3 = 28.36% (97) 4 = 7.017% (24) 5 = 23.09% (79);'Impacts on wildlife?'(365) 1 = 54.79% (200) 2 = 15.89% (58) 3 = 15.06% (55) 4 = 6.301% (23) 5 = 7.945% (29);------ SERVICES------Q60Parish residents are supported by a limited range of local services, increasing the need to look further afield for supplies, service and support.Are you satisfied with the accessibility of services?' (514 responses)Satisfied= 57.78% (297)No opinion= 31.51% (162)Dissatisfied= 10.70% (55).For some background as to why developers continue to pressure NSC Planning please see themapping on theMajor Developmentpage andassociated tableof information on BOB, includingGreen Beltmapping andpolicies/documentation.Alsocurrent developmentsin and around Bleadon.]]>
Sue Badger is our WERN (West of England Rural Network) Village Agent for Bleadon.
She is able to offer advice and support to older people in our community regarding many aspects of life and I think may well be a helpful person for various people in our community. I have attached a copy of her leaflet.
Please feel free to circulate it and/or contact Sue.
With much hope,
Rev'd Tim Erridge
Parish Priest: Bleadon and Bournville
Tel: 01934 815 404]]>
UPDATE JUNE 2018 - Applicantsubmits an Appeal to the Planning Inspector
UPDATE 23 OCT 17 - ApplicationRefused by NSCtheDelegated Reportis also available.
A new application for a the "Erection of a two storey dwelling and a single storey detached garage following the demolition of existing stable building", on another green field site outside of the Settlement Boundary!
Comments deadline is 27 July 2017. Here is the link to the application17/P/1484/F on North Somerset Council Planning website
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
Major Developments in and around Bleadon
Other InformationView NowProposedDespite this application being outside the Settlement Boundary/Village Fence with a Public Right of Way through the middle of the site, following their Parish Council meeting Monday 10 July 17 our five parish council representativessubmitted the following comment to NSC as follows:
"Bleadon Parish Council has no objections to this application"North Somerset make the decision on this development application. If you want your individual voice heard you need to comment directly to NSC.
Why are BPC approving building on greenfield sites when surely they should first be identifying, building on and exhausting brownfield sites first?On 2 Nov 16 The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) posted "More than a million homes possibleon suitable brownfield land".On 15 Dec 14 localMP Liam Fox spoke outin Parliamenton behalf of North Somerset and thehigh extrahousing development imposed by central government coming from the Bristol University court challengewanting to build on Green Belt land. NSC was subsequently asked to increase indentified sites from 14,000 to 21,000 houses. Liam Fox MP said, "..it must be made clear that greenfield development should come only as a last resort after all brownfield sites are exhausted".On 10 May 2017 DCLG wrote "With effect from 16 April 2017, each local authority is required by law to create an easy-to-access Brownfield Register and publish it on its website by 31 December. However, only sites suitable for new homes are to be included".How can any green field site be considered until this exercise has been completed? Any NSC policies that are currently in place to protect green fields and infill villages should be upheld, e.g. Core Strategy, Parish Plans, etc.How will the Public Right of Way across this greenfield site be diverted, extinguished or created as requested by the applicant?Bleadon has already lost its circular walk onSouth Hillwhen that landowner made changesThis application is in a Bat Habitation zone,has had nesting birds and is near two separate Sites of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI). What other creatures will be affected? The applicant's own form indicates that "Although not within the ANOB it is considered that this site is important within the context of Policy DM11" We therefore believe that this application should be refused.Firstly and fundamentally, Bleadon is a NSC (CS33) designated Infill Village and this application site is outside of the long established Settlement Boundary, so surely this application must be rejected as otherwise what is the point of the designation and the Core Strategy Local Plan Policy which involved extensive consultation and costly production. Also the 20 year Bleadon Parish Plan that was previously adopted by BPC in 2009 states it will "Through the Planning process vigorously question all development outside the Village Settlement" and "Ensure that all new development is within the village Settlement Boundary". Also NSC Corporate Plan stating they need to "promote growth without compromising the things that we, and our millions of visitors, love about North Somerset: our beautiful countryside, stunning coast and distinctive towns and villages, each with their own unique character."
This application is on a greenfield site not a Brownfield Site, it has not been previously identified as suitable for development under the Site Allocations Plan consultation. This will not be affordable housing (CS17) in a sustainable location, being situated in a small but steep valley with obvious potential for flooding and landslip from above. The existing stable block has grown (possibly without permission) from a simple leanto shack to shelter ponies, into something more substantial and is on agricultural grazing land. This development will clearly change that purpose forever by creating a road over that land and thus also regular vehicular access on to/from Celtic Way (a steep narrow road) with very limited visibility. An accident (or more) waiting to happen from the existing field gate and also consideration to hedgerow regulations should be given.There is a public right of way with pedestrian access via gate/stile/steps on Celtic Way over this field. The views and natural habitat for wildlife over the surrounding landscape from the adjacent footpath (which is part of the West Mendip Way) and surrounding roads (also viewed from A370) will clearly also be permanently affected during construction and when completed. What about access for water, electric, gas, communication services and foul waste disposal too?The application support document states "Public transport passes the door, in both directions, hourly commencing at 08:40". The bus only goes up Celtic Way and thus will not be suitable to get to work or school before 9am. The application also states "If villages of this nature and character are not allowed to gradually grow ... they will stagnate", conversely the application already stated that Bleadon is an active, thriving community with WSM within easy reach, so why do the greenfields 'of beautiful countryside' that surround the village, that are key to Bleadon's 'unique character' need to be built on? Is the intention to 'gradually grow' Bleadon into a suburb of WSM with all greenfields being eventually built on and Bleadon village and surrounding greenfield parish destroyed?This is just one of many current applications within the surrounding area and almost all are outside our long established Bleadon settlement boundary. The accumulated effect of all these applications on the rural Bleadon community and environmental landscape needs to be considered as a holistic whole and not individually.We believe NSC needs to take a firm stand against all of these speculative applications and protect its own well considered and consulted planning policies. Otherwise what is the point of their existence leaving the property development industry to build whenever, whererever and whatever they please with the Planning Inspectors permission with no accounting for the health and well-being of the existing community residents they will and currently do affect!ASSOCIATED BOB BLOGS:
90 Static & Touring Caravansat Purn/Riverside Village on greenfield site outside Settlement Boundary.
16 Houses on Land Off Purn Wayon greenfield site outside Settlement Boundary.
70 Dwellings at Devil's BridgeBleadon Hill BOB Blogon greenfield site near Parish Boundary
Settlement Boundary Information]]>
What happened to the national/Good Councillor Guide/Nolan Principles adopted by BPC in their Code of Conductwith its 'Ethical Framework'and 'Seven Principles of Public Life'? For example:
"ACCOUNTABILITY Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.""OPENNESS Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and actions that they take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands.""LEADERSHIP Holders of public office should promote and support these principles by leadership and example."BPC have consistently refused to answer key questions in relation to the large scale developments in and around Bleadon and/or to state their view of the Future of Bleadon. They have recently responded to our request to understand their duties, roles and responsibilities, especially in relation to Public Rights of Way (PROW), stating "Bleadon Parish Council is currently taking advice with regard to the requests and issues raised in your emails and will, when such advice has been received, respond,or not, to the requests and issues raised".
Considering BPC is approving applications that seem contrary to the adopted Parish Planthat represents the views of 60% of residents; that BPC are approving the building on green fields which also directly affect the public rights of way on the current three fields under proposed development; and that BPC have approved a caravan parks with units equal to 60% of Bleadon's residential dwellings BOB feels that it is important that BPC publicly inform residents of their 'plan/approach' to the future of Bleadon. This is especially important seeing as BPC declared in April 2017 that they have 'lost/can't find' the paperwork associated with currently adopted 20 year Parish Plan!
The fact that BPC appears to need to take advice to let residents know what their current duties are, and have a random approach to their decison making, is concerning. The fact that they may or may not let 'us/public' know what these responsibilities are when they find out is doubly concerning, especially during this period of rapid development in the parish, and as the precept, currently£39K, is funding their decisions.]]>
UPDATE: 17 APR 18 - NSCRefuse the application.
------------------------
The deadline for this application is 25 July 2017,you can submit an online comment to NSC via theBOB link here.
This application is outside the Settlement Boundary/Village Fence, and following their Parish Council meeting Monday 10 July (Min 297.8) they submitted their objectionto NSC including the comment:
"...Bleadon is an Infill village and this development is outside the Settlement Boundary."Conversely, BPC has made 'no objection' to the green field development of 90 units at the Purn/Riverside Caravan Park, which is outside the Settlement Boundary, nor the development at Celtic Wayalso outside the Village Fence on a green field.
There have been mixed messages from BPC and NSC Councillors regarding the Settlement Boundary, their treatment of it and their view of the future of Bleadon. BOB has received a Settlement Boundary update/replyfrom North Somerset and the Department of Communities and Local Government, but we have not received a response from BPC to our Dec 16 query. See associated Settlement Boundary Information.
North Somerset make the decision on this development application. If you want your individual voice heard you need to comment directly to NSC.
See 16 Houses Planned on Land Off Purn Way for more information
ASSOCIATED BOB BLOGS:
70 Dwellings at Devil's BridgeBleadon Hill on greenfield site near Parish Boundary
--------
Application Number: 17/P/1351/O
Name: Bleadon Parish Council
Address: Coronation Hall Coronation Road Bleadon BS24 0PG
Tel: Email: parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Date and time of comment left: 14-07-2017 11:35
Comment Type: Object to Proposal
Comment: Bleadon Parish Council objects to the planning application for the following reasons:
i. The number of proposed dwellings is too high a density.
ii. Current village infrastructure is not fit to support this size of housing development.
iii. Roads in the immediate vicinity are currently inadequate and this would result in an increase of traffic.
iv. Parking of vehicles is currently an issue on Purn Way for residents and visitors to the meeting rooms at the Post Office. The new dwellings will provide an increase in number of cars adding additional pressure on the roads.
v. Road junctions are currently at best hazardous and at worse dangerous at Devils Bridge Anchor Inn and Bridge Road with the A370 and additional traffic will add pressure on these roads and systems that is already broken.
iv. Sewage system is currently at capacity and additional dwellings will add additional pressure to the system.
v. Potential increase in flooding to the bottom of the village as the field has no proper drainage.
vi. Sustainability ?? to consider that there are no schools or doctors and only one Post Office store in Bleadon.
vii. There have been some Archaeology finds close by to this site and request an archaeological survey to be considered.
viii. Bleadon is an Infill village and this development is outside the Settlement Boundary.]]>
The deadline for this application has been extended to 9 October 2017 (previously 07 August 2017), you can submit an online comment to NSC via the BOB link here.
Despite this application being outside the Settlement Boundary/Village Fence, following their Parish Council meeting Monday 10 July 17 our five parish council representativessubmitted the following comment to NSC as follows:
"Bleadon Parish Council has no objections to this application, however the Parish Council would like to request that the developer to be asked to contribute to the levy for the general improvement of traffic issues likely to be caused by the development particularly at the junction of the A370."There is no mention of the many reasons that BOB/public feel support a refusal to this application. For example:
This application is outside the Settlement Boundary.According to the Parish Plan Questionniare responses 64% of responding residents had 'reservations' or 'definitely' did not want tourism development/attractions.That if this application was granted it would mean that a third of all dwellings in Bleadon would be on a caravan site.That if granted the number of caravan units in the Accomodation Road junction area will have nearly doubled from 163 units last year/2016 to a potential 310 all year round units this year.That 310 units is 60% the number of the existing 530 residential dwellings in Bleadon.That the current site licence is for non-residential units, so what monitoring is in place to ensure that these units do not become full time residencies? (It is our understanding that these caravan units do not count as Bleadon's allocation of residential units, hence the pressure to build houses on our green field sites outside the settlement boundary).That according to NSC data the site doesn't appear to officially be a camp site at present, so how can it be a change of use?
That according to NSC mapping there is a PROW right through the centre of the application (PROW responsibilites still not answered by BPC. Bleadon has already lost its circular walk on South Hill when that landower made changes).
That according to the site related application (17/P/1515F) to construct an equipment store the Site of Nature & Conservation Interest (SNCI) now appears to be a pond?! (This SNCI and associated landfill queryis still not answered by BPCor NSC).
That it is outside the Settlement Boundary and it would irrevocably change the nature of the green landscape in which it is sitedThat it would not accord with the adopted 20 year Parish Plan 2009, associated Action Plan and/or 103 Improvements to "Conserve the rural character - Retain the green space between Weston andBleadon" (Parish Plan paperwork was declared 'lost/not found' by BPC this year, with no local democratic consulted plan in place to protect our community or environment).North Somerset make the decision on this development application. If you want your individual voice heard you need to comment directly to NSC.
See 90 Static & Touring Caravans at Purn/Riverside Village for more information.
ASSOCIATED BOB BLOGS:
Caravan Site Information
16 Houses on Land Off Purn Wayon greenfield site outside Settlement Boundary.
Stables to dwelling on Celtic Wayon greenfield site outside Settlement Boundary,
70 Dwellings Application at Devil's BridgeBleadon Hill BOB Blog on green field site near Parish Bounary
Settlement Boundary Information]]>
UPDATE 22 JULY 19 Decision Notice Grants Outline Planning Permission for up to 60 dwellings.
UPDATE JUNE 2019: Road closure extended until 1 July 2019.
UPDATE APR 2019: " ...due to safety critical circumstances we have toextend the duration of the road closure on the bridge until the 9th of June"
UPDATE 22 FEB 19Plans to build60 houses on Weston-super-Mare's outskirts approved
UPDATE 06 FEB 19Request for Devils Bridge Meeting Assistance
UPDATE DEC 2018:Road Closure at Bleadon Hill/A370 junction 23 DEC 2018, and 7 JAN for 33 days (until 09 FEB 2019)
-----
The deadline for this application was extended to 25 July 2017,you can submit an online comment to NSC via the BOB link here.
Following their meeting on Monday 10 July 17 Bleadon Parish Council submitted a comment to NSC as follows:
"Bleadon Parish Council objects to the planning application based on the same grounds as W-S-M Town Council."For reference Weston Town Council submitted as follows:
"Raised concerns due to overdevelopment and highway access to main busy road. Not in favour unless these issues can be resolved."So little comment from our public representatives for such a major planning development. We know several residents will be disappointed in this response as they were hoping BPC would respond to these large developments and address the potential traffic and pollution issues that they willcreate for Bleadon.
North Somerset make the decision on this development application. If you want your individual voice heard you need to comment directly to NSC.
See 70 Dwellings at Devil's Bridge Bleadon Hill for more information on this greenfield site near our Parish Boundary
ASSOCIATED BOB BLOGS:
16 Houses Planned on Land Off Purn Wayon greenfield site outside Settlement Boundary
90 Static & Touring Caravansat Purn/Riverside Villageon greenfiled site outside Settlement Boundary
Stables to dwelling on Celtic Wayon greenfield site outside Settlement Boundary,]]>
There are only 13 Infill Villages with Settlement Boundaries identified in the whole of North Somerset as indicated in NSC Core Strategy (2017),CS33. Development in these villages, Bleadon included, "will be strictly controlled in order to protect the character of the rural area and prevent unsustainable development."
TheNSC Corporate Plan(2015-19) also states the "need to promote growth without compromisingthe things that we, and our millions of visitors, love aboutNorth Somerset: our beautiful countryside, stunning coastand distinctive towns and villages, each with their ownunique character."
Although we have not received a response from Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) to our queries on this topic last year, Dec 2016, theirJuly 2017 minutes(Min 297.4i) state "..there is currently not a settlement boundary at this present time for Bleadon."Conversely, their comments to NSC regardinghousing on Purn Waydecided at the same meeting state "Bleadon is an Infill village and this development is outside the Settlement Boundary". So, what is BPC's approach to the Settlement Boundary? We have receivedresponses from North Somerset implying the opposite and a response from the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG)regarding identifying Brownfield sites to use before green field sites.SeeSettlement Boundary Information
So what is BPC's approach to our Public Rights of Way which are affected by all three current applications in greenfield sites which are outside the Settlement Boundary?]]>
UPDATE 20 August 2017 - Both BPC andNSC approve the caravan site expansion with reduced 40 units.
UPDATE 13 August 2017 -£5 Million development article(on top of the£7 million in the last few years).
UPDATE 23 July 2017 - BPC submit comment to NSC on this applicationA new application for a "Proposed change of use of land from camp site to the siting of 40no. (previously 90no.) static and touring caravans" has been submitted to North Somerset (click onabove annotated image).Comments deadline has been extended to 9 October 2017 (previously 7 Aug 2017). Here is the link to the application 17/P/1502/F on North Somerset Council Planning website athttp://wam.n-somerset.gov.uk/MULTIWAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=585384A04F3A6D7048BC6D2B9FBC14D3?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=17/P/1502/F
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
Major Developments in and around Bleadon
Other InformationFull Site View from
Purn Hill SNCI
River Ax/Crook Peak View from PROWBrent Knoll View from PROWNow
ProposedThe associated press advert indicates it was advertised on 6 Jul 17. The documents published on this website state 4-5 Jul 17, yet the Consultation Expiry Date is 16 June 2017...Surely this must be a mistake for such a major application? (Deadline subsequently changed to 7 Aug 17 now extended to 9 Oct 17)
The2011 Bleadon Parish Censusstates 'Total number of dwellings'in Bleadon was 530 of which only44 were 'Caravan or other mobile or temporary structure".These newly proposed 90 caravans, in addition to others already on this site (163) and Accomodation Road (57), now total 310. If the granted and proposed units go ahead this potentially means thatover third of dwellingsin Bleadon will be on caravan sites,RiversideVillageindeed! Without proper monitoring these temporary dwellings may be lived in permanently all year round, as is the case in many areas of the country. A massive increase, also on services in the area especially as these are granted for all year round use.
The application proposal states "change of use of land from camp site to a static caravan site".When was this site approved to be used as a camp site? It appears that in 1995 this area was refused change of useto recreational land stating "The size of the proposed recreational area is excessive when compared with the size of the caravan park it is to serve and granting planning permission for a recreational area of this size would represent an undesirable precedent, making it difficult for the local Planning Authority to resist future proposals for associated recreational facilities on site. The proposal therefore represents a threat to the character and appearance of this open rural area.."We believe this is still the case yet BPC have no objectionto this development? How can this green field be permitted to be developed with 90 static and touring caravans?
116 car parking spaces as well as bases for caravans are planned, yet apparently this application"will not increase the risk of floodingelsewhere"? Will there be any additional pollutants from the 90+ vehicles stationed here, seaping into the water table/river? As the land is being covered surely there will be additional run-off water and this will exacerbate flooding of the Public Right of Way (PROW) which already suffers from access issues due to existing sluice gate problems? The application also refers to a 'balancing pond' east of the site, how does this affect the Site of Nature & Conservation Interest (SNCI) site, being queried as seen below.
As can be seen from the annotated map above there is a PROW right through the centre of the site. BPC recently minuted "Footpath down by the river on the A370 recommends to be closed. The river has been penned and the footpath is seen to be dangerous, as the grass has got so wet there is nothing stable to walk on. The Clerk to inform North Somerset Council that the state of the footpath is dangerous."(12 Jun 17 Min 296.17.c).There is no mention as to whether this is a permanent or temporary closure, so in light of this new application we sincerely hope that BPC will ensure that this beautiful riverside footpath through green fields along the river Axe remains open.We are still waiting for BPC to respond to our requests to confirm their duties and responsibilites, but we last asked about PROWs in relation to theMay 17 BPCmeeting minutes, where the Village Ranger was being asked to maintain a PROWrather than NSC,thereby the public potentially paying twice for the same footpath access.
Concern over extensive landworks (including the burial of building waste materials) on the land adjacent, agricultural fields, was reported to NSC in September and November 2016 when the SNCI site (ancient Roman Sea Port/Ad Axium), known locally as The Withies, seemed to be destroyed and a new 'lake' created with a feed from/to the River Axe. Is this the 'balancing pond' site mentioned in the application? (See BLERT Blog). There is also currently an application (17/P/1515/F) for "construction of equipment store".Although the precise location is not indicated the application states that it is on current "hardstanding associated with caravan park"(so should not be related to the landworks under query to NSC/BPC) the site location plan indicates that the SNCI as a pond!There was also a massive clearance of shrubs, hedgerows and trees along the River Axe PROW affecting the natural habitat of kingfishers, water voles, swans, otters, etc. This appeared to all happen after the holiday park site had being granted permission last year to expand the existing 'clubhouse' again, now we perhaps know the real purpose of these works. BOB is stillwaiting for a response from NSC. Wealso asked BPC for an update inJune 17 but they have not acknowledged, yet alone answered our request, probably due to their policy implementation against us, which apparently enables them to ignore any question they don't want to answer.BOB therefore questions theApplicant's answersto 'tick box' questions 3, 6, 12, 13 and 14.What action was taken after the queries to NSC/BPC and how is this new application related to the landworks on the adjacent fields?
How is this application to build/use a green field site related to government statements to usebrownfield sites before green fields?
See comment section below for BOB's submissions to NSC with Bleadon's Parish Plan Questionnaire supporting statistics.
For some background as to why developers continue to pressure NSC Planning please see themapping on theMajor Developmentpage andassociated tableof information on BOB, including Green Beltmapping andpolicies/documentation.]]>
A new outline application for 16 dwellings has been submitted on Land off Purn Way (adjacent to West Mendip Way PROW and allotments), outside the Settlement Boundary.
Comments deadline has now been extended to 25 July 2017, according to the NSC website. Here is the link to the application17/P/1351/O on North Somerset Council Planning website.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website link as above. As otherwise they will be ignored by NSC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The following maps were created from the NSC GIS system whichis a useful resource to see what policies and emerging proposals affect our land and environment in North Somerset.
Map 1 annotation indicates 'major' planning applicationsof recent years and the critical road junctions affected. It indicates how our rural area is threatened with environmental attack through traffic and light pollution; andwhyessential health services such as hospital/GP, dental appointments are so difficult to get. Apparently there is a central government formula that gives extra health service funding based on population, from our perspective this clearly isn't working as they are stretched already yet more houses and people are planned!See related Weston HospitalA&E Services ReducedBlog andtable of major developmentsin and around Bleadon.
Map 2, with annotation, is an image of Bleadon Parish Boundaryshowing the Settlement Boundary. Note 2011 Census recorded 530 dwellings in Bleadon, so clearly these additional development applications will make a significant difference to our environment, health and wellbeing when built.
Map 3, with annotation, is an image of Bleadon Settlement Boundary.
Bleadonappears inNSC 'Core Strategy' section CS33 as a designated 'infill' village and below shows the Settlement Boundary beyond which any development is supposedly more tightly controlled on criteria specified by the National Policy Framework (NPPF) and NSC Core Strategy policies. Bleadon's 20 year Parish Plan was formulated in 2005, adopted in 2009 and sent to NSC to feed into the NSC Replacement Local Plan process. (Folllowing the Localism Act 2011 it is now known as the 'Core Strategy'). Unfortunately despite costing thousands of pounds it can't be found by either BPC or NSC, although BOB still has a draft 2008 copy along with the Questionnaire data and background informationhere. The Localism 2011 Act introduced Neighbourhood Plans and now (if produced) they specify where local housing and economic development is desired. However, BOB and others (see CPRE) still believe that our Parish Plan Data and 103 Actions should still play an essential, valuable and central role in routinely steering the holistic direction of BPC resource allocation in performing their duties/powers and decision making, including what applications to 'grant' or 'refuse'.See additionalSettlement Boundaryinformation on the Major Development page on BOB.
Mapping indicating the Public Right of Way and proximity to Sites of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI)
For some background as to why developers continue to pressure NSC Planning please see the associatedpolicies/documentation andGreen Beltmapping on theMajor Developmentpage andassociated tableof information on BOB.]]>
An Outline Planning Application(17/P/1138/O) for 70 dwellings has been submitted to NSC on land at the junction of Bleadon Hill and Bridgwater Road near Devil's Bridge.
"Land adjacent to Bridgwater Road Weston-Super-Mare. Outline application for the erection of up to 70 dwellings with associated public open space. All matters reserved for subsequent approval except highway and pedestrian access."
Comments can be made directly via the link above,the current consultation deadline has now been extended to 25 July 2017, according to the NSC website.
Based onour recent personalexperience of two other major housing developmentapplications on Bleadon Hill that after refusal by NSCwent to public inquiry appeal (one accepted and one rejected by the inspector), it seems that planning application decisions need nottake account of the holistic 'bigger picture'. Services outside of the delivery of NSC responsibilities do not seem to be taken into consideration at the time of theapplication. So for example,a developer can be asked by NSCto make section 106 or Community Infrastructure Levy contributions to compensate someNSC services affected but there isno officialstatementon how relatedhealth care provision will be met as a consequence. The health care service provision in the area is already at breaking point,particularly evident when trying to get a GP appointment, so more houses equate tomore people, and that can only make matters worse.Surely this is wrong, so please ask your local councillors and MP how these issues are addressed (contact details here).
FYI, all the residents of Bleadon Parishwere asked by BPC in 2005 via a questionnaire how they would like to see their community develop over the next 20 years. In 2009 a Parish Plan was adopted by BPC and supposedlysubmitted to NSC (http://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishplan.htmlwith residents views summarised in the 103 Improvementsleaflet).Unfortunately when BOB raised this with BPC at the time of the 2016Bleadon Hill Appeals it could not be found, and worse, they refused to correspond withBOB on the topic, subsequentlysubmitting usto their draft'vexatious policy'! While Parish Plans seem tohave been superceeded by neighbourhood Plans for planning matters, according to CPRE (Campaign for protection of Rural England) they still remain a good indication of local views.More details https://planninghelp.cpre.org.uk/improve-where-you-live/shape-your-local-area/parish-plans
This particular developmentsite is not within the Bleadon Parish Council boundary so, from my understanding, BPCwill not be formallyasked for comment, butyet again the bigger picture of the consequential effect on all services should surelybe considered, for example, increased local traffic (on an already dangerous junction) asother routes via Bleadon may be taken. Local community services may alsobe used such as thehalls, playground, wildlife reserves,footpaths. toilets etc., and whilst this might enliven the village itwill also presumably comeat an increase in residents' precept to covertheassociatedmaintenance, health and safety, insurance, etc. costs.So why should BPC not be formally asked for their comments? Of course all individuals are able to submit commentspersonallyas they didalso collectively viaour Parish Plan.
So in conclusion, if all aspects of this application are considered in the wider context then it could be of benefit to the community with alloutstanding concerns and issues beingaddressed.Unfortunately, from past recent experience it could just cause more emotional and financialstress for local residents and be detrimental to their currentfuturehealth and well-being. To read and/or comment on thelocal discussion and feedback on BOB see comments below andhttps://www.facebook.com/BleadonBOB/. Also see related Mercury articlepublished 22 Jun 17.
Also previous BOB post here]]>
At the appointed time I put my hand up and asked councillors to publicly declarewhat had happened to the current adopted Parish Plan. After some debate Iwas effectivelytold 'Who appointed me to be caring about/representing our community, who was I to be asking BPC for the plan?'. Well, I am a resident who, on hearing my neighbours in the community say that councillors 'do what they want', is trying to ensure that BPCat least hear ourconcerns.
Again I was told the Parish Plan is not lost, yet the Clerk still stated that he does not have one in his possession to send to me, the same situation since I asked for a copy for the public Inquiry four months ago. I am tired of the contradictions.I am tired of BPC's miscommunications and inaccurate minutes, of being told "The issue of whether what was said is incorrect or not is irrelevant", and tired of councillors choosing which policies they willignore and which ones they will follow, adopted or otherwise.
I am resident who istired of BPC implying that unless residents physically attend meetings and speak to the council, in front of anyone attending, then they will do as they feel fit with little regard to feedback or consultation.I am a resident trying to do something, to improve communication and representation within our community, despite BPC's negative pubic comments about me or Bleadon BOB, our community website. Perhaps the appointment of up to four new councillors can rectify this public communication situation and make it more honest, open and transparent?
Again the publicwas told that councillors areour elected representatives.At full complement Bleadon has 9councillorswho areresponsible for maintaining and supporting our ruralcommunity, involvingfeedback from residents and financed through the annualprecept(currently £39K). Then how can BPC justifiably ignore the current 20 yearParish Plan as adopted in 2009, that wascreated by feedback from265 households involving many hundreds of associated people? How can they justifably indicate that the plan is 'lost' less than8 years later, that represented the views of "60% of residents"? Duringthe recent public inquiry, andagain at the meeting, BPC indicated that "Parish Plans carry very little weight nowadays". That may or may not be so with regards to someplanning issues, but what about allthe otherwide ranging topicsof the more holistic plan?(Since the Localism Act 2011 Neighbourhood Plans are now used to determine where development is desired).
We believe, like CPRE, thatthe current Parish Plan isstill valid. Aside from the fact that it was costly to produce and that it represents the views of 60% of residents, it still reflects some ofthe currentlocal action groups and initiatives, ongoingissues, and itemshighlighted in BPC minutes.Just have a quick look at theleafletassociated with the Parish Plan, previously distributed to residents in 2009.
Instead of addressing this situation it appears that councillors are now going to dismissthe Parish Plan, with no apparent plan to take its place. If so they will beignoring hundreds of residents' views i.e. 60% of our community who took the time and effort to give their long-term feedback to the council, in addition to those few who have been able and willing to attend public meetings and/or send feedbackalong the way!
In this hectic day and age people say that they find it difficultto physicallyattend parishmeetings, this doesn't mean they are not interested in what goes on. The communitydepends onkey documents to guide councillors' actions on their behalf, those that represent and supportBleadonand its residents (like the parish plan and other policies, protocols, agreements, etc.) with the public relying more heavily on timely, accurate and accessibleforms of communication such asagenda, minutes, etc.
I have found public access to information on this and other topics very difficult and BPChave yet to supply us/residents with a copy of the adoptedParish Plan, or publiclydeclare their view/plan for the future of Bleadon. The draft plan indicated that "The parish council will act as champions for the plan with the knowledge that it reflects the wishes of the wider community not just the parish council".
So, if the plan is 'lost'whathave councillors beenbasing their decision making onto date and what will the future of Bleadon be based on and at what expense?
For more background on Bleadon`s Parish Plan click here.]]>
BPC seem to have spent an awful amount of time avoiding answering our questions, speaking/minuting negatively in public, making incorrect and misleading statements, drafting/redrafting and implementing their vexatious policy.We wonder, are these resignations perhapsin orderto avoid publiclyansweringquestions relating BPC'sactions during and subsequentto the publicInquiry, theParish Plan,its 'loss', and BPC's undeclared intentions for the future of Bleadon. They must allhave breathed a collective sigh of relief when the Appeal was finallydismissed, otherwise their inaction may certainlyhave gained more ire andcriticism!
Which is the more accurate BPC access to information mechanism: the legal minuted ratifiedpublic minutes approach(indicating a parish plan to be submitted to the Inquiry); or the selective email to councillors,Action Group and usapproach (indicating that BPC can not find a copy)? In the process of trying to find out BPC publicly implemented theirvexatious complaint policy and are not stillanswering these and other basic questions for at least the next six months! Let's hope that the Parish Plan turns up beforeBleadon gets another major development application (like the new proposalfor70 houses on Bleadon Hill/A370 junction down the road from the Inquiry location).
However, manyquestions stillremain unanswered from this process, including:
Where is the Parish Plan?that was created at great publicexpense,and what is the future plan for Bleadon should further applications be forthcoming?How can a parish council refuse to send a copy of a Parish Plan to residents/us but can state that it has sentitto districtcouncillors, North SomersetCouncil and apublic Inquiry? Surely itsa public document as created by Bleadonresidents with BPC!How cana parish council implement anyunadopted and unpublishedpolicy against residents, in this case its vexatious policy? There is supposed to bea legal democraticdecision makingprocess leading to BPC's adopted declarations.How can a parish council be allowed toinvoke its vexatious policy against members of the publicto seeminglyavoid supplyinginformationto the public, whether documentation or their publicapproach? In this casea parish plan andavoidance of stating theirintentions for the parish of Bleadonduring and subsequent toa publicInquiry.How can a parish councilchooseto mislead residents rather thanclarify/correct their minutes and public statements?How can BPC conduct complaintpoliciesin public forums, agenda and/or minutes and committees, but not discuss their intentions or actionswith the people it concerns in person or via email either before, during or after the process?How can a parish council who has resolved to create andmaintain its thirdwebsite, to publish information to residents,not publish key documentation and facts indicating its policies,plans, etc.for Bleadon, includingtheParish Plan?Did BPC actually hold a legal sub-committee meeting to discuss their vexatious complaint,bypublishing a publicnotice of meeting summons, if so where and when was it published?Why is it that simple basicrequests forinformation lead toBPC makingpublic negative statements about us/BOB and that BPCresignations occurbeforeclarity of the issues hasbeen made,both to the public andresidentsinvolved?This is asimilar outcometo our successfulrequest to BPC tocontinue publishing draftminutesbetween meetings last year and queries about design of the third BPC website re-write. This ledto BPC'snegative publicstatementsabout us/BOB over a number of months,a closed extra-ordinary meeting and the resignation of two councillors and the clerk around the same time as ourofficial complaint.Questions stillremainunanswered following that process too.
Towards the end of BPC'sMar 2017 meetingthe public were excluded 'byreason of the confidential nature of the items of business to be transacted'(293.22). We thereforefeel thatBPC's conversational'notes' made "After the meeting had finished",which weretagged on the end of the official publicly distributed minutes, arehighly inappropriate. It is writtenthattwo peopleattributetheir involvement in this debacle as a "contributory factor" yet BPCdo not inform the public as to what questions were raised by usthat led BPCto escalatethis situation i.e. the loss of theParish Plan.We believe that these resignationsshould have eitherbeen made beforein the public forum or not be minuted at all. BPC have repeatedly stated that they cannot correctminutes and only include what was said at the meeting,including stating "The issue of whether what was said is incorrect or not is irrelevant." We believe that BPCare therefore inappropriately, and perhaps unlawfully,using their minutes as means to unjustlyfurther discredit us/BOB in public forums rather than answer key questions.
In our opinion, this farce has shown BPC'sdisregard for government's best practice guidelines and their associated responsibilities as public facing elected representatives. Like 'Groundhog Day' BPCseem toignoretheir own historicpolicies, plans, procedures, decisions,rewritingthem as theygo andmisinforming the public. The lack of use of the parish plan as a reference for public opinion and support, repeatedly indicatingatpublic meetings thatthey have a copy yettelling us they can't find an electronic or paper versionis one example. Instead of following a holisticpublic producedstrategic planthey are guided by ... what? ...their own individualpersonal views?What happened to The Good Councillors GuideandBPC'sCode of Conductwith its 'Members Obligations' to the public and'The Seven Principles of Public Life' i.e. selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership?
An example ofhow BPC use their public forums and disregard their policies, in our opinion,istheir publicimplementationof the draft unadoptedvexatious complaintpolicies.BPC haveneglectedto inform the public that they ignored the current published adopted version and insteadusedtwo differentdraft versionsto ensure implementation against us; i.e.beforeeither hadbeen officially and publiclyadopted (min 293.15).Absentis any publicstatement as to why their draft versionsremoveaspectsof theadopted policy, including the whole of section "1. Rights of Public Access,'whichopening pointstates"The Council recognises that,in the absence of good reasons to the contrary, members of thepublic have a right of accessto the Council to seek advice, help or services that the Council offers".Also,BPC's minutes aggressively state the reasons for their vexatious complaintimplementation but againneglects to accuratelyinform the public ofthe original reasons and questions that led to BPCescalating this situation(293.23).
Similar to our official complaint last yearwehave notreceived any explanation as towhy our queries are 'unreasonable or unacceptable'; or why BPC are 'unable' to communicate the informationto us/residents; orwhyBPC has acted the way it has towards us/BOB, especially inpublic.Three months on and still BPC are avoiding answering the questions and have notpublicly declared the whereabouts andcurrent status ofthe Parish Plan.
It must be remembered that this all started when we/BOBwrote a groupemailtoNSC,BPC and theAction Group during thebreak inthe public Inquiry, urgentlyasking forclarity of informationand approachbeforeit reconvened the following week. This was to ensure thatwe all had the same knowledge,understanding and approach and worked together during the Inquiry. We asked BPCfor a copy of the Parish Plan, associated documents, theirapproach to protecting Bleadon as arural village community and its useof the Planin this process.The Parish Plan wascreated by,and for, the residents of Bleadon. Itisa 20 year plan,adopted by BPCin 2009 and supplied to North Somerset, as statedinBPC minutes. BOBonly hasadraft version of a25page A4document.North Somerset indicate that they have not received a copy. Cllr Porter and/or BPC did not submit or present a copy at the Inquiry, nor did theysupplyus with a copy to present ourselves. InsteadBPC chose to publiclyimplement itsvexatious policyagainst us and refuse to answer our correspondence on this subject. We still have not received a copy of the Parish Plan over three months after our initial request.In the meantime if anyone has a copy of the 2009 adopted Parish Plan, or manages to get hold ofa copy, please send it to us as none of the parties indicated above seemwilling or able. We can then publish it on BOB for everyone to access along with the other Parish Planinformation.Ifwedo receive any answers or documentation we will of course let you know.]]>
BPC informed the public, in three different meetings, that they had a Parish Planthat they wouldsubmit tothe Inquiry. Theyultimately told the public that they were too late to submit it. At the same timetheytold BOB that they could not find a copy of the Plan or any associated documentation. Three months later it seems that the adoptedParishPlan is 'lost' and that BPC's view of the role of an elected publicrepresentativeis different to BOB's and other members of the public.
Without the time and effort put in by the Action Group, and supportivemembers of the public, the developers may have won their appeal to build 79 houses.Bleadonwouldhavebeen irrevocably joined to Weston-super-Mare, physically no longer a separate village. Although the village remains separated at the moment no doubt more development applications will be on the way in and around Bleadon e.g. 70 houses at Bleadon Hill/Bridgwater Roadjunction.
The question of how 'we' can build on the recent public Inquiry knowledge and experience to protect our rural and village communities, and fulfil residents view of the future of Bleadon, still remains; as does the issue of an agreed Plan for the parish.
More details, links and views here.]]>
What is the truth? During the process of trying to solve this problem and receive a copy of the plan in time to present at the Inquiry BPC made several negative public statements about BOB. They also publicly invoked their draft vexatious policyagainst us rather than send us documention or answer key questions about the future of Bleadon. So,
Ifthere is a Parish Planthen please can someone send us a copy? We believe BPC should publicly state/minute why it did not submit it in good time during the Inquiry; why it didn't present it; why it didn't allow us/BOB/Action Group/public a copy to present at the Inquiry; why BOB still hasn't received a copy three months later; and why it told BOB they couldn't find either an electronic or paper copy.If there is not a Parish Plan we believe BPC should publicly state/minute why it told the public there was, in three separate public meetings. We also believe BPC should declare what their plan is for Bleadon's futureand BPCs role in it.The current 20 year Parish Plan was created in consultation with all residents of Bleadon, over a number years, costing residents thousands of pounds as part of it's Quality Council accreditation process. BPC minutes indicate it was formally adopted in 2009 and submitted to North Somerset Council (NSC) for their consideration/inclusion in their plans and policies (although NSC state they didn't receive a copy). BOB feels that it is shameful that such a key document supporting residents views of Bleadonshould be so blatantly disregarded and 'lost' with only thedraft 2008 versionseeming to be the only remaining evidence of its existence at this time (see also questionnaire). BOB would like to thank the public Action Group once again for their successful efforts in defending Bleadon's environment despite such obstacles, showing that public comment and action does make a difference.
Bristol Water has said that ''Weston-Super-Mare is one of Europe’s fastest growing towns' and so we believe that a coordinated and supported plan is essential to protect our community from repeated large scale developments. This view is also supported by Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) who indicate that Parish Plans remain a valid resource for public engagement. The appeal for 79 houses may have been overturned in Mar 2017 but there is another application on the way for 70 more on Bleadon Hill,BOB welcomes your further thoughts.]]>
Bristol Waterwas working on itsSouthern Resilience Scheme, a new £27 million water infrastructure project which "will help us meet the increase in demand for water over the coming years. Weston-Super-Mare is one of Europe’s fastest growing towns, and so we need to supply all of the new residents and businesses coming to the area." South Western Energy Ltd had stated their desire to drill "just south of WSM", also presumable in relation to future utlity/energy needs due to increased housing development.
At the same time Bleadon was in the middle of theBleadon Hill public Inquiry which was asking to add an additional 79 houses to our community. BOB asked Bleadon Parish Council (BPC)a number of questions includingits approach to protectingresidents' environment, health and well-being in relation to large development applications, including those relating to fracking:
Please can BPC/NSC inform us of what is being done, or can be done, to protect our Parish Boundary from neighbouring developmnt pressuring 'us' to accept addtional development?How do BPC/NSC balance short term job creation via development vs long term environmental damage? How can we all work together?This must be a similar situation to North Somerset trying to protect its boundary and residents from neighbouring District Authorities and Central Government decision making e.g.the mandate to increase housing availability in North Somerset. Alsothe fracking licences in bothNorth Somerset(including the Bleadon Levels)andSomerset, presumably to supply the increased power demand due to increaseddevelopment in the area (http://www.bleadon.org.uk/fracking.html).Hopefully any potential effects of fracking near our water supplies in theareahas been/will alsobe seriously considered, jointly by all cross boundary parties,along withthe need for increased water provision.FYI, onFriday 2 December 2016South Western Energy Ltd's indicated their"desire to drill ‘just south of Weston-super-Mare’ and to build a ‘small modular power station’ to convert any shale gas into electricity". Frack Free North Somerset stated"We were told to expect planning permission submissions within the year, and drilling with two years, it is now particularly important that we quickly develop the skills and capacity to watch planning permissions coming in to Somerset & North Somerset councils"http://frackfreenorthsomerset.org.uk/south-western-energy-ltd-announce-plans-to-drill/How is NSC/BPC protecting our environment, water and air quality, health and well-being from these types of application? How is it working with neighbouring parish/town/district councils/government and related public? How can 'we' build on recenthearing/inquiry knowledge, experience and general interest to enable the publicto officially and successfullyinteract with the process?Over three months later and we are yet to receive an informative reply from BPC, but they did subsequently invoke their vexatious policyin regards to these and other questions relating to the future of Bleadon. However a member of the public did receive a reply from North Somerset MP John Penrose which was posted on the Frack Free North Somerset website. Other members of the public have also commented on theposted response.]]>
Unfortunately rather than try todevelop a positive mutualworking relationship,BPC has chosen tofurther invokeits vexatious policy against BOB, seemingly to avoidsupplying information to the public/us until at least 18 Sep 17! It seems our simple requests for information may have contributed to theresignationsof Cllrs Gutsell, CllrGibbonand the Clerk beforewe have received an explanation as towhy our queries are deemed 'unreasonable or unacceptable'; or why BPC are 'unable' to send informationto us; orwhyBPC has acted the way it has towards us inpublic. Definitely a case of deja vu...!
---
POSTED 12 MAR 2017
It seems that BPC really do not want the public to know what they are doing, or not doing, as the public's elected representatives.
In response to BOB's public inquiry queries andrequest for a copy ofthe Parish PlanBPC started makingnegative and incorrectpublic statements. Last month, Feb 2017 they publicly declared they had enacted their vexatious policyyet wrote to us stating they were 'informally' writing to us?From our perspective there isno clear reason as to why our requests for informationare considered'unreasonable orunacceptable' or why BPC is'unable' to answer them.
The Clerk has however informed us on March 2 that he will "not be replying further" to our response email regarding our concerns. We also note from the publicMar 2017 Agendathat BPCare now considering invoking their policy further rather than discuss our email with us; or the validity or implementation of their draft policy.
BOBwill of course keep you updated, and publish a copy of the Parish Plan and/or BPC's view of Bleadon's future if/when we receive a response. Also any policy updates.
---
CORRESPONDENCE WITH BPC IN RELATION TO IMPLEMENTATION OF VEXATIOUS POLICY
From:Cllr GUTSELLDear Chris and Jo,
The Vexatious Committee has met and discussed the contents of your last email. Please find below answers to two new questions which were raised in your email.
Web contact details of North Somerset Council Standards Board are
https://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/my-council/complaints/complaining-about-councillors/
New members of the Vexatious Committee will be appointed at a Parish Council meeting in due course.
Yours Sincerely,
Claire Gutsell
Chair Bleadon Parish Council
From:Bleadon BOBSent:19 March 2017 11:58
To:Bleadon BOB
Subject:Formal notice
Good morning Mr Butler and Ms Gower-Crane,
Bleadon Parish Council considered the email that I received from you on 2ndMarch (sent on 1stMarch) at their meeting on Monday.
It was resolved that point 3.2 of the Vexatious Correspondence and Complaints Policy should be invoked as the following sections of the policy have been breached:
1.1Behaviour which is obsessive, persistent, harassing, prolific, repetitious
The email received on 2ndMarch is considered to be part of a chain of persistent emails.
1.5 Repeated and/or frequent requests for information, whether or not those requests are made under the access to information legislation.
Repeated emails have been received requesting information. The email received on 2ndMarch is the latest in this series.
I attach a copy of the policy which the Parish Councillors have decided was breached.
You have previously raised the point that this policy is not valid, as it does not include the amendment that the Parish Councillor’s agreed in March 2016. I have taken advice from ALCA, who advise that the amendments would not have made any difference to the sections of the policy that you have breached, and so the implication of the policy is valid.
Any future correspondence will be passed directly to the sub-committee who will consider whether it raises any substantive new issue(s). You are advised that if no substantive new issue is raised, any future correspondence will not receive a response. You are advised that the decision will be reviewed in six months from the date of the letter advising them that their complaint/correspondence has been determined to be vexatious. There is no route of appeal against the decision that a complaint or correspondence is vexatious.
TheVexatious Correspondence and Complaintspolicy refers to the requirement that I send letter to you. Please provide me with an address to send the letter.
If you do not accept this decision then you should submit a complaint to the North Somerset Council stands board, not to the Parish Council.
Kind regards
Tony Jay
Parish Clerk
-----------------
From: Tony Jay <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk>Sent: 02 March 2017 12:29
To: 'Bleadon BOB Community Website'
Subject: RE: Bleadon Parish Council
Hi Chris and Jo,
I acknowledge receipt of your email. I will not be replying further.
Tony Jay
Parish Clerk
---------
From: Bleadon BOB Community Website <bleadon@live.co.uk>
Sent: 01 March 2017 03:41
To:Cllr Gutsell; Cllr Clarke; Cllr Gibbon; Cllr Hartree; Cllr Chinn
Cc: Bleadon Parish Clerk
Subject: Re: Bleadon Parish Council
Dear Councillors,
Firstly, the decisionto include all councillors in this emailis not a 'scattergun' approachas we believe that all councillors should be included in this reply as wefeel that even thiscorrespondence againhighlights BPC'songoing poorcomprehension andcommunication with us, andmembers of thepublic.We have tried to keep thisbriefbut as always it is very difficult to discuss these things via email rather than face to face, especially given the poor efficacy by BPC that ultimatelytranslates to itaccusing us ofbeingvexatious, which we refute.
Please note that we believethe vexatiousdocument assupplied in your correspondence is an invalid BPC policy as it has not received the resolved amendment of March 2016 minutes, or beenpublished to the electorate. Therefore the we believe the appropriateVexatious Policyto use isthe onecontained in thecurrent, publicly declared,2014Corporate Policyaspublishedon theBPC website.This version appearsmore publicly orientedand focused on how to communicatewhy BPC is 'unable'to answer a request and reasons for limiting access. For example, the introduction/first section of this documentstates:
1. Rights of Public Access1.1. The Council recognises that, in the absence of good reasons to the contrary, members of the public have a right of access to the Council to seek advice, help or services that the Council offers.1.2. Criticism of, and complaints against, the Council or its employees are a welcome, legitimate and necessary part of the relationship between the Council and its local community. They are a valuable means of reflecting on the operations of the Council and improving both those operations and the quality of the Council's relationship with its local community.1.3. Nobody, no matter how much time and effort is taken up in responding to their complaints and concerns, shall be unconditionally deprived of the right to have those complaints or concerns addressed........This information isnot included inyour attachedunpublished, seemingly draft,2016Vexatious Correspondence andComplaintspolicydespite theMarch 2016(282.5.3)minutes stating"It was resolved unanimously thatsubject to the addition of the introductionof the previous Vexatious Complaints Policy, the new Vexatious Complaints Policy be adopted and implemented with immediate effect for any new complaints."The unpublished version you have sent us appearsmore BPC orientedand morefocused on reasons/waysnot to answer a request from the public. Wecan now finallysee whycomments of concernwere minutedregardingthisdraftversion at the time.
As stated previously ourcorrespondenceis usuallyborn out of BPC's poor communication of information to us and other members of thepublic (who voice theirconcerns to us).The communicationproblemis compounded by BPCnot supplying publicdocumentation (that through its minutes and best practiceshould be promptlyavailable/easily accessible, e.g. vexatious policy),andnotansweringqueriesre:BPC roles/responsibilities/vision,contradictory statements,etc. Examplesof somecurrent issues include:
BPC repeatedlyappears not be be following its own policies, plans or resolutionslet alone government recommendedguidance,thereby repeating previous BPCactions and processes withsomeincurring/potentially incurring additional costs atpublic financialexpense.Recent examples include:Parish Plan(which cost thousands of pounds to create),Vexatious Policy,Protocol 205 Halls/BPC agreement, NSC duties,but there are plenty more.In this correspondence it appears BPC has used anunpublished 2016 draftversion of the vexatiouspolicy.How are we/public supposed to know whatBPC hasagreed/disagreed if you don't tell us/public and supply the appropriate current documentation? This type of issue is usually where our requests for information/clarification to BPC start. (Please see detailedcomments below re: current vexatious issue).Just under a year agoBPC publicly agreed, for the at least the second time,that it would publish information e.g. policies, procedures, protocols, plans, minutes, agendas, etc. when itresolved to formallyadopt the governmentICO Model Publication Scheme. It nowseems that although BPC relaunched its third versionofthe BPCwebsite in January 2016 it was already out of date by March 2016, and continues to be so with regards the vexatious policy.If the information was readilyavailable as BPC haspreviouslyresolved thenwe/public wouldn't need to ask/repeatedly ask for information and subsequently be accused of being vexatious.Our recent Parish Plancorrespondence with BPCfollowed one-to-oneconversations and communications withDistrict Councillors and Action Group membersheavilyinvolved in the very urgent public Inquiry, with associated very short deadlines. We therefore do not feel it was a 'scattergun' approach to includethem and BPC councillorsin BPC responses to ourenquriesre:BPCinvolvement,Parish Plan documentation, BPC village/parish protection approach, etc.especially assomeinvolved the future status of Bleadon as avillage.Many keyquerieswere never directlyansweredwithmanystill outstanding. In our opinion surelythe expected response from a parish councilwith a publiclyadopted parishplan shouldhave been along the lines of"Here's a copy ofthe plan, BPC has/will present the residents/BPCsviews at the Inquiry...." instead we/public got avariety of excuses and BOB/we get indirectly informed we are incorrect and are being vexatious,why?At three separate meetingsBPC publicly statedthatit would be submittingthe Parish Plan to apublicInquiry yetwrotetous statingthat it couldn'tfind it in electronic or paper format.Thispromptedrepeated urgentrequestsduring theInquiry and subsequent request forpublic clarification, which has not happened.This key publicdocumentation stillhasn't beensent to usovertwomonths later. So, which is the correct BPCstatement?BPC tell us that minutes cannot be amended, updated, annotated to clarify a situationas they are a record ofameetinge.g.Parish Plan submission to the Inquiryissue as noted above,yetminutescan be annotatedas clearlyseenin this months Februaryminutes292.4.i.Having read your attached copy of the unpublished,seemingly draft,2016 vexatious policyweand otherswould have assumed Section2of the policy (below)would have been more discrete.Itisclear from past experiencethat councillors do communicate, approveandagree individual andfull councilactions behind closed doors if they so wish e.g.newsletter issue. So, if it is BPC's intention to discuss Section 2in public forums then we feel that thisneeds to be stated in its policy. The publicwill then be fullyaware that they, andtheir communications,will be negativelydiscussedwithout their priorknowledge with no ability for them to discuss or put forward theirview of the situation either to full council, sub-group orin a public forum either before, during or after theprocess. Please also make it clear that there will alsobe no verbal discussion between parties to clarify or resolve issuesduring this process, only public announcements by BPC.
2 Using the (unpublished 2016)procedure(as usedby BPC in this correspondence)
2.1 If the Clerk or Councillors identify behaviour that theyTHINKexhibits these characteristics, and which theyBELIEVE MAY BEvexatious, they should form a sub-committee consisting of the Chair and two members of the Council;BPCdid this in a very public manner announcingin the Jan 2017 meeting that it was going to invoke the Vexatious policy against usbefore forming a sub-committee to discuss the issue; Making it obvious it was being invoked againstus;Making incorrect/unevidenced statements about the past (still unanswered and/or publicly corrected i.e. Minute291.6);andwithout officiallyinforming usbeforeannouncing iteither atapublic meeting or subsequentdraft minute publication.
2.2 If the sub-committee agrees with the assessment, they should prepare a briefSTATEMENT OF WHYthe sub-committee considers the complaint or correspondence to be vexatious, including its effect upon the Clerk, Councillors and/or the village. This should be accompanied by alist of correspondenceover the last 6 months via email, telephone and letter, including information about whom the correspondence was addressed to, how many people/organisations it was copied to on each occasion, and a one-line description of each piece of correspondence.Please can we have a copy of the 'statement of why' including thesupporting informationascollated and produced by the sub-committeeduring this processas stated in 2.2 of the vexatiouspolicy usede.g. 'list of correspondence'? As our requests relate to BPC public communications re:policies, plans, protocols, resolutions and/or seeming contradictorystatements, we would expect to be informed where our query was answered ora clearindication as towhy BPC is'unable' to answer it, no side-stepping or avoiding the query. We would also expectthe informationtoindicate why the public are hearing discussions,reasons,explanations, outcomes,etc. to ourcorrespondenceinpublic forums and/or minutesbut we are not given thecourtesy of an officialresponse or communicationeither before, during or after the event e.g. recent vexatiousdiscussions, parish plan.
3.1THE FIRST STEPwill be for the Chair to inform the correspondentINFORMALLYthat his/her behaviour is considered by the Council to beunreasonable or unacceptable, and request a changed approach.
You state that BPC is invoking 3.1 yet BPC has alreadyinformed the publicat the January meeting/minutes that they haddecided that the policy "would be invoked". The February minutes alsostatedto the public that the "..Vexatious Correspondence and Complaints Policy had been breached by the two Parishioners, and that therefore the terms of the policy will be invoked".
Assuming section3 comes after section2 how didBPC consider this approachinformal, and how does it translate to formal publicannouncements and minutes oftheJanuaryandFebruary meetings, it certainly doesn't feel or indicateinformal to us, or others?We were nottoldthisprocess was going to be undertaken, or informed ofthe outcome until now. BPC left it to the public grapevine to let us know, with BPCwaiting anadditionalsevendays to send this email to us,on the same dayasthe publicdistribution of the February minutes.We have tried and suggested a variety of different communication approachesand freelyoffered to share our knowledge,experience andservices, yet BPC has not suggested how it could change its approach toimprove our, or the public,communication situation andinsteadpursuedimplementinga vexatiouspolicy. As indicated above, we usually start with a simple request/query relating to BPC publiccommunicationswhich then appear to be side-stepped or avoided by BPC. Therefore,which of our requests were 'unreasonable or unacceptable'?For example:
Our urgentrequest fora copy of the Parish Plan during the Inquiry; still not received after two monthsbut publicly stated given to other people?Conversely there has been nopublic clarification in the minutes to indicate that the plan hasbeen 'lost'?Our request for clarification of the minutedParish Plan andInquiry issuestated to beCllr Porter's problem and not BPC's;withno clarification as to why the minutes stated our information was inaccurate as we received itdirectly from NSC officers and/or BPC; andwith no response from BPC clarifyinghow itintends toprotect Bleadon's rural village status now, during Inquiries orin the future i.e. What is BPC's plan for the parish and its future if it has 'lost' and is not usingthe current20 year plan asadopted in 2009?Our request for clarification of the BPCstatement thatcurrentcouncillors do not need to be aware of previous publicly published BPCplans, policies,protocols, resolutions; withno response to date;yet BPC expect the public to be aware,even when policies have not been published,withthe Vexatious Correspondence and Complaints Policy appearingto be another example?Our request for evidence of BPC's public statement that the vexatious policy has been invoked against us before; overa month has passedand still noreceipt of proofnor any public statement to the contrary?Our request for clarificationofthe many BPCcontradictory statements; e.g.BPC repeatedly stating that theycannot annotate/correct/supplement/etcminutes to clarify public misinformation, and in our case BPC's portrayal of us in public meetings andminutes (e.g. parishplan, newsletter,access to information, vexatious issue,etc.), yet they clearlycan if they so wish (Minute292.4.i)?BPC Code of Conduct adoptedFeb 2016
Inrelation to our outstandingrequests for informationBPC's adopted Code of Conduct states that "All elected, co-opted and independent Members of local authorities, including Parish Councils, are required to abide by their own, formally adopted, Code. The Code of Conduct seeks to ensure that Members observe the highest standards of conduct in their civic role. The Code is intended to be consistent with the seven principles":The two principles we feelmost related to our requests are:
ACCOUNTABILITY:Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and mustsubmit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.OPENNESS:Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and actions thatthey take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only whenthe wider public interest clearly demands.We believe that these principles are in harmony with the "1.1Rights of Public Access" as noted above and containedin the currently published Vexatious Policy i.e. the ones missing from the version you used andsent us.ConsideringBPC's own policies, etc.we wouldlike BPC to explain why, instead of directly answering queries,itencourageda 'repeated requestsforinformation' and 'lengthy correspondence' situation, then invoked a vexatiouspolicy to seemingly avoid answering the queries and publiclyput us/BOB in a negative light?We continue to expect answers to our outstanding queries;including those that shouldinform thepublic where incorrect BPCstatements have been made.
3.2 If there is noimprovement in behaviourthe Council will write to the correspondent advising them that their complaint and/or correspondence has been determined to be vexatious and giving the reason for that decision, along with a copy of the Vexatious Correspondence and Complaints Policy.......
You state that BPC is invoking 3.1, yet youappear to be half way through3.2,with the inclusion of the policy, butwith no agreed way forwardfrom BPCwith regards public access to information or queries.BPC has stated that it wants to beopen and transparent.Our 'repeated requests' for information arise due to BPC's avoidance of directly answering queries,contradictory statementsor not supplying documentation.If BPC won't indicate which of our queries/requests are 'unreasonable or unacceptable'or why it is unable tofulfillthemhow does it think the situation will improve?Our 'lengthy' correspondence puttingqueries into context (like this one)is againborn out of BPCs unwillingness to directlyanswerqueries orsupply existingdocumentation, which BPC thenappears tofind unmanageable. If BPC doesn'tindicate howcommunications with us/publiccan be improved so that they will answer public queries/requests, how does it think the situation will change in the future?If BPC doesn't publish its plans,policies, procedures, protocols,etc. how do they expect the publictoknow and understandBPC's preferredway of working with them? FYI, paragraph3.2 is numbered twice in the 2016 Vexatiouspolicy document, which paragraph should we readin relation to your email below?
As I hope you can see from the above we are very disappointed inyouremail, the manner in which this process was undertaken, its outcome, andalso in the way thatBPC are again avoiding answering requests/queries. This time BPC has chosen to publicly use aseeminglyinvalidvexatious policytohideitsactionswhilst blamingus for what we believe to bevalid publicenquiries. Theserequestswe believeshould solicit simple expedient answers asanticipated and expected by BPC's own policies andgovernment best practice guidance documents,such as the ICO Model Publication Scheme, that BPC resolved to adopt againfor its thirdwebsite re-writeonly a year ago!
We look forward to receiving the outstanding requests fordocumentation and information ASAP.Also, aspart of itsFebruaryresolve toreview itspolicies, perhaps BPCshould consider whetheritsinformationand communicationapproach to theelectorate is effective,andwhetherit is indeed fit for purpose.After all,itseems thatduring the recenthousingInquiry process BPChas indirectly, but not publicly,declared that it hasdelegatedcrucialissues, queries, actionsand decisionsto NSC and itsDistrict councillors (and public action groups) along withthe strategic future of Bleadon Village and itsParish Plan.
Kind regards,
Chris Butler and Jo Gower-Crane
email:bob@bleadon.org.uk
web:www.bleadon.org.uk
twitter: @bleadon
facebook: BleadonBOB
latest news:http://www.bleadon.org.uk/news.html
--------------------
From: Cllr GUTSELL
Sent: 20 February 2017 07:36
To: Bleadon Bob
Cc: Tony Jay
Subject: Bleadon Parish Council
Dear Chris and Jo,
As you are aware the Bleadon Parish Council set up a sub committee to consider if the correspondence received from yourselves has become unmanageable, in terms of the repeated requests for information, your demands, the length of the correspondence received, the time it takes for Councillors and the Clerk to process,it's affect those individualsand your ‘scatter gun’ approach when sending some emails.Thesub committee met and agreedto recommend to the full Parish Councilthatunderthe terms ofsection 3.1 ofBPC's VexatiousCorrespondence and ComplaintsPolicy I should write to you as Chair of the Council and ask you to cease writing to the council in such fashion.It was resolved at the full Parish Council meeting on 14thFebruary that the Council now invokes section 3.1 of the policy
In the event that any of the Parish Councillorsor the Clerk receivefurtheremails of the type described above then section 3.2 of the Vexatious Correspondence and Complaints Policy will be invoked.Please find a copy of the VexatiousCorrespondence and ComplaintsPolicy attached.
Yours sincerely
Claire Gutsell
Chair Bleadon Parish Council]]>
UPDATE 2020 - Insurance still not clarified (Min 334.7.10) What does it cover? Does it include the halls?
KEY POINTS:
Halls Protocol Agreement 2010, as received from BPC, Signed by Penny Skelley (BPC Chairman), Len Chamberlain (Halls Chairman) and witnessed by Bruce Poole (BPC Clerk)1. The "...Parish Hall itself and the skittle alley was to be held "on trust" for the benefit of the inhabitants of the Parish of Bleadon and its immediate vicinity"5. "The Agreement should be read in conjunction with the Trust Deed"No Trust Deed has been publicly accessible?6(iii) "The responsibility for insuring the buildings .... rests with the council"The contents insurance with the Halls Management Committee (BVN 85)6(x) "The [Halls Management] Committee shall hold regular meetings open to the public at least once in three months ..." Where are these announced? Where are the minutes published?"That the Parish Council is the Custodian Trustee and as such should record the asset on the Parish Council Asset register That the value should be listed as Nil value.That the Coronation Hall Management Committee is the Managing Trustee" (July 2008 Min 205.10.5)UPDATE Jan 2019: Ownership and Asset Register issues continue - F&P (Min 55.6) and Full Council Min 318.13. Insurance queries (Min 322.20 & 322.21)
Bleadon Village News Extracts
BVN76 1995 Halls Committee applied for Charity status, and this was duly granted by the Charities Commission
BVN80 "The Coronation Hall is a registered Charity, with the Committee as Management Trustees, and operates under the rules and objects of our 1938 trust deed."
BVN81 "The issue of Custodian Trustee and the associated matter of whose name should appear on the Hall insurance policy have both been resolved. By rescinding its earlier Resolution, the Parish Council accepted that the asset value of the Hall Buildings should not be included in the accounts of the Hall Committee. One matter remains to be addressed and that is to redraft the Governing Document (the Trust Deed of 14 January 1938) to remove the ambiguities contain in that document. This matter is being discussed with the Charity Commission."
BVN85 "Contrary to their previous advice, our insurers (Aon Limited) have confirmed that the Hall insurance policy should be divided into two – the buildings element being written in the name of the Parish Council as legal owners of the property and the contents and other matters being in the name of the Hall Management Committee. Legal advice given by Hall, Ward and Fox is that the Governing Document (the Trust Deed dated 14 January 1938) is ambiguous. Their recommendation was to draft a Protocol to clarify the ambiguities and bring the Governing Document up to date. This has now been completed and the Protocol was signed by Penny Skelley (on behalf of the Parish Council) and Len Chamberlain (on behalf of the Hall Management Committee) at the Annual Parish Meeting on 12 April."
BVN86 "It also mentioned the signing of a new Protocol document, to clarify the ambiguous wording on our 1938 trust deed, which to my knowledge has been the cause of several serious and conflicting interpretations in past years. So we are confident that future hall committees will have the benefit of the action we have taken now and we have minuted our appreciation of the time and effort put into this over the past year by Clive."
BVN89 "Although the buildings are held in trust by the Parish Council on behalf of us all, the daily management and running of the facility is entrusted to the Hall Management Committee, and is separate from the Parish Council itself."
BVN108 "The parish council acts as the Custodial Trustee in the ownership of the Coronation and Jubilee Hatls, the village youth ctub tand and the children's ptayground."
--
In Nov 2016BPC turned its attention tothe Halls Committeeregarding the ownership of thevillagehalls andland, and associatedresponsibilities;withtalk about takinglegal advice at the public's expense(Nov 2016Min 289.9)BOB informed BPCthat there was aBPC/Hall Committee Agreement-Protocol and requested a copy.
From our understanding:
"The legal ownershipof the Hall is vested in theCouncil as Trustees for the use and benefit of the Beneficiaries and it is therefore an asset of the Council."theHalls Committee have "control and management of the property"We believe Dec 2016Min290.13ismisleading i.e. itdoes notindicate thatBPC has legal ownershipIN TRUSTto be logged on the BPC asset register as an asset of nil value as indicated in previous BPC minutes. The deeds state"...for the physical and mental recreation for the inhabitants of the Parishof Bleadon"; BOB last informed councillors of this in May 2016.
We, and others, feel that a correct record is important because the halls and land are not BPC'sassets to do with as they wish, theybelongtothe parishionersof Bleadon.Also, should BPC 'fold' in the future these assets should not then pass to any other government authority.
---
CORRESPONDENCE WITH BPC RE: HALLS OWNERSHIP & RESPONSIBILITIES
From: Bleadon BOB Community Website <bleadon@live.co.uk>
Sent: 18 November 2016 18:10
To: Bleadon Parish Council Clerk
Cc: Cllr Chinn; Cllr Clarke; Cllr Gutsell; [Hall Rep]; [Hall Rep/Member of public]
Subject: November Minutes - Halls Ownership, Building Insurance, VAT
Dear Tony,
Thanks for the minutes (now on BOB) , but having read the minutes I'm confused what the problem is here between BPC/Halls, andas Jo was on the Halls Committee at the time she has compiled the reply below based on her knowledge and research on the matter - Chris.
I'm aware ofa lengthy legal process in 2006-10 on the issue of ownership and interpretation of the Coronation Hall Trust Deed as I was on the Halls Committee during 2007-09. From public documents and minutes I understand thatin2008BPC resolved to register its assets with HMLR including 'Coronation Hall/Jubilee Hall/Childrens Play Area/YouthClub/Car Park' (hopefully including all trust information where necessary).BPC thereforeown the halls (as publicly stated in 2010 andconfirmed by you viaHMLR). They areowned with BPCas Custodian Trusteein relation to a1938Trust Deed for '..the physical and mental recreation of the inhabitants of the Parish of Bleadon'.The Halls Management Committee run the halls as Management Trustees, alsoin relation to the TrustDeed.In 2010 the public was informed that this issue wasconcluded withan agreement signedbetween the Chair of BPC (Penny Skelley) and the Chair of Hall Committee(Len Chamberlain) i.e. Protocol 205. It was stated that this documentwas 'to clarify the ambiguities and bring the Governing Document, the Trust Deed of 1938, up to date'.So why theseownership, insurance, etc.issues have beenraised again only six years laterI'm at a loss to understand,especially considering the time andmoney spent on legal advicein the past, and suggestedagain now. Let's hope this currentprocess will clarify the situation once andfor all.
Please can you send BOB a copy of BPC/Halls Committee agreementi.e. The Protocol regarding the interpretation of the Coronation Hall Trust Deed dated 14 January 1938 (Protocol 205), signed and concluded at the Annual Parish Meeting 2010?
I'm also a bit confused by the insurance and VATstatements.
I believe that it was the hallsownership andinsurance issue, asoriginated in2006, thateventually caused Protocol 205 to be written in 2010 to clarify the situation, we seem to be repeating that process again, some info:
October2007:The clerk advised the meeting of the responses he had received from both the NALC and SLCC. As a result he confirmed that he would be accepting their advice by formally amending the entry on the Parish Council Asset list with regards to the Insurance Value of the Coronation Hall. In the future the value would be listed but in brackets with the following explanation – Held in trust by Bleadon Parish Council as custodial trustees.July 2008:Resolved to receive Custodian & Management Trustees Report and to accept the Clerk’s following recommendations:That the Parish Council is the Custodian Trustee and as such should record the asset on the Parish Council Asset register That the value should be listed as Nil value That the Coronation Hall Management Committee is the Managing Trustee That the Parish Council and the Coronation Hall Management Committee mutually seek direction from AON the Hall Insurers as to whose name should appear on the policy and who are legally are responsible for paying the Annual Insurance PremiumBleadon Village News - 85 -Summer 2010:Contrary to their previous advice, our insurers (Aon Limited) have confirmed that the Hall insurance policy should be divided into two – the buildings element being written in the name of the Parish Council as legal owners of the property and the contents and other matters being in the name of the Hall Management Committee. Legal advice given by Hall, Ward and Fox is that the Governing Document (the Trust Deed dated 14 January 1938) is ambiguous. Their recommendation was to draft a Protocol to clarify the ambiguities and bring the Governing Document up to date. This has now been completed and the Protocol was signed by Penny Skelley (on behalf of the Parish Council) and Len Chamberlain (on behalf of the Hall Management Committee) at the Annual Parish Meeting on 12 April. Cllr Clive MorrisBVN 86 - Autumn 2010:Bleadon Coronation Hall In the last issue of the Village News, our report was given at the Annual Parish meeting by our Hall Representative and Treasurer Cllr Clive Morris. It was a comprehensive report, on finance, improvements and general happenings in both halls. It also mentioned the signing of a new Protocol document, to clarify the ambiguous wording on our 1938 trust deed, which to my knowledge has been the cause of several serious and conflicting interpretations in past years. So we are confident that future hall committees will have the benefit of the action we have taken now and we have minuted our appreciation of the time and effort put into this over the past year by Clive. Len Chamberlain - ChairmanVAT:
May2016 :The hall funds will be used to carry out the refurbishment work, but the Parish Council have agreed to donate up to £20,000 to make up any shortfall. The internal auditor has advised that if the work is commissioned in the name of the Parish Council, and they receive the invoices then the VAT can be reclaimed.June 2016:284.12 To discuss the Village Hall rebuilding works. A working group has been set up, and met a week ago. The auditor Terry Lewis has advised that if invoices for all the work are made payable to the Parish Council then the VAT can be reclaimed.I feel public clarification is definitelyrequired with regards to BPC's ownership of all its assets(including trusts)and its meaningfor the people of Bleadon;its relationship with other groups e.g.theHalls Committee, Youth Club, etc.;anyrelated operational and financialmanagement responsibilities;andassociatedtrustee and public scrutiny. I believe there is a difference between'owning' an asset and 'owning it in trust' and I feel that this must be clearly communicatedto residents.It seems that an open and transparent approach to access to information on these issues is required for all parties, including the public, otherwise the public perception may be that the PC/Halls could perhaps otherwiseuse 'its' asset without recourse to Bleadon and potentially involve more unnecessary costs now and in the future.
As you are awarethis is therecommended practice under the FOI Actby the Information Commissioners Office(ICO) Model Publication Schemeto help prevent these typesof legal,financialand timeconsuming issues recurringfor all interested parties. We havepreviously suggested and requestedthis practicenumerous times withBPCresolvingto adopt the ICO Model Publication Scheme inDecember 2008 and againin March 2016 but this informationisstill missing from thewebsite.
When this matter is finallyconcluded could youpleasekeep BOB (and Bleadonpublic) informedbypublishing all related documents alongside all BPC public documents,policies, protocols, newsletters,etc. on the BPC websitefor future reference as per theICO Model Publication Scheme?
Kind regards,
Jo
---
From: Tony Jay <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk>
Sent: Friday, 18 November 2016 7:06 PMTo: 'Bleadon BOB Community Website'Cc: 'Cllr Chinn'; 'Cllr Clarke'; 'Cllr Gutsell'; 'Hall Rep'; 'Hall Rep/Member of public'Subject: RE: November Minutes - Halls Ownership, Building Insurance, VATHi everyone,
I circulated the draft PC minutes to Bleadon BOB on Wednesday, as per our protocol. I was concerned that public comment would be made regarding the ‘hall ownership’ issue before it had been resolved, as the situation on Wednesday was very different to that on Monday following the receipt of the land registry report.
The issue has raised its head again because the hall committee received advice from the Charity Commission that the Charitable Trust were the owners of the hall. The hall management committee stated that they intended to completely rely upon this advice, which the PC did not agree with. Hence the PC was forced to make the enquiry with the land registry which eventually proved that the hall is owned by the PC.
If it had transpired that the PC did NOT own the hall then it would have been very unlikely that the VAT could be reclaimed. The citizens of Bleadon would then have lost £12k. When the internal auditor gave his advice, he was under the impression that the PC owned the hall. His advice would have been different if that was not the case. The VAT will be reclaimable now, so this is no longer an issue.
I am quite happy to reply to any request for information regarding assets etc. I do not hide anything. The asset register is currently being updated and will be published when completed.
One of my many unfulfilled tasks is to publish all of the policies etc. on the PC website, however due to my workload regularly exceeding my 15 hours a week on regular PC business, I simply have not had enough time to do so yet. It is not in the financial interests of the village for my hours to be increased (and I don’t want to work more hours anyway), but when a Clerk only works 15 hours per week it has to be accepted that it will sometimes take a long time for non-urgent tasks to be completed.
Tony
--
From: Bleadon BOB Community Website <bleadon@live.co.uk>
Sent: 20 November 2016 23:08
To: Tony Jay
Cc: 'Cllr Chinn'; 'Cllr Clarke'; 'Cllr Gutsell'; 'Hall Rep'; 'Hall Rep/Member of public'
Subject: Re: November Minutes - Halls Ownership, Building Insurance, VAT
Dear Tony,
Thanks for the promptreply.
We appreciate your/council time constraints, as does theICO, which I supposeis why they created themodelpublication scheme to assist allcouncils/clerks to reduce the number of direct requests for information (whether viapaper, email or website). I thereforewould have thought that thepublication of key public documentswould be anurgent priorityfor BPC, especially since the currentwebsite is nearly a year old.Publicly accessible documentsenables everyonetoeasily findthe essentialinformation theyrequire,reducing the amount of your/BPCtime needed to dealwith requests or worse, 're-inventing wheels'. Easily accessible, current, and definitiveinformation can thenbe used toassist future decision making whether byformer, currentorfuture councillors, members of the public, orin this case the Halls Committee too.
We realise thatthe current lack of onlineaccess may be due to your predecessors (as this is a 2010 document, created when the public were informed that BPC 'owned' the halls)but wehope that you can rectify this for all ICO recommendeddocumentsin the near future.
Jo and Ilook forward to receiving a copy of Protocol 205 as soon a possible please, by return of email, if that's easierthanvia theBPCwebsite.
Kind regards,
Chris Butler
email:bob@bleadon.org.uk
web:www.bleadon.org.uk
twitter: @bleadon
facebook: BleadonBOB
latest news:http://www.bleadon.org.uk/news.html
---
From: Tony Jay <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk>
Sent: 21 November 2016 08:32To: Bleadon BOB
Subject: FW: Ownership of the Coronation Hall
Hi,
I have recently been forwarded Protocol 250 from [a member of the public]. It is the first time that I have seen it. I do not hold it electronically. A copy may be in the PC cupboard at the Coronation Hall. Councillors and I will be going through the contents of the cupboard tomorrow.
Tony
----
From: Tony Jay <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk>
Sent: 21 November 2016 08:41To: 'Bleadon BOB Community Website'
Cc: 'Cllr Chinn'; 'Cllr Clarke'; 'Cllr Gutsell'; 'Hall Rep'
Subject: RE: November Minutes - Halls Ownership, Building Insurance, VAT
Hi,
I have forwarded scanned copies of Protocol 250 in a separate email.
It is true that the website is not up to date in some respects, (agendas and minutes are up to date) however my priority is to deal with ‘day to day’ business, which is currently taking more than my allocated 15 hours per week. If and when my workload decreases then I will have time to work on the website. If anyone wishes to have a copy of a document which is held electronically, or is easily accessible then I will obviously provide a copy.
I have removed [Hall Rep/Member of public]from the cc list, as he is not a Parish Councillor.
Thanks.
Tony Jay
Parish Clerk
--
From: Tony Jay <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk>
Sent: 30 November 2016 11:00To: Bleadon BOB
Subject: FW: Ownership of the Coronation Hall
Hi,
I understand that you are saying that you have not received a copy of the protocol.
I will resend it again.
Tony
Parish Clerk
--
From: Bleadon BOB Community Website <bleadon@live.co.uk>
Sent: 30 November 2016 12:58To: Tony Jay
Subject: Re: Ownership of the Coronation Hall
Hi Tony,Thanks, we did get this email, but [member of the public]states it is draft, so assume you have now found the original signed copy?Regards Chris and Jo-----From: Tony Jay <parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk>Sent: 05 December 2016 15:05To: Bleadon BOB
Subject: Protocol for the Coronation Hall
Hi,
I attach the signed protocol.
Tony Jay
Parish Clerk
.]]>
It seems that anothersimple request for informationhas caused Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) a problem. This time it has led them toimplementing their vexatious policy rather than giving us/public access tothe information.We've therefore decided to review BPC's approach to public access toinformation in relation to us/BOB/public queries.
BPC Review of Policies
Last month, Feb 2017,BPC decided once againto review its policies whilst in the middle of an access to public information debate with BOB.A year ago,Feb 2016, during ouraccess to timely accurate informationcomplaintwe requested a copy of the current BPCComplaints Policy, the Chair wanted to delay our receipt until after itsreviewand the Clerkdidnot send a copyto us, so we used the most current version on BOB as given to us by the previous Clerk. This time BPC appear to have used adraft unpublished vexatious policy against ussowe havereferred tothe currently adopted, publicly stated one aspostedonthe BPCwebsite.
We can only hope that BPCdon't try and further restrict public access to informationasone of the councillors tasked to review thepolicies this timewas a strong supporter of the ex-councillors restriction of access to public information last time. This was confirmed in theminuted decisiontoremovethe publicemail service in regards to timely public access to minutes (Feb 2016Min 281.7.3) andour informationrequests in the Jan 2016common ground meeting.It was the same councillorwe feel thatpushed through amendments to variouspolices in Feb 2016. This was despite theconcerns ofother councillorswho indicatedthat amendmentshad not been madeby a qualified person and that councillorshad not hadenough time to consider them (Feb 2016Min 281.7.4).We believe that this lack of due consideration has had a subsequent effect on BPC's use, misuse and non-useof policies, plans, procedures, etc.a year later; potentially other policies may prove to be more restrictiveas well, if/when they become enacted. When reviewing the polices this timeBOB strongly suggests that BPC takesthe pre-March 2016 versions into considerationas these werecompiled by the then qualified Clerk.
BPCImplementation ofVexatious policy and accuracy of minutes/policies
At the beginning of thisyear, Jan 2017,in response to BOB'srequest for a copy ofthe Parish Planand seeking to understandBPC's approach to current and futurelarge scale development applications in the parish, BPCagain started makingnegative and incorrectpublic statements. By Feb 2017 they publicly declared they hadenacted their vexatious policy, yet wrote to us stating they were 'informally' writing to us?
From our perspective there isno clear reason as to why our requests for informationare considered'unreasonable orunacceptable' or why BPC is'unable' to answer them. BOBwill of course keep you updated, and publish a copy of the Parish Plan and/or BPC's view of Bleadon's future if/when we receive a response. Also any policy updates.
Village Halls Ownership & Responsibilitiesand accuracy of minutes
In Nov 2016BPC turned its attention tothe Halls Committeeregarding the ownership of thevillagehalls andland, and associatedresponsibilities;withtalk about takinglegal advice at the public's expense(Nov 2016Min 289.9)BOB informed BPCthat there was aBPC/Hall Committee Agreement-Protocoland requested a copy, which we received over two weeks later after various emails from us and another member of the public. From our understanding"The legal ownershipof the Hall is vested in theCouncil as Trustees for the use and benefit of the Beneficiaries and it is therefore an asset of the Council."to be logged on the BPC asset register as an asset of nil value as indicated in previous BPC minutes, theHalls Committee have "control and management of the property".We believe the Dec 2016Min290.13misleads the public as itdoes notindicate thatBPC has legal ownershipin Trust as indicated in the agreement/protocol; we had last informed councillors of this six months before, in May 2016.
We, and others, feel that a correct record is important because the halls and land are not BPC'sassets to do with as they wish, theybelongto the "inhabittants" of Bleadon.Also, should BPC 'fold' at any time in the future, e.g. be incorporated into a District Council, these assets should not then pass to any other government authority.
BPC Newsletter and accuracy of minutes
The month following BPC's response to our complaint, inMay 2016,BPC started a newsletter issue,again speaking negatively, incorrectly and mis-leadingly about us/BOB in itspublic meeting; andagainbefore actually discussing our concerns with us. Following a meeting with BPC and the Clerk more issues were highlighted so, to try and resolve and mediatethe issues we approached the newly appointed Clerk but to no avail. BPC didnot indicate any amendmentto public perception or accuracy of informationbut it didindicate itsrestrictedapproach to information and selective service to the public. We werelater asked if we/BOBwantedto submit an article to the Sept 2016 newsletterwithBPC choosingnot topublish our submissionunless it was rewritten in an interview/chatty style. We felt that this was inapproapriate considering BPC were not speaking with us and the fact that theyrepeatedly portrayed us in a negative light in their public meetings/minutes. We felt that it would have been a public mis-representation of BPC's actual relationship with BOB.
Access to timely, accurateminutes and website usageByNov 2015BPC hadremovedpublicaccess to BPC minutes between meetings. BOB asked whyand askedfor timelyminutesto be reinstated, also questioning the purpose/use of BPC'swebsite in regards to access to information. In responseBPC spoke about BOB/us negativelyin public meetings for several monthswhichculminatedin BPC holdinga closedextra-ordinary meetingasindicatedin theFeb 2016minutes introduction, There wasnodiscussion with us/BOB either before, during or after the process so we/BOB submittedanofficial complaint.
Bythe end of the process BOB/public access to minutes was resumed.BOB/public was not given a reason as to why BPC acted the way it did, with some questions still unanswered and issues unresolvedto date. Two councillors and the clerk involved in this restricted accessissuehad resigned before we received our complaint response from BPC. Full service was not resumed until May 2016, seven months later, with the appointment of a newChair of BPC.
Correction of BPC public statements e.g. minutes
On several occasions we have asked BPC to 'amend' their minutes to more accurately reflect an issuee.g. access to minutes, newsletter, vexatious statements,parish plan, halls, etc.but this doesn't seem to happen. In Jan 2017, in relation to the Parish Planand Public Inquiry statements BPC wrote "As far as the minutes are concerned, I will not be amending them in any way..... Everything in the minutes of the last meeting was said during the meeting.... The issue of whether what was said is incorrect or not is irrelevant. If it was said, it can go into the minutes..."
BOB's question has always been thatif councillorsknow that a statement is incorrect, at or subsequent to a public meeting, how and when is theinformation publicly corrected? Similarly, if a member of the public asks for an issue or statement to be publicly corrected or clarified, how and when is this done?
Currency of BPC website
During our request for the Halls Protol BPC acknowledged that "It is true that the website is not up to date in some respects, (agendas and minutes are up to date)".What about all the currently adopted plans, policies, procedures, protocols, etc. that explain how BPC operates and communicates with the public; indicatingwhat it has agreed to do, and not do, on behalf of residents as their elected representatives?
The Clerk has also stated that, "If anyone wishes to have a copy of a document which is held electronically, or is easily accessible then I will obviously provide a copy."As can be seen from the items above, e.g. in relation to the Parish Plan, this is not always the case in our experience.
In Summary
Despite BPC's public statements inminutes and newsletters we believe that Bleadon residents have poor access to information. BPC has resolved at least twice that they would follow government best practice guidelines but do not appear to implement them.The Clerk and Councillors have stated various times that they don't have thetime to send us/the public information. In just over a decadeBPC has commissioned and paid for three separatewebsites, each with their ownassociated clerk and councillor training, email addresses and ongoingmonthly costs. The last one was launched just over a year ago, in Jan 2016, and was almost immediately out of date, lacking key information, and continues to be so.
We believe that ifBPC betterused their publicly paid for resources, and published key information on their website, then the public would not have to ask for it, the clerk and/or councillors would not have to rummage in filing cabinets to try and find it, documents would not become 'lost' and councillors and the public wouldknow what has been resolved and agreed on behalf of Bleadon residents. Best of all none of us would have to waste time on long explanatory emails or meetings!]]>
Congratulations to the Bleadon Hill Action Group and North Somerset legal team for their sterling efforts ensuring that the appeal to build 79 houses was refused(link to detailed planning info).
This application, if successful, would have irrevocablyjoined Bleadon to Weston-super-Mare affecting its independent/separate 'village' identityforever and could havepotentially openedthe floodgates for future large scalehousing developments in our green ruralenvironment.
BOB would like tothank the Action Group andall of you who assisted in the process, either byphysically attending and speaking up for Bleadon at the Inquiry, sending the Inspector written comments or working behind the scenes (including spouses and partners for their patience and support), many of whom are mentioned at the end of the Inspector's report.
Correspondenceduring the Inquiry also revealed that Bleadon Parish Council did not haveaplan to protect Bleadon oritsfuture, having indicated thatthey had 'lost' the current20 year planas adopted in 2009. We, like others, believe that aclear, communicated and publicly supportedplan would help anyfuture developmentto occur in a more manageable, publicly supportedand structured way.
Let us hope we can all learn positivelessons from this experience and continue to protect our rural villagecommunity way of life (link to CPRE Parish Plan information).
Previous Application Blog post here
]]>
North Somerset Council propose Traffic Waiting/Parking Restrictions on Bridge Road Bleadon. To be discussed by Parish Council on 13th March with NSC Public Consultation period following. Contact Parish Council for more information. Also note that there is currently an application proposal for a section 106 funding modificationby Weston Wake Parkthat may mean Accomodation Road/A370 junction improvements are delayed by NSC.
More details here on Traffic issues on Bridge Roadand notices proposed as issued by BPC clerk.
NSC Notice 1
NSC Notice 2
NSC Notice 3]]>
Hot on the heals of the Wentwood Drive Hearing andBleadon Hill Public Inquiry another new housing development of 70 housesseems to be in the pipeline at the junction of Bleadon Hill and Bridgwater Road (by Devil's Bridge). A'public consultation event' is being heldthisThursday 26 Jan, between 2pm and 8pm, at W-s-M Cricket Club, Devonshire Road, BS23 4NY.
Other developments in and around Bleadon, putting pressure on its limited roadexits, include:
Bridge Road (which now has 42 dwellings approved at the Quarry)Bleadon Road (which now has 50 units/lodges approved opposite this junction at Accommodation Road; which is alsoopposite the165 all year round units at Purn Caravan Park)Totterdown Lane (which now has 50 dwellings approved at Wentwood Drive)and we're also waiting for the imminentoutcome of the Inquiry re:79 dwellings at Bleadon Hill, opposite Hillcote)The development onslaught appears to becontinuingwith this newest development being investigated. A member of the public has informed usthat:
Savills are proposing, on behalf of the landowners, up to 70 new houses to be built on the field at the Bridgwater Rd end of Bleadon Hill immediately next to the railway line. There has not yet been a planning application, but Savills are holding a "public consultation event" on 26 Jan A copy of the letter from Savills to local residents can be read here.
BOB has been made aware of further detailsvia Streetlifeindicating proposed suitability of the site and use of theexisting amenities, schools, GPs, Hospital, etc.
BOB has also been sent thisrecent Daily Mail article"Ministers shelve plans to bulldoze Green Belt after coming under pressure from their own constituents"
All this and the formal Bleadon Parish Planstarted in 2005 and adopted by Parish Council in 2009 for 20 years seems now to be missing.....More on this later!
Some images received from the public meeting (apologies for quality)
comments by 10th February 2017 by email to mtucker@savills.com
or post to M Tucker Savills Embassy House Queens Avenue Bristol BS8 1SB]]>
Marshalls have invited Bleadon Parish Council to meet with them on a regular basis in the future to discuss traffic issues relating to their operations in Bleadon. The Parish Council would like to invite three members of the public to join them in these discussions. An open meeting will be held in the Coronation Hall at 7.30pm on Monday 23rd January 2017 when these three people will be selected. Everyone in attendance will be able to vote for their three choices.
Note: The above notice was emailed by BPC Clerk to BOB on 11/01/2017
Link here to related post on meeting 12 December 2016and alsoBPC Minutes for that meeting here.Please share with all interested in attending. Alsosee here for information on Quarry re-development plans]]>
----------------------------
Below are notes of a meeting between Councillors and Marshalls distributed at the above meeting.
]]>
The Planning Inspector has upheld theWentwood Drive appeal by the developer for outline planning permission of 50 dwellings on land at the top of Wentwood Drive and Highfield Road on Bleadon Hill. TheInspector's Decision reportis here.
The Bleadon Hill Action Group should be congratulated and be very proud of their efforts to try and protectour green space, and now must hope that NSC ensure that allreferred matters and conditions are fully met by the developer.
The otherBleadon Hill Appeal for 79 houses resumes on 13-15 December. There is currently someconfusion whether thepublic are encouraged to attend and speak at the appealor attend butnot speak. Regardless,clearly more residents please need to attend this inquiry to try and ensure the appeal result will reflect public opinion. It is acknowledged that this maybe difficult due to work or travel issues but would be appreciated.
-----
17 APR 2015 -Application & 13 MAY 16 Original Decision Notice
03 DEC 2018 - AdditionalReserved Matters Decision with legal agreement
19 NOV 2019 -Keepers Gate Development Wentwood- Non material amendment]]>
Today was the first day of the Bleadon Hill Appeal Inquiry with the Action Group andmembers of the public attending. The Action Group would welcome your support at this hearing, even if for anhour or so,to show the Planning Inspectorevidence of stronglocal support. On listening to the proceedings your feedback to the groupmay also support their case.
There will be a site visit from 9:30am tomorrow, reconvening at The Town Hall at 1:30pm.
Application information here
]]>
For your further information, here is a google link to various related articles]]>
Can you sign the petition now and demand that looking after our parks is made a legal requirement by the government?
It only takes 30 seconds to add your name:http://bit.ly/2coGutk]]>
"Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) is a designation given to sites that have substantive local nature conservation and geological value ... SNCIs tend to be selected because of particular wildlife habitats or if they support scarce or rare species outside their natural habitats. They can be natural sites or man-made."
New gravel path (May 20)Private Fishing PondAllocated Fishing PegOriginal Site of Nature
Conservation Interest (SNCI)
Demolished
New OS Aerial Mapping
New pond &
unofficial walking route
New OS Mapping
New pond &
unofficial
walking route
-----
UPDATE 23 OCT 17 - BPC and NSC have still not explained how this Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) has apparently been destroyed and become a 'balancing pond' for current and expanded use at Rivermead Caravan site?
The collated correspondence on this site fromSeptember 2016, but not yet answered,can be seenhere.
SNCI Before balancing pond
Aug 16
During Pond Construction & connection to River Axe
Nov 16
Afterwards/Now Oct 17-----
ORIGINAL BLOG
Bleadon Parish Council have raisedconcernswith North Somerset Council (NSC) over significant earth moving works on land adjacent and South-East of thePurn Holiday Park, whichhas greatly affected the wildlife area alongside the River Axe footpathandparticularly the ancient river port section (see comments section below).
Ithas been reported to NSC with a case reference of 2016/0424. So ifyou also have any further information on this issue, or indeedhave other concerns, then you can also inform NSC via http://forms.n-somerset.gov.uk/forms/ReportABreach/ReportABreach?UPRN=24013035&addressType=ContactAddress
Landworks at Purn Holiday Park 'expansion' affecting River Axe footpath
and ancient 'Ad Axium' Roman port/withy beds
Also see this report by BLERT (Bleadon and Lympsham Environs Research Team) published in 2005 that amongst other interesting items, mentions this River Axearea of interest.
]]>
The Open Spaces Society has been working for decades to prevent this looming disastermore information on how you can help via this link]]>
The dates for Bleadon Hill (79 HOUSES) Inquiry Appeal have changed again!! Now 29 Nov - 01 Dec at the Town Hall, then 13-14 Dec atRoyal Hotel and then 15 Dec back at Town Hall, see below [Previous blog here]
The Hearing Appeal for WENTWOOD DRIVE/Highfield Road (50 Houses) is still 8-9 November
[Previous blog here]
UPDATE OCTOBER 2016
The dates for Bleadon Hill (79 HOUSES) Appeal Inquiry at WSM Town Hall has now been changed to December 12-19,
WENTWOOD DRIVE (50 houses) Appeal Hearing is confirmed starting at 10a.m November 8-9 at WSM Football Club BS24 9AA . Further details below.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poster information is repeated below with links to applications and further details
The Wentworth Drive and Bleadon Hill Action Group has been set up to oppose these planning applications.
In regard to the Wentwood Drive (50 houses) application (15/P/0983/O), the Planning Inspector has decided that a full hearing will be held. As many residents as possible are strongly encouraged to attend the hearing, to show the collective local opposition to the application.
Strong community support against the proposal at the hearing can have a massive impact on the outcome
The date of the Wentwood Drive hearing is 8th-9th November 2016 more detail via Planning Inspectorate case website here.
In regard to the Bleadon Hill (79 houses) application, the revised application (16/P/1053/O)has now been withdrawn by the developers leaving just the original application (15/P/0167/O)which will be heard at anappeal inquiry starting on 12th December (previously 29th November) 2016starting at 10am over a potential SIX day period, at the Town Hall, WSM. Again, all residents are encouraged to attend for the same reasons as above.
The Action Group have been deemed a ‘rule 6 party’ which means that they can make a representation to the hearing. The Action Group will address the hearing, concentrating on transport issues; sustainability; visual impact; landscape and ANOB impact; highways and access, and the proposal is outside of the adopted core strategy.
North Somerset Council will also be objecting to the proposals.
The developers have appointed a QC to represent them, so they are making a determined effort to have the application approved. Therefore, opposition support from the local community in attending the hearing is absolutely vital.
PLEASE SHOW YOUR OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENTS BY ATTENDING THE APPEALS HEARING AND INQUIRY
Link to previous blog information on all these applications]]>
How to comment on the proposed CIL Draft Charging Schedule
Any person may comment on the Draft Charging Schedule.You can view it and the associated documents online and at the Library within the Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ. You can also make your comments online, or if you prefer:
E-mailpolicy@n-somerset.gov.uk;orPost to Planning Policy Team, Floor 1 Post Point 15, Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.Comments must be receivedno later than midnight on Friday 23September 2016.You can also indicate whether or not you wish to appear at the examination.
Please let us know if you would like to be kept informed of the progress of the CIL.
If you have difficulty accessing the document or would like it in another format such as large print, Braille or audio format and for any other queries regarding this consultation please contact Jenny Ford on (01934) 42 6609 orjenny.ford@n-somerset.gov.uk.
What happens next?
Once the Council has considered all the representations received, the next stage is to submit the Draft Charging Schedule for independent examination. The examiner can approve or reject the schedule, or suggest modifications which the Council must make to adopt the schedule. The CIL Charging Schedule has to be approved by resolution of full council (adoption). It is anticipated that the CIL charging rates will be implemented in summer 2017.
Planning Policy Team
North Somerset Council
www.n-somerset.gov.uk/CIL]]>
UPDATE - 8 August 2016
Further to appeal details below, the appeal process has now been changed to a 'Hearing' rather than 'Written Representation'. The date for hearing has yet to be set but an extension to 2 September has been made for the deadline for additional comments to be made to the Planning Inspector (details below).Here is a link to a Planning Portal document explaining the Hearing process.Thanks to all who keep BOB informed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the decision by NSC to refuse the application, The applicants appeal process has now started for the Wentwood Drive/Highfield Road Development on Bleadon Hill. The Appellants statement and other documents can be found on the following link: 15/P/0983/O
As regards the appeal please read the following letter sent out by North Somerset Council. If you wish to make additional comments this must be done by 5th August 2016 as prescribed in the letter below.For convenience here is a link directly to the appeal webpage, application reference3151660
Previous information on Wentwood Drive can be foundhere]]>
The applicant has now withdrawn the re-application for 79 houses on Bleadon Hill. BOB is currently unsure how the current appeal to Planning Inspector on the original application for non-determination by North Somerset is affected by this, See NS Statement of Case here (posted 9/8/16). Althoughthe original application was refused (albeit late) by NSC it went to appeal, so the Planning Inspector is still involved. Bleadon residents therefore need to remain vigilant as this process continues. [Previous 79 HOUSES information here]
Also, theWENTWOOD DRIVE development appeal process has now been changed to a 'Hearing' from 'Written representation',more details on this post
Thanks to theaction groups and individuals protecting our environment who have taken the time and effort to comment on the original and re-applications to North Somerset. Also thanks to all who contact BOB to share their concerns, communicate processes and deadlines, highlight meetings, etc. with our community by various means includingthe BOB website, blogs/comments and emails.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear All,
Despite an appeal already being submitted to the planning inspectorate, an outline planning application for 79 houses on Bleadon Hill has been re-submitted witha deadline of June 2ndfor commenthere
Apparently, the comments previously submitted to NSC regarding the first application will NOT automatically be taken into account for this 'new' application. Residents can use exactly the same submission but need to use the 'new' application reference number16/P/1053/O
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset Council
Development Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
This seems to make no sense and perhaps someone from NSC can explain why the developer is allowed and has re-submitted a seemingly identical application, but in the meantime please comment again asap.........
FYI, It also includes a letter from the agent reasoning that the Wentwood Drive application (for another 60/50 houses) was treated more leniently on the topic of landscape, visual impact and sustainability.
In addition, North Somerset officers have recommended approval for a"Change of use of land from a mixed use of agriculture and seasonal car boot sales to use as a holiday lodge and caravan site"on Accommodation Road land - 15/P/2304/F
So, including Bleadon Quarrythese developments, if all approved, could bring a potential of up to 250 new housing spaces to the immediate Bleadon area, when according to the 2011 Censuswe currently have about 530, a massive increase! As far as we can tell there is no corresponding increased provision in the essential amenities or services e.g. doctors, dentists, etc
Previous application informationhere
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE
I have also been asked by a Bleadon Resident to circulate the following related message below:
!! IF YOU DO NOT WANT 79 HOUSES BUILT ALONG THE RIDGE OF BLEADON HILL YOU NEED TO MAKE AN OBJECTION THIS WEEK !!
What is happening?
Molwin Estates has resubmitted its plan to build 79 houses on Bleadon Hill. This has largely been 'under the radar' and many people have either not seen the application or have assumed that their previous objection would be carried forward. Unfortunately this is not the case.
We are desperately trying to contact anybody who may want to lodge an objection to make sure that as many people as possible have the chance to comment.
Why has the developer resubmitted the original application?
Our Parish Council's Locum Clerk, Tony Jay, says that this is a common tactic used by developers. People assume that their original objection will be used in respect of the duplicate application, but that's not the case. The consequent low number of objections allows the developer to say that their plans have been accepted by the local community.
In this case, the original planning application is being appealed with the Secretary of State. A low number of objections to this duplicate application will strengthen the developer's hand at the appeal hearing. It is rather a sneaky tactic designed to bypass community opinion.
IT IS VITAL THAT AS MANY OF US AS POSSIBLE LODGE AN OBJECTION BY 2 JUNE 2016!
Why should you object?
Building in this unique location would:
Close the gap between Weston and BleadonOverburden our already stretched local resources (including drainage and community facilities)Make a narrow country road many times more dangerousCreate a dormitory community that will contribute nothing to our local economyCreate an exclusive hilltop development that would not create any opportunities for the young people in Bleadon to remain in the areaCreate an eyesore directly in front of the Mendip Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, that would be visible for milesThere are many more good reasons for objecting – you can find details by looking at the objections that were made to the original application.
How do I make an objection?
For your objection to have the most impact, it should be in your name only. If you are part of a couple or group, you should each submit individual objections.
There are two ways to lodge your objection:
1. Object online
Click here: 16/P/1053/O
Click on 'comment on application'
Please note: if the planning portal is offline, make a note to try again later
2. Write to North Somerset Council
Your letter of objection should be addressed to:
Neil Underhay
Development Manager
Post Point 15
North Somerset Council
Town Hall
Weston super Mare
BS3 1UJ
What should I say in my objection?
For maximum impact, your letter should not be a copy of another letter – it's important to use your own words.
Friends of the Earth have produced a simple but effective guide to writing a planning objection, which you can find here: Updated Oct 2016
There are many good reasons to object to this development, but here are some ideas you might like to consider:
Safety
The site is situated on a narrow road with three dangerous corners and poor sight linesThe site will give rise to a significant number of traffic movements which will prejudice the safety of residents, drivers, riders and pedestrians on an already dangerous stretch of roadSustainability
The development has not been identified in the Housing Core Strategy as the area is not sustainableHousing growth is most sustainable when close to the community facilities and services a community requires. These services are mostly situated in Weston, where a great deal of brown field development is already taking placeThe proposed development fails tests on the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable developmentEconomic: there are few employment opportunities in the immediate area: this would in effect be a dormitory developmentEconomic: the resident would be unlikely to support local businesses in the Bleadon area and so would not make an economic contribution to the communitySocial: the site is separate from Bleadon village, where social facilities (such as the village hall) are already suffering from over-demand. There are no social facilities on Bleadon HillEnvironmental: The development will cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the landscape, including views to and from the Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural BeautyEnvironmental: The development will destroy the unique and special hill line of this part of the Mendip Hills Character AreaEnvironmental: The lighting on the development will further erode the dark skies to the south of Weston impacting on populations and wildlifeTransport
The site is situated at the top of a steep hill limiting the transport choices of any residents contrary to the National Planning Policy FrameworkSimilarly, there is no easy access to realistic pedestrian and cycle routes, which should be a priority for any sustainable developmentOverall, the site would discriminate against the less mobileIt is a given that despite being on a bus route, residents will almost exclusively use cars for journeysOver development
This development would effectively join Weston to Bleadon, affecting the nature of the entire area and eroding the character of Bleadon villageThe type of housing needed in the UK is reasonably priced town-based housing on brown field sites. Weston has this in abundance across a number of sites including the airport, Locking Road car park and the developments near the motorwayThis would be an exclusive hilltop development, making no discernible impact in solving the UK's housing crisisSchools
]]>
For your convenience, here is a link direct to the Appeal webpage, application reference 3142927
and also here is a link to the Application on NSC website with more detailed Appeal documents (15/P/0167/O)
Previous information on this application
]]>
At the March Parish Council meeting it was reported that the mobile library service is getting fewer customers in Bleadon and would like more people to use the facility.
For those who haven't used the service, it parks opposite Bleadon Church on alternate Fridays between 1045 and 1245 (check March-August 2016 timetable here). Should you wish to contact the service you can call01934 426 020 or 01934 426 657 and/or emailmobile.library@n-somerset.gov.uk
Full time table and contact details also hereonthe North Somerset Mobile Library webpage
]]>
The consultation documentation also includes this document,Sustainability Assessment of Rural Settlements in North Somersetthat unfortunately lists Bleadon bottom of it`s section on Infill Villages.For your convenience, here is an extract of the Bleadon related information created as a PDF document.
-----------------------------
Message from North Somerset Council Consultations
Dear Sir or Madam
Site Allocations Plan (Consultation Draft) March 2016
Consultation Period Thursday March 10th 2016 –Thursday April 28th 2016
What is the purpose of the Site Allocations Plan?
The Site Allocations Plan brings forward detailed site allocations that complement the strategic context set out in the Core Strategy.
The principal task of the Site Allocations Plan is to identify the new residential allocations necessary to deliver the Core Strategy shortfall, taking into account the need to provide deliverable sites to ensure the Council can maintain a five year housing land supply. In addition the plan reviews existing and the identification of new allocations covering, for example, employment uses, as well as designations to safeguard or protect particular areas such as local green space or strategic gaps.
What stage is the document at?
The Site Allocation Plan is at the Consultation Draft stage . All responses received from this consultation will be taken into account when finalizing the plan and submitting it to the Secretary of State for examination. An earlier consultation draft was consulted on in February 2013 but work on this was delayed due to the uncertainty over the Core Strategy housing target. Because of the increase in the Core Strategy housing target it is felt necessary to consult further
Where can I view and make comments on the plan?
Hard copies of the Written Statement and proposed allocation plans can be viewed at the following locations:
Your local library – for library opening hours see: www.n-somerset.gov.uk/librariesCastlewood, Tickenham Road, Clevedon, BS21 6FW.The Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.How can I talk to Planning Staff about the Site Allocations Plan ?
Planning officers will be available to discuss the content of the plan at the following locations and times :
Monday March 21st 4-7pmWeston Library
Tuesday March 22nd h 4-7pm Nailsea Library
Wednesday March 23rd 4.30 -7pm Churchill Primary School
Thursday March 24th 4-7pm Portishead Library
Tuesday March 29th 4-7pm Clevedon Library
Wednesday March 30th 4-7pmCongresbury School Rooms
Thursday March 31st 4-7pm Yatton Library
Monday April 4th 4-7 pm Winscombe Community Centre
The best and preferred way to comment on the plan is to make comments online by visiting :www.n-somerset.gov.uk/sitesandpolicies
You can also email comments to: planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.uk or
Write to:Planning Policy and Research, Post Point 15, North Somerset Council, Town Hall, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.
Closing date for comments is midnight on Thursday April 28th 2016.
Contact North Somerset Council on 01934 426177.
Yours faithfully
Graham Quick
Local Plan Team Leader]]>
In brief, as indicated in the February PC minutes and stated by Cllr. Findlay "it was unreasonable to ask the parish council to email to let anyone know when they (the minutes) were available" we have had to keep checking for minutes and agenda,and now they have been found. We have posted them herefor your convenience and posterity as they have had a habit in the past of disappearing from PC website, despite their"total control"(see february minutes for explanation).
Like Cllr. Gutsell, BOB will also be interested to know"the amount of time spent by the PC Clerk in responding to BOB requests"(for public information) as so far we have received very little! Althoughwe have instead received plenty of adverse public meeting comments from certain councillors.
The minutes also note a change to a .co.uk website domain name. Regardless of their domain name choice we believe that they should focus on the quality of their data and its maintenance. For instance, there is still no January 2016 Agenda posted on their `new`website. Good job we requested the agenda independently and posted it on BOBas it contains the only finance and correspondence information for January.
Enjoy.....
Here is a link to related blog posts]]>
Post meeting note: NSC unanimous vote to refuse permission but as stated below this is going to a future appeal decision process
District councillors are going to discuss whether to approve or refuse the Bleadon Hill application for 79 houses on Wednesday 9/3/16 at 2.30pm at Weston Town Hall in Walliscote Grove Road.
Apparently, fromthe Committee reportobtained via the application webpagethe application will be dealt with on appeal, the report states:
"The applicant has lodged an appeal against the failure of the Council to decide the planning application within the statutory determination period. This means that the Council cannot decide the application and a decision will instead be made by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. The appeal will be a public inquiry at a date to be confirmed. The Council can therefore only consider what it would have concluded had it been able to determine the application. This report describes and assesses the planning application in the usual way, but the recommendation is adapted to reflect the appeal process. However, if given the opportunity to make a decision, the application would have been recommended for REFUSAL. The full recommendation is set out at the end of this report."
People who wish to speak about the application must inform the council before the meeting. Alternatively, go online and add a new comment ASAP on the previous Previous 79 houses blog.
Please note: This is a separate application to the recent update sent on Wentwood Drive/Highfield Road proposed development]]>
Please see email below from the Bleadon Hill Action Group regarding the above.
If you have or indeed haven't already done so, please take the time to comment again on this revised application for proposed development on Bleadon Hill land above Wentwood Drive/Highfield Road and very close to Hillcote estate. 15/P/0983/O
Previous and further information available here
--------------------------
Att Neil Underhay
Planning Department
North Somerset Council
Town Hall.
Weston super Mare
BS231EY
Dear Sirs
We respond to the re consultation for the 50 unit layout
The applicant has revised the layout to provide the ecology and open space that the initial submission required. The 60 unit layout with the initial application was never realistic and achievable. Houses were plotted on ecology buffer land that the applicants own accompanying reports required. So, nothing has changed and in reality the applicant has not reduced unit numbers. The applicant has corrected its own error.
We note that building heights have been restricted around the site periphery. We do not see how the buildings in the centre of the site remain at 2 storey. However any building will have a visual impact as the applicants own visual impact assessment has indicated.
Our previous observations still stand and we OBJECT to the application
We have further observations and would like to bring to your attention to misleading and ill-informed statements in the IMA Transport Planning report
Manual for streets (MFS) is referred as the design document, Manual for streets is used to design new residential streets and shared spaces predominately limited to 20 mph, not existing Roads. Totterdown Lane is a Road, not a street, and has traffic using it to speeds way in excess of 20 mph, it’s also a Road which is currently substandard in both its width, footpath provision and drive way visibility. Suggesting, “Because it’s already substandard and therefore acceptable” is misguided. There is also reference to NO accidents, if correct, this has occurred by the grace of god and through pure luck rather than the grace of Highway Engineers and the current environment.
Totterdown Lane is not lightly trafficked as stated. The traffic flows were taken over a 6 hour period during a quiet period, the traffic figures are not at all reflective of peak period. Totterdown Lane is heavily trafficked at rush hour, outside of school holidays and usage is increased and passing traffic exacerbated on Bank Holidays and during the summer peak period. Traffic is particularly heavy on events days for example Weston Air show Days where Totterdown is used as a short cut for traffic by passing the Hospital Roundabout and diverting through Bleadon Village.
2.22 states “It is noted in advance that the route towards Bleadon Hill is not likely to be used heavily by those living at the site; the northbound route is a more valuable route in respect of the locations and facilities that it gives access to”. Quite an assumption!!! The Nub of the issue I believe. Bleadon Hill is the preferred desire route for pedestrians, I can vouch for that and I assume so can many others. The majority of walking occurs for leisure and pleasure purposes due to the slopes!!! We are near the base of a Hill, so the desire for most is to seek its peak and the views from it. The Purn Nature Area, Hellenge Hill, Roman Road PROW to name some. Also access is gained to Bleadon Village Play area and the St Catherine’s Public House as other leisure examples. All accessible going North, up Totterdown Lane. The local amenities are too remote for most and we must assert that the car is the preferred method of transport to Broadway. Broadway and beyond It is not within walking distance for most as stated and it is not the desire route, much the opposite in fact. North, not South is the preferred pedestrian route. For amenity purposes the Hill is a massive deterrent (South), for pleasure/leisure (North) a desire route, surely its common sense, so let common sense prevail?
Could you please ask the councils highways Engineer to consider the above?
No ecology bat surveys have been completed in spring/early summer months as requested by Natural England, who have a holding objection to the application. The council's own ecologist and the bat consultee have standing objections. We await to see the Bat surveys from April, May, June and July.
There is another environmental concern and one that has received a lot of press coverage lately. Flooding.
Whilst we appreciate officers have been consulted on Flooding and Surface Water Drainage, We and many residents still have reservations. We don’t think enough investigation and ground infiltration tested has taken place to enable an informed decision.
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/up-england-devon-35318276 it’s exactly the same problem residents had and still have concerns about. Those concerns have been exacerbated by this news article and further clarification would be appreciated from officers or a guarantee that flooding will not be a problem from members.
No infiltration impact assessment has been done. No flow path modelled done. No points of adequate connection established should infiltration proves unsatisfactory. Residents have already expressed concern re current flooding and ground water infiltration into properties, the development will only exacerbate the current problem. It is therefore essential more is done before the outline application can be determined. It should not be conditioned as it may prove unfeasible and the site not deliverable.
No flow paths are shown on the developer’s proposals, we believe it is essential the flooding question is answered before the Outline application is determined. The water must flow somewhere, usually downhill, the question is can the water flow bypass lower lying properties??
Based on the above can Members, Officers and the councils Engineer confirm that no flooding will be caused by infiltration or overland exceedance flows?
In summary we believe that this site is totally unsuitable for development and there must be others that meet the Councils housing targets that we understand and appreciate must be delivered for future generations.
Yours faithfully,
LIZ ALEXANDER. ON BEHALF OF THE WENTWOOD DRIVE/BLEADON HILL ACTION GROUP]]>
Related informationhere]]>
The following blog only relates to the publication of, and access to, BPC agenda and minutes. In particular the outcome of the BPC extraordinary council meeting of 4 Feb 'to consider the on-going relationship between the Council and a parishioner' i.e. the Bleadon BOB community website, which the public including us were excluded from attending.
The full council meeting on Mon 8 Feb 2016 was chaired by Cllr Hartree. He informed all attending that Chairman Ian Gibson had resigned as councillor following the extraordinary meeting, citing the council being deeply divided as a factor. The five councillors present then voted on a new Chair, and after a divided vote, Cllr Hartree used his casting vote as acting chairman and he was elected as chairman of Bleadon Parish Council.
Cllr Hartree read out the long resolution that was made at the extraordinary meeting last Thursday 4 Feb. There was no written information regarding the resolution for the councillors or public to read, and we/BOB had not received any feedback prior to the meeting, so Cllr Gutsell kindly asked for it to be read out again, assisting everyone present. In essence it relates to all of us in that,
with regards to access to minutes and agenda Bleadon BOB will be treated as any other resident and therefore will not be sent the agenda/minutes by email. These documents would be available on the BPC website.
BOB has fought for timely access to BPC public information on behalf of the Bleadon community for many years, so being treated as any other resident is not an issue. For, example this whole issue requiring an extraordinary meeting has occurred because at the end of last year BOB raised a problem with the timing of the agenda/minutes resulting from the new Clerk/BPC proposed process. The current BPC finally agreed to recontinue publishing minutes prior to meetings, just as the previous PC and Clerk did for many years. (See previous blogs and 14 Dec 2015 minutes under AOB).
What still hasn't been answered satisfactorily though is how will anyone know when they are published i.e. why can't the public, including BOB, continue to be notified when the agenda/minutes become available? For over two years, until the above problem, BPC offered everyone a service to automatically receive an email from the Clerk containing the agenda/minutes as soon as they were available. Bleadon residents, BOB, village groups, etc. as well as other organisations such as the police, NS councillors, The Mercury, etc. could request to be added or were on the email circulation list.
Who would have thought asking the current BPC to continue to deliver previous minutes before the next meeting; and tocontinue to automatically inform BOB when they were available could have led to these events. As Cllr Clarke indicated in her comments, all this for asking for one address to be put back on an email circulation list.
Here are some observations from the full council meeting:
Cllr Hartree stated concern about control of the BPC website and information.Cllr Findlay indicated that minutes will be available on the BPC website no later than 7 days before a meeting, possibly sooner.Cllr Gutsell asked how will people know if minutes were posted sooner, e.g. 10 days before meeting? Cllr Findlay replied that people would just have to keep checking the BPC website.Cllr Clarke referred to the email service in Class 4 of the Publication Scheme in the Corporate Policy. Cllr Hartree said his interpretation was it didn't mean an ongoing email service (as used to date).Cllr Gutsell and Cllr Clarke tried to support and promote a timely and communicative service for residents/BOB to receive the agenda/minutes. In the end the vote was divided and Cllr Hartree used his casting vote as Chairman. The resolution to effectively only allow residents/BOB ongoing access via the website, and not be notified via the automatic email service was passed.What wasn't made clear however was whether the automatic email notification service has been stopped altogether. Has a two-tiered system now been created with residents having to manually and repeatedly check the website yet the police, NS councillors, press, etc. still being automatically emailed, i.e. receiving a better, more timely and communicative level of service than that offered residents?From the above it seems that some councillors are intent on making the communication process between BPC and residents/BOB as time consuming as possible; and with all of us supposedly being equal also making it difficult for the police, press, etc. as well.
The purpose of the Information Commissioners Office Model Publication Schemeis to assist every public authority under the Freedom of Information Act, to make the maximum amount of information readily available at minimum inconvenience and cost to the public. The current BPC adopted Publication Scheme within the BPC Corporate Policy, was/is based on this model and was set up following the Localism Act by the previous qualified Clerk and is based on thisdownloadable templatefrom the ICO.
So, rather than you having to repeatedly visit the BPC website to see if the agenda or minutes have been published (as suggested by Cllr Findlay), BOB will do this for you. We will let you know when they are made available, as we currently do, thus saving you all the time and effort.
Please continue to send us your comments and feedback and let us know of anything you'd like us to raise within our community. You can also contact your parish council via the Clerk!
For background correspondence to this issue please see comment section below and these previous blogs:]]>
We have discovered the Parish Council Agenda for an Extraordinary meeting (excluding the public) on the 4 Feb, and Full Council on 8 Feb have now been published, which are now available as are theJanuary minutesthatgive a detailed insight into how the recent Parish Council public meeting was conducted.
With regards to the comments about BOB within the minutes, we are taking this further with the PC and we have requested adopted copies of the Corporate Policy and Code of Conduct (both publically available documents).
As an update, after the 11th January PC meeting, but before the publication of the meetings minutes, BOB did have an amicable meeting with Cllrs Ian Gibson and Steve Hartree. Our meeting pointswere accepted except for the key issue i.e. to include BOB on the clerk's electronic information mailing list at this time, although no reason was given for not sending us these public documents. So, at the moment this still leaves us all guessing as to when it's time to find them.
There also seems to be a change of minute format, December's minutes lost the month's expenditure. The correspondence didn't show the email from BOB that was referred to in the meeting, nor did the minutes indicate what the email was about. FYI, I've already put the one I believe it refers to in the comments of the bloghttp://www.bleadon.org.uk/beinvolved.html?part_id=160604&post_id=22628&action=view_commentsi.e. electronic receipt of agenda and previous minutes before a meeting; confirmation of document access process/procedure (the email to clerk is near bottom of blog on 10 Jan). We still haven't received an acknowledgement or response to this correspondence (apart from in December Minutes).
January's minutes seem to have lost both the expenditure and the correspondence information. Again, the minutes didn't indicate what the email was about, so I've put the one I believe it refers to in the comments of this blog below i.e. how does the PC envisage its website coexisting with community websites including Bleadon BOB? We still haven't received an acknowledgement or response to this correspondence (apart from in the January minutes). At the moment it seems that the expenditure and correspondence can only be found in the agenda which has not yet been posted for January on the BPC website.
A copy of the January minutes and agenda can be found on BOB herehttp://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishcouncil.html Alternatively the minutes may be found on the newly created (3rd) BPC website which is currently being updated herewww.bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk/parish-council/agendas-and-minutes
Kind regards, BOB
]]>
You've been invited to participate in the West of England Joint Transport Study consultation by the consultation manager, South Gloucestershire Council (Clare Nelmes).
This consultation is open from 9 Nov 2015 at 10:00 to 29 Jan 2016 at 17:00.
We want to let you know that you still have time to help shape future housing and transport development in the West of England.Thank you if you have already taken part in our consultation which has been running since 9 November 2015 and closes on Friday 29 January.The local councils of Bath & North East Somerset, Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire are seeking people’s views on how and where new homes and transport should be provided over the next 20 years.The West of England is growing and economically successful: the area is worth around £26bn a year to the UK economy, and around 95,000 new jobs are targeted to be created by 2036. Estimates state that the area needs at least 85,000 new and affordable homes by 2036, which is 29,000 more than currently planned and predicted.
Please make sure you take part in this important debate and provide your views by joining the consultation.
You can give your views by taking part in our online surveys available from our website: www.jointplanningwofe.org.uk
or you can email comments direct to: comment@jointplanningwofe.org.uk
You can also write to us at: West of England Joint Planning Consultation, c/o South Gloucestershire Council, PO Box 299, Corporate Research and Consultation Team, Civic Centre, High Street, Kingswood, Bristol, BS15 0DR.
The closing date for responses is 29 January 2016.
If you have any questions please email comment@jointplanningwofe.org.uk or ring one of the following numbers, depending on which local authority area is relevant to you:
- Bath and North East Somerset - 01225 477548
- Bristol - 0117 903 6725
- North Somerset - 01934 426775
- South Gloucestershire - 01454 863469
Further information is also available at: www.jointplanningwofe.org.uk.
Participate in this consultationIf you would like to change your email alerts, please visit the website]]>
Due to a minor error in the wording of MM10 relating to Policy DM9: Trees, which has now been corrected, the consultation will be extended until midnight on the 2 March 2016.
The consultation documents can be viewed at www.n-somerset.gov.uk/sandpexamination where you can also comment online
----------------Message from North Somerset Council ConsultationsSites and Policies Plan Part 1: Development Management Policies
Proposed Main Modifications consultation: 14 January 2016 – 26 February 2016
The Sites and Policies Plan brings forward detailed development plan policies which complement the strategic context set out in the Core Strategy.
Development Management policies contained within Part 1 are more generic policies used when assessing a range of planning applications and development proposals. This plan does not contain site allocations but contains policies which cover a broad range of development issues including development in the Green Belt, major transport schemes, Conservation Areas, extensions to dwellings, development in the countryside, retailing, accommodation for elderly people, minerals planning and design.
The Consultation Draft of this document was published in February 2013 and the Publication version was consulted on in February 2015.
The Plan was submitted to the Secretary of State in July 2015 and the Examination hearings were held on 3rd and 4th November 2015. All the submission and examination documents can be viewed on our website: www.n-somerset.gov.uk/sandpexamination
We are now consulting on the proposed Main Modifications to the submitted plan. These Modifications are a result of:
Changes made in response to comments we received during the Publication Version consultationChanges to the plan proposed by North Somerset CouncilChange to the plan proposed by the Inspector following the examination process including the hearings.All responses received from this consultation on the Main Modifications will be forwarded to the Inspector who will take the comments into consideration. He will then issue his final report to North Somerset Council.
North Somerset Council will then take the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 forward for adoption in April 2016.
Once adopted this plan will supersede many of the remaining policies in the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan. Appendix A of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 sets out which Replacement Local Plan policies are being superseded by policies in this plan.
Where can I view and make comments on the plan?
Hard copies of the Schedule of Main Modification and the Plan with the Modifications marked up can be viewed at the following locations:
Your local library – for library opening hours see:www.n-somerset.gov.uk/libraries
Castlewood, Tickenham Road, Clevedon, BS21 6FW.The Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.To view the plan and make comments online visit:
www.n-somerset.gov.uk/sandpexamination
E-mail comments to: planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.uk
Write to: Planning Policy and Research, Post Point 15, North Somerset Council, Town Hall, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.
Closing date for comments is midnight on 26 February 2016.
Contact North Somerset Council on 01934 426 816.
Yours faithfully
Claire Courtois
Principal Planning Policy Officer]]>
BOB would like to take this opportunity to thank all of you who have taken the time to give us positive feedback over the last year, encouraging us to continue to make information available to you all. We gratefully receive your comments thanking BOB for the work we do, and telling us that you especially look forward to the updates and blogs. We would also like to thank those of you who pass information onto your neighbours, in their preferred format.
For all of you interested in the access to electronic documentation issue, the good news is I've discovered that draft versions of minutes will be available again in the future, thank you to those parish councillors that made this happen. This shows the importance of expressing our views to BPC, of them listening and subsequently publishing informative and timely minutes. I've also finally received both the November and December documentation on 6 January. These are now posted on BOB community website for reference as usual. Another success for us all and a great start to the new year, although some questions still remain unanswered as indicated below.
BPC intermittently updated its website until 2014 when it stopped completely whilst still continuing to pay for a website on a monthly basis. Since May 2013 BOB received electronic documentation via the previous clerk and published it on behalf of the parish council on the BOB community website.
In the absence of a maintained parish website I have, in good faith posted BPC/public electronic documentation on BOB for all to access and I have directly informed hundreds of BOB readers enabling them to link to and read as soon as they were posted. I have delivered this service free of charge for BPC, saving BPC/public website update costs and associated technical support costs, it has also reduced access for electronic documentation requests to the clerk thereby saving BPC/public the cost of answering numerous enquiries. The BOB community website has also helped Bleadon residents to receive timely best practice access to electronic information.
Despite BPC knowing the above, and knowing that the electors of Bleadon would be affected by the halt in the delivery of electronic documentation process in October, it didn't have the courtesy to let me/us/public know that they were going to change the process or what benefit the change would bring. It also has not told BOB/us/public what the new process for public access to electronic documentation will be. Although the December minutes, just received, go part way to explaining:
Minutes 14 December 2015 (received 6 January 2016): 279.15.3 "Cllr Gutsell – concern expressed that draft minutes are not being supplied to Bleadon BOB prior to the meeting. The Chairman expressed concern at the content of an email sent to the clerk by “Bleadon BOB” and read the email out to the Council. It was noted by the Chair that once the parish website is operational, the minutes will be published thereon. Some councillors expressed support for the Clerk and others for the publication of draft minutes as soon as possible. It was proposed that the draft minutes first go to the Chair of the respective committee and Council as soon as possible; then a week prior to the next Council meeting the minutes will sent to councillors and made available to parishioners on the parish website. A majority agreed with this decision."(nb: see posted comments below this blog for a copy of email that BOB sent)
Thank you councillor Claire Gutsell for raising this very important public communication issue under 'Any Other Business', and thanks to supporting councillors, for bringing it to some form of resolution, especially with regards to the draft documentation and its timely publication. It should be noted that at the time these minutes were written and distributed there was no maintained parish website.
Minutes 14 December 2015 (received 6 January 16). The Clerk has been in touch with Webglu and the site should be up and running soon.So the questions remaining are:
- How will BOB/public will be informed that electronic documentation has been posted to read prior to each monthly/annual/etc. meeting? If no informative mechanism is in place then every person will have to work out a date, try the website, if the documentation is there great, if not they'd have to keep trying until such time it is posted. A less effective system than the previous system of being informed by the clerk. There are various mechanisms that can be used, so when BPC tell me the process, or I find out, I'll let you know.
- How will BPC work with the community website/BOB to ensure that there is minimal duplication of website content, maintenance effort or BPC money?
- How was a long-standing public facing process stopped by one person (or more?) without without full council approval, and without warning or explanation to the public or the service provider (BOB)? i.e. the flow of electronic documentation from BPC to its electors, via BOB, in October. Hopefully this type of process/procedural situation won't arise again.
- Why have subsequent email requests for electronic documentation, and confirmation of the new BPC process for access to information, not have been responded to by either the clerk or councillors? Obviously BOB correspondence was read and some queries raised at a meeting and resolved, thank you, but they have not been communicated back to me/BOB, a member of the public. and a service provider, only minimally via late publication of minutes.
- Why was it verbally agreed at meeting, although not minuted or communicated to BOB, that BPC had set up a delayed, less efficient system for BOB/public instead of instructing the clerk to send them directly to BOB? (Thank you councillor ID Clarke for sending me the November and December minutes). It's my understanding that the police, North Somerset council, press, etc. still receive the faster documentation process via the clerk, a distribution list that we/BOB were part of previously. I would like to think that as Bleadon electors pay for a clerk, and the associated costly IT equipment used to deliver documentation, that we would be the priority with regards to communicating what is being undertaken on our behalf. Hopefully when the new access to electronic documentation process is declared this will resolved will all having equal status..
BOB will keep you posted as to if/when we receive explanations to the above.
A great start to the New Year. BOB looks forward to receiving your continued suggestions, comments and support for the coming year.
------------------------------------------------
3rd January 2016
According to CPALC (Communities, Parish and Local Councils)
"There is however an absolute right to access, view andcopy the minutes whether UNAPPROVED or APPROVED. It is a criminal offence to prevent these rights from being exercised."
So without publication on BOB (or the costly PC website...still waiting update 2 years on) everyone will now potentially need to make separate and individual requests to read documentation (costly and time consuming for all)......
Alternatively, since 2014 the public are now legally allowed to attend meetings and video them for broadcast.....!
Here are some links to relevant 'Modernising Government' documents:
Local Government Transparency Code - House of Commons - see 2.2
Openness Guide - Department for Communities and Local Govenment (DCLG) - see part 4
Model Publication Scheme - Information Commisioners Office (ICO)
The Essential Clerk Booklet - Society of Local Council Clerks (SLCC)
Quality Council Scheme Review - National Association of Local Councils (NALC)
Councillors Guide 2015/16 - Local Government Association (LGA)
Good Councillors Guide - NALCandAddendum
Localism in Practice (case studies) - NALC
What are Local Councils - NALC
CPALC - It's your Parish CouncilandMeetings and The Parish Clerk
1972 Local Government Act - see part 228
Naming and registering websites - see 3.2
Code of Practice on Local Authority Publicity - DCLG
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy New Year
For those unable to get to see the village notice boards.
Please find attached (above) a photo from village notice board of the agenda for Bleadon Parish Council Finance and Personnel meeting to be held Monday January 4th 2016 at 7.30pm? In Bleadon Youth Club. Apologies for the quality, but in the absence of having agenda/minutes sent to me I had to take a photo of the notice board and it was raining!
In a current change of regular practice of the last three years, the new clerk has decided not to routinely send BOB a copy of meeting agenda or minutes for publication and only post agenda on village notice boards within the minimum legal time period i.e. three days. This gives little time to no time for the public to interact with the process hence why BOB lobbied the previous clerk to create the previous more open and accessible system that has now been changed.
BOB has been asking since October the reason for the change and has raised concerns to the clerk and council about the departure from officially recommended clerk and council best practice, and it's reduction in communication transparency and openness, but has not received a full explanation for this change of policy and how it benefits Bleadon. FYI, BOB is still awaiting November and December minutes of the main council meeting to make available/circulate to you all.
No longer a 'quality council' BPC seems to have returned to following procedures enshrined in the dated 1972 Local Govenment Act instead of following and supporting the various modernising government initiatives.
Link to BeInvolved Home Page
Link to BOB Parish Council page
-------------------------------------
BOB Response to comments made by Ian Findlay on this blog post (3-4 January 2016)
[Ian Findlay] Your opening remark and quote from CPALC implies that Bleadon Parish Council have committed an absolute offence in not publishing minutes on your web site. Having read the act and looked at the circumstances I can find no evidence to substantiate any such allegation. I will of course stand corrected but can find nothing in the act that suggests any local council minutes or agendas MUST be published on
privately owned web sites by the Clerk or Bleadon Parish Council (BPC)
[BOB reply] Firstly, this is not a case of BPC publishing minutes on my website, it is a legal access to information, transparency and openness issue. I will try to respond to your points in each paragraph below.
[BOB reply] There are legal requirements that members of the public have access to agendas, minutes, etc. which I, as a member of the public and on behalf of BOB readers, request and then subsequently publish on my website. The 1972 Act was written before accessible public electronic information systems were developed. Therefore it is current recommended legal and/or best practice by government and other professional bodies for PCs to publish this information on a website (see modernising government documents on the blog post above, especially the ICO document and transparency code). Bleadon.org.uk was the original village website, taken on from Bob McKay. I believe it was created before BPC decided to create their own website(s) as part of their Quality Council status bid. I independently publish public information and send it to BOB readers. In the absence of BPC being able to update their own website for nearly two years I have continued to deliver this public service, free of charge despite BPC paying a web company to host their out of date pages during this time.
[Ian Findlay] I am aware that you do have access to an electronic set of agendas and you only have to ask your contacts and would be furnished with them something that was confirmed during the last BPC meeting. However this would be on a private sharing and would not commit BPC to showing any favouritism to any particular private web site. I can only conclude that the manner in which you have gone about this, ie taking a
photo of the agenda and posting it with such comments, is intended to create mischief and distrust of the Bleadon Parish Council (BPC), a course of action I personally find extremely unhelpful distasteful and
unjustified for this village.
[BOB reply] My access to PC electronic information is via the proper officer, i.e. the clerk, which I have requested. This is not a matter of favouritism it is a matter of legal access to public information as and when it is produced by the council (see ICO Model Publication scheme). This can be obtained directly by being sent the document by the clerk, or by being informed that the information is available to download from the PC website via social media, or other means. As always I'm happy to attend a meeting to discuss how this could most efficiently happen.
[BOB reply] The last couple of months I have not always been sent copies of electronic agendas/minutes by the current clerk, even when requested, as the clerk has changed the established process, which is why I'm still asking for them and having to guess future meetings or find notices on the notice board. Bruce Poole sent out the agenda and minutes in a timely manner (to various members of the public including me) to enable greater public interaction.
[BOB reply] With regards confirmation at the last BPC meeting, under the current clerk system until the minutes have been drafted and ratified, over one month after the meeting, they will not be sent out to the public (I am still waiting for Novembers minutes). So the clerk and councillors have not officially communicated this new information to me, or the public, at this point in time. My official public point of contact is, and rightly always has been the clerk, who has now changed the process and not sent me a copy of the recent agenda/minutes requested. I was only aware of Mondays 4/1/2016 finance meeting having looked at the notice board today and so the photo was the most expedient way to inform the wider Bleadon public as the meeting is tomorrow (especially given it's importance for budget and precept setting).
[BOB reply] There is no favouritism with regards a private web site, I'm a member of the public requesting public information to be communicated to the public as is every public persons legal right. I am still awaiting conformation as to whether I (and other individuals) will now have to repeatedly and randomly ask for documentation for each meeting until they are provided, at some point each month, or if I will be automatically notified as was the previous clerk process. FYI, I am sure given your role and experience that if there are meetings due to take place for which an appropriate notice has not yet been legally posted it will potentially invalidate any resolutions made at those meetings. Surely it also makes sense to encourage greater public participation through transparency and openness to post Notice of Meetings and Agenda as far and widely as possible and not restrict it to minimum 3 days before.
[Ian Findlay] The BPC have been decimated by the resignation of the Clerk and so many Councillors in the last election. The new Councillors and Clerk are finding their feet at a rapid rate of knots but they are being hindered by inherited problems that need to be rectified before they can move forward as an effective open council. I have sat at the meetings and listened to the concerns of the Council and how eager they are to get it right, perhaps if you attended meetings you would have a greater understanding. One such issue as we are aware is the BPC website which has been an issue of contention for some time. The council is working
hard to turn this round and be able to publish all village communications on this site, this will enable you and the village to view the correspondence and download and publish it on their own web sites. Not forgetting that there is nothing to stop anyone else opening another village web site that I know of but I doubt would be as comprehensive as yours. It is important however that BPC retain ownership of the initial documentation something that can only be assured of by having publishing rights on its own website.
[BOB reply] I do agree it was a great pity that many outgoing councillors chose to leave without offering to hand over their knowledge and training, especially after committing BPC to a new significant website development expenditure. You may be correct that the current BPC is attempting to publish council information on its website (again see ICO document), as it did several years ago, but the fact is it is still struggling to deliver and the ongoing question of maintenance will also need to be publicly answered. The current minutes on the BPC website are dated 2014, it still has all the old councillors, clerk and associated information on it.It should also be noted that if a PC has a website with a .gov.uk domain (not essential) that is not suitably maintained then the domain name may be removed from them by the authorities.
[BOB reply] I'm still offering my expertise and support and despite me agreeing with the previous council to attend website meetings in 2013, no meeting date/time was ever offered. I did have a productive informal meeting last October with a current councillor and received informal feedback but as the minutes are yet to be published, nearly two months on, I'm still officially none the wiser as to what the council is trying to achieve, when or by whom, nor is the general public. I'm trying to continue to deliver the service that I did via Bruce Poole on behalf of BPC, but the new clerk has stated, via her previous email correspondence, that she has decided not to continue this process, consequently offering a severely restricted and potentially non-compliant information service to the public.
[BOB reply] I'm still awaiting confirmation from the clerk and/or councillors as to whether this change has been agreed by councillors or whether we can resume where Bruce Poole left off. I must state again, this is not a website issue, it is an access to public information issue highlighting legal and transparency issues. BPC may produce the documents but at the end of the day these are public documents that any member of the public can legally request and copy, which I have done via the clerk.
[Ian Findlay] Your web site and the information on it is very good and I applaud you for it. I use it, as do other villagers and visitors, however it is your web site. It does not mean your web site is the official voice of Bleadon. It does allow residents to express opinions but publication is subject to your editing rights. The proper way to express opinions and have a say in BPC matters is to attend the meetings and hear first hand the deliberations of the council. Of course you can video the proceedings and publish it but as the average public attendance at meetings is about 8 residents out of over 1000 I doubt this would create muchinterest.
[BOB reply] Thank you for your compliments. Many people, like myself, may be unable to attend meetings on the specific date and time that the council chooses. Also, just because eight people attend doesn't mean that only eight people are interested in what the council are doing (E.g. the public meetings for planning/housing development(s), bus service and public request for election in 2013). With informative and timely agendas/minutes, etc. the main points and decisions can be disseminated quickly to many people to read when their schedules allow (see ICO Model Publication Scheme). Although technically unnecessary with the production of informative and timely minutes, video coverage may remove any ambiguity about what and why issues were resolved in a more prompt fashion than waiting for minutes to be produced over a month later, or over a year in the case of annual meetings. (Please read the Openness document from DCLG).
[Ian Findlay] You have shown much interest in the BPC and been hyper critical from a distance. I cannot understand if you feel so strongly why you are not standing to be cooped onto the council. With your knowledge and expertise I am sure you would be an asset to it. It would also give you a far better opportunity to express your views and a better understanding of the constraints and operating procedures encountered by BPC. Of course it is voluntary and is often a thankless task. There are, as you know, current vacancies.
[BOB reply] I make no apology for my continued public scrutiny and support of PC matters or indeed other public bodies, especially as all current best practice advice is encouraging openness and transparency in delivering increased localism. (see Localism in Practice by NALC). I attend PC meetings when able and have always willingly offered my professional information management knowledge, experience and services within both local and national government freely to BPC, and support them where I can as a member of the public. The fact that I agreed a timely process with Bruce Poole for electronically publishing the BPC agenda/minutes and other information free of charge for many years shows my support, especially as the PC website has not been updated for two plus years. A person doesn't have to be a parish councillor to perform a community service which is of benefit to the public as many other local volunteers prove, especially if there is demand for professional skills outside of those of the councillors. I believe that the PC needs a more open engagement with the community to be able to utilise their skill sets, of which I am sure there are many untapped resources within our parish. (Refer to the incomplete 2005 Parish Plan process, only briefly revisited by PC in 2009 for QC re-accreditation).
[Ian Findlay] I am not a Parish Councillor but am an employee, I have in the past been on the BPC so understand all the frustrations, all my comments are based on experience and knowledge gained by attending the BPC meetings in person as a member of the public.
[BOB reply] My current frustrations, and those of some BOB readers, is that somehow, during the notice period handover/exit strategy from Bruce to the new clerk (an employee) all electronic notice of meeting/agenda/minute processes seem to have been stopped with no explanation other than the new clerk has decided that there should be a new process. Legal, best practice and professional bodies all publish information on the web that is easily accessible and support the previous working process. Surely the newly suggested restrictive process by the clerk is not in the public's best interest.
[Ian Findlay] I hope Bleadon residents and yourself find my comments useful and informative
[BOB reply] I am sure you agree that this written exchange, although informative, is very time consuming for both of us. If you, or indeed any councillors have any further queries following my response, please feel free to give me a ring so that we can discuss more easily and to avoid any miscommunication.
]]>
]]>
This consultation is open from 9 Nov 2015 at 10:00 to 29 Jan 2016 at 17:00.]]>
NORTH SOMERSET CORE STRATEGY CONSULTATION ON CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGES TO REMITTED POLICIES CS6, CS14, CS19, CS28, CS30, CS31, CS32, CS33
The Core Strategy is the strategic planning document for North Somerset covering the period 2006-2026 and was adopted in 2012.
As a result of a legal challenge, it has been necessary to review a number of policies and to propose some changes. The most significant of these is that the number of homes required over the plan period has been increased to 20,985 from 14,000. This revised number is now formally part of the plan. The next stage is to review the other remitted policies in the light of this change. This is to find out if the need to accommodate a larger number of homes means that we need to change the strategy for how these homes will be delivered across North Somerset.
The Council has set out which changes it proposes to make and is now seeking your views on both the general approach we have taken and also the proposed changes themselves.
The policies concerned are:-
CS6 Green BeltCS14 Distribution of new housingCS19 Strategic gapsCS28 Weston-super-MareCS30 Weston VillagesCS31 Clevedon, Nailsea and PortisheadCS32 Service VillagesCS33 Infill villages, smaller settlements and countrysideAll representations received will be forwarded to the new planning Inspector who will undertake the examination of the proposed policy changes, arrange hearings as appropriate and make recommendations. The Council will then be able to re-adopt these remitted policies.
The last day for comments isFriday 18 December.The easiest way to respond to the document is online.
Comments can also be emailed to planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.ukor sent to Planning Policy Team, North Somerset Council, Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ.
To view background documents relating to the re-examination of the remitted policies visit the CouncilsCore Strategy webpage. If you require any further information on this consultation please contact Michael Reep on 01934 426775 or emailmichael.reep@n-somerset.gov.uk]]>
I’m a qualified cycle instructor delivering Bikeability (previously Cycling Proficiency) to our North Somerset schools. My son hasn’t had the opportunity to take part in the Bikeability scheme at his school so I am offering to run a course in Bleadon on Tuesday 27th October for any other Bleadon children or grandchildren between the ages of 10 and 14 who have also missed out!
Bikeability has 3 levels, Level 1 is for children to show us that they are able to ride their bikes with skills needed on the road, ie. Stopping, starting, looking around (particularly behind them) and able to ride with one hand for signalling. Level 2 is taking the children on the road to use those skills which I would do around Bleadon village. More information on Bikeability is HERE.
They would need roadworthy bikes although I may be able to help if a child doesn’t have one.
I would deliver Level 1 in the car park between 9 and 10.30 am and Level 2 between 10.30 am and 4pm with a break for lunch (children to bring a packed lunch or pop home and return). The cost for the whole day would be £15 and would include badges and certificates.
To confirm, I am DBS certified and am also fully insured with documentation you are more than welcome to view. In the last two weeks I have delivered Bikeability Level 2 in both Hutton and Uphill schools and keen to teach as many of our children as possible to ride safely on the roads.
If anyone is interested, please contact me on 07976 410720 or via caroline.thewhitehouse@gmail.comfor further information. If you aren’t available on Tuesday but would be interested in taking part at a later date, please get in touch.
Many thanks,
Caroline Lance]]>
]]>
Bleadon Rights Of Way Group (BROW)
Will be clearing the Axe footpath on Tuesday morning 8th September meet in the car park near Bridge Garage at 10.30 risk assessment will be completed and tools and protective equipment supplied. This is a beautiful walk that has been closed for a while and we want to restore it for all to enjoy. It is walk able at the moment but lets give it a new lease of life and make it even more accessible anyone wishing to help is welcome if we have moved on and working follow the sound of the strimmers and find us. If it is inclement weather we will not be there ....it is voluntary
Ian Findlay (Village Ranger)
ian.findlay@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
01934812862
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bleadon Natural History Walk/Talk Wanted
I am the Chairman of Weston-super-Mare Archaeological & Natural History Society. In the past we have had a Natural History Secretary who would devise and lead walks for our members. Currently we are unable to fill this post, and I am trying to organise about 3 walks, the first one to take place in November, anywhere in the North Somerset area, and the Bleadon area would be interesting.
What I am looking for is someone with a knowledge of the area and natural history to lead the walk. I am hoping you may know of someone who may be able to do this for us, obviously we would pay the person, but we do not have a big budget and would have to pass it on to the members taking part in the walk. The walk would ideally be between 2-5 miles. The important bit being the knowledge of the natural history. Kind RegardsJenny Kingsbury.j.kingsbury@virgin.net------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For more information onBleadon Public Rights of WayandBleadon Walks and Wildlifeclick links.Bleadon volunteers cleared River Axe footpath
on 8th/11th September 2015]]>
UPDATE FEBRUARY 2016
This application has been revisedsee new blog post here
Also, at Bleadon Parish Council meeting on 8 Feb 2016,North Somerset Councillor Terry Porter reported that the Bleadon Hill Development for 79 Houses was likely to be turned down by March Planning Committee on the basis of landscape and sustainability issues, however the developer was likely to appeal and had already done so on the basis of non-determination. As regards Wentwood Drive, this was more difficult and rated as 50:50 for approval or refusal, a bat survey had been completed and would change what could be done. The number of houses had now been reduced to 50 by developer and development was unlikely to be refused on landscaping/sustainability issues and developer was meeting with highways on 9 Feb. This all echoed what had been previously reported at the 11 Januarymeeting as minuted by BPC, so no real extra detail.
You may also be interested in a BBC report affecting a development in Devon,I saw this on BBC news on 15 January and thought of the proposed drainage solution for Highfield/Wentwood Bleadon Hill development?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35318276
Terry Porter also reported that from the recent Sites and Policies consultation, no new areas had been identified so the status of an infill village for future development should not be affected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE - OCTOBER 2015
See this update on another application for 79 houses on Bleadon Hill
More Environmenal impact reports and information on public transport deals
--------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE - See What's New
The Action Group has organised a public meeting at Weston Football Club, Winterstoke Road on Monday 15th June at 7.00pm. Doors open from 6.00 pm. North Somerset Council will be asked to send representatives. All welcome.
ANOTHER APPLICATION BY PROPERTY DEVELOPERS ON BLEADON HILL FIELDS
Outline Planning permission is being sought for another 60 Houses on Bleadon Hill.The Land is off Totterdown Lane at the top of Wentwood Drive & Highfield Road on Bleadon Hill adjacent to Hillcote Estate
URGENT DEADLINE for comment
The deadline for comments on an Outline Planning Application (15/P/0983/O) for 60 Houses off Wentwood Drive & Highfield Road and adjacent to Hillcote Estate on Bleadon Hillis 4th June (extended to June 22nd, Extended again to 30th)!
UPDATE - See What's New
Following the 79 houses application on Bleadon Hill, BOB has been alerted to a new applicationon Bleadon Hill fields by property developers, this time for 60 houses on land between Wentwood Drive/Highfield Road and Hillcote Estate. This application was apparently posted on NS planning website in late April when local politicians were fully occupied with election fever and with the public focussed on an approaching May Day Holiday.
BOB has been asked to help publicise this latest attempt to blight our rural landscape and is informed that no local neighbourhood notices have been posted for this application and residents have only just been alerted by a recentWeston Mercury report
PLEASE take the time ASAP to make comments on this application via this link (or to the postal address below) and alsoinform your neighbours and friends to do likewise. No doubt comments previously made on the other Bleadon Hill development application for 79 houses will be as valid for this new additional proposal and our local politicians will hopefully also agree that this is unwanted and un-needed. BUT comments need to be made AGAIN otherwise the prospect of connecting Bleadon Village to Bleadon Hill becomes closer, which would changeour ruralvillage landscape forever.
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
If you do make comments on this BOB blog (below), please also make sure that they are made to, and appear on, the North Somerset website for formal consideration via 15/P/0983/O
Also contact the Town & Parish Councillors and North Somerset Councillors via links below and let them know your views too.
The Land is at the top of Wentwood Drive & Highfield Road on Bleadon Hill adjacent to Hillcote Estate and is actually inWeston-super-Mare Town Councilboundary and next toBleadon Parish Councilboundary.The relevantNorth Somerset Council wards are Hutton & Locking and WSM Uphilland MP is John Penrose.
This is yet another major potential development application in our area so please take the time to comment online and/or email or write to your respective councillors with your views to be considered as part of the official planning process.
TheBleadon area has potentially 205+ new properties 'planned' including these two Bleadon Hill proposals, Bleadon Quarry and potentially Amesbury Drive (+ other 'infill' ones) to come!
This seems very excessive considering that the Bleadon Parish 2011 Census recorded 530 properties. This would imply a potential40% build increase in our area without any apparentinfrastructure growth to cope with the population & traffic that mayalso come with these properties!
How did we get to this? See here for the battle our MP's are having with Government Planning Inspectorate.
Please forward or print this to others you know who maybe interested.
]]>
Liam Fox addressed Parliament, 15th December 2014, on what is now a planning policy mess in North Somerset and you might be interested in what he said. Seehere for details:
The Hansard transcript for this address can be seen here. (PDF)
It might be helpful if you could contactDr Fox and raise your personal concerns.
Full list of identified sites (which could be developed can be found from the attached MD/11:
http://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/Environment/Planning_policy_and-research/localplanning/Pages/Core-Strategy-Hearing-documents-January-2015.aspx
And on hereare links to latest North Somerset consultations including the 'new' Sites & Development Policies for Core Strategy.
Consequently, I hope 'our' Bleadon Resident views from 2005 ParishPlan will have also been submitted to be included in this Localism process by BPC and that it was not just a means toward a 'Quality Council' end. As far as I'm aware the BPC Action Plan does not seem to have been updated, and republished, since BPC were last re-accredited in 2009.]]>
UPDATE - MARCH 2016
(post meeting note: NS unanimous vote to refuse permission but as stated below this is going to a future appeal decision process)
District councillors are going to discuss whether to approve or refuse the application on Wednesday 9/3/16 at 2.30pm at Weston Town Hall in Walliscote Grove Road. People who wish to speak about the application must inform the council before the meeting. Or go onlineand add a new comment
Apparently, fromthe Committee reportobtained via the application webpagethe application will be dealt with on appeal, the report states:
"The applicant has lodged an appeal against the failure of the Council to decide the planning application within the statutory determination period. This means that the Council cannot decide the application and a decision will instead be made by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. The appeal will be a public inquiry at a date to be confirmed. The Council can therefore only consider what it would have concluded had it been able to determine the application. This report describes and assesses the planning application in the usual way, but the recommendation is adapted to reflect the appeal process. However, if given the opportunity to make a decision, the application would have been recommended for REFUSAL. The full recommendation is set out at the end of this report."
Please note: This is a separate application to the recent update sent onWentwood Drive/Highfield Road proposed development
UPDATE - OCTOBER 2015
Things may have appeared quiet but from a highways advice reportrecently posted on the application webpage, the developers heeding highways previous advice to refuse, have been setting up a deal with Crosville to provide a new bus service for the proposed development (and also the other 60 houses proposed on Wentwood)thereby hopefully mitigating the un-sustainability aspect of the original Highways report which now seems to have given NS Highways a change of heart! Although developers will only fund the service for 3 years should development be accepted/approved, by when Crosville say the new service will then be commercially viable.....
But what if it isn't and the new residents still use their cars (look at the current poor use of 4a)? Will the houses then be demolished.........
Perhaps developers should also be asked to fund new doctor's surgeries, dentist's, schools etc. etc. that are already creaking throughout the area, perhaps if they did then the scheme may not be quite so financially attractive to them.
Not forgetting of course the complete and tragic loss to future generations of our natural environmental landscape's beauty forever! Hardly compensated for by a small local play space or S106 contribution to Hutton Moor! We are unfortunately witness to the continued erosion of our 'green and pleasant' land.
See also latest ecological mitigation reports on Wentwood application.
........................
Below is copy of an email received by BOB in reply to above and shown for your information
Following Your Bleadon BOB information I asked for advice from my son (who is managing director of a fairly large building company in the UK) ,and regularly involved in trying to buy land and get planning permission.
The report from Highways is simply their position with regards to fundamental design and road safety. The developer has addressed all of their concerns about design of the access – that is a box ticked for the developer, and is just one issue resolved from a technical standpoint. It does not mean that permission will be granted.
Other issues concerning effects upon the countryside and sustainability are more complicated, and to a large degree are subjective. However all planning applications must work within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and also the Local Plan (written and adopted by the Local Authority). North Somerset has its own “Core Strategy” which was adopted in 2012, and although subject to judicial review, only one policy, CS13, relating to “scale of new housing” was found to be unlawful. As a result several policies are under review as they may be affected by CS13. However, “the policies can still be accorded appropriate weight in any decision making….”. In other words, planners or the planning inspectorate use these documents to determine if an application follows the rules/guidelines set out in those documents, with each document given appropriate “weight” in their decision making process. For example if a local authority has a Local Plan but it is not legally adopted, the planning inspectorate can give little or no credence to that document. As North Somerset’s Core Strategy is adopted, it should be used as the main framework for decision making, alongside the NPPF.
As I see it there is fundamentally only 1 factor:- Sustainability
Sustainability is key to the NPPF, and has 3 mutually dependent strands; an economic role, a social role, and an environmental role.
Economically it is relatively easy to see a benefit in building these houses. Additional households means more people spending money in the local shops etc, not to mention short term gains from an employment basis during the construction process. It could, and should, be argued that social benefits are subjective and perhaps better suited to alternative locations. Social factors such as additional pressure on local services such as GPs etc should be considered. It also needs investigating if there is indeed a social need – ie does the Local Authority have a need for additional housing in this area – does it have a 5 year land supply which is adequate to construct sufficient housing for it projected population? This could be key. If there is sufficient land/housing identified for a 5 year period, then there is no social need for this development! Other major developments already planned in the area could be vital to prove that the land supply is already sufficient.
The environmental argument is perhaps the main issue in this application, and is also possibly the most subjective. What one planner believes to be acceptable, another may not (and local residents certainly will not). It is on this point (and possibly the 5 year housing supply) that I would expect the residents and the local planners to concentrate their arguments. This would include such things as …. Having a new bus route is all well and good, and the local roads may not be up to their theoretical capacity, but it still means substantially more car journeys will take place than say 79 houses located in a more sustainable location where more people CAN walk to local services. Planning policies require a set number of parking spaces per dwelling (dependent upon number of bedrooms), which will probably work out at 2 spaces per house. With 79 houses, hence 158 parking spaces (and one assumes 158 cars) how did they only get 43 cars leaving the site every morning? You can prove anything with statistics, although common sense would suggest otherwise. It may be useful to have your own survey and assessment carried out (because the planners won’t). There are also clear policies about building in the countryside….
“Policy GDP/1 –Except where provided for by other policies, built development in the countryside will not be permitted. Where built development in the countryside is proposed, the maintenance of the character and appearance of the countryside and the avoidance of coalescence of settlements will be objectives of any decision on the proposal.”
The applicant already has a landscape mitigation strategy in place, but I would argue that, although you can to a certain extent hide the development by planting trees and hedges, it does not address the fundamental argument that they are building in the countryside. Again having your own study to contradict their argument would be useful. Personally I felt that too many of the photos and arguments used were long range, and did not address the more local issues upon the landscape. It could also be argued that the long range photos which show the areas of existing residential development on Bleadon Hill and beyond, perfectly demonstrate that this site will merge villages together.
Another issue raised by the NPPF is regarding Green Belt land (not sure if this site is classed as green belt, but the principle should hold up). That is :-
Green Belt serves five purposes:
● to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
● to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
● to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
● to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
● to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
The second point of merging urban areas into one another would, in my view, be a strong argument to refuse permission, and is one that should be pushed harder. This development specifically contradicts the NPPF in this matter.
I am not a planning consultant, and indeed would normally be sitting on the other side of the table in these situations, but I would suggest that the local planners will be taking all of the relevant policies and guidelines into account. However with the current political agenda being to relax planning and get more houses built it would be prudent to have a concerted and prolonged dialogue with planners as well as local and county councillors to try to get them on board with the local residents. Ultimately this will probably go to appeal (assuming that the planners do refuse it in the first instance) at which point the planning inspector will rely heavily upon the NPPF. All arguments should therefore, even at this stage, refer back to that document.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf
Happy reading
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weston Mercury report
UPDATE 19TH FEBRUARY 2015
The deadline for comments on the Outline Planning Application for 79 Houses on Bleadon Hillis 25th February, NEXT WEDNESDAY.
I know that many have sent their comments to North Somerset alreadybut, if you haven't yet then please take the time to do so and/or alsoinform your neighbours and friends to do likewise. Comments already submitted include thoserelating to the infrastructure issues, environmental and ecological impact, ancient burial ground, covenantsand the possibility that the additional lowerfield may be purchased, whichover time maybring the developmentclose to Purn Way and thus open the likelihood of connecting Bleadon Village to Bleadon Hill, which would changeour ruralvillage landscape forever.
If you have made comments on this BOB blog (below), please make sure that they also appear on the
North Somerset website for formal consideration (15/P/0167/O):
If you prefer to post your comments then the postal address is:
North Somerset CouncilDevelopment Management
Post Point 15
Town Hall
Weston-super-Mare
BS23 1UJ
------------------
FYI. This application was considered by the Bleadon Parish Council on 9th February, who decided to reject the application, the meeting was well attended and draft minutes will be posted herewhen published by the clerk.
------------------
WSM Town Council met on 11th February and have published their decision already as follows:
OBJECTION: The Town Council do not support the application on the following grounds:-
The site affects an SSSI.The site is within an AONB and will affect the visual amenity adversely.A development of this size would join up and damage separate identities of two settlementsThe development is outside the 'development boundary' and therefore contrary to the Local Plan.The development is 'out of character' with Bleadon Hill and would be to the detriment of its identity as a settlement.------------------
LATEST NEWS
Planning Application 15/P/0167/O has now been submitted, Please make your comments to North Somerset online via this link and before 25th February 2015
Also contact the Town & Parish Councillors and North Somerset Councillors via links below and let them know your views too.
Outline Planning permission is sought for 79 Houses on Bleadon Hill
The Land is on Bleadon Hill opposite Hillcote Estate and is split between Bleadon Parish Counciland Weston-super-Mare Town Council. TheNorth Somerset wards are Hutton & Locking and WSM Clarence & Uphill and MP John Penrose.
The application for outline planning permission for 79 houses on Bleadon Hill that spans both Bleadon Parish and WSM Town Council boundaries has now been submitted to North Somerset Unitary Authority.
This is yet another major potential development application in our area against our Parish Planso please take the time to comment online and/or email or write to your respective councillors with your views. If you previously made comments to the developers website these should now be made again to North Somerset to be considered as part of the official planning process.
Please forward or print this to others you know who maybe interested. The deadline for comment is 25th February 2015
----------------
DECEMBER 2014
More details and opportunity to make your views known viahttp://landatbleadonhill.co.uk/
NB:This developer website link may now no longer be live & you should comment to North Somerset via links above
PLEASE NOTEFEEDBACK BELOW FROM A RESIDENT
"Thanks for the information. I have completed their comment form. However there are 2 issues with this form that we should all be aware of:
1. There is no email link i.e. “Send” button on the page, so you have to save the form as a Word document, then attach it to a separate email to the developer.
2. HOWEVER the email link at the foot of the page is wrong – if you click on it, it goes to the wrong email address – it links to comment@landatchudleigh.co.uk You need to manually enter the email address - comment@landatbleadonhill.co.uk
I have informed the developer but I think we should all know. Another “accident” in procedure? If they don’t get any objections by email then they won’t think that there are any. Wrong!! Also the email link goes to the wrong email address – it links to comment@landatchudleigh.co.uk "]]>
http://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/Environment/Planning_and_development_management/Pages/Planning-Home-page.aspx
Application informationhere
]]>
Bleadon resident Patrick White, assisted by local businesses, has made a poignant tribute to those from Bleadon who died in 'The Great War' (1914-1918).
Please visit and make a donation in person(box removed overnight for security)
or online to 'Help for Heroes'
]]>
UPDATE 27 NOV 2020 -20/P/2727/EXTGRANTED:
"The time limit for implementation of planning consent ref no 14/P/0746/F2 is therefore extended to 1 May 2021 in accordance with part 3 section 17 the Business and Planning Act 2020."
See Notice of Decision and Delegated Officer Report. NB: No BPC comments have been posted on the BPC or NSC websites, nor in NSC reports at this time (Despite being on BPC's16 Nov 20 Agenda?) [UPDATE 16 NOV (Mins 337.6) state, "Details noted", i.e. no comment?]
UPDATE 31 OCT 2020 -20/P/2727/EXT Application for Additional Environmental Approval to extend the time limit for implementation of planning permission 14/P/0746/F2.
This was on Bleadon Parish Council's 12 Oct 20 and16 Nov 20Agenda - no comments yet posted on NSC website, and no published BPC minutes as Fri 20 Nov?
This application is outside thesettlement boundary yet, it appears that Bleadon Parish Council made no official comment on the original major application,14/P/0746/F2(not on NSC or past BPC published minutes?) See Settlement Boundary Review blog.
UPDATE MAR 2017 - Section 106 modificationandRequest todelay payment, i.e. "... to alter the trigger date for the payment of the remainder of the Highway Contribution so that the remainder of the Highway contribution shall be payable on the date that the Development is open to the public"
"General Observation Comment: Bleadon Parish Council does not to support or oppose this modification, however the Parish Councillors wished it to be noted that they have been told that traffic lights are to be installed at this dangerous junction, funded solely by this s106 money. These lights are urgently required."BPC Comment on S106 Modification, 14 Mar 17 (although not agreed in BPC Mar 17 Full Council Mins, it was in its Planning Mins P65.6?)
UPDATE 24 JULY 2015 - North Somerset approved (with constraints) this application
Decision NoticeandDelegated Officer Reportfrom NS website
This application is outside the settlement boundary yet, it appears that Bleadon Parish Council made no official comment on this major application (See Delegated Officer Report - "Parish Comments None received".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To North Somerset ( email: dccomments@n-somerset.gov.uk )
With reference to :
14/P/0746/F2 Major Development with Environmental Impact Assessment Large scale major application for Leisure complex together with an Environmental Impact Assessment with change of use from agricultural lakes to tourist facility(D2) providing a water-park for cable-tow wake-boarding, water-skiing, canoeing and other non-powered water-based sports with construction of retaining bank for a series of lakes consisting of a long lake for triathlon with 2no islands, a main lake with central island, up to 8 masts for cable-skiing, a balancing lake and a training lake. Works to include erection of club house with showers/wc, restaurant/cafe, equipment hire/shop-(A1), kitchen-(A3 and A4), offices, training facilities and grounds management. Erection of a boat and equipment storage building, boiler room, pumping and control cabins, parking for 65 vehicles, reed-bed treatment plant, associated landscaping with hard-surfaced tracks and water-control features for attenuation of excess water (part retrospective) at Weston Wake Park, Accommodation Road, Bleadon. Notice under Article 8 of Application for Planning Permission accompanied by an Environmental Statement. Members of the public may obtain copies of the Environmental Statement from Bleadon Post Office during normal office hours for a charge of £50 per copy and an electronic version is available by email to info@westonwakepark.co.ukWe are not wholly against this proposal as a potential nice new South-West leisure facility adding interest to residents & tourist alike, but overall the cohesion of the applications documents is poor and certainly not on the residents requested agenda for the 20 year development plan of Bleadon Parish Council.
In brief, we find the application summary misleading. It clearly states 'non-powered water based sports' leading people to believe that this will be a quiet development, with little pollution and facilities that blend into the landscape. However, from reading the application details, and looking at the proposed site images/photos, it appears that this will not be the case and key aspects are unclear.
For example:
- It appears the lakes will be 3 metres (10 feet) above the surrounding ground, not at ground level as the images imply.- This is not really a change of use of the irrigation lakes as firstly they don't exist, secondly this full planning permission is asking for taller/deeper and additional lakes which appear different size and location to the original granted application. - Will there be 3 or 4 lakes, next to the newly proposed two storey building?- Where would the future proposed fishing lake go?- The proposed visual impact images show trees and a new forest that could take decades to establish or look like the proposed image- There are proposed motorised boats towing clients with potentially associated noise and water pollution in the local environment- Leisure hours vary, the application document indicates 6am to 9pm seven days a week, with a restaurant/cafe, with associated licenced drinking, from 9am to 11pm involving noise and traffic to varying degrees for potentially up to 17 hours a day.- Parking indicates 65-85+ cars, 2 LGV and 4 Buses.What are the true figures as documents contradict each other? Where is the simplified information showing the potential ongoing daily effect of these customers not just at peak hours? Trip data shown is based mainly on 1998 data. If one assumes that patrons come for an average of 3 hours per session, during an activity day of 15 hours (8am-9pm) then potentially there could be up to 325-425 vehicles a day visiting the site making a total of 650-850 journeys into and out of the site daily. It is even stated that "There are expected to be times when car overflow is required, which is proposed to be a flexible reinforcement (Hexmat) of the grass field already there." Also I assume that the traffic flow data show that the vehicles keep travelling along the road, not slowing down and turning into/out of Accommodation Road potentially causing traffic jams and more vehicular pollution.- This would not include any issues, including traffic, arising from proposed future developments of fishing customers at the lake; restaurant and bar customers; nor the minibus to/from the railway station. Surely this would have an effect on the road system and surrounding neighbourhood re: pollution e.g. noise, light, traffic, etc.- Documentation indicates that future plans include accommodation for groups, fishing bays and equipment hire.- Will green transportation issues be fully addressed e.g. pedestrian and cycle access.- This application acknowledges that it will affect views from Purn Hill, Uphill, Bleadon Hill and Hellenge Hill even as far as Brent Knoll. Especially as it will now involve buildings, masts and fencing.- During 104 week construction there will be an estimated 18,980 deliveries, approximately 77 maximum movements along Accommodation Road per day (8 deliveries per hour over 10 hr day) with vehicles ranging from 8.4-16.5 metres in length.-The original lakes application was only importing 80,000m3 of soil. This application will be a 2 year development with an estimated 189,800m3 of soil imported from various locations but the undated, or different dates of documentation, make it difficult to ascertain where the soil will come from and how much traffic this will truly create for Accommodation Road and the A370. One document states the majority of soil will come from Wessex Water sewage treatment works extension. Another states that soil will come from Weston Superpond which is on the old Weston and Locking airfield sites for the Weston Village development where two lakes are being built. In another it states earth will be brought in from local building projects.We find that the information supplied with this application doesn't enable the public to make a fully informed decision.
More information and time is needed to assess the real effects on Bleadon's future environment due to the varied amount of documentation, inconsistencies and missing information. Also, many of the scanned documents display incomplete information with appendices missing or poorly referenced which prevents informed comment. I see from recent comments on the NS website that professional organisations also request additional information/reports with regards crime, flood, drainage, wildlife, landscape/environment, disabled access and archaeology.
More detailed comments include:
The Bleadon & Somerset Level's are famous for being LEVEL so the 'Before/After' visual impact interpretation photographs are misleading as the lake 'bunds' are (I believe) intended to be constructed to be 3 metres (10 feet) above ground level (with all the imported soil) So the 'after' photograph provided is a totally false impression. Also, additional fencing may be erected, again spoiling the level view of the site.The noise report states that the noise from the motor boat would be `practically inaudible to the human ear at the nearest noise sensitive property`. If this is to be a motorised application and noise is subsequently an issue for residents, i.e. is audible, will the applicant be asked to remove the boats? If not then this application may be misleading to residents as it is billed as a non-motorised sports facility. Also what effect does the prevailing wind have on noise transmission as this will lead to any noise being magnified affecting the whole of Bleadon?Are there 3 or 4 lakes? different reports state different things and reference is already made to increased use (fishing) in the future which will presumably also increase local traffic. 3 lakes seem to be long, main, balancing (split into two). 4 lakes seem to be long, main, balancing and training? Also appear to be a different and size and location to the original lakes application.How will this also affect the Wessex Water Bleadon Levels enhancement proposals & near SNCI/SSSI?Clearly the original agreed application for Irrigation Lakes and continued farming use (at least since 1658) have not even been completed let alone used, & now a change of use has been applied for. From local hearsay a waterpark was always the intention and like the proposed adjacent Solar Farm, represents another potential sad loss of valuable agricultural/arable farming land for Bleadon (and the UK) leading to more dependence on imports. Surely these type of projects should built on 'brownfield' areas such as Weston Airfield/Hutton Moor (where much of the construction soil may be sourced).Many of the comments applicable to the neighbouring Solar Farm application (under appeal) can equally be applied to this application.Especially as regards the required security, visual impact on landscape and effect on nature & wildlife and archaeology no matter how well it maybe disguised.The unknown increased traffic during the 2 year construction phase, added with unidentified future increases of customer visits, should require an urgent review of the A370/Accommodation Road junction as further collisions to this accident blackspot are inevitable. Add this to the Bridge Road/A370 junction that also needs improvement, exacerbated by the Marshalls Quarry application, a major highway review is needed for Bleadon's transport infrastructure. Also regular weekend Boot Sale traffic at adjoining field throughout the summer will combine to make this junction horrendous as traffic ridiculously is allowed to travel 50-60 mph through it while traffic attempts to turn off it. What is the true/current business plan estimate on the number of customers, e.g. traffic per day, as estimates could be an extra 800 per day at 65 (or is it 85) parking places x 1hr sessions).A current location accident report (2011 provided in application, 3 years ago) is needed and would surely show even more incidents at this locally notorious junction area. Apparently from the report, as if this is OK, ONLY one was a fatality!!Volume of parking spaces do not add up, one document says 65 another 85 another additional overflow parking may be required.Number of employees are also inconsistent between documents one says 12 another 34. More detailed disabled and public access information is also required.Bus services to/via Bleadon are in-frequent and were recently reduced and surrounding footpath maintenance is virtually non existent especially along A370 to Weston. It is suggested that cyclists access the proposed path off the cycle network along a circuitous route on a gravel path - will this be upgraded so that it can be ridden safely? It is suggested pedestrians walk along the narrow, busy Accommodation Road without a pavement to join an existing grass PROW - will either the road or the PROW be upgraded to walk this safely? It is mentioned that construction staff are unlikely to use public transport "due to remoteness of the site and the low number of buses in the area this is not expected to be a well utilised form of transport by the construction staff". So it appears the public transport facilities and green forms of access will need closer examination. Also, without hire equipment, which appears to be a future proposal, it is highly unlikely public transport will be used otherwise!Is all this extra traffic truly factored into carbon footprint calculations, along with energy consumption during operating hours, not to mention noise and light pollution. The frequency of A370 traffic, Aircraft & Rail network already give enough disturbance to our tranquility, why add more noise on the presumptuous basis that it will be at different times, thus of course making noise continuous with no respite!!Potential of increased attraction of criminal activity to the area and need for enhanced security, perhaps 24/7.If the application is successful, how will compliance to all the various facets raised as potential concern be monitored and controlled? Eg: Fuel used, Archaeology, River Axe Water consumption, impact on Flood risk, Nature & Wildlife etc?Given it's budgetary constraints, can/will North Somerset provide resources to monitor and enforce compliance through both development and operation?People do not feel that they've been properly consulted in an easy to understand manner. On 14 April BOB asked for a copy of the presentation given at the Bleadon Parish Council (BPC) Annual Parish Meeting by the applicant, but is still waiting for the information so that it can be made available to all residents not just those who may be able to attend a council meeting. Also, although an article on this application appeared in the Spring Bleadon Village News, published by BPC, it unfortunately neglected to tell people the deadline leaving people feeling that they're now chasing a deadline they didn't feel was coming. It stated 'Alistair and Rob look forward to showing their plans to the public at the Annual Parish meeting on April 14 as well as a few other dates which will be publicised locally'. BPC meetings are renowned for being very difficult for members of the public to interact with. The agenda noted the presentation but didn't state an invitation for a two-way discussion at the meeting which may have misled people into thinking that this was a presentation to the BPC not a neighbourhood consultation enabling the discussion of any public concerns. The minutes of this meeting are also yet to be published and may not be until next year's meeting as last years APM have only just being published.
The BPC conducted a questionnaire of it's residents in 2005 in order to acquire a Quality Council status. This produced results for a 20 year plan for the neighbourhood community that I believe did NOT indicate that this type of development was either anticipated, wanted or needed therefore on that basis alone, surely there should be more informed information for the public to consult and decided upon? Please see http://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishplan.html for further information. Other surrounding villages have published recent neighbourhood plans showing that they are listened to and consulted. Bleadon should be able to do the same.
In conclusion, we feel the application should at this stage be rejected due to the high level of apparent conflicting information issues that have not yet been adequately investigated or explained by the supplied data. Also, given the major nature of this proposal and its complicated and voluminous documentation, perhaps a full neighbourhood consultation similar to that undertaken by Sanders for development on land adjacent to Bleadon Road, and Marshalls for their Quarry proposal, should also be undertaken?
Kind regards,
Link to previous 2011 Application 11/P/0305/F for 3 Irrigation Lakesand FYI there is already an established Wake Parkless than 30 minutes away at Middlemoor that now considers Cycling and Athletics a growth areaso this could be a potential white elephant for Bleadon.
Link to related blog
More Blog posts]]>
North Somerset call for sites 2014
As part of the plan making process the local planning authority is encouraged by government to undertake a ‘call for sites’. This is to identify potential sites and broad locations which might be suitable for a range of uses including residential and economic uses such as retail, leisure, cultural, office and warehousing. The call for sites should be aimed at as wide an audience as is practicable so that those not normally involved in property development have the opportunity to contribute.
All sites submitted will be assessed in terms of their development potential, their suitability for development and the likelihood of development coming forward. This will then provide an up-to-date evidence base to underpin local plan policies and allocations, especially the forthcoming Sites and Policies Plan.
In accordance with the government’s National Planning Practice Guidance 2014, the current call for sites has extended the scope of the 2010 exercise which was purely for residential sites. Individuals and organisations are encouraged to submit potential sites, although there is no need to resubmit sites which we are already aware of, unless details have changed.
If your organisation has any sites or broad locations you would like to submit, please go to the Council’s website at www.n-somerset.gov.uk/planningpolicy - just follow the link to the call for sites 2014. All sites should be submitted by 30 May 2014.
If you need any further information, please contact the Planning Policyand Research team on 01934 426331 or by emailing planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.uk.]]>
Thanks for your interest in the Bleadon Levels Wildlife Enhancement project,
I've attached a draft plan for reference. The project proposes to improve Wessex Water landholdings adjacent to the Sewage Treatment works for its nature conservation value. There is currently a considerable amount of pedestrian use of the sea wall as well as some motorbike use. Some of this is undesirable because of disturbance to birds (more so in the southern section). As a compromise Wessex Water are considering developing pedestrian access along the sea wall in the northern section (but with gates to prevent motorbike use). This access would link up with existing rights of way to create a circular walk. The southern section would be completely closed off using gates so there would be no public access.
Other proposals are to introduce grazing (2) to improve the quality of the saltmarsh in one location (stock proof fencing will be required to achieve this and could be located at the base of the sea wall on its western side), as well as possibly raising water levels in the ditches (3) and in the conservation meadow (1). We have consulted initially with the regulatory bodies, who have been positive about the proposals and we are now consulting with the wider local community.
If possible and in due course, I would like to meet with the Bleadon Parish Council to discuss the proposals.
Kind regards,
Nichola Davies
BSc. Applied Ecology MSc. Behavioural Ecology MCIEEM
Davies Ecology Ltd 7284190
Tel. 0117 279 2470 / 07811 403 652 / davies-ecology@sky.com
more Beinvolved posts]]>
"As part of North Somerset Councils planning policy on renewable and low carbon energy generation, we have produced a Supplementary Planning Document for wind turbine developments. This is to let you know of the first opportunity to comment on this draft document. This consultation period will run for 6 weeks from today until Monday 14 April. You can access the document and find out how to submit your comments via our consultation system: http://consult-ldf.n-somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/wt_dspd/consultationHome If you would like to discuss any matters relating to this document, please contact: Jessica.Harper@n-somerset.gov.uk / tel: 01934 426905. Should you wish to be removed from our emailing list for consultations then please email planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.uk. Jessica Harper Sustainability Coordinator Planning Policy and Research North Somerset Council Town Hall Walliscote Grove Road Weston-super-Mare BS23 1UJ"
More beinvolved posts]]>
The floods on The Bleadon & Somerset Levels would seem also now to be affecting our Hedgerows as Farmers & Landowners seek for permission to remove them so they can dredge the rhynes to assist with land drainage.
Should you wish to comment to North Somerset, here are some recent requests from Slade Barns, Shiplate Road(also here) and South Hill Farm.
It's definitely a difficult decision and getting the right balance between nature/wildlife and business, here is what Campaign for Rural Englandsay, Hedgelink alsoRivers Trustand Natural England
Why not also take a browse of our Walks & Wildlife page
more beinvolved blogs
]]>
The actual expenditure in 2011/12 was £38,752 (within income received).
The actual expenditure in 2012/13 was £48,290 (over income by £7,397).
The expenditure budget for 2013/14 is £40,065 which hopefully will be within income received by the end of March.
Naturally, we all expect that the proposed expenditure for 2014/15 will be within the total income received but clearly councillor's are now requesting additional funding to be made available for items not yet 'officially' declared.
So what is the additional funding requested to be spent on and how will it be paid? What will be the impact (if any) on our parish reserves? We don't want a precept increase either so should the whole expenditure budget be critically reviewed for essential and statutory activities? E.g. It appears IT & Admin costs are increasing yet communications to the public, e.g. newsletter, clearer informative minutes, open consultations, are ever decreasing!
We sincerely hope that all BPC expenditure, but especially that from reserves, is clearly related back to the 20 year Parish Plan, which originally had input from residents via the 2005 Questionnaire process (produced to gain Quality Council Accreditation), see http://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishplan.html. Any new expenditure or priorities should then be discussed and/or openly communicated in relation to this plan i.e. what is being dropped or becoming a lesser priority to accommodate new proposals instead of requesting more money from residents via precept or drawing on our reserves.
The last BPC Action Plan was last updated and published in 2009! (coincidentally & perhaps only for Quality Council re-accreditation) so hopefully we will see a copy of the latest and current Action Plan published and included as a regular newsletter feature very soon.
FYI, as usual, the Agenda for 27/01/14 meeting date is on http://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishcouncil.html and previous minutes for 7th November 2013 are also shown here http://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishcouncil.html#previous. The latter mentions an unsupported proposal by the Finance Committee Chairman to reduce the precept for 2014/15 to £36,000, the committee resolving instead to keep the precept the same as 2013/14 at £38,000! At least the new chairman seems to be trying.
So, why not go along tomorrow to hear the discussion and find out what our money is going to be spent on in 2014/15? Please note, the meeting is at the Youth Club and NOT at the Coronation Hall.
BOB
More BeInvolved posts here]]>
As you may already know, North Somerset have issued an order supporting the application by the landowner to divert footpaths on South Hill.
Please find attached a copy of the order and the report as made by NS PROW to their November committee that led to their decision to make the order.
BOB is concerned that these proposed changes are of no real benefit to the public at large.
The deadline for objections is 23rd January 2014 (Thursday this week). Any representations about or objections to the Order may be sent in writing to the Director of Development and Environment, Natural Environment Team, Streets and Open Spaces, Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ not later than 23 January 2014 (quoting reference EB/PPO 159). Please state the grounds on which they are made.
Objections can be submitted by email so long as the correspondence is an attachment which contains your contact details. This is required because if this matter is referred to the Planning Inspectorate they will only correspond by letter. Please email : Elaine.Bowman@n-somerset.gov.uk and/or streetsandopenspaces@n-somerset.gov.uk quoting all relevant references.
Grounds for objection should be related to the Section 119 of the Highways Act (1980) as shown in Section 4 (Legal Tests) and Section 7 (NS Assessment) of the attached NS PROW report. FYI, The detail of Highways Act (1980) is also shown here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/119
From feedback BOB has received the main public objection appears to be covered by part of the Legal Test under the effect that "the diversion would have on public enjoyment of the path or way as a Whole". As written in the PROW officer report attached NS is "aligning the public rights of way’s Definitive Map with routes that seem to be the preferred routes walked by the public". The NS PROW officer also writes "In respect of AX 6/14 it could be stated that this proposed diversion will not be as convenient to the public". Yet NS and Bleadon Parish Council seem to agree with the land owners application to divert the path rather than protecting the public's existing access?
The landowner has still blocked the circular route that has historically been enjoyed by the Bleadon walking community for many generations/decades. As the attached PROW report states "This land was previously owned by the Church Commissioners who tenanted out the land. At this time the area was open and available for the public to wander as they wished. Once the current owner took possession of the land he has decided to fence the area off in order to protect his stock". Unfortunately, this doesn't appear to count as part of the Legal Test for this proposal and will need to be dealt with under the Wildlife and Countryside Act.
FYI, as stated in Section 8 of the NS PROW officer report, "If made, an Order can only be confirmed by North Somerset Council if no objections are received following publication and if the Council is satisfied that the legal tests in S119 of the Highways Act 1980, as outlined in Section 4 of this Report, have all been met. In the event of an objection being sustained, the decision rests with the Public Rights of Way Sub Committee as to whether the matter should be submitted to the Secretary of State for determination or that the Order should be abandoned leaving the legal line unaltered. When referred to the Secretary of State the matter can be dealt with in a number of ways: Written Representations; a Hearing or a Public Inquiry. Written Representations are the least expensive procedure and a Public Inquiry is the most expensive procedure. If objections are sustained, NS has to decide whether to refer to The Secretary of State".
Please forward or print this link for others who may wish to respond to this issue before the deadline this Thursday 23rd January 2014
Kind regards,
Other related Blog posts here
Please see an OBJECTION SENT below and Planning Inspectorate website information and/orPlanning Inspectorate Booklet Guidance for considering objection to Definitive Map & Public Path Orders
Dear North Somerset PROW,We object to the proposed Diversion Order. Reference EB/PPO 159Grounds for objection of Diversion Order 5 2013 for parts of AX6/12, AX6/14 & AX6/15 with reference to other pre-order consultation comments (copied below).Under Highways Act (1980) Section 119 (2) and (6)(2) A public path diversion order shall not alter a point of termination of the path or way(a) if that point is not on a highway, or(b) (where it is on a highway) otherwise than to another point which is on the same highway, or on a highway connected with it, and which is substantially as convenient to the publicNOT AS CONVENIENT, LONGER THROUGH POOR GROUND(6) The Secretary of State shall not confirm a public path diversion order, and a council shall not confirm such an order as an unopposed order, unless he or, as the case may be, they are satisfied that the diversion to be effected by it is expedient as mentioned in subsection (1) above, and further that the path or way will not be substantially less convenient to the public in consequence of the diversion and that it is expedient to confirm the order having regard to the effect which—(a)the diversion would have on public enjoyment of the path or way as a whole,DETRIMENTAL EFFECT, LOSING HISTORIC INTEREST & INCREASING LENGTH VIA POOR CONDITION GROUND.
(b)the coming into operation of the order would have as respects other land served by the existing public right of way, and,LOSS OF ACCESS TO KEY POINTS OF INTEREST
(c)any new public right of way created by the order would have as respects the land over which the right is so created and any land held with it,MAINTENANCE OF NEW PATH VIA WOODED AREA & WINTER FLOODED LAND]]>
Hi Bleadon residents and users of Purn and Bleadon Hill. This is a copy of a letter I have sent to the Planning Inspectorate at Bristol, to the email address teamp16@pins.gsi.gov.uk regarding the planning appeal for the PV array in Accommodation Road. We have until the 31st December to make written comments. If any of the material below makes sense to you as a user of Purn Hill and surrounds, please feel free to use it and send your own email. The more emails they receive the stronger the case will be against the case.
I've written a long letter but here is the last paragraph to summarise.
"The loss of agricultural land and beautiful scenery to solar panels in this planning appeal is misguided and misjudged, and the problems with allowing the array to go ahead are manifold. Farmland will be lost to agricultural use for at least 25 years, with no definite return to agriculture afterwards as there is no precedence for this. More importantly, it sets the precedent for many more areas of solar panels on agricultural land rather than brown field or urban sites where PV arrays create less environmental impact. If this appeal fails, as it should, it will allow future generations of residents in and around the Mendips to continue to enjoy uninterrupted views to the sea in an area of outstanding natural beauty. Please do not allow the appeal to win."
And here's my letter in full:
TO: The North Somerset Council
Planning and Development
FAO: Mr Rob Worgan
Ref: 13/P/0854/F2 Land at South Hill Farm, Lympsham.
AND
Hazel Stanmore-Richards, The Planning Inspectorate, BS16NP
From:
Alison Warner Phd
Black House Farm,
Hinton Ampner, Alresford,
Hampshire SO240LF
Dear Mr Worgan,
It is with disbelief that I received your letter referencing the Appeal Reference APP/DO121/A/13/2208198, viz the siting of the photovoltaic array by Energi plc in an area of land off Bridgwater Road and Accommodation Road, Bleadon. I have a PhD in environmental geography & pollution, and a first-hand understanding of the issues locally as I grew up in Bleadon and return regularly to visit family & friends on and around Purn Hill. I always walk up the hill to see the fantastic views and often meet locals who come from as far as Weston to see the spectacular sunsets and the changing seasons.
I would like the following points to be made to the Planning Inspectorate.
1. The glint and glare assessment does not take into account the view line from Purn Hill, Uphill, Bleadon Hill, Brent Knoll and Brean Down, where recreational users of these resources will all clearly be able to see the PV array. Whilst the appeal notes that Purn Hill creates a visual barrier from other parts of the MAONB, this ignores the large number of walkers that physically use Purn Hill itself, and live locally, who will not be protected from the visual pollution the array will create whilst they are using this valuable rural resource. This is a critical element of the argument against the placement of the array is the site applied for, and must not be underestimated.
2. The Mendip Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty was a conservation structure put into place to conserve local viewlines and precious landscapes. The hills noted in point 1 are all either part of the MAONB or are an integral part of the view from these points. Placing a PV array within these viewlines is an act of conservation & environmental vandalism, and North Somerset Council will be more than accountable for this massive long-term degradation of the landscape that will impact the next generation and potentially beyond.
3. The website portal did not allow a full search of the appeal referenced APP/DO121/A/13/2208198, on December 22nd 2013, but I understand from reporting on the subject in local papers that the array has increased to 36,400 panels from 32,000. This is, in my opinion, cynical and underhand behavior from Energi plc and leads us to doubt their environmental integrity. I would add that the December date of the appeal also adds to be overall cynical nature of the developer, who is not local to the area.
4. It would make sense, from a planning position, to understand how much these beautiful views are worth to people who live and visit the area. Thus there is a need for a large scale amenity assessment of the cultural, recreational and social value of the views affected by the solar panel array. This would need to include Purn Hill, Uphill, Brean Down. Brent Knoll and Bleadon Hill, and be carried out by an independent assessor with no vested interest over an annual period to avoid seasonality. The fact that this is not already in the EIA is exceptional and speaks volumes through its absence. The reasoning behind this must be that ADAS/Energi plc were anxious about the results and thus decided not to go down that route. I think this needs massive flagging up.
5. There are a number of social media and web based references to the beauty of the area and users of the region and Purn Hill. Some of these include the following addresses: http://www.wondersofweston.org/nominations/my-den, http://www.docstoc.com/docs/75388294/Walborough-and-Purn-Hill-for-coast-paths-and-hilltops http://www.bleadon.org.uk/purnhill.html Image 8 of this last web address looks across to Brean Down, and is clearly a valued view. The addition of solar panels (34,600 of them) will be a negative addition to this rural and beautiful landscape, and a photo of the array would be making a different, definitely negative point.
6. Zoopla the property sales company makes this point in its description of a house on Bleadon Hill: “A modernised 3-bed detached bungalow situated on Bleadon Hill & enjoying views toward the Bristol Channel & Welsh coast” [http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/bleadon/purn-road/]. There will be a detraction in property prices and amenity value for local residents if the array goes ahead. Zoopla are unlikely to state ‘enjoying views over the 34 thousand solar panels towards the Bristol Channel…’ which is what the house owner would be overlooking if the PV array consent is granted.
7. The planting of a large woodland belt to the east of the project needs to be considered carefully. There is evidence of a lack of policing of environmental mitigation elsewhere in Bleadon (namely the grain drying unit off Accommodation Lane that is supposed to be screened by willows but is not). Furthermore the species of trees needs to be decided carefully: having a large run of fast growing conifers to ‘reduce the landscape impacts of the scheme’ will not mitigate but add a hard green line to the landscape when viewed from the Mendips and hills around the site. Screening species need to fit the landscape and be locally found Ash-Maple woodland species as found in the woodlands of the Mendip Hills (http://www.naturalareas.naturalengland.org.uk/Science/natural/profiles%5CnaProfile84.pdf p8, p13, para 4.2.2) rather than fast growing, evergreen types. Even with this boundary line of trees, I raise the pojnt that screening implies the panel array will be ugly to look at and reduce visual amenity.
8. Please can the planning inspectorate ask Energi plc/ADAS for further details about net gains in biodiversity, specifically with reference to additional habitat for brown hares, notoriously sensitive to disturbance from humans. The reference to brown hares without supporting scientific evidence (referencing habitats and population increases through appropriate habitat development) appears to be an attempt to reference a much-loved creature in order to create a positive spin on the appeal. In my opinion, this raises the issue of Energi plc’s environmental credibility again, in an attempt to win the appeal on the basis of the promise of brown hare habitat.
9. There is limited reference to the use of chemicals to keep the grass down under the solar array panels. Please can the Planning Inspectorate confirm that ADAS/Energi plc have identified and confirmed which herbicides and pesticides they plan to use on the site, how the use will be monitored, and that the chemicals chosen will not cause habitat destruction or eutrophication of the locally important hydrological system, with potential loss to sensitive species such as Great Crested Newt, or the nationally scare Pearl-Bordered Fritillary butterfly present in the SSSI’s locally. I refer you to the document http://www.naturalareas.naturalengland.org.uk/Science/natural/profiles%5CnaProfile84.pdf . pp8-10
10. I urge the Planning Inspectorate also to gain confirmation of names of the specific farmers who have confirmed they will graze sheep in the array. There are very few sheep farmers locally. Again, this has the taint of green wash.
11. The large scale array proposed is effectively extending urbanization and industrialization into the countryside. The appropriate place for solar panels is within urban areas, specifically on large roofs of industrial buildings and supermarkets such as those in and around Weston-Super –Mare.
The loss of agricultural land and beautiful scenery to solar panels in this planning appeal is misguided and misjudged, and the problems with allowing the array to go ahead are manifold. Farmland will be lost to agricultural use for at least 25 years, with no definite return to agriculture afterwards as there is no precedence for this. More importantly, it sets the precedent for many more areas of solar panels on agricultural land rather than brown field or urban sites where PV arrays create less environmental impact. If this appeal fails, as it should, it will allow future generations of residents in and around the Mendips to continue to enjoy uninterrupted views to the sea in an area of outstanding natural beauty. Please do not allow the appeal to win.
Yours sincerely
Alison Warner PhD (SOAS)
Wonders of Weston is a programme of remarkable and memorable artworks, part of the national Sea Change initiative, which seeks to support the revitalisation of British seaside towns.
Link to Solar Farm Appeal information]]>
In accordance with the school admissions regulations, the proposed admission arrangements for all Community and Voluntary Controlled Schools and some own admission authority schools (including Cooperative and Foundation Trust, Voluntary Aided Schools and Academies in North Somerset) are being consulted upon.
The proposed arrangements cover New Intake admissions, Admission Numbers, In-Year admissions and Coordinated Admission Schemes for 2015-16.
Please use the following link to access the proposed arrangements:
http://consult.n-somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/propschad_arr/consultationHome
Paper copies of any of the proposed arrangements are available upon request.
You are invited to take part in the consultation. Please provide me with any comments on the proposals by 28 February 2014.
Comments on the proposed arrangements for own admission authority schools should, unless indicated otherwise, be sent to the Head Teacher/Principal or Chair of Governors of the school concerned.
Please accept my apologies if you are a member of more than one of the target groups and so receive this email more than once.
Yours sincerely
Bill McEntee
Senior Admissions Adviser
School Admissions and Transport Team
People and Communities Directorate
North Somerset Council
Tel: 01275 884 794
Fax: 01275 884 753
Post: Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ
Web: www.n-somerset.gov.uk
PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
The information contained in this email transmission is intended by North Somerset Council, for the use by the named individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged or otherwise confidential. If you have received this email transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender of the error by reply email.
Any views expressed within this message or any other associated files are the views and expressions of the individual and not North Somerset Council.
North Somerset Council takes all reasonable precautions to ensure that no viruses are transmitted with any electronic communications sent, however the Council can accept no responsibility for any loss or damage resulting directly or indirectly from the use of this email or any contents or attachments. Communications via the GSi network may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes
==========================
http://www.n-somerset.gov.uk
Main switchboard: 01934 888888
IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager or the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
*** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals, and malicious content. ***]]>
Firstly, thank you to all BOB readers who have taken the time to pass on their comments, issues and concerns regarding our village of Bleadon. Whilst BOB doesn't always agree/disagree with your issues or concerns I endeavor to raise them with our readers, many, if not all, of the currents ones have been included in this update.
BOB is delighted to see that this community website has at last got a mention in the latest BVN, and that so many of your blog post topics seem to be included (albeit in less accurate or balanced detail) alongside other interesting articles and photos. However, BOB was sorry to see that the latest edition will be the last until Spring. Also, that there is no longer the free Bleadon business listing page, only paid adverts. Perhaps it is so that more paid advertising space can be made to ensure BVN is truly 'free' to Bleadon Homes. For your information, some Bleadon Business can still be found here
As regardsSouth Hill PROW footpaths and loss of access to all, BOB emailed the PCfor their support before BVN publication and although this has been stated on blog posts before, it is worth restating in light of the BVN article....The landowner can of course put fencing where he wants on his land but NOT if it blocks the line of an existing PROW, as it currently is. The current official paths are indeed as shown in the BVN (and at http://www.bleadon.org.uk/prow) BUT these paths are currently subject to a landowner application for an order to divert them so they should not have been blocked until that order had been successful and the PC (or their representatives) should not have allowed or indicated otherwise.The landowner's application for the PROWs to be diverted is still going through the North Somerset process and has not yet reached a conclusion. If an 'order' is made by NS this still needs formal public consultation and no consequential sustained objections before taking effect.
Moreover, for many decades, and generations, Bleadon walkers have been able to walk other routes on South Hill (& elsewhere) not just these 'official' PROWs. These paths can be claimed as 'new' PROWs. Although this will take time BOB, and its readers, are currently undertaking the collation of the necessary material to try and make this happen with North Somerset PROW team. If you have regularly walked South Hill please let BOB know so that we may talk to you about your experiences and whether they may help reopen these historic paths. Given thehistory of the hill, it would be nice if the landowner could provide a permissive path by allowing a currently 'barbed' gate to be opened to make this happen, only time will tell.
BTW, BOB has offered to assist the Bleadon Rights of Way Group to maintain our PROWs. I have also asked the parish council for the group's schedule of works in order to publish it on BOB so that, as stated in the BVN, if you "have the time and energy to help maintain and improve Bleadon's footpaths", you'll know where to find the team working within the village. I'll let you know when the schedule has been posted.
The farce of the Ball Wall (for so long known as the 'GoalPosts' and first raised a year ago by the PC!) could have been done so much more cheaply and quickly had the users of the park of all age groups, immediate neighbours and ROSPA been fully consulted before installation and not hidden behind 'blind' minutes. The BVN states "Children have been using the structure as a climbing challenge", that the posts "are very securely installed to withstand the onslaught of hormone enriched youngsters" and so "the tops of the posts will be cut at an angle to discourage youngsters climbing along the top of the posts", when will the parish council recognise that the users of the park need to climb!
The BVN also writes "re-locate the ball wall in front of the two Silver Birch trees", that is exactly where the original, challenging, well used, appropriate for all ages and abilities climbing frame was sited before they removed it and introduced a ball wall instead! Perhaps a new climbing frame should be added to the PC "wish-list"? (NB: The last solution to the ball problems was the installation of the current, tall, noisy & expensive steel fence.)The PC seem to want to discourage climbing, but why not discourage the football as "an affordable and practical solution to the problems created by the new ball wall"? The sign on the park gate says soft balls only, perhaps footballs should be classified as a hard ball especially when kicked hard by stronger children at an immovable and noisy structure?
I'm all for better facilities for our youth but it has been said the Youth Club is getting a much higher profile than ever before and perhaps more than the census profile of Bleadon residents merits. As the BVN noted "Bleadon has over twice the national average of residents aged over 45" and that "many villagers are seeing a real reduction in their spending power"? How many YC members aged 10+ actually live in Bleadon? Also, why does it now seem the YC is competing more against Village Hallsfor functions & meetings? (Nb: A recent funeral was 'gifted' to the YC by Halls)
The BVN writes of the Solar Panel Park "the direct impact of the development on a majority of Bleadon residents was fairly minimal". The Bleadon parish council's minuted response on 10th June to this solar application was "if North Somerset implements its strict guidelines when reviewing this application we can raise no objection to this proposal, We would however once again urge the council to take note of any concerns raised by Bleadon parishioners". The final decision was with North Somerset who, agreeing with Bleadon Hill residents, refused the application.As BVN writes, NS "refused the proposal by reason of the scale, form and proximity to public viewpoints and residential property. Fearing that the resulting development would dominate the landscape and cause unacceptable harm to the landscape and character".It seems that the impact would be hardly minimal. So if you have concerns about any application affecting Bleadon's character and landscape (surely that's why we live here) it seems advisable to respond directly to the application at North Somerset, as well as informing the parish council.
Marshalls Quarrypromised to share public comments from the meetings in September with our PC & NS, so hopefully these comments will be reflected and/or shared in their planned final re-development presentation on November 27th in the Youth Club. There is concern among residents that the extra infrastructure needed to support this development is crucial, not least to cope with the extra drainage and traffic joining onto A370 at 50/60 MPH, which will need proper research and resourcing. Section 106 has/is being replaced by Community Infrastructure Levy but it is not clear what % of CIL Bleadon would receive (depends on our Neighbourhood Plan) and on what it should be spent, which surely needs to be properly related to the development for it to be fully accepted and to be a successful 'legacy' for Bleadon.
As I'm sure our PC is aware, accessing and leaving the village via the A370 at the Anchor Road end will also need careful consideration in relation to the Weston Park Lakes proposed development with the increase in traffic that may result from a successful venture. It should also be remembered that in the Parish Plan Questionnaire village respondents identified the A370 as a danger spot, with 75% stating that there are speeding problems around the village. Perhaps now is an ideal time to review all traffic issues within our village.
It also appears that Community Infrastructure Levies can be used for a diverse range of things as a consequence of development. Perhaps it's time to think less of what the PC members want, e.g. a PC office and to think more of what the population of Bleadon needs. The BVN notes that there are suggestions that the PC "should be doing more for the older members of our community". For a long time Bleadon has had access to a Police officer on a weekly basis and a health visitor at Baby Toddlers on a fortnightly basis, both giving residents easy and personal access to services without the need to travel into Weston or surrounding villages. Perhaps now is the time to consider a Community Health Service where all services can be accessed in the village thus saving a commute into WSM, supporting all Bleadon residents ongoing health requirements e.g. doctor, optician, nurse, health visitor, services advice, etc. for all ages, especially in light of our resident population being "over twice the national average of residents aged over 45". For more community views see alsothe results of the 2005 Parish Plan Questionairre
BOB has no problem with the sentiment stated in BVN "Looking after ourselves", however, BVN writes "Having councils doings things like weeding of our pavements, sweeping of roads and regular clearing of drains are likely to become fond memories ... Clear those weeds from the kerb and pick up the litter outside before it blocks a drain and becomes a real problem. No one else is likely to do it.". Our authorities (or their contractors) have been paid in the past to keep services to a contractual standard yet these services are not delivered to that standard, or indeed if at all, yet the costs do not reduce. For example, the A370 highway foot/cycle paths are overgrown with grass, weeds etc. NS (& Sedgemoor) has been paid to keep paths clear since they were created but clearance is obviously not enforced and because of this lack of diligence, users are often forced into the road by overgrown shrubbery & vegetation. E.g. a mobility scooter was seen driving into 50/60 mph oncoming traffic towards Bleadon, highly dangerous we agree, but what were they expected to do in thatsituation?
So who is expected to 'weed' this Bleadon Parish pavement? Where has the money gone for poor or non-performance of these services? Lost in administration or spent on non-statutory services that we are now expected to undertake or forego them! Surely if statutory services are lost we should expect/demand to see Council Tax & Precept falling not standing still or worse, rising to do less? Our PC should also lobby NS & our MPto ensure these questions are answered and services maintained.
Savings - or, what do you NOT want the PC to spend your money on? As stated previously, the offer made by BOB to the BPC in May was not taken up but, BOB is happy to continue posting PC Agenda, Minutes. I could also add other documents such as policies etc. thus potentially saving the PC several hundred pounds per annum and duplicated effort on the PC's own website. BOB would again also like the PC to critically review the attendance cost/benefit of members on SLCC 'training' as it seems not all members have the opportunity to practice this costly training, so is it worth it? The BVN writes "The Finance Committee and the Parish Council will be deciding on next year's budget over the next two months", so to ensure that your views are heard regarding what the PC spends, or doesn't spend, your money on please write to the parish clerk and/or BOB ASAP.
Finally, Twitter & Facebook, the PC (like BOB did sometime ago) has recently decided to utilise social media (BTW, ex-councillor Pete Trevitt originally set up a PC facebook account so perhaps this is the one they will now maintain). BOB will 'follow' this new move with interest and hopes to 'like' what's being done! Of course, like all good public authority organisations this doesn't come without the need for a governing policy so it will be interesting to see how the members policy copes with the spontaneity of social media response.
As seen from above there is still concern via BOB reader feedback and conversation that certain BPC members seem to adopt the style of, we know best, we are elected, we don't need to consult, we can do what we like, spend (and potentially waste) public money as we see fit and raise the precept next year! This attitude can breed apathy and suspicion from the electorate so surely, the criteria for what makes a quality council (which of course is what Bleadon aspires to be) needs to be reconsidered by some to fully engage the community or ultimately risk a Community Governance Review.Let us hope the parish council will continually reflect on their Chair's statement to "continue to serve this village with diligence and vigor".
In the meantime, please continue to let BOB know your concerns, and/ or suggestions, about what you would like see happening, or not happening, in our village via BOB@bleadon.org.uk, and I will endeavour to communciate them to all interested parties.
More BeInvolved posts here]]>
The West of England Rural Network (WERN) is a charity established to support and shape rural communities in South Gloucestershire, North Somerset, Bath and North East Somerset and Bristol. We aim to support and encourage community led action and strong local governance, to increase the long term sustainability of local community life and to influence policies and services to achieve equity for rural communities.http://www.wern.org.uk
More Beinvolved posts]]>
Have you got a little bit of time to spare to keepBleadon's Monthly Village Market going?
We urgently need people to adopt oneor more of the metal road signs which go up in the week before the marketand come down Saturday afternoon/Sunday morning. Also occasional help isneeded with setting up tables and road bollards at the hall on the Fridayafternoon and early Saturday morning, and then clearing away the tables andbollards at the end of the market at 12.30 on market day.All this happensjust once a month.
If you think you can support this popular village eventplease email me: Joanne Jones or call 01934 812370.
More BeInvolved posts here]]>
Goal Posts Farce continues as pricetag mounts!
MOVINGFrom HereTo Here!Another potential £1000 to move some timber posts looks likely as the Playground 'GoalPost' sagacontinues. (see OS minutes of 9th and & 12 September 2013)
The original PC aspiration for the playground goal posts (aka several lengths of timber posts placed onend into the ground forming a wooden wall to hit a ball against thus minimising impact noise) waspriced at £4000. However members of the public (& even councillors) baulked at this huge cost but having sourced acheaper option the pricetag is now set to rise having installed the posts in an potentially unsafe place.
The PC unfortunately decided to put them too close to the fence at a cost of £1000+ where surprisesurprise the older children who don't play football (or just aren't competent see this PC notice) went looking tocompensate for the removal of the old challenging climbing frame and took to the trees, fences andgoalposts to stave their boredom. Already BOB has been informed one child has broken an arm whileclimbing a tree instead of a purpose built climbing frame.
Following this event, and letters from concerned residents regarding balls in the road and childrenclimbing on the new structure and fence, the PC paid ROSPA over £200 for their view on the installation.Why no-one on the PC thought to ask ROSPA first (especially as ROSPA safety concern was given as theoriginal reason to remove the old play equipment) thus saving this moving cost is probably best posed to thePC. The outcome is that the goal posts are now to be moved to the area of the old climbing frame andthe tops of the logs to be cut at 45 degrees to deter climbing or should we say make it morechallenging for children to climb!
So the cost of these 'goalposts' and fencing is likely to grow to the region of £3,000 yet when will our primary age & aboveschool children get the challenging equipment they deserve, and used to have in our park? When will thePC ask ALL the users of the park for their views on it's development and ensure the park is a facility that ALL can enjoy? It isalso hard to believe that some councillors don't consider asking the public for their input is a goodidea! (see OSC minutes 12th August 2013).
Memories of Historic and Current South Hill Walkers Wanted
The 'new' farmer on South Hill has decided he doesn't want people walking around his land as they havedone for generations and wants to change the existing route of PROWs over it and confine walkers towalk the 'legal' line only in future.
He has installed an apparently "much needed" stock management fence around the perimeter, also bisecting the hill from North toSouth, and rather than leave a new strategic gate unlocked thus still allowing a relatively level circularwalk, the landowner has instead wrapped the gate with barbed wire blocking a route that has beenenjoyed by residents and tourists for decades. Elderly Dog walkers in particular have already stoppedusing South Hill because of this and BOB thinks it's a real shame and loss to the general publics historicright of way.
Other local walkers and associations like OSS and Ramblers have also raised their concerns with NS overthese changes and it was hoped some compromise could be reached with the landowner but to no availand now the change of PROWswill be decided by a North Somerset committee in November.
So what can be done? The PC have shrugged their collective shoulders and determined it's thelandowners right to do this, saying every thing done to date is fine, but here comes the Wildlife & Countyside Act 1981and Highways Act 1980(Section 31) .. if it can be proven that this route has been used regularly over the last 20 years it can be claimed and deemed an official PROW and the definitive map modified ordered (DMMO)
So, to anyone who has EVER used this route on South Hill (from Wonderstone Stile to The Veale gatepath), especially during the last 20 years and more, can they please contact BOB so that they can beadded to the list to claim our right of way for future generations to enjoy!
To gain official access for future generations to the historical route, we would need to 'claim' a 'new'public right of way path. Would you be willing to sign and/or help try to find others who would sign andgive evidence that they have historically used this path? Collectively we need to have been using thepath for 20 years or more.Attached here is a PDF copy of the form required(or also in Microsoft Word format) which will need to be completed, collated by BOB and finallysubmitted to North Somerset.
Please let BOB know what are your views on the latest situation by contacting us and/or comment on this blog? Also torefresh your memory, the proposed PROW plan is here on this previous blog post.
Meanwhile, case of the missing footpath solved (ish)!
Regular BOB blog readers may recall a previous footpath issue, again involving South Hill. NorthSomerset created a footpath extinguishment order that suggested a footpath on South Hill may havebeen quarried away, however research of old maps back to the late 1800's now suggest that it wasprobably a mistake in the creation of the definitive PROW map which was then subsequently digitised tooverlay on the real-world map with the accuracy of GPS coordinates and satellite imagery and it was this being corrected. Although, as suggestedwith historic recollections in the Village News (Summer 2013 edition), it does appear that thepath has been eroded away from the original route and fence moved.
This erroneous digisation by NS has also caused confusion with other routes across the landowners fields not matching thewaymarkers with maps, add to that potential diversions and confusion can exist on exactly where youare allowed to walk and roam.
So aided with the North Somerset Definitive Map of PROWs (courtesy of the PC's Local Govenment/Ordnance Survey mapping agreement), BOB has started a long term project to try and catalogue allBleadon Parish PROW and for the benefit of resident and tourist alike try to itemise the path with anitinerary of stiles/gates etc along the route. This information should also hopefully be useful for identifyingfootpaths for various requirements under the Highways Act. See iPROW Good Practice Guide
It is for reasons such as above that BOB believes our heritage walks and open spaces should be preserved where possible today for future generations tomorrow to enjoy as Bleadon's new business NatureKids would hopefully agree.
More PROW information from iPROW,Open Spaces Society,Ramblers.
Bleadon Parish Council Website
BOB is glad to read in the Full Parish Council September minutes that following a long period ofinactivity (you may recall that BOB had agreed to meet interested parties in May 2013 but this offer was nottaken up by the PC), Councillor Clive Morris has now taken on the role of website mantainenance and ismaking progress with this important Quality Council communication issue. Already new pictures andcontact information for our councillors is available and I am sure that timely meeting dates/time,agenda, informative minutes, statutory reports and important parish consultation correspondence/documents willalso soon be made available.
QPS Re-Accreditation
BOB could not quite believe reading in the September Minutes that the PC will actually consider applying for the Quality Parish Scheme re-accreditation when/if it is re-launched. Perhaps the continued costly visits to SLCC 'training' events during this year has hadsome effect and the PC feel confident the residents will recognise the benefit of spending more of ourmoney on this quango award! PLEASE consider the real tangible benefit of this process to residentsbefore doing it again, we seemed to do OK before 2003!
And finally....This view will change....Quarry Meetings
Although subject of previous blog post (linked here)I thought I would remind people to please make the effort to attend the presentation meetings scheduled for Wednesday & Thursday this week at the Youth Club building. If you can't go then make sure your views are heard through friends, neighbours so that any forthcoming planning application can be influenced before it is made.
More BeInvolved Blog Posts here]]>
Sent: 13 September 2013 10:36
Subject: Planning application 13/P/1560/F for a 110 foot wind turbine inButcombe
Dear Mr Turner (CEO North Somerset)
My constituent, Mrs Carole Venner of Windrush, Butcombe BS40 7UX tells thatMs Brenda Wear of Windover, Yewtree Batch, Butcome has made thisapplication. The electricity company, Endurance Wind Power, a Canadian basedcompany, are behind the application and Aspire Planning Ltd, 1st Floor, StAugustines Yard, Orchard Lane, Bristol are behind the publicity for theelectricity company.
A Committee is being formed in the village and they may have already maderepresentations to North Somerset.
Butcombe is in the Green Belt and thereare no good reasons why the usual restrictions should be breached.
Myconstituent has lived in Butcome for 43 years because she enjoys living inthe peace and quiet of the countryside.
This will be a blight on the villagedue to the site being so prominent and unsightly and, in addition, thenoise will cause them distress. My constituents feel that if the applicationis accepted, this will open the gates to other applications from landownerson the Mendips which will be detrimental to the areaMrs Venner and other local residents are concerned about their future ifthis development is permitted. The noise and disruption will affect theirquality of life considerably. This is a most unsuitable place for a windturbine of this size.
I hope you will consider the opposition of the village to this proposal andreject this planning application.
Yours sincerely
LIAM FOX
Parliamentary Office of the Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP
more BeInvolved posts]]>
(NB Compare to original Mercury article statement in Sept 2013 , "The council’s sites and policies document states that the area could be used for around 20 residential properties, but Marshalls believe this could be more. It is expected a planning application for the quarry could be submitted by the end of this year."
UPDATE 13 AUG 2014 -North Somerset Planning Report
NB: NSC UPDATED THEIR PLANNING SYSTEM AND SO SOME LINKS MAY NEED TO BE FOUNDBY ENTERING AND SEARCHING BY THE APPLICATION NUMBER ON THEIR SITEHERE
LAST CHANCE FOR COMMENTS
Further to meeting of 6th August 2014. The Parish Council is holding a meeting on Monday 11th August at 8pmwhich they will apparently outline what went on and what was said at their site Inspection held on 7 August. More Agenda detail from parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk or at http://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishcouncil.html
People are welcome to attend and air any further views they may have. That will be the last chance to do this before North Somerset determine the application on Wednesday 13 August at their meeting which starts at 4.00pm in the Town Hall.
This meeting is open to the public but only one person is allowed to address the Planning Committee in support of the application and one opposing it. North Somerset must be advised of who's doing this before the meeting - contact details on their website.
June/July 2014 - Outline Application Amended - see link below
Outline Planning Permission Application DEADLINE 8th May 2014)
An application has now been submitted click here to see it on North Somerset website (14/P/0687/O) if you previously made comments to the presentation evening and are still concerned then you should make your views known again as part of the formal application process. This is a major new development for Bleadon and will affect it's future in many ways so please take the time to read the documents provided and comment accordingly.
UPDATE 2nd December 2013
I have now obtained a copy of Marshalls QuarryFinal Presentation (PDF)boards displayed at the Youth Club on 27th November 2013. So please click on the links to see them and/or download and make comment if you wish.If you have any problems viewing them please let me know.
As stated in conclusion on Board 6 "Marshalls’intention now is to submit an Outline Planning Application to North Somerset Council within the next three months. Comments received prior to submission will be recorded and shared with your Parish Council and North Somerset Council.As we have endeavoured to do throughout this process, we will incorporate your suggestions wherever possible within a viable solution. We trust that you will see that our revised proposals have been informed by your comments and changes have been made wherever possible".
So, please remember to record your comments via thededicated email address created to accommodate the engagement processconsultations.bleadon@marshalls.co.uk
Marshalls have stated the end date for responses to be considered will be 3rd January 2014
UPDATE 19th November 2013
As stated in Bleadon Village News, another meeting is scheduled for 27th November 2013 (2 sessions 10.30am-1pm & 5pm-7pm) at the same Bleadon Youth Club location. Please make every effort to attend and see the comments made following Septembers meetings and Marshalls subsequent final proposal for planning permission.
UPDATE 5th November 2013
Parish Clerk has provided a copy of report analysing a survey commissioned by Marshalls in early 2012 on "Assessing the Housing Needs in Bleadon". here isa survey copy
For comparison purposes, you may be interested to look at the results of the 2005 Parish Plan Questionnaire that has a section on Housing.
Also here is an interesting illustrative map created and kindly shared as part of a submission to the Quarry consultation process that shows the relative housing densities of areas within Bleadon compared to the Quarry proposals.
UPDATE 16th October 2013
Following the meetings in September (see below line),
Marshalls have now supplied me their QuarryPresentation (PDF)andFeedback form (PDF)as displayed at the meetings. So please click on the links to see them and/or download and make comment if you wish.
If you have any problems viewing them please let me know.
Marshalls Group Property Manager has also given me the following information:
"Please note that a dedicated email address has been created to accommodate the engagement process and I should be grateful if you would relay this to visitors to your site consultations.bleadon@marshalls.co.uk
We would obviously like to pass on our thanks to those who were able to attend and make comments and, at the same time, encourage those that didn’t/couldn’t to give some consideration to our proposals and tell us what they think so that we can try and address any issues and improve our Outline scheme in time for the second and final event which we have undertaken to host sometime in November.
Please note that it is our intention to host a one day event at the Youth Centre, albeit with shorter sessions - perhaps a two hour lunchtime slot and a two hour teatime slot each day.Further details will follow in due course."
As you may have seen advertised in the Bleadon Village News (Summer 2013), there are presentationmeetings arranged for consultation about proposals that willlead to a future planning application for re-development of thequarry.
Marshalls' presentation meetings are in Bleadon Youth Centre (Coronation Halls area)and there is a choice of day and session for you to attend,Wednesday 18th or Thursday 19th September (10am-2pm &5pm-7.30pm on both days).
It is a very large site and could have huge implications for thecharacter and size of the village, including a loss of employment. Marshalls will need communityapproval for their plans especially if they wish to exceed theprovisional 25 houses and may look for a much largerdevelopment with the approval of the community in exchangefor some community facilities. A properly thought out anddesigned mixed use development on this brownfield site could well be anasset to the village.
It is essential that as many people as possible attend, view theproposals and share their thoughts and opinions with Marshalls'representatives at the consultation, members of the ParishCouncil and in writing to Marshalls and the Parish Council.
Previous comments on the Quarry site that were submitted to North Somerset as part of their Sites & Policies (Development Plan) Consultation, can still be viewed via this previous blogand directly ( by searching for comments containing Marshalls Quarry Bleadon here) and these comments should also besubmitted again to Marshalls and the Parish Council as part of this presentation/consultation process.
You may also be interested in this Marketing Review Document produced for Marshallsand posted with their comments on the North Somerset Sites & Policies consultation by their agents RR Planning Ltd and previous correspondence to North Somerset Planning on Core Strategy for the site.
Related Weston Mercury articles 22nd October 2011 and15th September 2013
More BeInvolved Blog posts here]]>
"Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Arrays Supplementary Planning Document - consultation August 2013
This email is to notify you of a consultation we are conducting on Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Arrays Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for North Somerset. This guidance is provided as part of our planning policy on Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation in North Somerset.
We carried out an initial consultation on the Solar PV Arrays SPD in June. Thank you to those who submitted comments on this first draft version of the document. We received 55 comments from 32 respondents. A consultation responses report which details our response to all comments received can be viewed here:
http://consult-ldf.n-somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/rrlce/consultationHome.
We have made revisions to the SPD in light of these comments and now have a revised document available for comment. There will be a four week period to comment, fromThursday 1st AugustuntilThursday 29th August.
If possible, please respond online at
http://consult-ldf.n-somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/rrlce/consultationHomeor if you prefer to email, please send your reply by return to this email address.
If you would like to discuss anything contained in the SPD, please contact Jessica Harper on jessica.harper@n-somerset.gov.uk or call on 01934 426905.
Jessica HarperSustainability CoordinatorPlanning Policyand ResearchNorth Somerset CouncilTown HallWalliscote Grove RoadWeston-super-MareBS23 1UJT: 01934 426905"
[UPDATE: SPD Document, Solar Report, Draft Arrays Guidance, Revised SPD]
I have noticed that North Somerset Unitary Authority recently released a four week consultation on policy guidance for the development of Solar Photovoltaic (PV) arrays in North Somerset. Consultation ends on 12th July 2013.
Please see this link http://consult-ldf.n-somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/rlce/consultationHome
This may give an insight into their thinking and likely decision making process for the Bleadon Solar Farm application so worthwhile reading and of course comment.
If you would like to be informed directly via email of future BOB posts please use our contact form.
Click for more BeInvolved Blog posts]]>
About 50 people attended offering lots of input.
I have just been informed that there is a meeting TODAY, Sunday 16th June, at the Jubilee Room at 3pm, to discuss concerns/issues about the Bleadon Solar Farm planning application. All welcome to share their views before Wednesday's submission deadline.
Please also find attached draft information produced for submission as comment from a chartered landscape architect that has kindly been offered to share.
Please contact your District Councillor here
If you would like to be informed directly via email of future BOB posts please use our contact form.
Click for more BeInvolved Blog posts]]>
So, if you do have any comment to make or know others who enjoy the views from Purn Hill (an Avon Wildlife Trust owned designated Site of Specific Scientific Interest) and may also like to comment, please let North Somerset know them by this Wednesday 19th June 2013.
Please also find attached a statement from The Mendip Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty for reference. Other comments and information including an Environmental Impact Assessment report commissioned by the applicant can be found here(old linkhttp://wam.n-somerset.gov.uk/MULTIWAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=149438FBC3AB9CE664300FF5EF4386B9?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=13/P/0854/F2) [Environmental Statement & NSC Natural Environment statement]
If you would like to be informed directly via email of future BOB posts please use our contact form.
---
See this link for minutes of 10th June 2013,(P23.4) Bleadon Parish Council Planning Committee meeting.
P23.4 ..."The planning committee feels that if North Somerset implements its strict guidelines when reviewing this applicationwe can raise no objection to this proposal, We would however once again urge the council to take note of any concerns raised by Bleadon parishioners."
Also approval byFull council 254.7
Click for more BeInvolved Blog posts]]>
Also see comments at end of blog
Click to enlarge image
AUG2013 APPLICATION IS REFUSED - Please see below for a copy of the official North Somerset Unitary Authority Planning Notice of Decision, Delegated Officers Report, Appeal Refusal Decision and also an interesting article by Martin Hesp (West Country Life) suggesting an alternative solution. Many thanks to those who passed BOB the information
Please also note North Somerset Solar PV Policy Consultation ENDS 29th August 2013. Click for more details
and other new energy companies are also trying other North Somerset areas see this Weston Mercury article
STOP PRESS - Further to this new Weston Mercury report, BOB has been informed that residents of Purn Road (Bleadon Hill) that overlook the site and approximately 60 others have received notices of a further 28 day consultation period, due to lack of information. All residents overlooking the proposed site and some villagers close by, have been sent a letter this time informing them of the exact address and given a further 28 days from 18th June to respond (ENDS 16th JULY). The planning number is 13/P/0854/F2 (link below) So there may still be time for you to comment on this application. (24/6/13 update - Mercury report confirms information)
Also see this link for minutes of 10th June 2013,(P23.4) Bleadon Parish Council Planning Committee meeting.
P23.4 ... "The planning committee feels that if North Somerset implements its strict guidelines when reviewing this application we can raise no objection to this proposal, We would however once again urge the council to take note of any concerns raised by Bleadon parishioners."
Also approval by Full council 254.7
32,000 panel Solar PV Farm planned - Comments to North Somerset by 19th June 2013
I thought you might be interested in the large solar photovoltaic array application on the land past Purn, on the left and adjacent to A370 toward Weston-super-Mare. Click here for Weston Mercury report
Here is a statement on Solar Arrays from Mendip Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
The full details for this application, reference 13/P/0854/F2, are available online at North Somerset website, please see here (old link http://wam.n-somerset.gov.uk/MULTIWAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=149438FBC3AB9CE664300FF5EF4386B9?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=13/P/0854/F2)
Although this all says South Hill Farm, the land is not near the main farm buildings or land currently subject to proposed PROW diversions, so it is unclear if the landowner is actually the same. Here is a link to the applicants (Energi PLC) website.and the Agent (ADAS Ltd.) website.
A historic smaller area proposal for 22,000 panels was made in January 2011 as can been seen in this article from the Bristol Evening Post published at that time at http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Solar-park-22-000-panels-placed-25-acre-site/story-11300568-detail/story.html#axzz2UPgNktoj.The associated 'screening opinion' application 11/P/0021/EIA1 to North Somerset in 2011 with comments can be seen here (old link http://wam.n-somerset.gov.uk/MULTIWAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=149438FBC3AB9CE664300FF5EF4386B9?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=11/P/0021/EIA1) Decision Notice and Delegated Report is inaccessible via the NSC planning system as at 22APR22?
Comments on the current application can be made to North Somerset by 19th June 2013 via the link provided on the application online (as above) or via here(old linkhttp://wam.n-somerset.gov.uk/MULTIWAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=149438FBC3AB9CE664300FF5EF4386B9?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=13/P/0854/F2)
or you may prefer to emaildccomments@n-somerset.gov.uk
Big Solar Farm scheme in Hampshire on 'brownfield' siteand Wedmore Community Solar Scheme
If you would like to be informed directly via email of future BOB posts please use our contact form.
Click for more BeInvolved Blog posts]]>
Further to the Consultation on North Somerset Sites & Policies Development Plan consultation, you may be aware that North Somerset has put this on hold due to a legal challenge to their main Core Strategy that defines the number of houses to be built and hence the sites or areas that may be developed upon.
This latest related consultation http://consult-ldf.n-somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/AH_SPD/consultationHomeconsiders the potential for Affordable Housing to be built in Service & Infill Villages like Bleadon so in the context of the proposed Marshalls Quarry development and other potential development sites identified with Bleadon, you may wish to read the documents and comment. A search for key words such as parish, or infill may help identify specific provision.
You may also wish to register with North Somerset to obtain future consultations directly.
REMEMBER - DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS ON THIS TOPIC IS 20th June 2013.
click for all BeInvolved posts]]>
I have received information regarding further proposed changes to the footpaths on South Hill and those crossing through South Hill Farm itself. Comments are invited by North Somerset Council by May 27th 2013.Please see the more detailed attachments/linked below.
South Hill (AX 6/12 & AX 6/15)
As dog walkers among you will know, it is now impossible to walk the original circular perimeter due to the new stock fencing (it now requires a more dangerous & longer walk from Wonderstone stile to The Veale via Shiplate Road) so these further restrictions may be equally unpopular. I know of several people that enjoy blackberry and sloe picking or a summer picnic viewing flora & fauna on the large stones & hollows on the current footpath route which may not be possible in the future.
South Hill Farm & access to Shiplate/River Axe (AX 6/12 & AX 6/14)
While diverting the path from going through the farm may be preferable to the farmer it is a pity that those walkers wanting to see a working Somerset farm during their walk will now be excluded as well as being diverted around a longer less direct route.
South Hill is designated by North Somerset a SNCI (Site of Nature & Conservation Interest) so these new proposed restrictions seem a great shame to all walkers and ramblers either resident or tourist.
In this paragraph, I have linked an image from North Somerset mapping system (right) showing the existing pathways walked on South Hill relative to the official PROW ones. I have also attached North Somerset consultation documentshere a copy of the original consultation letter (Microsoft Word)or(PDF copy of the same NS letter)and pre-order plan/map showing planned diversions.
Valid acceptable objections are made against legal tests see Highways Act 1980 section 119 shown at the following link herehttp://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/119Item 6 may be the most appropriate reason to consider any objection.
Comments are required back to North Somerset by May 27th 2013 so please forward and/or print this information ASAP to any others who may be interested in commenting on these proposals. Your comments should be made directly to North Somerset (Elaine.Bowman@n-somerset.gov.ukNatural Environment, Development and Environment, North Somerset Council, Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston super Mare, BS23 1UJ. Telephone: 01934 427406If emailing, please remember to include your full name and postal address to be included as a valid comment.
Comments can also be made to The Open Spaces Societyas a main consultee (johnives@blueyonder.co.uk). I will also collate and post information for people to review if comments are sent to BOB, or as usual you can post directly and anonymously on this blog post, in time for all to consider before submitting their thoughts to the relevant bodies.
I don't know whether our Parish Council will be making any formal comment as this is not a specific agenda item for their Monday 13th May meeting (although these documents have been received by them). This is something our existing and new councillors should consider as if the new footpaths are ultimately contained within 2m perimeter bounded paths, our free roaming open space that we have been used to will disappear, also the cost of maintaining the footpaths may fall on the parish (as opposed to the grazing animals).
PLEASE REMEMBER DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS TO NORTH SOMERSET IS MAY 27th 2013
click here for all Beinvolved posts]]>
New concillors will not have to wait long for the first Parish Council meeting to 'cut their teeth' as it is this coming Monday 13th May at 7.30pm in The Coronation Halls.
There is plenty on the agenda of interest, unfortunately only currently available to see on notice boards. I am sure a high priority for discussion will be how to get the PC website (or alternative) regularly and expediently updated with key information such as agendas, minutes, reports, consultation, policies, contacts etc. etc. The appointment of a Chair and Responsible Financial Officer is also happening.
So why not go along and see our new and full parish council in action. If you ever have any ideas for encouraging people to be involved in parish issues or to regularly attend PC meetings then please let our councillors know, or of course you can tell BOB and I will pass the ideas on. Who knows, in the future we may see and/or hear the meeting on a web or podcast via our parish technology and new hall broadband?
Finally, remember that although this contested election may have cost each of our 946 electorate a few pounds it is nothing more than should already have been budgeted. At least these new councillors now have the satisfaction of knowing they were elected by many more people than a co-option of 6 existing councillors and the electorate can also not complain they did not have a chance to choose them.
click for all BeInvolved posts]]>
306 papers were actually returned representing 32.35% of the electorate, 25% of these attended the polling station the balance being postal votes.
click for more BeInvolved posts]]>
Have you got a little bit of time to spare to keepBleadon's Monthly Village Market going?
We urgently need people to adopt oneor more of the metal road signs which go up in the week before the marketand come down Saturday afternoon/Sunday morning. Also occasional help isneeded with setting up tables and road bollards at the hall on the Fridayafternoon and early Saturday morning, and then clearing away the tables andbollards at the end of the market at 12.30 on market day.All this happensjust once a month.
If you think you can support this popular village eventplease email me: Joanne Jones or call 01934 812370.
Bleadon Coronation Hall Management Committee - Treasurer Vacancy
(VACANCY NOW FILLED (September 2013) But please get in contact if you want to be involved)
Due to a resignation Bleadon Coronation Hall Management Committee are looking to fill the position of Treasurer.
If you feel you have a little spare time and would like to make a contribution to the welfare of the Village,
please contact:- ID Clarke 01934 815182 for further details.
]]>
Although hopefully you may already be well aware, please find attached the Notice of Poll and personal profiles for each of the four candidates that has also been distributed to properties in the parish as promoted by Les Masters. So if you haven't yet received a copy here is one and please forward to anyone who may want one. Also, credit to the Parish Council who have also already posted this information on their website and the notice should also be posted on all the Parish Noticeboards (unfortunately these are only within the settlement boundary)
Once again, many thanks for all your help, advice and encouragement to BOB during this process which has certainly created a heightened political awareness within Bleadon and so all we now need is good weather and hopefully a good turnout come May 9th.
Good luck to all the candidates and regardless of the outcome, the three who are successful can be happy in the knowledge that they were democratically elected by the electorate of Bleadon.
In the meantime, Village plant-up team meet at the hall at 10am tomorrow (Saturday May 4th 2013) and The May Day Fayre is Monday 6th 2013, more info here
More BeInvolved Blog posts here]]>
This consultation is not just about the village settlement boundary or the planned development at the quarry (BL1 as the Parish website indicates) it potentially affects everything within the Bleadon Parish boundary which as you can see includes the Bleadon levels to Loxton; and from the A370 to Hutton Hill.
Bleadon needs continued protection from any unwanted development and this consultation is the opportunity to do so.
Bleadon currently has several areas under North Somerset policies and constraints including, but not limited to, housing development, flood areas, nature conservation areas, groundwater protection, various areas of sites of scientific interest, etc.That's why comments on the latest North Somerset Sites & Policies Document (or Development Plan) is so very important so that any protections are not lost. Something the PC today seem to have completely lacked in communicating to parishoners. Considering this consultation started on the 26 February there wasn't a mention about this important and vital process in the recent Parish Council Village News, and was only posted this week on the PC website on April 11.
Please be aware of errors on the recent PC website posts, the deadline for comment is 19th April and not the 9th so you still have time to comment. Also, the PC comment regarding the resident that supports Quarry development needs clarification as the comment actually supports the proposed North Somerset policy proposal with significant caveats and NOT the Marshalls Development as the PC website text may imply.
So, please try and read all the policy consultation that could potentially affect Bleadon (complicated I know but worthwhile for the future of Bleadon). The PC website comment states that they will carefully monitor responses to ensure they are representative of parishioners. I for one would really like to know just how exactly they know the parishioners views considering their limited forms of communication on these issues and it would be interesting to know what comments the planning committee have received for their meeting on 15th April.
If you are interested about how housing development sites have been determined, e.g. sites like the quarry, then this link should help.
Please also be aware that the NS development plan may need more public input and even perhaps a public referendum before it could proceed and the request to comment now is part of the process. I would also hope that the 2005 Village Plan questionnaire results (achieved at significant cost) are also used as a ready reference for this type of consultation as these were the residents views for Bleadon's 20 year plan at that time and are no doubt still relevant today. Unfortunately, I fear that these results have long since been forgotten by the PC as the last update to the Action Plan was in 2009 as also published on the PC website as of today.
Comments on the consultation can be made to North Somerset via email or online. The online comments here indicate some of the diverse policies and issues that are being commented on during this consultation. (you can specify the comments to only search for Bleadon)
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
When villagers enquired as to what had happened to the notices, initially the clerk said the notices had been posted on April 3rd but after further investigation he had to admit that it had not happened at all due to a mis-communication with the ranger and lack of a website editor. This no doubt prompted many quick phone calls and activity to correct the situation, albeit a little late and also resulting in incomplete and/or inaccurate posts by the PC (more on that later).
Although concerned about the lack of key communication not reaching those without internet access, North Somerset were content that the publication of the election on their website and notice boards in WSM, as well as on BOB, had already yielded some response so were happy to let things continue but promised a review of procedures to help ensure this could not occur again.
This oversite by the PC is hard to understand as:
Our clerk is very well qualified in parish procedures, as seen by his frequent references to polices, procedures and government acts in correspondence to parishioners. Yet, the clerk also stated in the Mercury "The difficulty is that a small group of people has called for an election whereas it could have been filled quite easily by the parish council".The Parish Council Village News had been already been published with the PC asking us to watch the notice boards. Yet, its article on 'What Price Democracy?' states "It will be great if we have a load of community-minded people come forward wanting to be parish councillors. But I won't hold my breath".Our Parish Council was awarded Quality Status and all that entailedin 2004 and again in 2009.This is the first call for an election since 1999, which ended in a co-option as there was only one candidate, so the Parish Council & clerk can perhaps be forgiven for being a little out of democratic practice.
So, what now..... Despite the lack of official communication within the parish there are 4 nominations for only 3 vacancies, perhaps there could have been more with better communications and time. So, we are going to have an election poll (subject to no-one withdrawing) on May 9th. Our democratic choice of 3 will be the first election poll since 1998 and surely has to be much much better than a co-option interview process.
The very best of luck and success to candidates and BOB sincerely hopes that this process will result in more democratic and transparent PC activities, and a more informed Bleadon electorate through improved and detailed communication from the PC.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
BOB is sorry to read in the Parish Council Village News that some blogs are considered a fuss but surely that's what democracy and freedom of speech is all about. We are all allowed opinions on what's best for Bleadon regardless of whether we are on the PC or not. BOB's post on this issue on 14 March was a direct result of emails from concerned residents with regards to fencing on South Hill, the proposed footpath extinguishment order and the lack of response from PC members. I make no apologies if BOB Blogs make the PC/VN Editor a bit uncomfortable or sensitive to perceived criticism of the current PC.
So, BOB needs to respond to one particular Spring 2013 Village News article on the South Hill fences....The PROW was of course not extinguished 'under the noses' of the current PC as this was an extinguishment ordermade by North Somerset which the PC and public were properly consulted on and chose to accept due to practicalities. BUT, this footpath may have been quarried away at sometime long ago and this presumably did happen with the then PCs knowledge (or not) but as the current PC are now asking for villagers memories, clearly there are no parish records which would seem to confirm that this did indeed happen 'under their noses'. BOB's main concern is that the current PC doesn't know how the loss of these local rights has come about, which is why comments on the current North Somerset Sites & Policies Consultation are so essential to protect our remaining rights.
Bleadon Parish currently has several protected areas under North Somerset constraints and policies including, but not limited to, South, Hellenge and Purn Hills, Bleadon Hill fields, Shiplate Woods, etc. That's why comments on the latest North Somerset Sites & Policies Document (or Development Plan)is so very important so that these protections are not lost. Something the PC today seem to have completely lacked in communicating to the villagers as there wasn't a mention about this important and vital bit of information in the Village News, especially surprising as this consultation started on the 26 February but was only posted this week on the PC website on April 11 with a sole focus on The Quarry development proposal.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
BOB is glad to see that some of its followersbudget suggestions to the PC have now been taken up e.g. a reduction in staffing costs and floral planting. Let's hope the PC continue this trend and perhaps visits to SLCC/NALC events will also be reduced so that even greater savings can be made.
Finally, don't forget the Civic Service at the church on April 21st at 10.15am where we have been invited to 'celebrate the work and commitment of the PC'. Although, the Village News confusingly also states that it's on April 7? If only the PC could sort out timely, accurate and detailed communications regarding their activities, and those affecting Bleadon in general, then perhaps we could all appreciate what they do much better.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
If only the editor of the village news had read BOB or asked the North Somerset Election Specialist then the full facts of the election process would have been made very clear to him and why one is desperately required (i.e. combined elections requested by 2nd April would not incur further significant costs, all of which should be in the budget anyway). He could even have read a previous Mercury articleor asked our very well qualified Parish Clerk.
To refresh recent memories, here is link to the previous BeInvolved blog post on the Weston Mercury article referred to.http://www.bleadon.org.uk/beinvolved.html?part_id=160604&post_id=13527&action=view_comments
It would also have been nice to see the Notice of Election posted on the Parish Council's own website and Facebook page but ...? Only one councillor vacancy has been posted but the link doesn't work (as at 05/04/13)!
Please feel free to share this information with all so that the Village News article can be democratically balanced.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
You may be aware through information on http://www.bleadon.org.uk/beinvolved.html that the PC has spent over £2000 on training and seminars for the clerk and councillors this year alone. In it's 2011/12 budget it only allowed £1,000 and reduced this to £500 for both 2012/13 & 2013/14 election costs clearly knowing that the actual cost would be more. It seems they presumed that they could rely on their casual vacancy/co-option process and interviewing prospective candidates knowing they could select who they asked. So much for democracy and perhaps why we haven't had a parish election for such a long time, apparently the last one filled after a request for poll was in November 1999 and the last contested election (Three nominees for one vacancy) was September 1997, all others since have been filled through parish council co-option!
So with all the previous years budget savings on elections, there should be more than enough in reserves to cover this easily. If not (as the CPALC suggests) we can always say "What, you have failed in your duty to provide for the cost over all these years!". Anyway, an election is less than the cost of toilets recently taken on at a cost of £3,000, that according tothe clerk, would make a very suitable parish council office!
You might also like to email Weston Mercury http://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/contact-us and sarah.robinson@archant.co.uk. You can also comment on the actual story here http://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/news/election_could_land_village_with_2_500_bill_1_1993435
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS 19 APRIL 2013 - CLICK FOR UPDATE
North Somerset Sites and Policies document is out for consultation and includes areas in Bleadon.The Parish Council supports the mixed use redevelopment of the site
where this results in community benefits.
This allocates sites for development, and has allocated 25 dwellings (along with business and community facilities) for Bleadon quarry. Now is the time to write in if you have any concerns about development at the quarry site, and it’s also important that people write in to support the exclusion of the other sites that were submitted (click here to see map). Those that put them forward will no doubt be beavering away putting together arguments as to why they should be re-assessed. The Sites and Policies document also carries forward the settlement boundary excluding the field opposite, and re-designates this as open space, so if this document is adopted, any development on this site wouldn’t now be possible until 2026 at the earliest. It’s probably also worth encouraging people to write in to support this open spaces designation, as whatever they say, potential developers may try and get the designation removed. The argument in this instance should be made that Bleadon needs open space, not that it doesn’t need housing.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION - Update
The attached map shows two sites which could be developed if the village boundary is changed from that proposed. The developers will be pushing to have the boundary changed (not very likely maybe, but possible). Which is why people should comment on the consultation if they do NOT want these sites developed, or an excessive number of houses in the quarry: This interactive emerging proposals map may also helpand/or the My North Somerset Map.
You can comment on the Sites & Policies Plan here: via email and/orvia the online system
There are four policies which directly affect Bleadon. Suggested comments are shown:
Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft Service and Infill Villages BL1
I/we support the exclusion of SHLAA assessment sites SHL72 and SHL98 from the Bleadon settlement boundary and from any development allocations.
I/we support the settlement boundary as proposed.
Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft Service and Infill Villages BL1
I/we support the proposed number of dwellings (25) in Bleadon Quarry. (Further comments could be made re: drainage, environment, etc. see other comments sent in. )
Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities DM72
I/we support the continuation of the Strategic Open Space site to the West of Bridge Road, Bleadon. (known to villagers as the Sanders' field)
Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities DM73
I/we support the designation of the three fields bordered by Bridge Road and Bleadon Road, Bleadon as Local Green Space (Policy DM73)(this is a new policy and would give more protection to the fields than the current Strategic Open Space which covers just half of the Sanders' field)
If you click on this link, and do a search for comments containing "bleadon", you will get all the comments so far relating to this village.If you want to comment see the suggestions above. Longer versions have been sent in. (these are in Planning "language", but can/should be simplified).
Marshalls already have written in along with some others. You can go directly to the Marshalls' comment: http://consult-ldf.n-somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/spdraft/listRepresentations?docid=3658708&objectoruid=8108001. Basically they want a lot more than the 25 houses suggested and have produced a report (PDF attached).
If anyone does want to comment it can be done directly on line (you have to register and log in), or by e-mail to: planning.policy@n-somerset.gov.uk. The Bleadon Parish Council Planning Committee are also going to comment on behalf of the people of Bleadon, but this is the chance for your individual say.
and here is the latest BOB post on this topic
You may also like to research thisLink to Neighbourhood Development Plan information under Localism Act
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
http://www.bleadon.org.uk/parishcouncil.html#CPALCArticles
Some of these you may already have seen previously but please have a look and share with others that may be interested.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
" I can confirm that a petition for election containing fourteen signatories was delivered to this office on the afternoon of Tuesday 5 March. This constitutes a valid claim of poll in respect of the current vacancy on Bleadon Parish Council (arising from the resignation of Councillor Trevor Marshall). I am liaising with the Returning Officer to set a date for the election. I will contact you when the election timetable has been agreed to advise of the date of publication of the Notice of Election. " Also the subsequent additional vacancies of Brian Gamble and Peter Trevitt will also be filled with this one as another request for poll was received by the April 2nd deadline.
BOB also understands that potential candidates have agreed to be nominated so once that is confirmed I will let you all know who so that we can lend our support. Thanks to all who have made this possible.
UPDATE :- ELECTION DATE is Thursday May 9th -
CANDIDATE NOMINATIONS to North Somerset Electoral Services by mid-day 11th April 2013
Please note that although Bleadon BOB website is NOT an official source of election related information, to aid parish election communication the following has been provided by North Somerset, Electoral Services who should always be contacted for any queries.
The election timetable for the Bleadon Parish Council by-election is now available on the North Somerset Council website at:
BLEADON PARISH COUNCIL ELECTION MAY 9TH 2013 - TIMETABLE
NORTH SOMERSET COUNCIL - PUBLIC & LEGAL NOTICES
Nominations can be submitted to North Somerset Electoral Services office IN HARD COPY ONLY from the day after the publication of the Notice of Election i.e. from Thursday 4 April onwards to arrive prior to NOON on Thursday 11 April 2013. an electronic copy of the nomination pack (including the Consent to Nomination) is attached on the basis that these must be downloaded and printed off to enable submission in hard copy.(these are available as originally supplied inMicrosoft Word 2007 format)or BOB converted PDF format)
Please could I ask that any enquires concerning the nomination or election process are made to this office.
Mike Jones
Elections Specialist Practitioner,Corporate Services,North Somerset Council
Tel: 01934 634 903
Fax: 01934 888 812
Post: Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ
Web: www.n-somerset.gov.uk
Please also click here for further answers provided by Electoral Services to questions on Parish Council Vacancies and Election process but if in doubt ask.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
In case you haven't seen the Weston Mercury recently please see attached.
The PC may congratulate themselves in their end of financial year Annual Report, but as they have managed to reduce our precept and still take on the toilets I think that shows the precept was already too high.Of course Bleadon still has one of the highest precepts in North Somerset, so we need to keep a close eye on expenditure next year but congratulate their current prudency.
Please also see this page
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
A candidate’s Consent to Nomination must be submitted prior to the close of the period for receipt of nominations i.e. before noon on Thursday 11 April in respect of the 9 May election. It must be signed in ink by the candidate and dated no later than the last day for receipt of nominations. It may be signed and dated up to one month in advance of that date. This allows an intending candidate to complete the document in advance of their nomination paper being prepared in order that it can be submitted to the Returning Officer in time. A Nomination Paper must be held invalid by the Returning Officer unless a valid Consent to Nomination has been received by the close of the period for receipt of nominations.
If a potential Nominee is abroad, one option is that the Consent to Nomination is emailed to the intending candidate. They could then print it off to complete, sign, date and return for submission prior to the close of the period for submission of nominations. I recommend the use of air mail or a courier service by the candidate to return the original signed Consent to either to the Proposer of their nomination paper for submission along with the nomination paper, or alternatively for that Consent to be sent directly to this office marked for my attention. If required, Consent to Nomination forms can be obtained from Electoral Services.
Options relating to a combined poll for all three vacant seats depend on a request for election in respect of the two recent vacancies being submitted to this office on or before Tuesday 2 April 2013. If this occurs the three possible scenarios are as described below.
If a further request for poll is not submitted by Tuesday 2 April but is submitted on or before Tuesday 9 April then a second separate poll would need to be held not later than 13 June. I estimate that such a further election is likely to cost the parish council a further £1500 to £2000 along with an additional £600 if poll cards are issued.
If no further request for poll is submitted by 9 April the matter would revert to the parish council for the two most recent vacant seats to be filled by co-option.
North Somerset Electoral Services have been notified of three casual vacancies arising from resignations :
(1) Trevor Marshall where a poll has been claimed and has been set for 9 May 2013;
(2) Brian Gamble and (3) Pete Trevitt are both subject of the second Notice of Vacancy which was published yesterday 18 March 2013.
The 14 day period during which a poll may be claimed in respect of the second and third vacancies ends on Tuesday 9 April 2013. However if a poll were claimed by ten electors on or before Tuesday 2 April 2013 it would be possible to combine the election for all three seats into a single poll with a significant reduction in the total costs to the parish.
Notice of Election for the 9 May 2013 election will be published on Wednesday 3 April 2013. For each intending candidate both a Nomination Paper (proposed and seconded by two electors) along with a Consent to Nomination (signed by the candidate) must be submitted to the Returning Officer at Electoral Services office by noon on Thursday 11 April 2013. I stress that a Nomination Paper would be held invalid by the Returning Officer unless a valid Consent to Nomination was received prior to the close of the period for receipt of nominations.
If there are more nominations than seats to be filled a poll will take place.
If there are less nominations than seats to be filled, those validly standing are elected unopposed and the Returning Officer would order a further election on a date that he selects within a period of 35 working days from the date of the original poll in order to fill any remaining seats.
If the number of nominations matches the seats to be filled, those validly standing are elected unopposed. This is distinct in law from “co-option” as each candidate is nominated to stand for election (and has not been opposed by other candidates), rather than having been selected (co-opted) by the majority of parish councillors at a parish council meeting.
The next full election to Bleadon Parish Council is due to be held in May 2015. This election could be combined with both the next General Election and North Somerset Council’s next full elections. The decision as to whether all three elections will be combined on one day is yet to be taken by central government. All seats on the parish council are subject to election in May 2015. All existing councillors at that date stand down and may stand for re-election (whether they were elected at the last full election in May 2011 or at any by-election prior to May 2015).
Where several elections are combined, shared items of expense e.g. polling station premises, polling and counting staff and equipment are split between the two or three elections involved. In such cases the Parish Council would be billed for either one third or half of such expenses as appropriate. In addition the Parish Council is billed for items that only relate to its own election e.g. the cost of parish ballot papers and posters.
It is difficult to be exact as to likely costs of an individual by-election in advance as this can depend on several factors including the number of candidates and whether polling cards are issued (a matter for the parish council to decide). It is estimated that a typical by-election in a parish the size of Bleadon is likely to cost between £1500 and £2000 excluding poll cards. Poll cards if issued are likely to cost approximately £600 .
With regard to the current vacancy, the law requires this is dealt with either, as provided in the Notice of Vacancy by a poll being requested , or if this does not occur by co-option by the parish council as soon as is practicable.
If an election is requested and there is only one valid nomination that candiate would be elected unopposed without the necessity for a poll to take place.
If an election is requested and no nominations are received the Returning Officer is required to hold further rounds of election until the vacancy is filled.
If an intending candidate has not submitted a consent to nomination prior to the close of the period for submission their nomination would be held invalid.
For a subseqent vacancy there is nothing to prevent any of the ten electors who claimed an earlier election signing a futher request for poll.
The detailed timetable of an election is very dependent on the date that any valid request for poll is received by the Returning Officer. In respect of the existing vacancy, if a poll is requested it would be held on or before 15 May, 2013 on a date to be set by the Returning Officer.
Hypothetically , if a valid request for poll was received by Electoral Services within the next few days then the poll could be set for a date between late March/early April and mid May. If the poll is not claimed until nearer the 8 March deadline given in the Notice of Vacancy it is likely that the poll would not take place until mid April at the soonest. Once a poll is requested the election timetable is calculated by counting back in time from the date set for the poll. The Notice of Election would be published by the Returning Officer approximately five weeks prior to polling day giving details of election day and the nomination and voting process.
The period for the receipt of nominations is approximately one week immediately following publication of the Notice of Election. If that Notice were published on a Tuesday the nominations could be submitted from the following day up to a legal receipt deadline of Noon on Wednesday of the following week.
Nomination papers would be available shortly after the date of an election is agreed. It is usual to provide these in hard copy form but Electoral Services could email the documents if requested provided they were printed prior to completion in hard copy. The nomination paper itself can be completed on behalf of an intending candidate e.g. it could be completed by their proposer and seconder and submitted on their behalf (there is no requirement for the candidate to complete any element of the nomination paper but it must be signed in ink by the proposer and seconder).
The one document that the candidate is required to complete at a parish council election is the “Candidate’s Consent to Nomination” which must be signed in ink and dated by the candidate and the date must be on or within one month before the last date for the delivery of nomination papers.
The legal requirement for a request for poll is that it is made in writing to the Returning Officer and signed by ten electors for the parish. It need not be a single document, and individuals or groups of electors could write and sign their own letter(s) to the Returning Officer which when all received at Electoral Services office total to ten electors. There is no proxy facility available for this purpose although a scanned image of a signed document emailed to Electoral Services would be acceptable. If Electoral Services can correctly identify the signatory(s) of such documents within the current Register of Electors they may add the electoral number(s) at their office. It is helpful if such letters can contain contact telephone numbers or / and email addresses for use in the event of a query .
The law relating to candidate’s nomination papers is specific and requires delivery to the Returning Officer of a hard copy document containing ink signatures. For this reason scanned images of nomination papers are not acceptable.
Until formally notified of the occurrence of any second vacancy, Electoral Services cannot give specific advice as to the timing of any resulting election. The timing of any election in respect of the first vacancy will be to an extent dependent on the date that any valid request for poll is received. There is limited opportunity to combine polls where two vacancies occur within a short time and both give rise to a valid claim of poll. Once the Returning Officer has set the date of election and Notice of Election has been given in respect of an initial election it would not be possible to combine that election with any subsequent poll. In such cases a further poll may be necessary and each may be separately recharged to the parish council.
There is currently one vacancy within Bleadon Parish Council arising from the resignation of Councillor Trevor Marshall. I attach a copy of the related Notice of Vacancy for your information. Electoral Services are informally advised that a further vacancy may occur soon but cannot confirm this until notified formally by the Parish Council.
As mentioned within the above Notice, an election may be claimed in respect of the existing vacancy if ten electors for the parish give notice to this office in writing by 8 March 2013 (otherwise the vacancy will be filled by co-option by the Parish Council). The law does not provide for such requests to be made by email as it is necessary for the claim of a poll to include each elector’s name, signature, address and electoral number. If you contact the Electoral Services office prior to completing such a claim for poll with the names and addresses of intending signatories Electoral Services can supply relevant current electoral numbers.
There is no prescribed wording or form for a claim of poll but I would suggest that it could take the form of a document including the following wording:
“We the undersigned being electors for the Parish of X do herby request that a poll he held to fill the vacancy existing within the X Parish Council following the resignation of Councillor Y”.
If an election is called in the case described above a poll will take place not later than 15 May, 2013 on a date to be set by the Returning Officer.
If a poll is successfully claimed and an election date is set by the Returning Officer, Electoral Services will prepare nomination forms and intending candidates may request these from this office. Once again the law requires that nomination papers are submitted in hard copy (and not by email). It is recommended that a candidate or their representative delivers these documents to Electoral Services office and if possible waits whilst they are checked.
You may download proxy voting (or postal voting) application forms from the Electoral Commission’s website: www.aboutmyvote.co.uk . You will need to print and complete these with an ink signature and can submit them either in hard copy to North Somerset Electoral Services office or as a scanned attachment to an email sent to: electoral.services@n-somerset.gov.uk
Mike Jones, Elections Specialist Practitioner, Corporate Services, North Somerset Council
Tel: 01934 634 903
Fax: 01934 888 812
Post: Town Hall, Walliscote Grove Road, Weston-super-Mare, BS23 1UJ
Web: www.n-somerset.gov.uk
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 10:12:37 -0000
To: Jo
Subject: RE: BPC - Communications and outstanding questions
Dear Both
If as you say my previous response does not conclude matters you only need to be specific in what you seek and I am sure the Parish Council will be happy to respond.
I find it somewhat disingenuous for you to suggest that Parish Council is not fully transparent in its communications with its residents. It has always strived to do so generally may I say against a backdrop of disinterest and apathy.
As to any forthcoming elections I hope you will explain to anyone that asks that if they are contested the process will come at a cost to the parish whereas the two forthcoming vacancies could have been filled by the casual vacancy process at no cost to the parish.
Bruce
Bruce Poole BA(Hons); Fellow ILCM; MMC
Bleadon Parish Council
Clerk to the Parish
Rooftops
10 South Street
Burnham-on-Sea
Somerset TA8 1BS
Tel: 07887802922
E-Mail: parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Web Site: www.bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
From: Jo
Sent: 11 March 2013 05:53
To: Bruce Poole
Subject: Re: BPC - Communications and outstanding questions
Dear Bruce,
I'm afraid that your response does not conclude matters and in due course we will still require more detailed answers to several of them. We all appreciate the apparent shortage of time in everyones hectic schedules these days which is why we continue to request for more detailed and transparent communications between the parish council and local residents, especially with regards to minutes. Perhaps the outstanding answers to our questions will come through future agenda items and associated detailed minutes if not directly from you.
We whole heartedly welcome the up and coming local election(s) in the hope that the successful candidate(s) can help prioritise and facilitate more communicative interactions with the electorate thereby requiring less requests for clarification of actions and issues. After all, what could be ''more pressing'' as you put it, than Councillors ensuring that their electors are well informed and content with the Parish Councils work?
Kind regards,
Jo and Chris
From:Bruce Poole To:JoSent:Friday, 15 February 2013, 5:02Subject:BPC - Communications and outstanding questionsDear JoFurther to your e-mail of the 13thFebruary 2013.Firstly can the Parish Council please correct any misunderstandings that you might have in how the Parish Council operates. It is governed by legislation and statute the main legislation being the Local Government Act 1972. It is this act which sets down exactly how a Parish Council which in law is an incorporated body has to conduct its business affairs. It is not therefore guide lines as suggested by you. Secondly all matters relating to the Parish Council that are brought to the attention of the Clerk are also brought to the attention of the members.1.Agendae & MinutesAs has intimated on previous occasions the circulation of the meeting agenda and the specific business to be transacted is dictated by the LGA 1972 –Sch 12 paras 10(2) and 26 (2)(a).Whilst it is accepted that we are in a digital age the strictures of the 1972 Act in this respect has not as yet been repealed.The Parish Council is very much aware of the problems created by only publishing confirmed minutes and has agreed to consider a resolution at the March Council Meeting that Draft Minutes should be posted on the Website. The reason why it has not done so for some years now in the past is because a member of the public took the draft minutes as fact acted upon them and then consequently discovered the draft minutes were found to include an error.(Bleadon BOB note: Draft Minutes for Februarys meeting were also sent as attachment) also needed for QC scheme2.ConferencesThe Parish Council has decided to rename this cost centre for 2013/14 as the word might be slightly misleading. The Parish Clerk is contracted to attend two conferences/training activities a year which is part of his annual CPD (continuous professional development) commitment. Parish Councillors are encouraged to attend these training events in order to keep them abreast of updated legislation and changing demands in the local government sector.These events are in the main spear headed by NALC (National Association of Local Councils) and SLCC (Society of Local Council Clerks). BOB note: and a direct cost of QC scheme3.Financial AnalysisPlease find attached. Please also note that this document does not reflect the final outcome as clearly there is more expenditure to include and virements to be carried out.4.Best ValueThe Parish Council is totally at the mercy as to what actions the local District Council takes in this regard and your questions in this respect should be addressed to your local District Councillors and Member of Parliament. BOB note: Click previous link for reply from MPWhenever a service is past down and assumed by the Parish Council it will as it always does is to proceed by the dictates in financial matters as set down in its Standing Orders and the good governance of the current audit regulations.5.PreceptsThe task of comparing/benchmarking with other parish councils is simply not practicable nor frankly achievable. Populations differ – services that are sought and/or provided differ as does the aspirations of its residents. Members are surprised that you have had to ask the question “what tangible benefits……” as they are of the view that the benefits are readily available for all to see! BOB note: really?(Bleadon BOB note: Precept submission for 2013-13 was also sent as an attachment)6.Quality Council StatusThe members are of the view that the cost of training of its clerk is mitigated by the professional service he is able and does offer. Clearly you have drawn the wrongconclusionsregarding “approved SLCC Contractors” as there are none. Contracts of employment are a matter of law prescribed by both the NALC & SLCC. The present clerk is not pensionable although the law on pensions is about to change. The present clerk by law is permitted to receive an expected gratuity of £3,500 which is not in the member’s opinion adequate recompense for some 24 years continuous service. Time prevents the writer from researching the information that you seek in respect to cost to the Parish Council. These are highlighted each year both in the Parish Magazine the village web site and by presentations given at both the Annual Parish Meeting (April) and the Annual Meeting of the Parish Council (March). (BOB note: see links above and make up your own mind - but cost is clearly more than an application fee as previously stated by the clerk)Quality Parish Council Status was in concept a good benchmark and one that Bleadon Parish Council fully supported. One of the set backs to the scheme was the sudden withdrawal after a year of additional funding from central government. If and when the scheme is re-launched after due consultation the Parish Council will as it does on all occasions review its position as to whether or not it seeks re-accreditation.7.Neighbourhood/Village/Action PlanThe proposed revisiting of the plan is an exercise to ensure that its outcomes are reflected in the subsequent proposals that may emanate from the proposed development of the Marshalls Quarry Site.The document to which you refer was made available to all residents at the time the Village Plan was published. A further copy is attached. (BOB note: see links and make up your own mind - last updated 2009 when re-accredited and certainly not published annualy)8.RelationshipsWith respect to the Coronation and Jubilee Halls the Parish Council in its capacity as an incorporated body is the custodial trustees and as such has no financial obligations other than granting any grants that it might be asked for. its major financial obligation is to insure the buildings.With respect to the Church the parish council has a financial obligation of paying an annual sum to the Church in respect to the clock and an annual donation towards the lighting. As the churchyard in legal terms is a closed churchyard the parish council is obligated to its general upkeep and repair.9.TechnologyNorth Somerset is progressing towards a paperless operation especially in terms of planning applications. The Parish Council took the step of introducing IT equipment into the halls some of which emanated from grants from North Somerset in order to be transparent with the public in respect in the main when discussing planning applications. That IT equipment is deemed to be a benefit for all other hall users. IT support for the parish web site and its financial governance requirements is provided by CRM and VSM. This latter step was done as a result of a process the Parish Council undertook when it introduced an exit policy for its main employee. The financial outcomes are reflected in the attached Budget document. The Parish Clerk has spent an inordinate amount of time far beyond his normal working hours in endeavouring to obtain a satisfactory broadband installation and when it is concluded it will become another beneficial asset to the Halls and its users.10.ToiletsPart of the negotiations with North Somerset has been to ensure that the Parish Council is not linked into any claw back situations so that if and when the building is no longer used in its present form the Parish Council of the day will be able to put it to an alternative use whatever that might be. The current aspiration is that it would make a very suitable Parish Council Office. The detail in respect to the future maintenance of this asset is still on going.11.Goal PostsThis matter is still under discussion and as such final decisions have as yet to be made.12.Grass CuttingThe present relationship is a contractual one and its present three year appointment ends in March 2014. As with all major contracts the Parish Council in accordance with its standing orders will seek three quotations. However it should be stressed that despite going through this due process the Parish Council invariably only receives one or two responses.The Parish Council has asked that it is pointed out that your recent correspondence has been fairly lengthy to say the least and as a result you will know how much personal time it has taken to scribe. In order to provide you with answers it has taken the writer an equal if not more amount of time at a time in the council calendar when there are more pressing matters to deal with – especially in the 13 hours a week devoted to Bleadon Parish Council work. This is not to say that the Parish Council does not wish to respond to parishioners questions but it does for the sake of the clerk’s working hours need to prioritise the work commitment. It is hoped that this lengthy response concludes matters.B PooleBruce Poole BA(Hons); Fellow ILCM; MMCBleadon Parish CouncilClerk to the ParishRooftops10 South StreetBurnham-on-SeaSomerset TA8 1BSTel: 07887802922E-Mail:parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.ukWeb Site:www.bleadonparishcouncil.gov.ukClick for BeInvolved main page]]>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:00:39 -0000
To: Jo
Subject: RE: Communication and Outstanding Questions
Dear Jo
I am in receipt of your e-mail and will as always bring the contents of it to the attention of the parish councillors. Again when the current financial discussions have been completed by the Parish Council I will gladly respond to your questions in full. My inability at this present time is due entirely to a lack of sufficient time over and above what is concentrating my time in respect to Parish Council Precept.
Bruce
Bruce Poole BA(Hons); Fellow ILCM; MMC
Bleadon Parish Council
Clerk to the Parish
Rooftops
10 South Street
Burnham-on-Sea
Somerset TA8 1BS
Tel: 07887802922
E-Mail: parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Web Site: www.bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
From: Jo
To: "parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk"
Sent: Sunday, 10 February 2013, 11:45
Subject: Communication and Outstanding Questions
Dear Parish Councillors/Clerk,
Thank you for your correspondence to date. We want to make it clear that it is not our intention to vex anyone The reason we, and other villagers, are asking these questions is that through the current communications mechanisms, including the minutes, we cannot find the answers by ourselves. FYI, the questions we have asked the Parish Council since December have been raised by a number of villagers and subsequently collated by us to follow up on their behalf. We are periodically being asked by them whether we have received any information or answers to the questions submitted to you. We are all frustrated by the process so far, you may well be too, hence our need to write the question summary below to ensure that no questions are overlooked by accident through the current process.
1. Agenda & Minutes (original email to PC 06/12/12)
Our understanding is that when an agenda is published it is final i.e. no further items can be added by the public but the contents of an email/request/query from the public are circulated to the members who will give it their consideration.
If a person couldn't attend the PC meeting, and the minutes are not published for at least 1 meeting/1 month how can a member of the public tell what has been discussed, addressed, or needs to be added to the next agenda? (An agenda item every month is to consider the previous month’s draft minutes). As the agenda is published 3 days before the next meeting, sometimes in advance of the minutes, a person potentially can't add a new agenda item for another month i.e. 2 meetings/2 months will have passed.
We assume that all queries/concerns emailed before a meeting will be discussed at the meeting only if there is an associated agenda item. Please confirm what happens in this instance e.g. whether new queries or associated questions not on that agenda are automatically put on the next months agenda.
The clerk has informed us that he follows the LGA (1972) guidelines for publishing the agenda, and minutes?, but these communication guidelines were written before the digital age and before the fast/instant emailing technology in most peoples homes, or accessible in public places e.g. village café.
As communication, transparency and inclusiveness between the PC and villagers are paramount could the minutes be published as soon as possible after the meeting? (We are now in February but are yet to see the outcome and minutes of the January meeting and the agenda has already been set). Timely and detailed minutes would enable members of the public who cannot attend meetings due to illness, work or family commitments to see what was discussed, feel included and potentially add an item to the next meetings agenda. We feel that this would also improve communications and therefore better support our understanding of the aims of Quality Council Status and the Localism Act. If minutes aren't timely and detailed and a person was unable to attend the meeting a person cannot successfully interact in the process and potentially feel excluded and not represented.
2. Conferences (original email to PC 13/01/13)
Please state what these are for, why they are necessary and what cost/benefit they yield.
3. Financial Analysis (original email to PC 14/01/13)
The clerk informs us that the Parish Council maintains an analysis as it is required to do within its governance and auditing regulations and that he would gladly provide us with a copy.
Please send us copies of past and current financial analyses.
4. Best Value (original from email the PC 11/01/13)
The clerk has informed us that services are being devolved downwards by district councils without regrettably any suitable funding. Obviously where pressure can be put on the district council the parish council will continue to do so.
How is the PC ensuring best value when taking on additional services previously undertaken by North Somerset with their economies of scale? E.g. Footpaths/PROW, Toilets, Dog Bins, Litter collection, Grass Cutting, etc.
Please can the PC tell us which of these decisions they have challenged on the public’s behalf?
5. Precepts (original email to PC 13/01/13)
Bleadon Parish precept has nearly doubled in the last 9 years. The clerk agrees and states so have the facilities and the benefits it provides.
What tangible benefits in terms of facilities & services does Bleadon have now that it didn't in 2003 for a lower precept cost?
So as not to duplicate effort, as we appear to have done for the financial analysis, has a benchmark against other similar and comparable local parishes been done? If so please can we have a copy?
6. Quality Council Status (original email to PC 05/12/12)
The clerk informs us that the physical cost to the Parish Council for accreditation and reaccreditation was just the application fees with the cost of preparation in terms of work time being absorbed in Parish Clerk’s working time and members time.
We disagree. There has been a consequential financial cost beyond simple application fees. Eg: The extra clerk qualification courses partly paid by the PC and subsequently gained by the clerk as a pre-requisite of the scheme has resulted in higher salaries and a pensionable employee status commitment for Bleadon's future. It has also led to an adoption of SLCC 'approved' contractors, contracts and training, e.g. SLCC Enterprises that were not previously needed but now are. One only has to look at pre-QC status precepts & expenditure for a comparison. Research has indicated that the QC scheme has had a very low acceptance amongst town & parishes (approximately 7%) and has now been suspended.
Now this scheme has been suspended and is being reviewed, what has been the cost to Bleadon, both to date and ongoing? E.g. permanent employments and pensions, qualifications, subscriptions to various bodies and trips to meetings, increased technology support, etc.
What tangible benefits in terms of facilities & services does Bleadon have now that it didn't in 2003 due to this scheme?
7. Neighbourhood/Village/Action Plan (original email to PC 05/12/12)
The clerk informs us that each year the Parish Council revisits the Village Plan in order to check as to its progress against the aspirations and where necessary provides monetary support to see that they are implemented.
Please send us a copy of the current action plan/targets to which this refers.
The clerk informs us that the plan that the Parish Council is now considering follows the suggestions of The Localism Act 2011 whereby it promulgates the idea of neighbourhood planning.
If the Parish Council revisits the current 20 year village plan (now only 7 years old) surely we already have a plan. This current plan has already been completed during the QCS accreditation period with wide consultation with villagers at a cost of over £5,000. Why is a working party needed now if the PC revisit the Village plan annually? Would this not incur more costs and time like the original Village Plan?
8. Relationships (original email to PC 13/01/13)
Please can you explain the financial relationship and responsibilities between the church and the village halls to the PC?
9. Technology (original email to PC 13/01/13)
What are the specific individual broadband and IT infrastructure costs like website and 'cloud' based server and backup technology provided via BT, CRM & VSM?
Why are these IT products specifically needed for Bleadon since 2003? Who uses them, for what purpose and why?
What percentage financial contribution is made by the PC toward these costs? What usage statistics are there to determine value for money?
Broadband - What about a different (cheaper) supplier?
10. Toilets (original email to PC 05/12/12)
What is the total initial and ongoing costs (e.g. approx £3,000 per annum maintenance, legal costs, insurance, etc) and effect on precept?
The clerk informs us that the long term aim of the PC is to incorporate say a disabled toilet within the hall complex with an external access and then the current toilets would be available for re-use.
Can you tell us what the parish council intends to use the building for, other than toilets, as this too may potentially have planning and building control application costs, ongoing maintenance, utility and insurance implications that may need to be covered by future parish precepts?
As regards this future development, why would the PC need to use council tax money (district and parish) to re-develop and re-use a facility that is designed for purpose and has been brought up to standard when it aims to lose this facility in the long-term anyway?
How long is long term?
North Somerset Council presumably got a better 'deal' for its toilet maintenance and cleaning contracts as it had 20+ toilets. Has the PC considered working in partnership with other PC's to reduced any maintenance and cleaning bills/contracts for the current toilets if/when they are taken on?
Please send us a copy of the Clerks report on the toilets.
11. Goal Posts (original email to PC 05/12/12)
What exactly is this new equipment and for what age group is it intended?
The clerk informs us that the playground equipment has been replaced but the park is now missing its climbing equipment and appears from previous minutes to be replaced with ‘goal posts’. We're glad the PC is still investigating this, and we see that it is a February agenda item. We hope that any new equipment will be more appropriate and challenging for older children in the junior and lower senior school age bracket.
12. Grass Cutting (original email to PC 13/01/13)
What hourly rate is charged, or is it a contracted price?
We hope the above question summary helps the PC to review all our outstanding queries/questions and ‘we’ all look forward to hearing the responses in the near future as some queries have been outstanding for two months. We truly thought that these would be simple questions that could be quickly answered by our Quality Status Parish Council relatively quickly considering some are ongoing agenda items and that some replies from you indicate the information is available, especially as éffective communication between all is essential for inclusion.
If any answers have now been detailed in the January minutes, which have not been published yet, we thank you in advance. If any of the above requires an additional agenda item please add it to the March meeting agenda.
Kind regards,
Jo Gower-Crane, Chris Butler et al.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:22:14 -0000
To: Jo and Chris
Subject: RE: Toilets paid within current PC budget
Dear Jo and Chris
I can confirm that the members were kept advised of your e-mails as they always are. I am surprised that you need to ask the question. Likewise it shouldn’t be necessary for you to ask that I ensure that your emails are recorded as being received when it would be and is my standard practice.
The budget process has not been completed due mainly because the Parish Council is currently waiting to be informed by North Somerset what the Grant will be for 2013-14. When that is received the Parish Council will move forward to confirm the Budget and Precept hopefully at its February Meeting. When that decision has been made the information will be incorporated within the Parish Council Minutes.
As far as the publication and circulation of the Meeting Agenda is concerned the timings are governed by legislation (LGA 1972) which is what the Parish Council works to. I do not actually follow your argument regarding waiting for a month – the agenda is circulated are prescribed and members of the public can if they so wish attend a meeting and speak subject of course to the Parish Council’s Standing Orders.
In conclusion I can confirm that the discussions that the Parish Council is currently undertaking with respect to the Budget and Precept takes all views and suggestions into account.
Bruce
Bruce Poole BA(Hons); Fellow ILCM; MMC
Bleadon Parish Council
Clerk to the Parish
Rooftops
10 South Street
Burnham-on-Sea
Somerset TA8 1BS
Tel: 07887802922
E-Mail: parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Web Site: www.bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
From: Jo
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:48:35 +0000
To: Parish Clerk
ReplyTo: Jo
Subject: Re: Toilets paid within current PC budget
Dear Bruce
Thank you for your reply. For continuity can you confirm that you also copied councillors the 'More on questions' as well please?
Also perhaps to aid communication these analyses could be put on website with the current action plan?
Please send us a copy of the latest ones.
I was aware our replies would miss the agenda but as the agenda and minutes were published Wednesday Night and our reply from you received on Friday at 5pm, it's difficult to see how anyone could get any new comment onto the agenda for a contextural discussion by councillors in the same month it refers. to?
It seems inevitable with the current process that new relevant electorate views on agenda items will always be a month behind when a decision may already be taken! How can this be quality democracy?
Please ensure that this email is also circulated and put on next months agenda with the others previously sent.
Kind regards
Jo and Chris
From: Parish Clerk
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:10:04 -0000
To: 'Jo'
Subject: RE: Toilets paid within current PC budget
Dear Jo
Thank you for your e-mail which is too late to formally go on to this evening’s agenda. However I have circulated its contents to the members who no doubt will give it every consideration when it comes to setting the Budget/Precept.
As you have rightly surmised the Parish Council does of course maintain an analysis as it is required to do within its governance and auditing regulations and if you had asked I would have gladly provided you with copies.
Time today does not allow me to respond to your points in detail but rest assured when I am free to do so I will provide you with the answers.
Bruce
Bruce Poole BA(Hons); Fellow ILCM; MMC
Bleadon Parish Council
Clerk to the Parish
E-Mail: parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Web Site: www.bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
From: Jo
To: "parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk"
Sent: Sunday, 13 January 2013, 15:05
Subject: Toilets paid within current PC budget
Dear Parish Council,
Attached - Overview Analysis of Parish Council Expenditure 2012-13 (so far) converted from Excel & Word documents using a legally free document converter obtained via internet, thus saving £15. Why did the Parish Council need to purchase one? (BPC minute reference 109 Jan 2013).
All data was extracted from the PC minutes & agenda published so far this financial year on the PC website and then categorised and summarised into headings that seemed to fit their descriptions.
From this analysis, we think we can identify and constructively suggest several items with potential savings to pay for the toilets (PC say annual cost is £2,941.39) without raising the precept.
For example:
Conferences £1,525 Please can you state what these are for, why they are necessary and what cost/benefits do they yield.
Grass cutting £2,678 What hourly rate is charged, or is it a contracted price? Could other local quotes be requested and hope to reduce this, say 20%.
Village News £2,200 currently £1,100 this year for 2 issues. Whilst a luxury colour version is very nice, publication can be time consuming to regularly produce (as indicated in your recent email to us) so perhaps there could be fewer publications, a reduction in the content similar to the previous newsletter, and/or residents could opt for an electronic version and print their own copy if required. This could reduce printing costs, reducing the impact on the environment and requiring less copies to deliver around the village. It will also mean villagers can all access a copy at the same time and not have to wait for a copy to be delivered. This could reduce the total cost by say 50%.
Flowers £1,064 This seems very high. Perhaps the village could try to obtain sponsors, fundraising events, or by donations.
CRM Website £390 As the current website clearly needs more regular updating all policy documents, minutes, agendas, BVN, Non-PC content, etc. could easily be put on http://www.bleadon.org.uk for free. Alternatively the current PC website needs much more regular voluntary maintenance effort and/or like other organisations they could make more/better use of Facebook or other free social networking platforms or significantly cheaper hosting solutions.
BT Broadband £333 This appears to relate to various locations eg: Shop, Youth Club, Village Hall, Councillors homes? What contributions are made by users/locations toward these costs? What use is made and do we need all of them, are there any usage statistics available? What about a different (cheaper) supplier?
Microshade VSM £400 Like many SLCC promoted services there are often other more cost effective commercial solutions available but why are these IT products specifically needed for Bleadon? Who uses them for what and why?
Estimated Potential Year on Year Saving over £2,941.39 We therefore believe that significant savings above the required amount could be made without "a significant reduction in some services & activities currently provided by the PC" (BVN convenience article, option 3).
Remember savings based on 10 months data only so these savings figures may hopefully increase.
This analysis did take Jo and I several hours to produce and of course I’m sure the PC have already done their own analysis and may present something similar at the meeting on Monday evening but I hope this analysis has been of interest and help for the Parish Council in making a difficult decision.
I'm also sorry I couldn't link article directly to BVN article as it’s not on the PC website yet and the editor hasn't as yet sent me a copy as requested, perhaps he’s still making the most of the Christmas break.
Kind regards,
Chris & Jo
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
To: "parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk"
Sent: Sunday, 13 January 2013, 15:02
Subject: More on Questions
Dear Bruce,
Thank you for your reply, albeit that it has taken 5 weeks to arrive. Unfortunately it has not completely answered the original question so please find below further comment/query to each of your answers in bold italic.
As our original questions are on Mondays agenda, we would be grateful that this email is also copied and available to Councillors for PC meeting on Monday night. We've appended our original questions to the bottom of this email for continuity and completeness of correspondence.
Please could you acknowledge receipt of this email and our request to pass to the Councillors for tomorrows meeting.
Kind regards,
Jo & Chris
From: Parish Clerk
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:01:45 -0000
To: Jo
Subject: Questions
Dear Jo & Chris
I would refer to your e-mail of the 5th December and my subsequent holding response.
Hopefully I am in a position now to answer the various questions raised in your e-mail.
1. Goal Posts.
The Parish Council has not as yet concluded its research with regards to this subject matter and as such has not committed to any expenditure. The £10,000 set aside for the replacement of the equipment was taken from reserves such monies being gained by the prudence of the Parish Council when it prevented a developer developing a property without it contributing some of his monetary benefit to the Parish Council the total of which was in excess of some £40,000. The equipment was replaced on the advice of RoSPA who following a succession of their annual reports indicated that the then equipment did not reach acceptable British and European standards.
We are grateful that the PC takes the safety of our equipment seriously and keeps an eye on its condition. You state that equipment has been replaced but the park is now missing its climbing equipment and appeared from the minutes to be replaced with goal posts. We're glad the PC is still investigating and hope that any new equipment will be more appropriate and challenging for older children in the junior and lower senior school age bracket. If research hasn't concluded in a process then we request that you please make this clearer on all future agenda items so that we can all distinguish between a discussion and a final decision point.
2. Toilets
The Parish Council is as you will have noted from recent issues of the Bleadon Village News still negotiating with North Somerset District Council on the proposed asset transfer. Failure to take them over will as has been stated result in their immediate closure and boarding up. The Parish Council are insisting that they are brought up to standard with immediate repairs and in addition and are currently seeking a grant £9,000 to complete the recommended repairs. It is anticipated that once the asset is transferred the annual cost of running the faculty will be in the region of £3,000 per annum. Contingent with this is the Budgeting process being undertaken at this present time where the Parish Council are endeavouring to see whether or not they can absorb the costs for the first year without over affecting the Precept. I am sure you will agree to lose the facility of the toilets will be a retrograde step considering that there no such facilities within the church and from the surveys taken as to their usage it clearly evident that they are well used by both resident and visitor alike. The long term aim is to incorporate say a disabled toilet within the hall complex that as an external access and then the current toilets would be available for re-use
We were pleased to see further information provided via the village news but again its hard for villagers to input into the PC agenda and decision making process without understanding the facts first. As regards future development, why would the PC need to use council tax money to re-develop and re-use a facility that is designed for purpose and been brought up to standard when it aims to lose this facility in the long-term anyway? How long is long term? The village already has two halls and a youth club so please can you tell us what the parish council intends to use the building for, other than toilets, as this too may potentially have planning and building control application costs, ongoing maintenance, utility and insurance implications that may need to be covered by future parish precepts? Surely development of the hall complex is for the Coronation Hall committee and absence of Church toilets a matter for the church although we do recognise that the PC is trying to save money by discussing alternative partnership working. Please can you explain these financial relationships to the PC? Notwithstanding, please also see our separate correspondence with constructive suggestions for paying for the toilets through the current budget.
North Somerset Council presumably got a better 'deal' for its toilet maintenance and cleaning contracts as it had 20+ toilets. Has the PC considered working in partnership with other PC's to reduced any maintenance and cleaning bills/contracts for the current toilets if/when they are taken on?
3. Footpaths
Like everything else that is happening with town and parish councils services are being devolved downwards by district councils without regrettably any suitable funding. The challenge to Bleadon Parish Council is to ensure services are upheld in the village and where they are not delivered by outside agencies it will have to consider what to fund and what not to fund. Obviously where pressure can be put on the district council the parish council will continue to do so.
Devolution of services to town & parish councils is a consequence of localism however this should not necessarily mean we have to solely pay for them. There is an economy of scale that is potentially lost through decentralisation of procurement contracts that ultimately increases national public expenditure. Something the financial ombudsman should be aware of if town & parish precepts continue to rise beyond and outside the council tax capping regime. I have raised this issue with our MP.
As an aside, I did notice that the proposed South Hill extinguishment order was effectively needed because the actual footpath had been quarried away at some point in history, something I am sure the current councillor(s) with diligent responsibility would not have let happen with modern legislation.
4. Hall Broadband
Currently the Parish Council has not paid BT anything as it is still in discussions as to the outcome of the first initial installation. Arrangements are that a new installation will be put into the Coronation Hall with the Youth Club taking over the first installation. The Parish Council has since its inception made a contribution to the Broadband Facility in the Café. This has been done on the basis that providing the computer in that location was a benefit to anyone in the village that wished to use it.
But please, what are the specific individual broadband and IT infrastructure costs like website and 'cloud' based server and backup technology provided via BT, CRM & VSM? Why are all these required and how are these paid for please and what usage statistics are there to determine value for money?
5. Neighbourhood Plan
Each year the Parish Council revisits the Village Plan in order to check as to its progress against the aspirations and where necessary provides monetary support to see that they are implemented. The plan that the Parish Council is now considering follows the suggestions of The Localism Act 2011 whereby it promulgates the idea of neighbourhood planning. The Parish Council is anxious to ensure that everyone has a say as to how the Marshalls Quarry Site is developed once it has closed for good. It is anticipated that the group would be in the form of a Working Party and again it would be hoped that sufficient volunteers will come forward to produce the plan
The Quarry site issue was raised and answered in the 2005 questionnaire as were many other matters to produce a 20 year plan. Therefore as we are not yet half-way into that plans term, surely this working group should pay very close attention to the past results and detail of that important work. If as you say the parish council reviews this plan annually please can the previous years plans/targets be posted online, or point us in the right direction, as we can't seem to find them, alternatively please send us copies via email. In particular please can you send us a copy of the current plan/targets/actions that the PC is working with?
Also I am sure you are aware that the localism act provides for other local resident electorate led initiatives not necessarily under the auspices of existing forms of government so we would not want duplication of effort or other contradictory target requirements through mis-communication between the PC and villagers.
6. Quality Council Status
The physical cost to the Parish Council was just the application fee – the cost of preparation for the first accreditation in terms of work time was absorbed in the Parish Clerk’s working time at no monetary cost albeit that a great deal of additional working hours was undertaken without recompense. The re-accreditation preparation was I am pleased to say undertaken by the members assisted by the Parish Clerk at no mean cost to their personal time, Again the only cost was the application fee costs.
We have to congratulate the Councillors and particularly the clerk for their efforts in achieving QC status for Bleadon, but there is a consequential financial cost beyond a simple application fee. Eg: The extra clerk qualification courses partly paid by the PC and subsequently gained by the clerk as a pre-requisite of the scheme has resulted in higher salaries and a pensionable employee status commitment for Bleadon's future. It has also led to an adoption of SLCC 'approved' contractors and contracts for facilities that were not previously needed but now are. One only has to look at pre-QC status precepts & expenditure for a comparison. Research has indicated that the QC scheme has had a very low acceptance amongst town & parishes and has now been suspended. What tangible benefits in terms of facilities & services does Bleadon have now that it didn't in 2003? Perhaps this is an area for savings to be made?
7. Precepts
Yes it has but so has the facilities and the benefits it provides. At the time of writing the Parish Council is considering its Budget but is held back in being able to make a decision on its Precept due to the fact that central government has changed the rules in dealing with the Council Tax Support Scheme. This undoubtedly will have an impact on the Parish Council resources. As always I am sure the Parish Council will continue to do all it can to balance what it has to provide in form of services and its legal obligations against the cost to the local community. The headline Tax for the current year for a Band D Property in Bleadon was £75.69 which equates to £1.45 pence per week. A moderate sum surely to enjoy all the benefits that Bleadon has to offer.
Please see previous comments. We respectfully request that Bleadon Parish Council compare it's Band D rate to other similar and comparible local parishes and then do a benchmark comparison of services and ask why are they cheaper to run than Bleadon? Again, what tangible benefits in terms of facilities & services does Bleadon have now that it didn't in 2003 for a lower precept cost?
8. Village News
You will no doubt be aware that the Village Newsletter is produced in its entirety by Councillor Keith Pyke on a voluntary basis. In the latest issue he gave what was considered to be a reasonable admission as to why the current edition was late on this occasion. I might just mention here that one of the suggested cost savings would be to produce three issue per year rather than four.
We appreciate the efforts of KP and the information that the BVN imparts to villagers but your response does raise the question that if the glossy version that is now produced is too onerous and too expensive then why was this agreed to by the PC? Many people I have spoken with are quite happy with the previous newsletter that didn't miss a copy! Perhaps a less ambitious return to a basic production is needed and a critical review of what is really required in an increasingly electronic communication age. Please see our other correspondence regarding paying for toilets.
Yours
Bruce
Bruce Poole BA(Hons); Fellow ILCM; MMC
Bleadon Parish Council
Clerk to the Parish
E-Mail: parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Web Site: www.bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 18:43:53 +0000
From: jo
Subject: Questions for December Agenda/Meeting
To: parishclerk@bleadonparishcouncil.gov.uk
Dear Parish Council,
Having seen the November minutes and December Agenda, posted on the web in the last couple of days, we ask you to consider and publish fuller details of the following, especially in relation to the council meeting on Monday:
1. ‘Goal Posts’ for the playground at a cost of over £4,000 (up £3,000 on November minutes quote), this on top of £10,000 already spent on play equipment more suitable for toddlers. There used to be taller slide, a large sandpit without toddler equipment in it, and a wonderful and challenging high climbing frame suitable for a range of ages. What exactly is this new equipment and for what age group is it intended?
2. Toilets – The Parish Council seems to have decided to acquire these from North Somerset. What is the ongoing cost and effect on precept? Will the Clerks report on this be made available on the website?
3. Footpaths – We applaud Andy Eddy and his volunteers but what pressure is being put on North Somerset Council to continue the service our Council Tax pays for? Will this not ultimately increase the precept when expenses are requested by volunteers?
4. Hall Broadband. – We believe the main purpose of this installation was for the Parish Council’s use in the hall with added benefit for Hall users and the Youth Club, therefore could you not get the cable re-installed at the hall at BT’s expense seeing as they haven’t seemed to achieve the objective? After all, it is only a phone line, it’s even possible the Wi-Fi signal will then work in Youth Club! Has BT refunded the cost of this failed installation? Is the line rental still being paid if it does not work, or has this also been refunded? What is the full cost (initial and ongoing) of Broadband facilities in the Café, Halls/Youth Club and Councillors, including the cost of supporting this and other technology eg. website? Please can you expand upon the local voluntary help requested to resolve this issue and why this is considered a solution for business failure i.e. BT’s?
5. Neighbourhood Plan – the 2005 Village Plan questionnaire was for a 20 year Plan and it cost a lot of money (more than £5,000) to produce results and views of the villagers and yet there seems to be no meaningful plan produced other than an outdated 2009 action plan created during Quality Status re-accreditation. Therefore, what plan is the Parish Council following for its priorities? Why do we need to investigate a new Neighbourhood Plan? Who will be involved in this proposed working group? If a new Neighbourhood plan is proposed will it work with the existing 20 year plan or will the group start anew, and possibly incur similar costs again if the villagers are to be widely consulted and have an input?
6. Quality Council Status – Now this scheme has been suspended and is being reviewed, what has been the cost to Bleadon, both to date and ongoing? E.g. Clerk & Ranger employment and pension, qualifications, subscriptions to various bodies and trips to meetings, increased technology support, etc. What proven tangible benefits to Bleadon can be identified from our participation in the Quality Council scheme?
7. Precepts – Bleadon Parish precept has nearly doubled in the last 9 years (£21.5K in 2003/4 to £41K for 2012/12). Given the national government austerity measures and that our precept is the highest of like/surrounding parishes, how is the PC intending to reduce its costs whilst maintaining or indeed improving services?
8. Village News – Please can you tell us why the Autumn Village News was not produced, published and distributed especially given the items currently being discussed, those without internet have been disadvantaged. Apparently this was the first issue missed in 25 years, what plans are being put in place so this doesn’t occur again? Will advertisers be recompensed?
Unfortunately, like others, we are unable to attend the meeting on Monday yet we are concerned about rising Parish Council costs especially during this poor economic time and subsequent need to cut costs at all levels of government without cutting services.
We look forward to these questions (and others) being answered as soon as possible, reported fully in the minutes and published on the website so that we can all appreciate what is being actioned and the reasoning behind the decisions.
Please confirm receipt of this email.
Yours sincerely,
Jo & Chris
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>
Bleadon Be Involved Blog is for anyone who would like to raise an issue about, affecting or concerning Bleadon Parish Area. Please send your information for a new blog item to us using the normal contact us pageand we will add it as soon as possible then anyone can add comments to it. These comments can be made in your name or anonomously but we reserve the right to take down anything we consider inappropriate or likely to offend. You can see historic posts by using the drop down bar at the top of the blog page
You may be interested in these links to other Bleadon BOB pages Parish Council Precept,Parish Plan& Issues.
For convenience, you can subscribe to RSS feeds from this page via email or by your own RSS reader, click for detail.
Click for BeInvolved main page]]>