The Post Office at the university moves 25m down the parade this week.
The branch in Fresh closed on Tuesday and will reopen in its new unit on Monday 28th. Opening hours will be 9-17:30 Monday to Friday with a half hour break from 11:15 on Wednesdays.
Intriguingly the Post Office official consultation period remains open until July 7th, so you may object to prevent the move up to 10 days after it actually happens!
A proposal to increase the size of the phone mast on The Avenue, near the university, has been withdrawn.
Vodaphone had hope to near double the height of their existing mast so that it would protrude beyond the tree line. Wet leaves damp the signal of the current mast within the canopy.
Well organised Beech Avenue residents were able to send enough letters of objection, plus a letter against from Bath University, to persuade the phone company to drop the application. Local residents will be vigilant for any further planning applications.
Lime Grove special school is now on the open market. If you want to buy it, the details are here (but there agents don’t reveal the price!).
This is perhaps the best proof available that the council have given up plans to continue using the site, including as a possible location for a wet-house. Last week when I met the Conservative cabinet member responsible in a council corridor, he confirmed that there were no plans for a wet-house, or even an experimental wet-house, on the site. He protested that a recent Chronicle article had misrepresented his plans.
However, with the history of secrecy surrounding previous plans for the site, many residents remain concerned and do not trust the Conservative cabinet on this matter.
The Police and Communities Together meeting returns to Bathwick on Wednesday 26th.
Representatives from the police, council and elected members will form a panel, chaired by Rev Prothero, to answer the public’s questions. On this basis, three priorities will be formed.
Unfortunately, for third meeting running, BathNES council is not planning to send anyone. I will be there and try to cover on council matters, but I represent Bathwick, not the council.
As a member of the council planning committee, I try not to take a view on planning applications incase they come to our committee and I am asked to make an impartial judgement on them. That said, many residents will be interested in an application to increase the size of the phone mast on The Avenue.
The current mast, hidden largely by trees, has one major drawback in that the signal is also hidden by trees, especially in the wet. The application is for a much taller mast which will project beyond the tree canopy at 24m.
Comments can be made to the council in writing or on-line (although today the council website appears to be broken) quoting the reference 10/01230/FUL.
The expenses of all councillors are published on the BathNES website. This year’s are due out soon and will show that I didn’t claim anything this year (except the regular ‘allowance’ or wage). This is because I am able to walk to nearly all of the meetings and forgot to claim travel money for the occassional trip to Keynsham.
The list of meeting attendence shows that I attended all five of the full council meetings and twelve of the monthly planning committee meetings. I also acted as a substitute for three Regulatory & Access meetings and one each of Corporate Audit and Enterprise & Economic Developement Overview and Scrutiny.
For two years, Bathwick’s buses have been running from a temporary bus stop behind the Avon Street multi-storey car park. Since all other services have moved to the new bus station, ours is the only one to still be using the temporary stop.
Last year, the council promised that the new bus stop would be available by January 2010.
In December 2009 I submitted a written question about the transfer date. The council promised that the move would be complete by the end of March.
It didn’t happen and now the council think that the bus stop might be available in May.
Bathwick’s bus users have been failed by the council and the Southgate developers. In answer to my written question, the Conservative cabinet member replied “the developers must complete the construction of the bus stop by the end of March”. Either the developers have failed in this obligation, or the council were mistaken in their interpretation of it. I have written in complaint to the council Chief Executive.
Bathick is owed a bus stop – and an apology.
Bathwi
Our long waiting for zebra crossing seems to have halted on Bathwick Hill.
I started campaigning for a zebra crossing outside the Bathwick Parade shops in January 2007, sending questions to the council, organising petitions and demonstrations. With the zebra agreed and budgetted, like many others I am surprised that the workers seem to have given up with the job half finished.
The stripes have been painted, the poles erected (in really inconvenient places) and electricity cables laid. However, we are missing the belisha beacons and no one has been at the site for over a week.
I have written to the council to get them back to work.
The planning inspector responsible for determining the width of AQ78 – the Combe Down to Claverton Down footpath – has recieved the case submissions.
This next public enquiry will be conducted by exchange of letters, rather than the public hearing style used at the Community Hall for the first attempt. The council has re-submitted their evidence about the width of the footpath from historic maps. The objector now accepts these, put has drawn attention to gates along the path shown on some records.
This continuing dispute means that the council will not repair the muddy path until the matter is settled. Cllr Edwards had offered funding for materials from his devolved budget and the Student Union President offered to organise a volunteer action day to fix the path. BathNES council refused these offers.
As I have written before, the old school on Lime Grove has been considered by the Conservative council as a site for a wet-house.
For all the time that the site was the leading contender for a homeless hostel, suitable for alcohol consumption, the plans were kept secret and only leaked out when the cabinet member accidentally referred to them in a council meeting. Currently, the planned location is by Kingsmead Square – although this is also hotly contested.
My ward colleague in Kingsmead has asked for the documentation about the decision and was only able to force access using the Freedom of Information act. This shows that Lime Grove was considered by the experts as the best site, although the cabinet eventually chose Kingsmead because they thought that there would be less public resistance.
Given that the Kingsmead site is also controversial, I asked the Conservative in charge about the Lime Grove proposals. The written quetion and answer are here – scroll to question 6 on page 6. He says that the Kingsmead site decision will not be re-visited and that he has no hold on the Lime Grove site. However, he did not answer my points about the secrecy and lack of consultation surrounding the process.
I have checked with the council’s property team and they are preparing to re-market the site for commercial purchase (you may remember the aborted student housing bid of last year). All indications are that the Lime Grove site will not be used for a wet-house.
The only question remaining – can you trust a Tory?!