I was asked by a resident of Hargreaves Court about blue bag recycling collections recently. Theirs had not been collected since the beginning of December and they wondered what was happening.
It also is the case that currently Hargreaves Court residents have not been provided with blue bins which obviously are much easier to use and less messy than bin bags.
I contacted the council about these matters and received this response:
"Thank you for your enquiry regarding the blue bag collections at Hargreaves Court. All blue bag paper collections have been suspended until Monday 25th January. After this date the bags will be collected on the usual day- weather permitting. The next paper bag collections for Hargreaves Court are Monday 25th January, Monday 8th February and Monday 22nd February. Once again these collections are dependent on the weather conditions at the time. Despite our best efforts, it may not be possible to collect all bins and bags in some parts of the borough, due to risk of injury to refuse collectors and members of the public. Please bear with us during these exceptional circumstances.
In answer to your other question, for the time being, Hargreaves Court will remain on a paper bag collection. However, it is our intention to work towards multi-material recycling bins throughout the borough.
I hope that this information is helpful".
I'd suggest that residents keep contacting their local councillors about the provision of such bins.
Wednesday 20 January 2010
Tuesday 12 January 2010
Eternit Planning Meeting
As you might have heard via BBC local news the council has given the green light to the Eternit proposals.
I attended the meeting and it seemed to me that such a result was a forgone conclusion. There were a couple councillors who asked questions about the remediation work but both were in favour of the projects.
Jason Addy the spokesperson for the residents (DRRA) had the usual five minutes to represent the residents position. He concentrated on requesting that the matter be deferred and that an environmental impact assessment should be carried out prior to the proposal coming before the committee again. This, he maintained, would be a win win situation for all parties.
He suggested that the planning expertise, UK wide, in relation to asbestos remediation work and its consequences were not very developed and that current practice relating to assessing types of asbestos concentrations on sites was inadequate.
One conservative councillor who was not on the planning committee and spoke in favour of two of the proposals praised council officers for their diligent work concerning the matter. He generally could not fault the detailed plans that had been drawn up to ensure the projects safety and felt that residents had had access to the detailed planning involved in the proposal. He suggested that the capping option favoured by the DRRA was not viable. I understood this to mean that it would be too costly.
The councillor went over the 5 minute time limit and several residents complained about this but were informed that councillors were allocated more time than the general public.
I think it was useful for everyone that the councillor was provided with this time and was enabled to finish what he wanted to say. Unfortunately this contrasted with the way Jason Addy was dealt with in that he was unable to finish his presentation. This seemed to me to fly in the face of natural justice.
A minor point perhaps particularly as it seems unlikely that whatever he had said in his conclusions would have made any difference to the outcome of the meeting. Also perhaps it was a situation that was unavoidable given the council's protocol. But it did not add to residents feelings that their views had been properly considered. I suspect they came away from this meeting very disillusioned with local democracy.
I don't know whether the proposals that have been accepted by the council are the most viable and safest way, given the circumstances, of dealing with the site - perhaps they are. What I do feel though is that in situations were health and safety is an important factor, particularly in dealing with the emotive issue of abestos material, that an environmental impact assessment on each of the three proposals should have been carried out - for the sake of everybody.
I understand that the DRRA are considering to appeal against the decision.
I attended the meeting and it seemed to me that such a result was a forgone conclusion. There were a couple councillors who asked questions about the remediation work but both were in favour of the projects.
Jason Addy the spokesperson for the residents (DRRA) had the usual five minutes to represent the residents position. He concentrated on requesting that the matter be deferred and that an environmental impact assessment should be carried out prior to the proposal coming before the committee again. This, he maintained, would be a win win situation for all parties.
He suggested that the planning expertise, UK wide, in relation to asbestos remediation work and its consequences were not very developed and that current practice relating to assessing types of asbestos concentrations on sites was inadequate.
One conservative councillor who was not on the planning committee and spoke in favour of two of the proposals praised council officers for their diligent work concerning the matter. He generally could not fault the detailed plans that had been drawn up to ensure the projects safety and felt that residents had had access to the detailed planning involved in the proposal. He suggested that the capping option favoured by the DRRA was not viable. I understood this to mean that it would be too costly.
The councillor went over the 5 minute time limit and several residents complained about this but were informed that councillors were allocated more time than the general public.
I think it was useful for everyone that the councillor was provided with this time and was enabled to finish what he wanted to say. Unfortunately this contrasted with the way Jason Addy was dealt with in that he was unable to finish his presentation. This seemed to me to fly in the face of natural justice.
A minor point perhaps particularly as it seems unlikely that whatever he had said in his conclusions would have made any difference to the outcome of the meeting. Also perhaps it was a situation that was unavoidable given the council's protocol. But it did not add to residents feelings that their views had been properly considered. I suspect they came away from this meeting very disillusioned with local democracy.
I don't know whether the proposals that have been accepted by the council are the most viable and safest way, given the circumstances, of dealing with the site - perhaps they are. What I do feel though is that in situations were health and safety is an important factor, particularly in dealing with the emotive issue of abestos material, that an environmental impact assessment on each of the three proposals should have been carried out - for the sake of everybody.
I understand that the DRRA are considering to appeal against the decision.
Monday 11 January 2010
Eternit and the Council - is it Fair?
The council's planning development committee will be meeting tonight to discuss the Eternit proposal.
Council officers have considered the proposal and will be recommending it goes through given that certain conditions are accepted by the developers.
The Derby Road Residents Association (DRRA) is very concermed that an environmental impact assessment (EIA) has not taken place prior to a decision being made about the proposal. The DRRA has been questioning the council about the reasons why it is going ahead without carrying out such an assessment. The council has to date not responded to these requests.
The Green Party too has been in contact with the council about it's concerns regarding the proposal and has requested that among other things an EIA ought be carried out before any decisions are made regarding the matter.
I am unsure of council procedures but think it unfair that the council have not been able to provide the DRRA with their reasoning regarding it not being necessary for an EIA to be carried out before the proposal is considered. If they had provided such information the DRRA would have been in a better position at tonight's council meeting to argue their case.
It could well be that on balance the council's arguments outweigh those of the DRRA's and that taking everything into consideration that the proposal provides the safest way to deal with the asbestos contamination. Let's face it this proposal, if it goes ahead, will cost the council tax payer less than it would if the council had to deal with the site in the future. But Derby Road residents should be given the opportunity to argue their case fairly for their sakes and our's.
The meeting tonight is at Runcorn Town Hall at 6.30pm - please attend if you can. Its important that the council are made aware of people's concerns about the issue. It could well be that the DRRA might legally challenge a decision for the proposal to go ahead if such were made tonight - so its important for local democracy that as many people go along to the meeting to show the extent of feeling about the matter.
Council officers have considered the proposal and will be recommending it goes through given that certain conditions are accepted by the developers.
The Derby Road Residents Association (DRRA) is very concermed that an environmental impact assessment (EIA) has not taken place prior to a decision being made about the proposal. The DRRA has been questioning the council about the reasons why it is going ahead without carrying out such an assessment. The council has to date not responded to these requests.
The Green Party too has been in contact with the council about it's concerns regarding the proposal and has requested that among other things an EIA ought be carried out before any decisions are made regarding the matter.
I am unsure of council procedures but think it unfair that the council have not been able to provide the DRRA with their reasoning regarding it not being necessary for an EIA to be carried out before the proposal is considered. If they had provided such information the DRRA would have been in a better position at tonight's council meeting to argue their case.
It could well be that on balance the council's arguments outweigh those of the DRRA's and that taking everything into consideration that the proposal provides the safest way to deal with the asbestos contamination. Let's face it this proposal, if it goes ahead, will cost the council tax payer less than it would if the council had to deal with the site in the future. But Derby Road residents should be given the opportunity to argue their case fairly for their sakes and our's.
The meeting tonight is at Runcorn Town Hall at 6.30pm - please attend if you can. Its important that the council are made aware of people's concerns about the issue. It could well be that the DRRA might legally challenge a decision for the proposal to go ahead if such were made tonight - so its important for local democracy that as many people go along to the meeting to show the extent of feeling about the matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)