Does anyone know what has happened to the plans to redevelop part of South Street Park? A planning application was submitted in January (ref: 00166/FB) but no decission seems to have been made. I thought the developers of the new Airpoint flats were responsible for paying for the park improvements. Is this still the case?
Hi all For those who are interested, the local Transition BS3 group are kicking off a community allotment project and have a couple of solar power info sessions set up with locals who have installed systems. See website for details & to get involved http://www.transitionbs3.co.uk Immediate dates: Fri July 4th BBQ @ 7pm on Redcatch 'E' Allotments (Beckington Road) Sat July 5th Get-together @ 6pm on Bedminster Down 'C' Allotments (Bedminster Rd, next to Cattery) Tues July 8th @ 7:30pm Solar info session (pv & hot water) @ 13 Alpha Road For further info, check the website, join the Google discussion group (link on website) or contact <email obscured> Best wishes
Very Good Points Steph! You are so right that the Marksbury Road area would be a fantastic recipient of incoming caring and greening! I'm all for that! Nixie Nixie James-Scott Therapist, Teacher & Reiki Master 0117 985 8036 / 07974 119428 www.nixiejamesscott.co.uk www.thefamilypractice.tv check out some great music at :- www.longdogmusic.net
I know there's been some discussion in the past about setting up a group to consider and contribute to planning issues in the area, but the for the time being the suggestion is for these to be raised here. I have a specific issue, but it relates to some broader points that may be of interest to others so I hope you won't mind be raising it. We live in Alpha Road which is in a conservation area and is one of the oldest streets south of the river; we think our house is about 1830. These houses have lots of character, but they are fairly small and due to their age, design and the work done over the years they tend to suffer from damp and other problems. They also represent a challenge to improve their environmental performance. For example the 'butterfly' roof means only limited insulation can be put in the loft and there is a large cold bridge where the lead valley runs. We've been working with Simon Lewis from The Green House Project http://www.thegreenhouseproject.net/ and, from starting at looking at external insulation, have come up with a plan to address a number of issue in the house including insulation of walls and roof, solar PV and thermal, rainwater and ventilation. There are various interesting ideas here but the one I want to raise is that we want to change the roof. It might be possible to do this without changing the external profile of the house, but the opportunity arises to put a room in the loftspace - and that's the only way to really justify the investment. So, after that rambling introduction, the nub of the issue is that we find ourselves in between two sets of planning priorities, both of which I'm sympathetic to. One being to maintain the character of the area and in particular to not permit changes to the skyline (see the Bristol Local Plan link below). The other more recent priorities are about upgrading older buildings and addressing environmental issues (see the PPG15 and SPD5 links). Now I don't know which way our planning case officer will lean, but there does seem a tension here. I'm also very aware that if our plan is approved then a precedent will be set that will open the door to other applications that will over time change the area. My feeling (of course) is that our proposal represents a useful way forward for houses like ours but I'd be interested in any other thoughts. (Of course if anyone felt able to post a supportive comment on the planning portal that would be helpful...)
And if they can be nut trees & fruit trees so much the better! Emma
Where we live in Victoria Park there is a not a problem with commuter parking, which from the comments on this forum and my own knowledge of the area is the likely to be widely true. I don't drive a car, I work from home and walk to the shops and I have a folding bike. There is of course a problem with cars and car journeys globally and I am really keen to see roads less choked with traffic and a greener, healthier environment for all, less need for cars and an easier life generally. So is the proposed Residents Parking Scheme going to help achieve this at all? I don't see it. You ask for pros and cons: 1.. People who live on the street already pay Council Tax 2.. People who park cars in the street already pay Road Tax 3.. The proposed parking scheme would be a new additional tax - a revenue raising exercise for the Council 4.. The benefits to the Council are guaranteed: Millions of pounds of income will be raised annually from the householder permit costs and visitor permit costs. Experience in other areas operating these schemes shows that once they are introduced, over-zealous parking wardens start doing the rounds issuing tickets at all opportunities, raising further millions of pounds of income in fines for things as trivial as not scratching off the correct year on a permit when the correct day, month and time are clearly indicated 5.. The benefits to the householder are zero or dubious - if bays are painted in the road this will usually reduce the amount of available parking space for everyone and the scheme will in no way guarantee that you can park in your street so, in the case where commuter parking is a non-issue, you may simply be paying a new tax for the privilege of having a reduced chance of being able to park in your road 6.. The dis-benefits to the householder are guaranteed - the permits cost 40 per year in new tax, a cost which will undoubtedly rise each year, and if your household already owns and continues to need more than one vehicle for work and you will either have to pay an additional higher charge of 80 for second permit, or there is a good chance you will simply not be allowed to park your vehicle within miles of your property, and the council offer no solution to this! What are households supposed to do in this case? 7.. The council is proposing to levy an additional charge for something that has always been paid for through other taxation (road tax, council tax etc) without planning to reduce your tax burden in other areas to compensate 8.. If a scheme was designed in your interest instead of the councils it would not start by penalising you for parking your own car in your own street 9.. If councils want to tackle this subject they should be forming radical and effective planning and other policy that focuses on re-localisation and reducing the need for millions of fossil-fuel powered vehicle journeys made every day, thus reducing the need for these vehicles as time goes on, instead of making a fast buck and providing no alternatives. 10.. And while I'm at it, this does not include undermining walking and cycle routes by giving them over to rapid transit buses! 11.. The hard fact is people like cars more than buses, trains, rain, etc. Making life more difficult and expensive for car users just makes more annoyed people driving cars. If you want to tackle the problems of cars and parking, work to reduce the population and the need for making so many journeys and having so many cars.
You are quite right Stephanie, so don't hide! Tree planting where ever there's room is a great idea and the "grey areas" should be prioritised for traffic calming such as chicanes with trees out into the present carriageway at intervals to slow the traffic. Tess
Hello
A fantastic improvement for the deprived and neglected Marksbury Area would be
planting lots of trees along the road- it would of course transform the area
visually and make it appealing rather than monotonous and depressing and grey
as at present, and it would also improve the air quality in this area which is
infamously poor due to it being the bottom of the valley. It would also prevent
drivers from persistently parking on the pavements and forcing pushchairs,
wheelchairs and pedestrians to walk in the road.
While we're at it, a strategically placed selection of Sleeping Policemen would
prevent Marksbury Road from continuing to be both a boy racer rally course and
a rat run.
I feel that Southville actually has quite a few facilities already, and what
with the Marksbury Area Green Space being threatened by a rapid transit route
and resultant further erosion of the quality of the environment in an already
grim area, then Marksbury should be prioritised for community improvement over
other, rather nicer areas... hides behind (skanky) sofa...
Thanks,
Steph Wardle
__________________________________________________________
Not happy with your email address?.
Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at
Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html
This is a much better approach, with only offenders required to pay. Tess
The next PACT meeting is due to take place at ST FRANCIS CHURCH, NORTH STREET, SOUTHVILLE on Tuesday 29th July 2008 at 1900 hrs. The following priorities were set in April and these will be discussed 1. ASB in East Street area 2. Drug Dealing 3. Vandalism and Graffiti We will also be setting the priorities for the next three months so it is vitally important that any feedback/issues are brought to the meeting that have been raised by fellow residents/businesses/colleagues during the last few months. Many Thanks PC 3127 Ed Wiltshire and PC 3242 Steve Gifford Southville Neighbourhood Policing Team ##################################################################################### This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared by MailMarshal #####################################################################################
Hi, Eric asked about 106 developments. The message below has just gone out to Bedminster Partnership members. I've detached the attachment. It's large, but I can send it to anyone who wants it. Only I'm off on holiday tomorrow, so you will have to wait until I get back. Cheers, Ben. All ideas welcome. Ben. Hi, I'm writing to members of the Greater Bedminster Community Partnership and a few others at the request of the Co-ordinating Group of GBCP. We are collecting information. Many of you will know that as a by-product of many property developments, developers are required to pay some compensation for stress caused in the community (eg extra pressure on roads, schools, public spaces etc). This is known as 106-money. It can amount to thousands of s a year. I've attached the most recent BCC report on 106, including the three wards of Bedminster, Southville and Windmill Hill. You will see that the current committed total for the three wards comes to 1,541,189. These investments have already been decided, but there will be further allocations to come from developments that have not yet been agreed. Until now the allocation of this money has been determined by negotiation and bargaining within the officer corp of BCC. We hope to open this process up, making it more transparent and accountable. We think that local people through the neighbourhood partnership should play an active part in the discussions that set priorities and allocates 106 monies. We think the same about other monies too, but that's for another day. So, what do we want you to do? As a first step in opening up the process, we've decided to start a 'Community Improvement List'. Initially, it will be just that, a list, possibly with some costings, but no official standing. It's a starting point. We'll also be asking statutory departments about their proposals in the area for the next couple of years. Once we have started the list we will circulate it so that people can say 'that's a good one' or 'don't like that' or 'you've forgotten so and so'. We'll try to involve as many local people as possible. Ok. Imagine that you had 1000, or 30,000 or 100,000, what would you spend it on locally? Some public seats in North Street? Refurbish the skateboard area in Dame Emily Park? Buy more books for Marksbury Road Library? What do you think? A couple of things are already on the table. These include proposals to make Phillip Street (opposite the City Farm) much more comfortable for pedestrians and cyclists rather than a rat-run and the Green Spaces and Rivers Network is calling for some pump priming money to prepare green space plans so that effective funding bids can be made to the lottery, landfill tax etc. Send me your one or two favourite ideas. Talk to the people in your organisation and find out what they think, too. If you can put a costing to it and other details, so much the better. Please note that we are only just starting on this process. Some parts of BCC are very happy to debate priorities. Other sections would prefer to leave it to the experts (ie themselves) to decide. Opening up the whole procedure may take a year or two. Cheers, Ben (Secretary, GBCP)
I've been reading back through previous topics and was interested in this one. It looked like a promising line but was working towards a November workshop for further discussion. Have there been further developments?
There are also concerns about other local schools in the review. Our focus is mainly on Southville Primary which is also a victorian building with similarly cramped classrooms but with even more restricted options for space and expansion. The proposal is for there to be NO investment in the school in the Primary Review, while Holy Cross on Dean Lane is down for expansion and Ashton Gate rebuilt. This is bound to have an effect on how Southville Primary is perceived in the coming years. The overall picture for the area seems to be to provide for a slight increase in numbers and to target the funds to specific needs. Inevitably this means some will get overlooked while others will benefit (assuming the detailed planning delivers what's needed). Southville Primary governors are discussing this next week but I imagine they might like to be in the position of Ashton Gate in thinking about how to manage planned changes, rather than having to cope with changes happening around them.
WANTED Greater Bedminster Community Partnership GBCP is one of 14 neighbourhood partnerships being established across Bristol. GBCP covers the electoral wards of Southville and Bedminster. GBCP needs a suitably experienced, self-employed development worker to work with local businesses. The consultant will encourage local businesses to join the partnership and to contribute to the Better Bedminster Community Chest. A fee of 500 is available. Closing date for applications: August 1. Applications should be by letter to GBCP, c/o Southville Centre, Beauley Road, Southville, BS3 1QG. The letter should include information about relevant previous experience and a broad indication of how you would approach this task. It is expected that this work will be completed during September and October 2008. For more information on GBCP and the Community Chest see www.greaterbedminster.org.uk or contact the secretary at <email obscured>
My sister lives in Middlesbrough where they have had residents only parking around the town centre for quite a while now. They get free residents parking on production of proof of occupancy and car registration documents but only one car per household. The system operates between 8.00 - 18.00 Monday to Saturday and is mainly to combat the ever expanding University traffic. They are allowed passes for visitors. The amount of wardens has increased (and in the summer they are deployed to other parts of the town.) It's a £60 fine for not having a permit and parking within the residents area and it breaks at least even each year. But we still need to look at ways of reducing all these cars rather than looking at ways to keep them.
I agree that the advantages far outweigh the cost. It is a classic scenario for these things that people complain of extra cost before implementation then thank their lucky stars after. Another disadvantage for us at the Tobacco Factory is that some of our users may find it more difficult, so consideration of the hours of operation is important to us, but it is only reasonable that residents have priority. All the best George George Ferguson Loft 1 Tobacco Factory Raleigh Road Southville Bristol BS3 1TF Website http://www.tobaccofactory.com P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
Hi folks, For anyone aware of and interested in the Council?s review of primary schools (the ?Primary Review?), I?m keen to hear your thoughts. It makes proposals for the renovation of schools across Bristol, including amalgamation, federation, closure, refurbishment, and rebuild. The report is at: http://www.bristol-cyps.org.uk/policies/primary-review.html My main focus is on Ashton Gate Primary (I?m a parent governor and chair of the Finance and Buildings Committee),but I?m also interested in the reactions of the wider community to the proposals, and indeed in hearing from stakeholders in other neighbourhood schools. As you may have read, the proposal is to ?rebuild? Ashton Gate in Phase 3 (i.e., not before 2013, subject to funding), possibly on the site that may be vacated by Bristol City FC. Failing that, presumably on the current site, since there doesn?t seem to be any other space available. (Hotwells is in a similar position, but with no neighbouring football club about to move!) This raises a number of points to consider: e.g., how would moving the school westwards a few blocks affect its constituency and community? In economic and environmental terms, what makes more sense? To rebuild from scratch, or to expand in situ? We have severe space constraints currently, with all permanent classrooms severely undersized. We have a precious bit of green space that parents are firmly against building on. But perhaps some imaginative engineering and innovative architecture could solve some of our problems, without the need to move site? But would that be feasible before 2013? In the shorter term, we badly need a new heating system and electrical system, but most of the funds normally available for such modernisation will be diverted to Phases 1 and 2 of the Review (i.e., to rebuild and refurbish more needy schools), meaning, possibly, another five years to wait? And even then, there is much uncertainty about funding for Phase 3, and nothing guaranteed about the outcome of Bristol City?s change of ground. The Council are, understandably, I suppose, not willing to commit a plan of action or money to Ashton Gate?s space problems until those uncertainties are resolved, and they have a firmer view of population growth in South Bristol. Does that make us an unreasonable hostage to uncertainty? What else? I?ll be communicating with parents next week to, hopefully, stimulate their thinking on the issues and prompt feedback on the consultation, either directly to the Council or through Governors (who meet to discuss this on the 16th July, the day before formal responses are due).
I hadn't got involved in this debate because I don't own a car and never have. I shop for myself and my 4 cats on a daily basis - walking to shops and back home. It takes more time but it's better for me and I'm not polluting anything. And when I go into town I walk, I rarely even get public transport and when I do I find that if you expect little you always get a pleasant surprise. I was raised in a family that walked everywhere. I still walk as a hobby and actually become part of my surroundings not someone who's whizzing by in a tin box. And of course I don't think this debate is actually really looking for solutions to the amount of cars on the roads, it's just looking for solutions on where to put them.
Totally agree with Lloyd Fletcher that a scheme should be based on research, so that we know what problems the "answers" are supposed to be addressing. If there is research it would be helpful to have this available before responding to the consultation. But at the end of the day, folks, there are just too many vehicles around from all the various uses - apart from residents (the main problem) and visitors, there are tradesmen (deliveries + workmen), shops and offices, garages, cafe/bars, restaurants and pubs, football matches, theatre, concerts, removals and storage facilities, parks visitors, schools etc etc. How many of these could reduce the car journeys and subsequent parking? Do local businesses offer incentives to staff to use buses or bikes? How many are prepared to provide some customer parking rather than make every bit of outside space al fresco dining ( good for business, but increasing traffic and reducing parking). Should there be any need for the school run by car? Could everyone give serious consideration to how many cars they need for their family (or even how to manage life without). Could neighbours set up car-sharing? And as for one comment in these letters about "there is only so much distance people are prepared to walk" - isn't that looking for impossible solutions from "them", without taking personal responsibility for this mess we have all got into? Diane Jones