Category Archives: County

Bramford to Twinstead network reinforcement

National Grid are again proposing to reinforce the grid between Bramford and Twinstead in Essex.  They want to be able to export 15Gwatt from Suffolk up from 4.5Gwatt at the moment. The scheme appears much the same as it was in 2012 with an additional 400kvolt pylon line running beside the existing line after the  smaller 132 kvolt line is removed.

Clearly the power from North Sea wind farms must get to areas where demand is highest and that is London.  There will be a similar need if Sizewell C gets approved.  We need low carbon energy if the world is to avoid catastrophic rise in sea level, but it cant be at any cost. We also need food.

It is possible to build a power distribution under the North Sea going down the Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex coast then up the Themes.  The main problem I believe is the legislation that controls who would have to build such a grid.

We are in for another round of consultations at the end of March and another fight!

Highways Work 9th December

2020-12-09-NA-Plan2-C492 Norwich Road and C496 Ipswich Road (2)
Just Got this from Highways  Cant upload the plan its too large and the routes are obvious

 

Hi All

 

We would like to apologise for the late notification of these works, this is due to the phased planning which has been required to ensure disruption and access restrictions are limited as much as possible. We are writing to inform you of our plans to carry out road resurfacing along C492 Ipswich Road and C496 Norwich Road, Claydon.

 

The works are programmed to take place between 9 December and 15 December 2020, working between 9am and 4pm each day. As we plan roadworks in advance, we schedule extra days to allow for bad weather or other delays beyond our control. If we need to make major changes to our work dates, we will update the information signs on site. Please note: the full length of the road will be closed; however, the works will be carried out in phases to manage access requirements.

 

Phase 1 (9 December) – Norwich Road, Claydon – Between York Crescent & Station Road

Phase 2 (10 December) – Ipswich Road, Claydon – Between Station Road and Church Lane (including part of Station Road junction)

Phase 3 (11 December) – Ipswich Road, Claydon – Between Church Lane and Newell Rise (including part of Station Road junction)

Phase 4 (12 December) – Ipswich Road, Claydon – Between Newell Rise and Old Ipswich Road (including Morgan Court junction)

 

Diversion route 1 – Norwich Road, Old Norwich Road, A140 and A14.

Diversion route 2 – A14, Old Norwich Road and Norwich Road.

 

Access to businesses and properties will be restricted and managed for the duration of the road closure. Staff will be on site to advise road users of the restrictions and arrangements at the point of required access or egress.

 

Request to residents – ‘Should you require the use your vehicle during the above working times, it would be much appreciated if alternative parking arrangements can be made to limit the vehicular access being required. Please allow extra time to your journey as there may be times where access is not allowed, due to ongoing operations.’ 

 

A plan showing the diversion route for these works is attached to this email. When we close the road and put a diversion in place, the route needs to be accessible to vehicles of all shapes and sizes. We make our diversions as clear as possible by placing appropriate signing along the route. The latest updates on our works can be found on our website at “Temporary road closures for Suffolk Highways roadworks” and on One.Network website.

 

There may be times that essential emergency works are required to take place on the highway network without advanced notice – you can follow Suffolk Highways on Twitter for the latest emergency roadwork updates.

 

Please could you use any contacts within your division or parish to circulate this notification.

 

Suffolk Highways

www.suffolk.gov.uk/highways

Report to Gipping Valley: April 2019

The turmoil and chaos around national politics and the Brexit disaster coupled with the need to focus on the District Council elections have been a significant distraction this month.  However, there is news from the County, a mixture of good and bad to report.

Investment for Special Educational Needs

In February I reported that the cross-party Policy Development Panel had recommended that the County invests £45.1m in SEND.  This will develop new Special Educational Needs & Disability schools and specialist units in Suffolk. 

I am pleased to say that this plan is going to Cabinet during April with a recommendation to proceed.  Some 800 places in the county to provide pupils the support they need locally will be a leap forward.

Children’s Centres

Less welcome is the news emerging from the cross party Policy Development Panel on the Family Services.  Regrettably this panel appears to be pushed in the direction of significant cuts.  The proposals are secret at the moment, and I can’t report how accurate the leaks in the press are.  However, this looks like an attack on a successful service that has great value.

Continue reading Report to Gipping Valley: April 2019

Road Closure in Baylham

 

Just to warn those of you who visit relatives or friends in Baylham, the main way in to the village will be closed for seven weeks from Monday. The Care Centre is connecting its dysfunctional sewage system to the village drains by putting a pipe in a trench up the road.

They won’t use any of the shorter routes across the fields or round the field boundary. The contractor is using “traditional” methods, not fast trenching machines, so seven weeks not two. Thanks guys!

Highways of course just agreed-like in Barham, Claydon and at Hackneys Corner. Trying to get them to look after the residents is up hill all the way. The diversion routes are through Little Blakenham or along Circular Road (Back Street) from B1113. Both 4.3km with few passing places.

We are asking people to come in via Back Street and out via Little Blakenham but not all will do that, its not official, please be careful. Highways have promised to try to grit the road if it’s necessary.
The Care Home is still accessible from the B1113

 

Question I Just Received on Highway Signs.

For several years it has concerned me, and many others I speak to, that trees, hedges and general dirt are being allowed to obscure road signs.  A while ago I searched for any rules that may apply as directed by the Department For Transport and found the attached from the Traffic Signs Manual (1982 Amended 2004).  I would bring your attention in particular to 1. Introductory, paragraph 1.2 and 5. The Design & Use of Signs, paragraph 1.31 (b) and 9. Maintenance of Signs.  All common sense, you would think?

Quite obviously these conditions are not being met.  For example: the road sign coming up to the Hadleigh Road mini roundabout at Sproughton from the Washbrook direction.  It is so obscured by the hedge that you cannot read the sign until you’re virtually next to it and nearly at the roundabout!!  Similarly, now the leaves are coming out on trees, other signs are disappearing behind them.  I cannot believe that this problem is not the subject of more of an outcry as with the pot hole debacle.  Being unable to read road signs from a safe distance is as dangerous as having to be more vigilant in avoiding potholes.

My Answer

Suffolk Highways needs to meet its obligations under these rules which are made for good reason.  I think you will have seen from my leaflets and “In Touch” contributions that I have been active in pressing for improved performance across the board although the key focus has been potholes .

I believe that the outsourcing of the highways contract has not worked and, despite the Conservatives rolling it on for another five years, it must either perform in short order or the work must be taken back in-house.  Suffolk people just can’t continue to put up with the issues you raise or the potholes.

We must have the management talent to guide the workforce to high performance.   As the government has been giving some relatively small but significant grants for such work and we could use a sensible amount, £2 million, from the £150 million reserves to make one-off improvements.  We should be able to do better!

You will get this if you ensure there is a strong opposition after Thursday to make sure that the mantra that everything must be privatised does not result in self-deception about the level of performance achieved.

 

John Field

Locality Budgets

District Councillors for this year only have a £5,000 budget to deploy in their wards to fund projects by community groups.  They must of course align with Mid-Suffolk’s objectives.  Forms to request grants of £250+ are available and your councillors will make final decisions by early January.

As a County Councillor, I also have my locality budget available and about £12,000 remains, after providing support for a Vehicle Activated Sign (VAS) in Henley and Hemingstone, pond refurbishment at Henley Primary and LED floodlights for Bramford Football Club.

I would like to support local community organisations to meet the needs of local residents, ideally but not exclusively, where county money leverages in funds from other bodies.  Further VAS might be an idea.

Devolution-is it Progressing?

The devolution discussions are wending their way forward.  The government has stated that both Norfolk and Suffolk must be involved as in the LEP. A number of powers will be handed down only if an elected mayor controls a combined authority.

There is now a Norfolk and Suffolk Framework Document for Devolution, which gives a clearer list of ambitions.  It opens “Devolution offers an exciting opportunity for greater local decision-making and influence to power economic growth and productivity and unlock the potential of Norfolk and Suffolk.  The two counties have the scale, ambition and leadership to maximise the opportunities offered by additional freedoms and responsibilities. We also have the potential to grow our economy faster, with strengths in key sectors such as agri-tech, food & health, energy and the digital economy.”

The framework claims strengths as:

  • National hubs for key business sectors, eg financial industries, that need to be nurtured to become magnets for global inward investment
  • An all-energy coast at the centre of the world’s largest market for offshore wind
  • Globally-leading research in life sciences and agri-tech, and pioneering technical innovations in ICT research and development.
  • The UK’s busiest container port, in Felixstowe
  • A fast-growing creative digital sector, with Norwich recently recognised by Tech City UK
  • Market-leading food and drink producers
  • Our first-class cultural heritage attractions mean tourism is worth £4.6bn annually across Norfolk and Suffolk

However, while our employment figures are among the best in the country, our skills and productivity levels are below the national average.

I believe the need to work with Norfolk and a wider variety of political parties has helped clarify the way forward.  Negotiations continue.

Community Transport

This month a cabinet decision to tender for continuing community transport using a new structure was “called in”.  Community transport is services like Dial a Ride that provide “on demand” transport to people not served by scheduled buses or trains.  There have been a number of these services under various brands serving different communities and user groups.  Their vehicles have been provided by the county and the services largely specified by county officers.

The proposal is that seven contracts would be let, one per district council so that people can easily know which they should phone to book a journey.

The current vehicles would be sold to the providers, a move that would allow a wider range of customers to be served.  When the county owns vehicles providers cannot use them to provide some desirable services.

In addition, they can then select vehicles to meet the need as they see it rather than having to use what the county provides.

The county hopes that this will allow competition for services such as some forms of home to school transport that will use the assets more intensively.

So why was this called in?  Well, among other issues, the intention was that, not only would the county no longer provide free vehicles saving some £570k but also it would reduce the subsidy from £1.4m to £700k over the next four years.  The revenue from the new freedom to provide services was supposed to compensate.

Scrutiny believed it more likely that, although the providers would survive, service to people without other transport options will be cut.

We referred the decision back but cabinet decided there would be no change, so much for democracy!