A group of residents voiced their concerns that the play area which should have been provided by the developer of the area around Applegarth as part of the conditions laid down when planning permission was granted had become overgrown, heavily fouled by dog faeces and show no sign of the promised play facilities being installed.
This has been a long running problem and the Parish Council have repeatedly asked for East Riding of Yorkshire Council Planning Department to enforce the condition. All this has been fruitless as nothing has resulted from these requests and it was remarked that the ownership of the parcel of land has apparently been transferred to a holding company. Other developments within the village are also incomplete, requiring various works but reportedly companies involved are insolvent.
None of these problems would exist IF the developers had been required to put up a substantial bond before being permitted to release any of the properties for occupation. The East Riding Council should take steps to remedy this situation as a matter of great urgency so that future development within the village does not suffer the same fate with promised facilities failing to be delivered. The failure of ERYC to operate on a sound business basis should not be permitted to penalise individual communities in this manner.
Before the ERYC took over the administration of this region their predecessors, Boothferry District Council, did obtain bonds to cover such works so there is nothing new in the concept, simply a failure of the present administration to protect our community interests.
Thursday 12 August 2010
Saturday 7 August 2010
Continuing Saga of the 2007 Flooding
Our resident self-proclaimed drainage expert and fidi defensor has sent an email to a number of targets attempting to justify his obstructive behaviour relating to the drainage improvement project. Having had a copy passed to me I note a series of disingenuous statements, basic errors and (deliberate?) lack of understanding of the situation.
In his email he has changed the story somewhat from the information he issued to the Goole Times in which he alleged there were two schemes - one "scheme" has become a draft plan based on the grant of £85,000 obtained from EU funds. I recall that at the time this grant was announced he publically stated it was by no means sufficient to provide a complete solution so his complaint that the community now need to contribute seems based on very selective use of the historical information.
The EU funds would have certainly gone a long way towards reopening the filled in or inadequately culverted dykes and left them as open watercourses but would have left these same dykes as vulnerable to interference as before and with erratic levels. To avoid the dykes becoming blocked or restricted again the ERYC did not proceed down this path but carried out proper levels and flow investigation surveys and designed an improved piped system which was put before the parish council. The Parish Council then held consultations with the affected residents of Westbrook Road, Scalby Lane/Greenacre Park/Chestnut Drive and finally, having obtained the agreement of these householders who would be most affected by the works, held a village consultation open day. Without agreement at every step of these consultations the project would not go ahead. The consensus of opinion was in favour so the Parish Council acted swiftly by holding a special meeting to approve application for a low interest rate public works loan and make the loan application.
It was at this meeting that the use of the ring fenced money held by the parish council for memorial hall rebuild was suggested by the individual mentioned above. As a result the concept of ring-fencing, and low interest capital works loans was explained to him. However he chose to ignore this and began issuing misinformation to the public with a number of "loaded" questions as a private consultation.
Following responses via Parish Council leaflets to correct the bizarre claims in the private consultation papers he approached the Goole Times local newspaper to make his case to that newspaper. Before the Goole Times printed the resulting article they asked the Parish Council for comment which did enable the true situation to be included and expose the lies being peddled, with testimony from both the Parish Council and ERYC drainage department that no alternative scheme had ever been drawn up. Subsequent enquiry of the Internal Drainage Board confirms they have no record of any such scheme either. From this it should be evident to all readers that there never was an alternative scheme for the Parish Council to consult upon as claimed, much less that the East Riding Drainage Engineers or the Internal Drainage Board had created one in conjunction with our self-proclaimed drainage expert as he also claimed. Professionally qualified Engineers do not normally take input from unqualified amateurs in any field!
This can only reveal a misguided determination to twist the truth to his own ends.
In his email he has changed the story somewhat from the information he issued to the Goole Times in which he alleged there were two schemes - one "scheme" has become a draft plan based on the grant of £85,000 obtained from EU funds. I recall that at the time this grant was announced he publically stated it was by no means sufficient to provide a complete solution so his complaint that the community now need to contribute seems based on very selective use of the historical information.
The EU funds would have certainly gone a long way towards reopening the filled in or inadequately culverted dykes and left them as open watercourses but would have left these same dykes as vulnerable to interference as before and with erratic levels. To avoid the dykes becoming blocked or restricted again the ERYC did not proceed down this path but carried out proper levels and flow investigation surveys and designed an improved piped system which was put before the parish council. The Parish Council then held consultations with the affected residents of Westbrook Road, Scalby Lane/Greenacre Park/Chestnut Drive and finally, having obtained the agreement of these householders who would be most affected by the works, held a village consultation open day. Without agreement at every step of these consultations the project would not go ahead. The consensus of opinion was in favour so the Parish Council acted swiftly by holding a special meeting to approve application for a low interest rate public works loan and make the loan application.
It was at this meeting that the use of the ring fenced money held by the parish council for memorial hall rebuild was suggested by the individual mentioned above. As a result the concept of ring-fencing, and low interest capital works loans was explained to him. However he chose to ignore this and began issuing misinformation to the public with a number of "loaded" questions as a private consultation.
Following responses via Parish Council leaflets to correct the bizarre claims in the private consultation papers he approached the Goole Times local newspaper to make his case to that newspaper. Before the Goole Times printed the resulting article they asked the Parish Council for comment which did enable the true situation to be included and expose the lies being peddled, with testimony from both the Parish Council and ERYC drainage department that no alternative scheme had ever been drawn up. Subsequent enquiry of the Internal Drainage Board confirms they have no record of any such scheme either. From this it should be evident to all readers that there never was an alternative scheme for the Parish Council to consult upon as claimed, much less that the East Riding Drainage Engineers or the Internal Drainage Board had created one in conjunction with our self-proclaimed drainage expert as he also claimed. Professionally qualified Engineers do not normally take input from unqualified amateurs in any field!
This can only reveal a misguided determination to twist the truth to his own ends.
Monday 2 August 2010
Village Plans - Controlled Expansion of Gilberdyke
East Riding Council is presently looking into the future growth of the village and the Parish Council asked to comment. As this is a matter which affects all residents to some degree, a parish consultation day is to be held in the Youth centre adjacent to the village Memorial Hall on 5th August from 12 noon to 7 pm. Also for consultation is a proposal to reduce the speed limits in the village.
On a personal level my present thoughts are that the village should grow slowly but on a planned basis to enable efficient use of the land rather than allowing a myriad of piecemeal developments which lead to islands of land becoming "locked" and inaccessible.
At the same time the ERYC Planners need to take proactive steps towards alleviating the traffic problems within the village caused by the location of the present industrial estate and its road access. I think it would be far better to stop further development on the existing site and provide an alternative for industrial expansion to provide local jobs by permitting industrial development to the West of the village where the old A63 (now the B1230) gives a direct connection to the M62. The farmland around that quarter is waterlogged for significant periods thus its loss would not be significant to regional crop yields.
On a personal level my present thoughts are that the village should grow slowly but on a planned basis to enable efficient use of the land rather than allowing a myriad of piecemeal developments which lead to islands of land becoming "locked" and inaccessible.
At the same time the ERYC Planners need to take proactive steps towards alleviating the traffic problems within the village caused by the location of the present industrial estate and its road access. I think it would be far better to stop further development on the existing site and provide an alternative for industrial expansion to provide local jobs by permitting industrial development to the West of the village where the old A63 (now the B1230) gives a direct connection to the M62. The farmland around that quarter is waterlogged for significant periods thus its loss would not be significant to regional crop yields.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)