Link this page where appropriate

The Executive Withdraw Gypsy Site Proposal

Follow it on the Executive WEB CAST Click Picture

Petition Process            Council Rules (Click)

To get the council to debate an issue, 1,500 signatures are required, we have well exceeded that with our Green Belt Petition

Any petition that is not a planning matter (the broader council deemed not qualified to consider these matters) must then be heard at a full Council Meeting. Petitioners are given a 5minute slot to speak It is then debated in public by the councillors at this meeting. Bring out the nodding donkeys

 

Although 3600+ signatures on the Green Belt petition were obtained, the council obfuscated the process and have duly sent it to be considered with the planning application for Oakwood Farm, which by the way  doesn't exist yet

 

The Resolutions Required …..The Oakwood Farm development proposal should be removed from the list of sites to be considered as traveller sites

The West Cheshire Council to recognise the Cheshire Green Belt and its Importance

Use these Links …good reading matter

Chester Green Belt

Big Society Local Communities planning their Community

Face Book ..  Green Belt Forum

Steven Mosley MP Views

Planning Reform and Green Belt

Campaign to preserve Chester’s Green Belt 

Interestingly the Government at the Manchester Tory Conference were at pains to say their new planning legislation  protects  the green belt. This in the light of a lot of national lobbying and the pitfalls of simplifying planning legislation

Eric Pickles made some  fairly encouraging  points about green belt  at their party conference  .. (click)

 

Contrary to this our own council seem well entrenched with sticking to their attack on our green belt even though they acknowledge there is  local opposition to their proposals. At some stage councillors may realise we are not punters but people, and at some stage voters. I am surprised central office haven't clipped Mike Jones wings yet. He seems able to do quite a lot of damage with his sensitive management style

Our Complaint has been two fold : That the council manipulate the procedural rules, consultation processes and rights to be heard, to suppress comment and criticism, this is an attack on our democratic rights

And secondly, the ruling cabal ride roughshod over the planning rules, regulations and policies they have in place to protect our countryside. For what purpose you may ask?

The irony to all this is we are paying them large salaries for them to give us a bad time and threaten our environment and community

We will judge them again when the Student Village proposal comes before the Planning Committee

Criticism of decisions to grant Travellers’ sites on Green Belt land has been rejected

Jul 7 2011 by Rachel Flint, Chester Chronicle

CRITICISM of council decisions to grant dozens of Gypsy and Traveller sites on Green Belt land across Cheshire has been rejected as ‘wishful’ and ‘unjustified’.

Over the past months Cheshire West and Chester Council have faced a furious backlash from villagers across Dunham-on-the-Hill, Helsby, Frodsham, Alvanley and Mickle Trafford after councillors granted two temporary Travellers’ sites on Green Belt land.

Now CWaC have said the criticism of their planning decisions is down to ‘wishful misinterpretation’ of a draft Government Bill, which has lead to ‘unjustified criticism of decisions made’ in accordance with current planning guidance.

In response to the criticism CWaC Leader Cllr Mike Jones has called for urgent clarification surrounding the guidelines for Travellers’ sites on the Green Belt, writing to Cheshire West MPs, Graham Evans, Stephen Mosley, Stephen O’Brien, Andrew Miller and George Osborne, for their support. Cllr Jones said: “Despite suggestions to the contrary, I am advised there is no evidence in the Government’s draft consultation document to suggest an end to the requirement for local authorities to assess the need for sites and provide sites.

“It seems that the national policy governing building in the Green Belt will largely remain unchanged. Gypsy and Traveller sites within the Green Belt will remain ‘inappropriate developments’ which, like other similarly categorised development, is only acceptable if justified by ‘very special circumstances’.

“In short, the current situation is at best unclear with the onus on local authorities to deliver a policy which is highly contentious against an uncertain background and potentially inaccurate perception of future policy.”

The appeal comes after villagers hounded the authority with letters, emails, FOI requests and phone calls after councillors granted a two year temporary site in Hillcrest, Chester Road, Dunham-on-the-Hill in May.

contact

Underlined Items are Links …...best viewed with Internet Explorer

Gypsy and Traveller Site Issue

I have left some of the Campaign material on this page as a reminder of the  situation our communities found themselves in and the Churchillian effort put in by everyone  to correct the crass decision to propose a Gypsy Site at Oakwood Farm