The contamination, rubber and other products, in the former car park that has
been mentioned to YPres Rose a few years ago has been found. Freshford Mill is
located within the Freshford and Sharpstone Conservation Area and within the
Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and an area of Special Scientific
Interest. What should happen with the waste that is shown below is surely remove
it and take it to a place where it can be properly and safely disposed of.
What is
happening is that the contractors are taking the waste to another location on
site which is close to the river and burying it there. (2nd September
2008) On a visit today (9th September 2008) it would appear that the toxic waste
is just being stockpiled awaiting collection.
The huge pile of rubber and
other evil smelling waste
Tipper truck being loaded
with waste
Tipper delivering waste to
be re-buried close to the river Frome on the same site
Nature Reserve will be Contaminated?
I understand that the place where the contaminated material is being buried
is the place that is designated as a nature reserve. But whether that is the
case or not this material if allowed to remain buried will leach into the river
Frome even more so than in its present location.
Apparently, we were alarmed for no good reason as the waste is being
stockpiled pending its safe removal. to quote from a company spokesman:
"The timing of waste removal is not a simple
matter of dig and collect, it requires agreement from various regulatory bodies
hence the stockpiling until these procedures are complete."
So it appears that any contamination will be in the short term. Of course if
the same regulatory bodies had done their job properly - the toxic waste
wouldn't be there anyway! The third photograph clearly shows (notwithstanding
the fence and railings) that the ground is level. As the ground is level then
the tipper must be arriving with its first load of waste to be stockpiled. Not
true, I had witnessed the tipper going backwards and forwards several times
while I was observing the works. Therefore either there was a hole to put the
waste into or a hole had been made. This area is a level area with the car park,
with no hole that I recall that could be filled. Therefore, if my observation
(about there being no existing hole) is true then waste was being buried, even
though it is not now.
Rainfall
Freshford Somerset Although my measurements are not official I am closer to the
location than the Met office's nearest station. Are we having more
rainfall than in the past? YES in the Summer see:
Historic Rainfall Record Nearest Station Lyneham July and August
rainfall here was almost twice the historic average!
December Rain 2008
57mm to web page date:
13/12/2008
Historic average 77.4mm
November Rain
2008
62mm to web page date:
Historic average: 66.9mm
October Rain 2008
at least 60mm
(rain gauge overflow!) Historic average: 70.4mm
September Rain 2008
60mm to page date Historic average: 63.9mm
August Rain 2008
94mm Historic
average: 56.1mm
July
Rain 2008
102mm
Historic average: 47.2mm
Freshford Mill
Flooded March 2008
During Saturday and Sunday the rainfall locally was in
excess of 55mm, my rainwater gauge couldn't take the amount that fell.
Subsequently I awoke to find that the river Frome valley was flooded and
Freshford was isolated for the rest of the weekend. Whilst the regular
floods tend to dissipate fairly quickly there is no denying the power of
the river as the following photos show.
River Frome flooding has reached the top of
the railings in the approach to Mill bridge. The bridge railings have
trapped debris that floats downstream
Flooded field by Freshford Mill.
Mill race area flooded
Photos showing two views of
"street" of buildings at Freshford Mill flooded on the weekend of the 15th
and 16th March 2008
A brave or foolhardy driver negotiating lower Staples Hill
by the bridge
A view across the flood plain by Freshford
bridge
Freshford Mill:
more Photos of the Flooded areas
and Remaining Buildings
National Floods England June and July 2007 Freshford Mill
Escapes Flooding
However, with people dying of floods
(June 25th 2007) deep concern needs to be expressed for the approval of a
development that will need extraordinary measures to protect its
inhabitants against flood. These measures include importing rubble to
build up the land, even though this is undesirable, as it reduces the
land's ability to absorb flood water.
BBC News 27th June
2007 The consequences of such flood mitigation measures at
Freshford Mill will reflect on
the environmental impact of the development and are likely to be most
unattractive..
This area of the country escaped the
rainfall that other areas have had over this period. In fact the total
rainfall at Freshford Mill for June was 102mm which was less rain than we
had in May which was 129mm. The current rainfall total for July is a mere
102mm.
Fortunately, the
tide at Avonmouth
was low during the period of our highest rainfall in this area. At the
end of the month with the tide becoming much higher with the full moon the
risk increases, but fortunately the weather forecast is for better
weather. August total rainfall 66mm
Why not see for yourself how beautiful this area
of the countryside is, whatever the weather! The world heritage city of Bath is 6 miles away and
a pleasant drive to Cheddar Gorge is only one of the attractions of having
a holiday here.
The Inn at Freshford has live jazz every Thursday night
and the
Farleigh Arms at Farleigh Hungerford has live Irish music every Sunday
night. There are also other pubs that have live music, and also, all
serve excellent food, and a range of real ales. There are footpaths between the pubs.
The website has been optimised for Internet Explorer at
its most common display resolution of 1024 x 768. Furthermore there are
photographs and video files that are best suited to a broadband connection. I
make no apology for designing the website to these parameters as the intention
is to assert the argument that we live in an extraordinary area of the country
and this message is best portrayed by publishing high quality photographs. Most
of the photographs are mine. I do not claim that I have by means of my
photographs conveyed the magnificence of this countryside, in fact I believe
that I have only tried to do so. Perhaps Joe Cornish, a renowned landscape
photographer, might be encouraged to visit this area of England and spend some
time photographing what we, as residents regard to be countryside of outstanding
value, but are unable to fully capture on film.
The Department for the Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs
The Department for the Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs DEFRA requested that the
planning application for redeveloping the site known as Freshford Mill
should be 'called-in' for their approval, before a decision is made.
Unfortunately, DEFRA has now decided NOT to 'call-in' the planning application,
and the BANES Development Control Committee has
decided to 'permit'.
The Government Office of the South West and "Planning
Matters"
In fact the decision Not to call in
the planning application was NOT made by DEFRA but by the Government Office for
the South West. An individual known as A. Citizen wrote about this matter on the
website www.lettertothepm.co.uk and
there is a correspondence on the article entitled "Planning Matters" published
there.
A letter written to Freshford residents in June 2000 has information
about the Inspector's Report that advises against residential use.
Freshford Mill
(Peradins) Inspector's Report
As this particular application has
such important national ramifications for the erosion of the Green Belt which in
this case is also within an Area Of Outstanding Natural Beauty and an Area of
High Ecological Value we are entitled
to know why DEFRA has changed its mind, especially when Freshford Parish Council had provided
a long list of very closely reasoned objections to this planning application. (that
can be read here) The correspondence on
www.lettertothepm.com provides the
"official reasons" unsatisfactory, although that may be.
Geoff Edwards (resident)
NB In spite of
having several months to correct an error, by the Ordnance Survey (that the
Environment Agency relies on) Freshford Mill is still depicted as being outside
of the flood plain. This error in any third World country would be regarded as
corruption at the highest level. Make no mistake Freshford Mill and the
proposal by Southern & Counties for more than 20 dwellings -that has been
approved by BANES planning officers in spite of total opposition from the
residents of Freshford and their Parish Council -lies entirely under water in
the event of a flood. The residents could only be rescued by boat or helicopter.
A thirteen ton fire engine was washed off the road a few hundred yards
from Freshford Mill in 2000. Correct DEFRA map
here Incorrect DEFRA online maps here
Apparently concerns over corruption have been allayed by my research that I am
sure both DEFRA and the Ordnance Survey could have resolved if they had the mind
to. The full details are discussed on:
Freshford Mill OS Maps
Since I was a child I have become
aware by regular visits to the countryside with my parents that some parts of
our countryside: the most beautiful, romantic, and interesting have been
preserved for the nation by the National Trust. Land purchased by the
National Trust (NT) is going to be safe for ever.
Members of the NT provide the funds
that are needed, and there are volunteers who help to maintain areas. When we
see real countryside, we are often looking at a NT property or one owned by the
Crown, a wealthy or aristocratic landlord or one owned by a large company.
Some of our countryside and cityscapes
are protected by the establishment of National Parks, Areas of Outstanding
Natural Beauty and the Green Belt. In these areas local planning has more
control over what residents, business and organisations can do. And there are
Conservation Areas that further curtail and control indiscriminate development.
Philosophy
and Nature is a page of this web site where I have tried to convey my views
of our responsibilities, I suppose we could take for granted, or agree, that
preserving our physical heritage: structures, landscapes and seascapes is
obviously important if not vitally important, but maybe the proposition needs to be set
down on paper to reflect upon.
Freshford Mill
Freshford Mill is located on the River
Frome in Somerset ten minutes walk from the Inn at Freshford
and close to
the border with Wiltshire.
Freshford is a particularly attractive
village within the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) the
village is about six miles South of the World Heritage City of Bath. The
nearest town is Bradford On Avon which is about 3 miles away
Geographically, the area consists of hills and three rivers: the Avon, Frome and
Midford Brook. The latter is not exactly a brook! it has been known to flood the
Old Bath road and a substantial viaduct had to be built over the Midford Brook
valley to accommodate the A36. these rivers undoubtedly add considerably to the
great charm of the countryside. They have sculpted out the deep valleys over
hundreds of thousands of years. As for the roads, apart from the single
carriageway A36 all the roads are narrow, steep, and single track. with little, or no
provision for passing except by using private driveways. View a recent appraisal
of Freshford and Sharpstone Conservation Area by
BANES Planning
here
Where the River Frome meets the river
Avon there is an extensive meadow - a flood plain. The flood plain is an essential feature
that helps to contain the
regular floods and
one must suppose, as there will be more floods in the immediate future, as global
warming continues to affect our weather, that the existence of these meadows will be even more
important. "Flood
plains are called flood plains for a reason - they flood" Bob Spicer
Professor of Earth Sciences the Open University and 2007 Lead Academic
Consultant on BBC1 "Climate Change - Britain Under Threat", I hour Attenborough
programme; contributor to accompanying websites; press interviews
In fact, the existence of the Freshford
Mill site, is itself, a threat to increased flooding elsewhere as the whole site
has already been raised above the surrounding land. It would be good sense to
remove not only the factory buildings but also the man-made plateau on which the
buildings exist. There are also problems in
Freshford when there is a cold spell due to snow and
ice.
The Freshford Mill Works (Peradins)
is currently subject to a planning application for 21 dwellings . . . The
residents of Freshford and their parish council, and we thought the area council
had rejected the application by
Southern & Counties (Suttons) Ltd. However, the application has now been
approved by the
Bath & North East Somerset Planning
Service under a recommendation from Area "B"
Development Committee. With no information given for its approval other than an
underlying agreement that something does need to be done to remove the eyesore!
The complete documentation for the application is available at
Planning Services using the 'Public Access' service. To search you will need
to enter the Application Ref 05/02563/FUL Note: if you include a space the search will
fail, you should then be directed to a results page.
There has been talk that the
application was approved because there is no other plan for the development of
the site. However, that is not the case as a plan for the redevelopment of
the site has been approved by the council: The creation of a rural
recreation area, nature sanctuary and workshops in 2005.I understand that
thisparticular plancould not be implemented without the necessary funds to buy
the site. Since this eyesore is within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
(AONB) we would have thought that money should be available, since the purpose
of this type of legislative instrument is meant to protect parts of the
countryside for the benefit of all. As an Area of High Ecological
Value with especially rare bats that may not survive the noise and turmoil of
the development there is even more reason not to allow this development to go ahead.
Penalties for even disturbing bats is severe see:
http://www.bats.org.uk/batlaw/batlaw_in_detail.asp
This is what the situation looks like:
entice developers to barter money for environmental cleanup in exchange for
planning approval for dwellings? Is this the only way we can have the mistakes
of former planning decisions cleaned up? The reality is that the developers,
will most likely, recoup their money and more from wealthy people who will buy
these dwellings -they won't be welcome here. They will be isolated from the
village geographically and socially.
Whereas, the Freshford Mill site could be a recreational area for the village
and an education centre for the area, this is what the village wants.
Our freedom of expression is
under attack from the media, using terms such as
'Nimby'.
The government has to be wary of accusations of being a 'Nanny State'.
We are all subject to mind our words because of the pressure of political correctness.
The present government is keen to encourage democracy at the closest
most egalitarian level which is the parish council. Each parish council has to
write a report which involves a survey to be carried out to find out what we do want
and what we don't want for the future of our villages. This rather demanding
activity is meant to facilitate appropriate development and improvements.
There is inevitably going to be a
measure of suspicion aimed at this government directive: especially, where in
the case of the Freshford Mill application our local government officers have
overruled their earlier decision to reject the application by Southern &
Counties (Suttons) Ltd. and have not provided to date 10th March 2007, reasons
for their decision. What's the point of carrying out a survey of our concerns
when our concerns are ignored at the whim of the local government possibly under pressure
from central government! All of this public consultation, whether on
environmental issues or health, is a sham. Public views will of course be
acknowledged if they coincide with those of the government!
So does the root of the problem as to why
the rejection of the application and then its approval! lie in the necessity to
find funding to clean up the site where, I understand, there has been toxic?
waste buried by Peradins, apparently
not exactly? There is also a substantial amount of material that contains
asbestos which is quite expensive to remove due to the necessity to protect
workers. Certainly this means that the present or would be owner, as
the site is for sale,
needs to spend a considerable amount of money and that to be a viable investment
there has to be more than 20 dwellings built. They have not been able to sell or
lease the site for industrial use, even though it has permission for such use.
Further information about the
site Council's response to the 2002
Application by Suttons
There is no doubt that the Freshford
Mill site is an aweful eyesore at present. It is as if the Development
Committee have gone for a solution, that obviously they don't actually approve
of, but approval would mean removal of the eyesore and the hazards that the site
is alleged to contain. It is only in the removal of the eyesore that the
whole village of Freshford approves, I have not met one person who agrees that the
Freshford Mill site should be used for housing.
The villagers and the wider community
are entitled to a report on this about face.
However, if Peradins were permitted to
bury toxic waste by the local authority in the late 1940's then surely the local
authority should foot the bill for cleaning the site up not a private investor.
Or if at that time, the local authority were under direction from regional
or central government then money should come from them.
I did meet the owner or a
representative of the owner, by chance, and expressed the opinion that four
dwellings on the site would perhaps be more acceptable. I was told that there
wouldn't be enough money generated, to clean up the site, if Suttons could only
build four dwellings. Not that I want any housing on the site. But I had failed to realise how important the
flood risk is. It doesn't make any sense to deliberately build on a flood
plain. No one lived at Freshford Mill except for those that lived in an attached
cottage (but not in living memory). former
Peradins and Freshford Mill site This web site is notable for exploring
places that have been forgotten, just like Freshford Mill has been forgotten,
this is because Freshford Mill is not suitable for its permitted use. The truth is that SURREY AND
COUNTIES ( SUTTON) LIMITED have not been able to sell the property to any
business user! Update February 11th 2006 the site has now been placed for sale
now they have planning permission for dwellings (the site was eventually sold to
YPres Rose Developments in
March 2007)
Historically, the only building that
has taken place in the Frome valley, by the riverside, near Freshford has been the Freshford Mill.
Local people are sensible and most vernacular buildings are located in places that
are in harmony with
the environment. The valley is not only subject to flooding but to mist, it is
more likely to be misty in the valley than not. Low lying areas are not healthy
areas to live in. These new dwellings will need more fuel to ensure that the
people living there are living in comfort. The mist also affects safety on the
roads, both for vehicles, and pedestrians.
The war time authority made the mistake of building pillboxes
in the flood plain. Here's a photograph of one taken recently!
This flood didn't extend far into the fields but did threaten The Inn at
Freshford where staff had sandbags ready. Unfortunately for this website, water
that was in the fields had retreated by morning preventing recording the full
extent of the flood. This
photograph doesn't convey how strong the current was. However, photos taken down
river at the bridge at Freshford show the full force of the river.
The Flood risk information page including maps and photos would convince any
reasonable person that what amounts to building a new settlement should NOT be undertaken
at Freshford Mill. The Association of British Insurers have also stated that the
risk of flooding is getting worse.
http://www.abi.org.uk/Display/File/Child/553/Document.doc
In this country the only land
that is left, is land that previous generations would not build on for what to
them were obviously sensible reasons. What we have now is pressure to NOT build on
unsuitable land. (deduced from the ODPM's website) but local authorities pressured
by central government
to build more and more housing! This housing is meant to accommodate not
only indigenous citizens of the British Isles which is increasing quite slowly
but the increasing number of people from the European Union (EU) which is
expanding, the Old and New Commonwealth and a migration of UK citizens to
Southern England, whilst more and more British citizens are emigrating mainly to
Australia and New Zealand.
All citizens of the EU that of course
includes the UK and the Irish Republic are entitled to live and work and draw
benefits in every other EU country. One major benefit of living in England
is, apart from better work opportunities, the extremely important acquisition of
the ability to speak and read the English language, a skill that has global
value. The net inflow of emigration, whether for a limited period or not, is
that the population of the UK and Eire is increasing whilst the attraction for
indigenous citizens to go abroad - to Poland or Italy for example to live and
work is almost non-existent. This factor and refugees, who favour
this country rather than France, for example, is adding to the escalation in
house values. Unfortunately, land like fossil fuel is a finite quantity
and with global warming our gross land area will reduce in size. Already, it is
realized that the coastal defences need to be partially disabled rather than
improved to allow the seas to reclaim the land. If in future, the near
future according to some forecasts, we need to grow more food within these
islands we will need every acre or hectare of land that we have. In this
case, the river Frome valley in Freshford is only suitable for sheep and cattle;
and possibly for rice.
Roads in the countryside are fewer than
in town, although there aren't so
many cars in the countryside the roads can be busier than in town, there is
often no choice in going from A to B, as in the countryside residential roads
are scarce. Photos of road junctions
Staples Hill. the unclassified road that
is the main road leading into Freshford from the east is actually busier than
where I used to live in London! (Crouch End)
Only lanes lead to Freshford Mill.
single track roads with no passing places. BANES Development Committee decided
to approve the application after consulting various reports. The Transport
Assessment (TA) that Surrey & Counties (Suttons) Ltd commissioned from David
Tucker Associates (DTA) is available to read on the BANES Planning Services
Public Access web site. In that assessment DTA made a number of conclusions
that need to be scrutinised.
DTA's Traffic Assessment concludes
that 'the proposed residential scheme fully accords with Government policy
to reduce the need for travel and to create sustainable communities. The
transport assessment demonstrates that the proposed use will generate
significantly less traffic than the historic or permitted uses and that the
adjacent highway network can safely accommodate the forecast traffic flows.'
1. This is perhaps, the only proposed
settlement where for emergency access boats will be needed!
1.1 Reduce the need
for travel? what by building a settlement where unless the residents use their
cars they will have to walk along narrow, twisting dark lanes that are subject
to flooding to a railway station over 1km away. Estimated time by foot over 40
minutes a day? excluding getting from the destination station to the workplace!
1.2 DTA's Traffic
Assessment has an old survey of where existing residents work. One
excellent way of reducing the need to travel, as there is no work in Freshford
is to move to Bath or Bristol or Trowbridge or . . .
2. Freshford is not even sustainable,
consider the list below, so how can Freshford Mill be sustainable?
2.4 a primary
school that is almost full, that has recently been extended, with no room to
extend further
2.5 an infrequent
bus service that only runs for part of the day
2.6 a limited train service, where you have to hail the driver, that had a massive gap
from platform to carriage until recently (offering a worse service than a cattle
truck)
2.7 traffic chaos by
the school in the morning, and afternoon, as there is no parking spaces for
parents
2.8 sustainable
communities have local jobs Freshford has: The Inn, the school, and the post
office, which is closing
NB I forgot to mention that I
cycle to the nearest bank in Bradford On Avon a return distance of 6 miles form
the centre of the village Although there is a post office-shop at Westwood.
3. 'generate significantly less
traffic than the historic or permitted uses'
3.1 YES I AGREE IT
WILL as when the Freshford Mill site was used by Peradins the amount of traffic
was unbelievable: '. . . that between
6am and 9am on an average day in 1969, eighty-two cars and two coaches arrived
at the works' and ' enormous articulated lorries were bringing raw
materials from the Midlands, and transporting manufactured goods to car plants
and ports. the size of these lorries was increasingly incompatible with the
ancient pattern and size of roads, lanes, hills and bridges, and incidents
frequently occurred.'
This material is from
respected local historian Alan Dodge's book Freshford: the History of a Somerset
Village, p244-245 (comment: a fascinating and most scholarly contribution to
the History of our countryside)
3.2
'or permitted
use' the site can be used as a factory and if it were to be, even though there has been
virtually no interest in the site since Peradins finally left in 1995, 'the
amount of traffic would be considerably more than its proposed residential use'.
This does not mean that there will NOT be an unacceptable increase in local
traffic, which has been steadily getting worse, and worse, if two dozen dwellings are
built.
4. 'the adjacent highway network can
safely accommodate the forecast traffic flows'
4.1 we all know about what the
highway authorities think of road safety: until someone is killed they don't
recommend pedestrian crossings etc.
4.2 as to reducing
stress, noise, safety for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians . . .what about
the government's plan to have "Quiet roads"?
http://www.cpre.org.uk/news/view/11 surely this
part of the countryside should qualify?
4.3 'a single track
road with passing places can carry a two way flow of up to 300 vehicles an hour'
i.e.. one vehicle every 12 seconds, 'the new settlement will not generate these
levels' but this statistic is less than the existing level inStaples Hill during peak times now!
what passing places? (I do not have time to open my rear car door!)
I certainly would
not walk along Staples Hill during the day, it's too dangerous, I am lucky I can
use a bridleway and footpaths. No such luck for the would be residents of
Freshford Mill. If this development goes ahead there will be more pressure
for residents to use their cars for local use,as the safest place to be on the
road is inside a vehicle. There is no evidence on the Internet for the
last statement, but if you think about it, (do you need to?) it is self evident!
Motorways are safer than other roads.
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,15149-1565657,00.html Even
the customers of the local pub, The Inn, use cars to get there!
I do not suppose that
anyone contemplating buying a property in Freshford or other parts of the
countryside has any illusions about whether their proposed purchase will be
value for the money invested. But first it should be realised that property
located in the countryside that has no garden tends to change hands more
frequently and is harder to sell.
The estate at Freshford
Mill or whatever it will be called will have to
levy a service charge for sewage treatment and maintenance of the community
gardens and infrastructure including security. These charges increase the
cost of living at Freshford Mill and will obviously affect the resale value of
the dwellings. Will the properties be Freehold or Leasehold; a thousand year
lease? Bath will probably be a seaside resort in a few hundred years time and
the river Frome will be tidal.
Corruption of Public Officials?
But before the dwellings are built
someone has to be prepared to take on the uncertainty of borrowing several
million pounds to invest in the development that will surely, always cost more
than anticipated.
There is talk that BANES planning
is corrupt. After all they have not published their rationale for approving this
application. So much for local democracy and open government. Of course this is merely
talk, that arises from the resentment that residents have, to what appear to them,
to be the unacceptable approval of planning applications when most of us have
difficulty getting planning permission for a shed! Why haven't BANES
planning department published the full text of the meeting that approved the
application by Suttons. This documentation would have helped residents to
raise objections that could be put before the councillors who eventually
approved the application by five to three. And might even have changed the
councillors minds about the proposal. Why isn't there a citizens right to
inspect the written and other records that should be made whenever there is a
meeting. Without these records, these meetings are effectively "secret
meetings"
If
the proposed development goes ahead, there will be 21 new dwellings for
sale. These dwellings are new, they did not exist before, never in 1,000 years
of history have dwellings been built on this site. The main reasons being: risk
of flood and living in a damp environment. In the winter, for example, sunshine
when it does shine, disappears after 12:00 noon in the valley bottom.
So Who May Consider Buying These Dwellings
Married Couples
Who will decide to buy these
dwellings? Surely not married couples who are intending to rear a family?
Consider the following:
1. the local primary school has very
few vacancies and has been extended recently, with little room for further
expansion. A number of children are being educated privately, this has created
some vacancies. It has also removed some of the brightest children from the
school, at worst, or altered the balance of ability and behaviour at best.
2. the trip to school is dangerous,
and time consuming on foot, you will need to use your car.
3. The dwellings don't have their own
gardens, and the communal gardens will most likely be ruined by flood waters regularly.
4. the river Frome although beautiful is dangerous,
very
dangerous, your children will be living close to it.
Second Home Buyers
So who will buy these dwellings?
wealthy people looking for a second home? This is an isolated settlement, it
could easily be the target of thieves. or worse, vandalism (which is alive and
kicking in the west country, there is an anti-cultural element!) police don't
"exist". (response time London, 999, crime in operation: 90 seconds)
this is not to
blame the local police force, this is a large area!!
Single Professional Buyers
So who will buy these dwellings? young
single professional people who work in Bath or Bristol? This is an isolated
settlement, it could easily be the target of thieves. You will either have to
spend an increasing amount of money on fuel or use the train - inconvenient and
time consuming and the service could be withdrawn and the fares will go up! Bristol takes at least 2 hours a day,
there and back,
to get to by car. What does that travelling time mean, well even if you pay yourself at an unskilled rate
of say £10 an hour and only travel to work for 300 days a year it will cost you
£6,000 of course if you value your time more highly then you should increase the
amount and don't forget to add the cost of fuel. I would have thought that young
professional people tend to prefer to live more centrally, in former docks areas
of a city centre for example.
Retired
people?
1. You will be dependent on your car
and your telephone as this is an isolated settlement, it could easily be the
target of thieves.
2.This is a damp, frosty area, being in a
valley, it is not a healthy place to live.
3. the Frome valley gets darker earlier
than the adjoining hillsides ,this is especially noticeable in the autumn and
winter months. Don't you want to sit in the sunshine in the evening? and then
there are the midges!
4. when there is a flood, which is
certain, you will lose your car unless you decide to evacuate your home until
the flood subsides. Or having planning approved the building of a platform,
which is sure to be unsightly, to park cars on when there is a flood?
Message to all potential residents:
people have not lived on this site for the last 1,000 years. Correction, never!
except for those individuals who have been virtually forced to live here.
I have been driven with the desire to
protect this exceptionally beautiful part of our countryside. 84% of the
population of the UK live in England, that's 50 million people, and as mentioned
elsewhere on this website apart from the Netherlands we are the most densely populated country
in Europe. We therefore, need to take a strong stand against
development in the countryside.
There are so many objections to this proposed
development that Freshford Parish council have so clearly presented, that are in
no way a reflection of just the views of local opinion, but have far reaching implications for
the UK and for other areas of the EEC, that the existing decision needs to be confirmed by central government
scrutiny. This is the classic Slippery Slope situation where approval may
lead to other applications to build on green belt land and within areas of
outstanding natural beauty and areas of special scientific interest. Or at
least, provide the grounds to cover footpaths and bridleways with tarmac and
destroy ancient lanes and byways.
The fact that it is necessary to have
to create a website to support our objections is worrying, it is absolutely
incrediblethat this planning application could be approved. We have had to
fight the continual application of Suttons' to make a profit from their purchase
of the Freshford Mill site. I have no sympathy for the company, but maybe
planning do, as this settlement will remove the eyesore, with no public expense. I can find no other reason for approving this planning application other
than that. There is another explanation that is that there is corruption. On
reflection there may be another, that is that the approval of this real estate
for property development will deter the building of a major road through the
Frome and Avon valleys.
Who knows what
may be approved in future. The
vicious scar that has been slashed in to the gentle hillside to accommodate
alterations to the A46 trunk road at Bath further down the Avon valley is the
sort of "development" that could happen virtually anywhere in this little island
of ours. The new road is subject to a 50mph speed limit and needs speed cameras
to control motorists who have a nice wide open straight road to speed down. The
old road kept motorists from speeding anyway.
Maybe approving
this particular development is the price we have to pay to forestall development
in the future. Maybe this is what the planners were thinking about. (probably if
the government decided to reroute the A36 into and across the Frome valley they
would anyway!)
I am
quite happy, in fact I would welcome, the opportunity to include the argument for
approving this application if requested, from both
the planners and those that were minded to permit. View:
Reasons for approval.
I have provided in this
website support for objections already raised by Freshford Parish Council. In
Freshford we are blessed with Parish council officers who have the skill to
formulate our objections to such planning applications.
God help those authorities who do not
have such capable people, as we seem to have lost the protection of the
government. In the mistaken belief that local autonomy will be more able to make
the right decisions.
In this particular case, we have a majority of two
councillors, two abstained. So these two
individuals have approved a far reaching decision to build a new settlement on
not just the green belt but in an area of outstanding natural beauty and an area of
high ecological value (with protected species)
and in my opinion an
exceptionally beautiful location within these designated areas. I would be
interested to hear from anyone who thinks that there are other areas that have
this beauty within Bath and North East Somerset and West Wiltshire, Are there
nicer areas? Apparently not, no response after over 2 years. (over 18,000
visitors to the web site Nov 2007)
Did these councillors make the right
decision, do they still think they did? Why are they silent?
Some, possibly
corrupt, at worst, or ignorant at best, officials approved the Peridins
development in war torn Britain and now we have to live with that decision. Our national and
international authority (EEC) have absented themselves from this decision.
This means that the site could be legally used for industrial use. It doesn't
say much for the law as an instrument to protect the environment does it? They agreed to industrial use. Change of use
to residential is another matter. Suttons's haven't been able to sell the site
to an industrial user. Easy, just set the price too high, this leaves an
alternative, sell the site for residential development. And claim this is the
only alternative. I was told by a representative of the company that a possible
acceptable redevelopment of the factory site would be to build four
houses, but was told that this would be financially impossible due to the
costs of the
extensive cleanup of the ground and removal of the buildings and all the
other infrastructure requirements.
Much has been said about sustainability
yet here we have an ideal location for a working mill to generate
electricity for the local community with a surplus that could be sold to
the National Grid. Or will we have to face the imposition of
windmills on our hillsides in future?
My personal view, which is in sympathy with an already
approved planning application presented by the village is that public money should be spent on
clearing up the site as the damage was caused by publicly elected
authorities in the past. That a proper working mill be incorporated in to
the old mill buildings. And that the area
should be used for recreation and conservation by locals and visitors.
The case for a working mill on the River Frome (Somerset) to
generate electricity may be reviewed here:
Natural Power?
What we need is a public enquiry
into approving Freshford Mill for dwellings