Culverhay Sports Centre

Bath Community Academy has issued this note, see below. We are working with the executive councillor for Leisure to try and ensure that the sports centre remains open to the public.

The current arrangements between Aquaterra and Bath and North East Somerset council relating to the management of the Culverhay Sports Centre will end on 3Oth June 2013. The subsidy that has been provided by BANES throughout the duration of that arrangement is no longer available to the Cabot Learning Federation (CLF). 

In light of this change in situation, the CLF and Bath Community Academy have worked hard to find a solution that enables these facilities to remain open to the public. The funding that the CLF and Bath Community Academy receives from central government is intended for the sole purpose of educating the students who attend the academy and we are not in a position where we can allocate this source of revenue to the maintenance of a sports centre provision. The CLF and the Academy will continue to work with BANES to pursue opportunities to appoint an external operator to provide this service in the future if it can be demonstrated to be financially viable, however as we are not able to facilitate an interim arrangement this will mean the facilities, whilst remaining open to the academy for student use during the day, will be closed to the public from 1st July

Sign at the Green

 We have asked for the damaged sign to be replaced

Core Strategy response

It is long but there are a lot of things that need to be said

I wish to object to the land being allocated in the core strategy for Odd Down and Weston,

SPC6 (Broad Locations) object to allocation for the sites at Weston and Odd Down for the following reasons, which are expanded on later:

• Their allocation doesn't fit NPPF guidance on allocation of land in the AONB
• The sites are urban sprawl and against green belt policy
• Neither site is sustainable as employment would be in the city centre not on the outskirts.
• There is no need, by increasing the housing density on the brownfield sites the need for greenfield development would be removed.
• In the case of Odd Down would damage the setting of the Wansdyke
• Co-coalescence of Bath and Southstoke may occur.
• For Weston this site is visual from a number of locations in Bath and would damage the world heritage setting of the City.

SPC14 (Need for Greenfield sites) I object to the this paragraph as I believe that increasing the density of housing on the brownfield sites would remove the necessity of building on the greenfield sites. Council's assessment has shown to sustain the number of houses required for job creation that only 10,000 hours would be required, this would exclude the greenfield sites

SP15 (economic growth) The council rightly says that economic growth will be directed along Western Corridor, but then allocates land at the edge of Bath, these areas being the worst possible possible in terms of sustainability in already transport poor areas. A petition is being collected against the cost of First's bus fares, the monopoly supplier of bus services in Bath, meaning it is likely that the developments will be car based. This could have been alleviated by increasing the density of housing in the surrounding areas.

SPC19 (Green Belt boundaries) Green Belt requirement is defined in NPPF as “The fundamental

aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open;” The allocations at Odd Down and Weston will be fundamentally opposed to this principal. The land allocated will create urban sprawl, although the core strategy document talks about small scale local employment, there are limited examples within Bath of this occurring. In reality this will just provide housing, with employment being outside of Bath or as the council indicates with the river corridor. It would mean that the current urban areas will be expanded.

SPC24 (Green Belt boundaries ) Same as SPC19

SPC31 ( Green Belt boundaries) Same as SPC19

SPC47 ( Green Belt boundaries) Same as SPC19

SPC54 housing at Odd Down and Weston See SPC 88 and SPC89 comments

SPC78 (Outer areas contributing) Same as SPC19

SPC87 General Same as SPC19

SPC88 (Odd Down) NPPF states “Planning permission should be refused for major developments in these designated areas except in exceptional circumstances and where it can be demonstrated they are in the public interest.” The council is proposing that 12700 houses should be built in the plan period, for Odd Down this represents 2% of the housing proposed, combined with Weston this totals 4%. Overall the level of error of a plan that is 15 years long could not justify the allocation of this site being in the public interest.

The paragraph goes on to say the need for the development, including in terms of any national considerations, and the impact of permitting it, or refusing it, upon the local economy; Evidence from the Council shows that there is only a need for 10,000 houses if only the need for jobs is considered in looking at housing number requirement.

Further paragraphs say “the cost of, and scope for, developing elsewhere outside the designated area, or meeting the need for it in some other way; and” This could be met by increasing the density of housing within other brownfield sites, and therefore the allocation should not go ahead.

The proposals don't fit within the final sentence in this paragraph any detrimental effect on the environment, the landscape and recreational opportunities, and the extent to which that could be moderated. There are a number of footpaths to

Protection of the Wansdyke should be an important consideration, even though a large stretch is within the council's ownership, a management plan has not been developed, destruct has taken place when the council built Threeways school. These proposals will not enhance the setting of the Wansdyke, with the potential for creating urban development both sides of the Wansdyke.

The village of Southstoke is quite different in character to the surrounding areas, with a lot of the housing built in a different style and from a different time to surround Bath areas to create a co-coalescence of Southstoke with Bath would not be desirable. Currently the village is separated by only 500 meters, to reduce this distance would effectively make Bath and Southstoke one urban entity.

One of the settings of the AONB around Bath is the escarpment at Odd Down, which is viewable for many miles around if building occurs on the plateau there is a distinct possibility that light pollution will be seen from miles fundamentally altering the character of the AONB in this area.

SPC89 (Weston) A lot of the objections to Odd Down apply to Weston, as defined by NPPF guidance on building on the AONB.

Loss of the 14a

As of the 24th March the 14a will stop as First moves to a completely commercial service unsubsidised by the Council.

We know that lots of residents in Bloomfield Road use this service, and will be unhappy with it going , as well as forcing more buses down Bloomfield Drive when there are more cars present.

We are trying to find out what can be done to review this decision.

Christmas market and coach parking at Odd Down playing fields - No thanks

We are asking this question at the Council's cabinet meeting  

Coach parking at Odd Down playing fields has cause a number of issues for those that live locally with traffic not following the correct routes through narrow streets, with the new cycle facility and potentially a 4G pitch, please could there be an assurance that the car park will not be used for parking this year

Council votes for housing in Odd Down

The council has voted for housing at Odd Down. We are very disappointed that the council has decided to build on these green fields.

The next stage is that these views are sent to the Governments planning inspector when the core strategy review continues, probably at some point in June 2013. We will be asking the inspector to uphold the governments own planning rules contained in the national planning policy framework.

We will be letting residents in the area know how they object to these plans.

Recycling centres will need permits

We have received this information from councillor officers

Scheme overview
From 2 April 2013 residents will need an electronic Recycling Centre Resident’s Permit to use any of the Recycling Centres in Bath & North East Somerset.
The permit is not something physical that residents will have to carry with them – it is an electronic authorisation based on a vehicle license plate.
Registration is free and for residents of Bath and North East Somerset only. Once authorised, vehicle license plates will be recognised electronically on entry into our centres and prove automatically that the driver is a resident. Resident’s Permit will last for three years.
There will be no need to apply for a permit if a resident already has a:
Van Permit and are using this vehicle to visit the centre or;
a resident’s Discovery Card and show this on site (this allows free or discounted admission to various museums and other heritage sites in Bath and North East Somerset)
Why are we introducing Resident’s Permits?

We are keen to introduce a system which does not unnecessarily inconvenience our residents, but ensures that we are no longer subsidising the disposal of waste from households located outside of Bath & North East Somerset.

This new permit should make it fairer for all. As well as helping us save costs, we hope that this will also reduce queuing times at the centres. Our neighbouring authorities have already introduced similar schemes.

The staff will continue to use their discretion to allow residents to use the sites whilst providing leaflets on how to register for future visits. We want to ensure the sites remain accessible to our residents and that they are offered a high level of customer service.

There will be no enforcement of the scheme throughout April to allow greater awareness of the new permits. We are keen however to start advertising the fact that the Recycling Centres are for residents only as soon as possible to discourage non-residents from using the sites.