Tag Archives: development

County Council Surgery, Suffolk County Council, Surgery, Woodbridge Youth Centre

What has been happening in Suffolk : September/October

Leave a comment

Woodbridge Youth Centre: future

You may remember that  I reported in March 2013   http://carolinepage.blog.suffolk.libdems.org/2013/03/12/woodbridge-youth-centre-saved-from-the-dragons-den/ that I had come across moves by various unelected officers at SCC and SCDC to organise the disposal of Woodbridge Youth Centre and sell off the land to the north of the Avenue for development,  without reference to either Woodbridge Town council, or the people of Woodbridge.

At the time, I took this to the highest level and was promised by the SCC CEO Deborah Cadman that any discussion about its long-term future will involve all stakeholders including the people of Woodbridge and our elected councillors.  I was also given to understand that Woodbridge Youth Centre was ‘safe’ and a ten year lease was being proposed.

However last week,  only 18 months later  I was asked to attend a preliminary meeting with SCC officers from resource management and a single elected member who manages to be both SCC deputy cabinet member for Resource Management and SCDC Cabinet member for Resource Management.  The subject they wished to address was the ‘mid-term’ future of the Woodbridge Youth Centre, and the fact that repairs of (max £200,000) being too much, they were looking  to ‘develop solutions.’

Interestingly,  I found  little interest in any other solution than sale of the land and removal of the occupants of the centre elsewhere.

I insisted in including other options – such as raising the money for repair and putting in a bid for the premises (and having them minuted too).

At the first meeting there were no representatives for Woodbridge Town Council, for SCC’s CYP, for the Integrated Youth Service,  or indeed, apart from myself,  any of the local people with an interest in the Youth Centre, in the demographics of Woodbridge or the young people of Woodbridge.

I therefore  asked that subsequent meetings should have representatives of these organisations attending.  I have also said that this issue needs to be brought into the consideration of the Neighbourhood plan, in terms of development, of youth provision, of green spaces and of demographics.

Development proposal: Woodbridge Football Club site

The 25 year lease on Woodbridge Town football club runs out shortly and Hopkins Homes has announced proposals to develop the currently occupied by the club for approximately 95 houses, including affordable housing, a community building and open space. Proposals are that the club itself would move to a Yarmouth Road site at Ufford, meaning that Woodbridge will lose its football club from the town itself, very much as it has already lost its rugby club.

As usual, this will have an adverse impact on young people who do not have access  to cars.

Woodbridge Town FC will be voting on this move at an Extraordinary General Meeting shortly.

As I understand it, if the football club votes to stay at the site it would be able to do so for another ten years. However it loses the chance to have another venue found for it, another clubhouse purpose-built for it  –  and would have to start paying a ‘market rent’ for the site.

There is currently a full public consultation about the planning proposals for the site in advance of an expected planning application by Hopkins Homes in the autumn. I am already having contact from residents with concerns about road access to the proposed development.

Suffolk 1: Students enrolled on the Foundation Learning course

Last year it seemed as if the future of 5 day teaching for Foundation level students at Suffolk 1 was threatened. After some negotiation, all students enrolled in Foundation Learning courses will return to a 5 day week from early October and this will continue for the entire academic year 2014-15. This will be a transitional arrangement. There will be a meeting on 18 November 2014  for  parents and carers  to discuss  what the arrangements will be from 2015.

0345 numbers for Suffolk County Council

From the end of September, the county council is changing all of its 0845 telephone numbers to 0345. The remaining seven digits of the telephone numbers will remain exactly the same. This includes the telephone numbers for people wanting to apply for a school place for their child, reporting a pothole or road defect and the Families Information Service.

Calls to 0345 numbers from landlines and mobiles are included in free call packages. For customers with these packages,  it will mean calling the council on these numbers, does not incur any additional costs. For people not on free call packages, a  call to a 0345 number costs no more than a geographical number (eg. 01284, 01787 and 01473).

However, existing 0845 numbers will not be switched off overnight. There will be a period of time where the 0845 number, and its replacement 0345 number, will both be live. This is to ensure people can still access the services they need whilst getting used to the new numbers. It will also mean the county council only replaces printed materials and liveries when current stocks run out.

All Freephone numbers starting 0800 will also remain unchanged.

October surgery

My surgery will be held this Saturday, 10 – 12 midday at Woodbridge library  as usual.

 

Offshore WIndfarm, Suffolk Coastal District Council

Dukes Park and East Anglia ONE

Leave a comment

My inbox has been buzzing with anxious emails this week  from people worried about a possible planning application for land adjoining Dukes Park. Although planning is a District Council issue it is in Woodbridge County division,and  is  also the site through which the EA One underground high tension cabling is due to be routed. As this appeared to have slipped under the radar of both residents and district council until I raised it last Monday,  I contacted the EA ONE  link officer at Suffolk County Council. I wanted to know if he had definitive information on the separation necessary between  housing development and underground high tension cables. closeup EA1

Here is his brief resume of the status quo and implications as he sees it:

East Anglia ONE have acquired both permanent and temporary rights for land within the Order Limits (red line boundary). The exact location of these rights however would not be determined until the project is being built, because the final positioning of the cables is not known. What we know now is that the corridor depicted on the plans is generally 75m wide though only 55m is needed for construction and this could lie anywhere within the 75m swathe. The final footprint for the operational development will be 42m The rights that have been acquired are set out within Schedule 6 of the Development Consent Order  . The permanent rights within the cable corridor generally provide for the retention of cables/ducts together with a surface right of access for occasional maintenance. Lands subject to temporary rights (i.e the ‘surplus’ 33m) would be returned to the current owner post construction (that is, around 2020). However as the SCC link officer understands it:

“…restrictive covenants are also in place. Activities within the Order Limits are prohibited as below. The footprint of the land these rights cover would diminish from the construction (75m) to operational phase (42m), but as I understand it apply to the full 75m currently: (a) prevent anything to be done in or upon the Order land or any part thereof for the purpose of the erection of any buildings or construction erection or works of any kind (including the foundations or footings thereto); (b) prevent anything to be done by way of hard surfacing of the Order land with concrete of any kind or with any other material or surface whatsoever without the consent in writing of the undertaker (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed if the proposed surfacing would not cause damage to relevant part of the authorised project nor make it materially more difficult or expensive to maintain the authorised project); (c) prevent anything to be done by way of excavation of any kind in the Order land nor any activities which increase or decrease ground cover or soil levels in any manner whatsoever without the consent in writing of the undertaker save as are reasonably required for agricultural activities or are required to be carried out by National Grid in order to exercise their rights in relation to their apparatus within the Order land; (d) prevent the planting or growing within the Order land of any trees, shrubs or underwood without the consent in writing of the undertaker (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed provided that the proposed trees, shrubs or underwood would not cause damage to the relevant part of the authorised project nor make it materially more difficult or expensive to access the relevant part of the authorised project). Consequently very little can happen within the area covered by the Order Limits at the moment. The extent of that redline boundary will shrink in due course, but even in that remaining area, no buildings could erected.”

The officer points out that land outside the Order Limits, and any land used during construction once returned to its original owner is not subject to any East Anglia ONE restrictive covenants. However it would be  on each side of the cabling  area. Requests for any further specific elucidation  are probably best directed to:

Joanna Young,  Stakeholder Manager ScottishPower Renewables East Anglia Offshore Wind, Room 101, OrbisEnergy, Wilde Street, Lowestoft, Suffolk, NR32 1XH. jyoung@scottishpower.com

Just 42, Suffolk County Council, Uncategorized, Woodbridge, Woodbridge Youth Centre, young people, Your councillor, Your Place

Woodbridge Youth Centre – saved from the ‘Dragon’s Den’

2 Comments

As you know I have been very anxious about an unconfirmed threat of development to the Woodbridge Youth Centre premises for a couple of years.

It turned out that despite the nay-sayers, this threat was genuine. I had wondered why officers had decided – in secret – not to process the licence for our local youth club, Just 42.  (This documented decision was not disclosed by officers.)  Just 42 had to have a licence to occupy the premises. Not renewing the licence would presumably have made it possible to give Just 42 speedy notice to quit!

This is a disgracefully disrespectful attitude to take to the young people of Woodbridge – and indeed to anyone who takes their concerns seriously.  These officers are our public servants. They are paid to work for the public good. They should be open and honest with councillors and with the public who have elected them. We may not be in Kansas, Toto but we’re certainly not in the Dragon’s Den either.

The culture of secrecy also meant that plans and proposals were being discussed for the redevelopment of the Woodbridge Youth Centre site. These had progressed to detailed plans for the development in question (I have copies) without any reference to the occupants, the users, the elected councillors of Woodbridge-  at all levels, or the people of Woodbridge as a whole.

Having discovered this information by a lot of detective work (and a lucky break when an email accidentally came to me with a string of prior emails attached to it, exposing the whole secret decision-making forum and process) I took my concerns to the most senior officer at Suffolk County Council – Chief Executive Deborah Cadman, who investigated the matter. She assures me that officers will never in the future make decisions without involving local elected representatives to the full. This means, I hope, that they will not behave with such disrespectful secrecy, arrogance, and assumed autonomy from the needs and requirements of the local communities they are supposed to serve.

We have been told that Woodbridge Youth Centre is now safe and that any discussion about its long-term future will involve all stakeholders, which jolly well includes our elected councillors. (My Woodbridge locality officer – in collaboration with SCC’s Rachael Rowe  – arranged the first stakeholders meeting last week – and I was delighted to see both Town and District council represented.)

I am very pleased to have it confirmed that my anxiety was not misplaced and that all the effort I have expended on this issue has been rewarded. The outcome will hopefully be protection – not only for the future of Woodbridge Youth Centre and the young people of Woodbridge – but also for other community facilities across Suffolk faced with similar threats!