Haygrove housing plans recommended for approval

Joe Notaro

Joe Notaro

First published in News Bridgwater Mercury: Photograph of the Author by

A PROJECT to build 186 homes off Haygrove Road in Bridgwater has been recommended for approval.

The application by Joe Notaro and joint developer David Wilson Homes is to be decided by Sedgemoor’s development committee on February 12.

The proposal has gone to committee because ward councillors, the Town Council and Parish Council disagree with the case officer's recommendation to approve it.

The Town Council has labelled the adoption of The Meads Supplementary Planning Document and the residential development “premature” as brown and greenfield sites are already identified for development in and around the town.

In August, Sedgemoor District Council refused an application by the same developers for 187 homes south of Haygrove Farm, because they felt there was insufficient evidence to warrant the early release of the land.

But the new application includes amendments, such as reducing the height of previously proposed three-storey homes near Durleigh Park.

Bridgwater Wyndham Ward Cllr Gill Slocombe told the Mercury: “I feel it is a new application, but still believe this housing development is not needed in the first half of the Core Strategy. Any exceptional circumstances do not warrant the early release of this land.

“Ward councillors, town councillors, Durleigh Parish Council and at least 50 other residents have all objected to this proposal. They can’t all be wrong.”

People submitted 57 letters of objection, including a petition opposing the development. Reasons included concerns over traffic congestion, road safety of pupils from Haygrove School, threats to wildlife, flooding issues and a general feeling that more housing is not currently needed.

In a statement, the developers said: “Overall, the revisions to the original scheme have resulted in a simpler and more legible layout with a clear loop road, enhanced pedestrian links from the southern frontage into the development, and improvements to the central area of open space.”

The scheme is recommended for approval, subject to a section 106 agreement with a series of terms and conditions including: contribution to the Meads Eco Park, provision of 30% affordable housing on site, a Travel Plan, zebra crossing, flood tariff, play facilities and a financial contribution to education.

Comments (42)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:51pm Fri 8 Feb 13

MartinB58 says...

The article says: "In August, Sedgemoor District Council refused an application by the same developers for 187 homes south of Haygrove Farm, because they felt there was insufficient evidence to warrant the early release of the land. "

Other than 6 months and -1 home, what has changed to now warrant release of the land?
The article says: "In August, Sedgemoor District Council refused an application by the same developers for 187 homes south of Haygrove Farm, because they felt there was insufficient evidence to warrant the early release of the land. " Other than 6 months and -1 home, what has changed to now warrant release of the land? MartinB58
  • Score: 0

3:03pm Fri 8 Feb 13

grisleyreg says...

Must say you do have to wonder why?,
A little disturbing I think
Must say you do have to wonder why?, A little disturbing I think grisleyreg
  • Score: 0

4:25pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Doverbeme says...

Bridgwater is becoming more and more of a giant housing estate.
Bridgwater is becoming more and more of a giant housing estate. Doverbeme
  • Score: 0

4:32pm Fri 8 Feb 13

LookingForLiars says...

Does this mean I won't hear the "Bittern's" again ?

Maybe if we allow some house's to be built as part of the Colley Lane relief road it will make it happen quicker ?
Especially if the same developer is given the project !
Does this mean I won't hear the "Bittern's" again ? Maybe if we allow some house's to be built as part of the Colley Lane relief road it will make it happen quicker ? Especially if the same developer is given the project ! LookingForLiars
  • Score: 0

7:22pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

If you read the report, it says that this is going before the Commitee on the 12th February 2013. it is only recommended by Officers from Planning. I put my trust in the actual Planning Commitee, this is why it has gone to Commitee, as the Ward Councillors have objected, now the Test will be as to wether their objection is within the Technical reasons as to this applications acceptance within Planning Guidelines.
It is not a done deal yet!!! Wait !!
I'm sure that Cllr Jill Slocombe Ward Cllr, with the support of Cllr David Baker, will make the correct and level representations to the Panel Members on the 12th @ the Planning Meeting.
There has to be correct reasons for any objections, to be taken in to account, not just NIMBY's even if they think their objection is Warrented.
We will all see next week.
Regards Blue-Owl
Former SDC Planning Member.
If you read the report, it says that this is going before the Commitee on the 12th February 2013. it is only recommended by Officers from Planning. I put my trust in the actual Planning Commitee, this is why it has gone to Commitee, as the Ward Councillors have objected, now the Test will be as to wether their objection is within the Technical reasons as to this applications acceptance within Planning Guidelines. It is not a done deal yet!!! Wait !! I'm sure that Cllr Jill Slocombe Ward Cllr, with the support of Cllr David Baker, will make the correct and level representations to the Panel Members on the 12th @ the Planning Meeting. There has to be correct reasons for any objections, to be taken in to account, not just NIMBY's even if they think their objection is Warrented. We will all see next week. Regards Blue-Owl Former SDC Planning Member. Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

8:18pm Fri 8 Feb 13

swjoduk says...

Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks.

Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals.

Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.
Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks. Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals. Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k. swjoduk
  • Score: 0

8:34pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Silverbirch says...

The February '13 Local Development Framework clearly states that there is an excess of available land for the next 5 years. Sadly, the Summerfields precedent is that the planning committee will consider the outrageous building on greenfields in order to obtain money and land for the ridiculous Meads ecopark project. The developers must be laughing all the way to the bank.
The February '13 Local Development Framework clearly states that there is an excess of available land for the next 5 years. Sadly, the Summerfields precedent is that the planning committee will consider the outrageous building on greenfields in order to obtain money and land for the ridiculous Meads ecopark project. The developers must be laughing all the way to the bank. Silverbirch
  • Score: 0

9:45am Sat 9 Feb 13

Waterway says...

Ok I may be a Nimby along with all my pals including the Bridgwater Town Council ,Ward Councillors and many residents who have spoken out for all the right reasons. Why build on green belt land when we have sufficient brownfield sites already identified within the town? Why build on an area which is one of the last unspoilt and natural areas of the town? Why are we building more houses when we are seeing the biggest housing slump in living memory and developers are finding it difficult to sell existing stock and in the process destroying green belt land to satisfy the balance sheets? I fear democratically elected Councillors seem to have there hands tied behind their backs when it comes to planning matters, the real decisions are made by non elected Planning Officers, so what's the point any more of having elected Councillors who are opposed to this development but have to be guided by red tape? Sad to say but my eyes have been opened in the past 3 years since the Notaro / Wilson homes application was submitted Do you recall the emotional comments made by the head of a local house builder when told he couldn't build house at the last application hearing - what was that all about? I hope our elected representatives will turn up at next weeks meeting and once again say a definite NO to this application as is the wish of many of the electorate. That's democracy in action


0061 - 295258961
Ok I may be a Nimby along with all my pals including the Bridgwater Town Council ,Ward Councillors and many residents who have spoken out for all the right reasons. Why build on green belt land when we have sufficient brownfield sites already identified within the town? Why build on an area which is one of the last unspoilt and natural areas of the town? Why are we building more houses when we are seeing the biggest housing slump in living memory and developers are finding it difficult to sell existing stock and in the process destroying green belt land to satisfy the balance sheets? I fear democratically elected Councillors seem to have there hands tied behind their backs when it comes to planning matters, the real decisions are made by non elected Planning Officers, so what's the point any more of having elected Councillors who are opposed to this development but have to be guided by red tape? Sad to say but my eyes have been opened in the past 3 years since the Notaro / Wilson homes application was submitted Do you recall the emotional comments made by the head of a local house builder when told he couldn't build house at the last application hearing - what was that all about? I hope our elected representatives will turn up at next weeks meeting and once again say a definite NO to this application as is the wish of many of the electorate. That's democracy in action 0061 - 295258961 Waterway
  • Score: 0

10:52am Sat 9 Feb 13

BaldCarl2 says...

Bridgwater is Notaro's monopoly board. He buys up green belt land cheap, sits on it for a few years, gets planning permission for houses and builds them.
Bridgwater is Notaro's monopoly board. He buys up green belt land cheap, sits on it for a few years, gets planning permission for houses and builds them. BaldCarl2
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Silverbirch says...

swjoduk wrote:
Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks.

Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals.

Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.
I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).
[quote][p][bold]swjoduk[/bold] wrote: Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks. Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals. Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.[/p][/quote]I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes). Silverbirch
  • Score: 0

8:50am Sun 10 Feb 13

swjoduk says...

Silverbirch wrote:
swjoduk wrote:
Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks.

Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals.

Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.
I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).
Would love to but currently the prices on the 'favoured west side' are out of our league. We only bring in an average salary (lower than that now with my partner on maternity leave), have no wealthy relatives on either side and no chance of affording anything upwards of say 170k, not prepared to mortgage us through the roof and put us on an unsound financial footing.

I personally can never see us owning a property upwards of 200k, seems a world away despite working hard and holding decent jobs. I'd love to move out to the countryside where I grew up but even my parents ex Council house when sold fetched 250k so even those properties are unaffordable.

Harsh realities of a modern life, you want your children to attend decent schools but you can't afford to live in the catchments, well, some of us can't!
[quote][p][bold]Silverbirch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swjoduk[/bold] wrote: Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks. Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals. Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.[/p][/quote]I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).[/p][/quote]Would love to but currently the prices on the 'favoured west side' are out of our league. We only bring in an average salary (lower than that now with my partner on maternity leave), have no wealthy relatives on either side and no chance of affording anything upwards of say 170k, not prepared to mortgage us through the roof and put us on an unsound financial footing. I personally can never see us owning a property upwards of 200k, seems a world away despite working hard and holding decent jobs. I'd love to move out to the countryside where I grew up but even my parents ex Council house when sold fetched 250k so even those properties are unaffordable. Harsh realities of a modern life, you want your children to attend decent schools but you can't afford to live in the catchments, well, some of us can't! swjoduk
  • Score: 0

8:55am Sun 10 Feb 13

swjoduk says...

Silverbirch wrote:
swjoduk wrote:
Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks.

Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals.

Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.
I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).
Would love to but currently the prices on the 'favoured west side' are out of our league. We only bring in an average salary (lower than that now with my partner on maternity leave), have no wealthy relatives on either side and no chance of affording anything upwards of say 170k, not prepared to mortgage us through the roof and put us on an unsound financial footing.

I personally can never see us owning a property upwards of 200k, seems a world away despite working hard and holding decent jobs. I'd love to move out to the countryside where I grew up but even my parents ex Council house when sold fetched 250k so even those properties are unaffordable.

Harsh realities of a modern life, you want your children to attend decent schools but you can't afford to live in the catchments, well, some of us can't!
[quote][p][bold]Silverbirch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swjoduk[/bold] wrote: Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks. Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals. Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.[/p][/quote]I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).[/p][/quote]Would love to but currently the prices on the 'favoured west side' are out of our league. We only bring in an average salary (lower than that now with my partner on maternity leave), have no wealthy relatives on either side and no chance of affording anything upwards of say 170k, not prepared to mortgage us through the roof and put us on an unsound financial footing. I personally can never see us owning a property upwards of 200k, seems a world away despite working hard and holding decent jobs. I'd love to move out to the countryside where I grew up but even my parents ex Council house when sold fetched 250k so even those properties are unaffordable. Harsh realities of a modern life, you want your children to attend decent schools but you can't afford to live in the catchments, well, some of us can't! swjoduk
  • Score: 0

11:27am Sun 10 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

BaldCarl2 wrote:
Bridgwater is Notaro's monopoly board. He buys up green belt land cheap, sits on it for a few years, gets planning permission for houses and builds them.
Bald Carl , Forgive me for seeing 'Grr
green Envey " in your post. Why should Joe Nataro's, like any other person who has made a success of his business Life, with the benefits that that brings, not be able to purchase, Land, Property, Cars, Holiday Homes or whatever, at least he has got Orf his Arse ! Worked , provided employment for others.
I beg to ask, what have You contributed to this our Town or District.? I for one would love to be enlightened, then perhaps ,I can understand where your resentment comes from....Blue- Owl
[quote][p][bold]BaldCarl2[/bold] wrote: Bridgwater is Notaro's monopoly board. He buys up green belt land cheap, sits on it for a few years, gets planning permission for houses and builds them.[/p][/quote]Bald Carl , Forgive me for seeing 'Grr green Envey " in your post. Why should Joe Nataro's, like any other person who has made a success of his business Life, with the benefits that that brings, not be able to purchase, Land, Property, Cars, Holiday Homes or whatever, at least he has got Orf his Arse ! Worked , provided employment for others. I beg to ask, what have You contributed to this our Town or District.? I for one would love to be enlightened, then perhaps ,I can understand where your resentment comes from....Blue- Owl Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

11:31am Sun 10 Feb 13

westmale says...

hope it gets turned down no benifit to bridgwater or its green belt land mind you our council has let housing estates to be built on what used to be flooded fields in and around the town which has totally messed up the traffic flow but then whats the point in saying anything no one ever listens
hope it gets turned down no benifit to bridgwater or its green belt land mind you our council has let housing estates to be built on what used to be flooded fields in and around the town which has totally messed up the traffic flow but then whats the point in saying anything no one ever listens westmale
  • Score: 0

11:35am Sun 10 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

Silverbirch wrote:
swjoduk wrote:
Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks.

Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals.

Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.
I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).
I was brought up on the So Called west side of Town,Wembdon Hill, do I live there now. No!, where did we start our Married life, in Queen St, centre of town 2 up 2 down including kitchen, then we moved to Bristol Rd, just past Kimberley Terrace. Where did we move to then, where We are now 35 years later, Somerville Way, off Bower.
Do I want to move to Wembdon Village or Durleigh Hill. Certainly Not. our kids may have flown the nest, but they know.
It's not where your house is! It's where your Home is !!!!
David L Preece
Aka Blue-Owl
-
[quote][p][bold]Silverbirch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swjoduk[/bold] wrote: Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks. Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals. Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.[/p][/quote]I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).[/p][/quote]I was brought up on the So Called west side of Town,Wembdon Hill, do I live there now. No!, where did we start our Married life, in Queen St, centre of town 2 up 2 down including kitchen, then we moved to Bristol Rd, just past Kimberley Terrace. Where did we move to then, where We are now 35 years later, Somerville Way, off Bower. Do I want to move to Wembdon Village or Durleigh Hill. Certainly Not. our kids may have flown the nest, but they know. It's not where your house is! It's where your Home is !!!! David L Preece Aka Blue-Owl - Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

3:52pm Sun 10 Feb 13

windswept and interesting says...

Blue Owl wrote:
Silverbirch wrote:
swjoduk wrote:
Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks.

Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals.

Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.
I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).
I was brought up on the So Called west side of Town,Wembdon Hill, do I live there now. No!, where did we start our Married life, in Queen St, centre of town 2 up 2 down including kitchen, then we moved to Bristol Rd, just past Kimberley Terrace. Where did we move to then, where We are now 35 years later, Somerville Way, off Bower.
Do I want to move to Wembdon Village or Durleigh Hill. Certainly Not. our kids may have flown the nest, but they know.
It's not where your house is! It's where your Home is !!!!
David L Preece
Aka Blue-Owl
-
Blue (Ostrich) Owl In my part time position as a ghost writer I am just finishing vol 1 of your life history.

Although I would normally spend some days / weeks with clients I have managed to gleam all of the info required from your hundreds of garbled postings.

Place of Birth ( tick), Childhood ( tick) Work History ( tick) Family ( tick) personal beliefs (tick) Loaction (tick) Hobbies (tick)...Oh yes there is one thing missing...What brand of toilet roll do you use ?
[quote][p][bold]Blue Owl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Silverbirch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swjoduk[/bold] wrote: Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks. Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals. Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.[/p][/quote]I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).[/p][/quote]I was brought up on the So Called west side of Town,Wembdon Hill, do I live there now. No!, where did we start our Married life, in Queen St, centre of town 2 up 2 down including kitchen, then we moved to Bristol Rd, just past Kimberley Terrace. Where did we move to then, where We are now 35 years later, Somerville Way, off Bower. Do I want to move to Wembdon Village or Durleigh Hill. Certainly Not. our kids may have flown the nest, but they know. It's not where your house is! It's where your Home is !!!! David L Preece Aka Blue-Owl -[/p][/quote]Blue (Ostrich) Owl In my part time position as a ghost writer I am just finishing vol 1 of your life history. Although I would normally spend some days / weeks with clients I have managed to gleam all of the info required from your hundreds of garbled postings. Place of Birth ( tick), Childhood ( tick) Work History ( tick) Family ( tick) personal beliefs (tick) Loaction (tick) Hobbies (tick)...Oh yes there is one thing missing...What brand of toilet roll do you use ? windswept and interesting
  • Score: 0

7:59pm Sun 10 Feb 13

notasnarrowmindedasmost says...

windswept and interesting wrote:
Blue Owl wrote:
Silverbirch wrote:
swjoduk wrote:
Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks.

Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals.

Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.
I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).
I was brought up on the So Called west side of Town,Wembdon Hill, do I live there now. No!, where did we start our Married life, in Queen St, centre of town 2 up 2 down including kitchen, then we moved to Bristol Rd, just past Kimberley Terrace. Where did we move to then, where We are now 35 years later, Somerville Way, off Bower.
Do I want to move to Wembdon Village or Durleigh Hill. Certainly Not. our kids may have flown the nest, but they know.
It's not where your house is! It's where your Home is !!!!
David L Preece
Aka Blue-Owl
-
Blue (Ostrich) Owl In my part time position as a ghost writer I am just finishing vol 1 of your life history.

Although I would normally spend some days / weeks with clients I have managed to gleam all of the info required from your hundreds of garbled postings.

Place of Birth ( tick), Childhood ( tick) Work History ( tick) Family ( tick) personal beliefs (tick) Loaction (tick) Hobbies (tick)...Oh yes there is one thing missing...What brand of toilet roll do you use ?
Nice one Windswept ......yet again Blue Tit hijacks another thread to tell us all about himself ...yawn yawn ...he really is a legend in his own mind . Do you think he has all those Jags he keeps telling us about to make up for lack of inches in the trouser department .
[quote][p][bold]windswept and interesting[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Blue Owl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Silverbirch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]swjoduk[/bold] wrote: Great if it does go ahead, would be a ideal place to move my young family in a few years, good schools, good area, good access to the Quantocks. Not everyone is against it, only the Nimbys and their pals. Question is will it be affordable given that its on the 'favoured west side' and David Wilson homes is developing it. Starting prices probably upwards of 180k.[/p][/quote]I am sure you would be warmly welcomed if you moved here with your family, as we were. The point is, there are plenty of houses up for sale in this area already - just look in the property section of the Mercury. Our point is that you and others might well decide you don't want to move here if these developments cover all the green fields from the Fair field through to the reservoir, if the schools are swamped (already operating out of portacabins) and the roads congested (and particularly dangerous for my kids and yours near Haygrove if Haygrove Rd is the sole point of access for the Wilson/Notaro homes).[/p][/quote]I was brought up on the So Called west side of Town,Wembdon Hill, do I live there now. No!, where did we start our Married life, in Queen St, centre of town 2 up 2 down including kitchen, then we moved to Bristol Rd, just past Kimberley Terrace. Where did we move to then, where We are now 35 years later, Somerville Way, off Bower. Do I want to move to Wembdon Village or Durleigh Hill. Certainly Not. our kids may have flown the nest, but they know. It's not where your house is! It's where your Home is !!!! David L Preece Aka Blue-Owl -[/p][/quote]Blue (Ostrich) Owl In my part time position as a ghost writer I am just finishing vol 1 of your life history. Although I would normally spend some days / weeks with clients I have managed to gleam all of the info required from your hundreds of garbled postings. Place of Birth ( tick), Childhood ( tick) Work History ( tick) Family ( tick) personal beliefs (tick) Loaction (tick) Hobbies (tick)...Oh yes there is one thing missing...What brand of toilet roll do you use ?[/p][/quote]Nice one Windswept ......yet again Blue Tit hijacks another thread to tell us all about himself ...yawn yawn ...he really is a legend in his own mind . Do you think he has all those Jags he keeps telling us about to make up for lack of inches in the trouser department . notasnarrowmindedasmost
  • Score: 0

1:37am Mon 11 Feb 13

ianeggbert says...

Narcissistic
Condescending
Sanctimonious
Narcissistic Condescending Sanctimonious ianeggbert
  • Score: 0

7:42am Mon 11 Feb 13

BaldCarl2 says...

Blue Owl. I have paid a lot of council tax. That's my contribution to Bridgy.
Which also of course helps to keep you in iPads.
Blue Owl. I have paid a lot of council tax. That's my contribution to Bridgy. Which also of course helps to keep you in iPads. BaldCarl2
  • Score: 0

7:46am Mon 11 Feb 13

BaldCarl2 says...

And Blue Owl. What are your contributions to Bridgy? Let me think.

Oh yes, you voted to demolish the swimming pool.
And Blue Owl. What are your contributions to Bridgy? Let me think. Oh yes, you voted to demolish the swimming pool. BaldCarl2
  • Score: 0

9:03am Mon 11 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

To all of the above, while you are having a moan about the content, or indeed the length of my Posts, are you actually contributing to the So- Called Thread, I can see none of you at all adding positive info, input to any of the Subjects being discussed or debated.
Instead of throwing slurs in my direction, how about actually writing something constructive yourselves, on the issues b 4 us.......
Or do you have no valid thoughts ,views, or unable to do so.
Whilst, I await your comments , I will get on with more important things......
Blue- Owl
To all of the above, while you are having a moan about the content, or indeed the length of my Posts, are you actually contributing to the So- Called Thread, I can see none of you at all adding positive info, input to any of the Subjects being discussed or debated. Instead of throwing slurs in my direction, how about actually writing something constructive yourselves, on the issues b 4 us....... Or do you have no valid thoughts ,views, or unable to do so. Whilst, I await your comments , I will get on with more important things...... Blue- Owl Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

11:02am Mon 11 Feb 13

ianeggbert says...

Blue Fowl,

Many people do have views on the news stories posted on this website, some of which I agree with, some of which I don't, however, it is your inability to show anything other than self aggrandisement and inflexibility that really gets backs up. It's one thing having a belief, its quite another being able to put it across in a way that might win people over which is unfortunately a massive problem for you.

The fact that you are an EX councillor really says it all.
Blue Fowl, Many people do have views on the news stories posted on this website, some of which I agree with, some of which I don't, however, it is your inability to show anything other than self aggrandisement and inflexibility that really gets backs up. It's one thing having a belief, its quite another being able to put it across in a way that might win people over which is unfortunately a massive problem for you. The fact that you are an EX councillor really says it all. ianeggbert
  • Score: 0

2:32pm Mon 11 Feb 13

MartinB58 says...

What remains unanswered, and I expect always will regardless of whether permission is granted tomorrow or not, is how a planning officer can decide that an application to build 186 homes now meets (amongst others) policy P1 of the Sedgemoor Districy Core Strategy and therefore justifies early release of the land when just six months ago an application to build 187 homes on the same land did not meet the same policy.

This is not a case of nimbyism as I am not directly affected by this proposed development, it is a merely a question about how planning officers reach their sometimes questionable recommendations.
What remains unanswered, and I expect always will regardless of whether permission is granted tomorrow or not, is how a planning officer can decide that an application to build 186 homes now meets (amongst others) policy P1 of the Sedgemoor Districy Core Strategy and therefore justifies early release of the land when just six months ago an application to build 187 homes on the same land did not meet the same policy. This is not a case of nimbyism as I am not directly affected by this proposed development, it is a merely a question about how planning officers reach their sometimes questionable recommendations. MartinB58
  • Score: 0

4:40pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Waterway says...

MartinB58 wrote:
What remains unanswered, and I expect always will regardless of whether permission is granted tomorrow or not, is how a planning officer can decide that an application to build 186 homes now meets (amongst others) policy P1 of the Sedgemoor Districy Core Strategy and therefore justifies early release of the land when just six months ago an application to build 187 homes on the same land did not meet the same policy.

This is not a case of nimbyism as I am not directly affected by this proposed development, it is a merely a question about how planning officers reach their sometimes questionable recommendations.
Martin B58- Absolutely hit the nail on the head. Democratically elected Councillors are guided in their decisions by non elected Planning Officers who's decisions are at times open to interpretation. It appears the starting point for a major planning application seems to be approved it unless there's a good reason to refuse it, Seems a little biased in favour of a developer. I and many others have contributed to a so called consultation process with Sedgemoor planners over a period of 3 years, yet the Planning officers have ignored every possible point we have made and even to the point where we were told the Meads Eco park was nothing to do with the housing application! As we all now know this was not the case. Still waiting for a plausible explanation from the Principal Planning Officer as to why?
Said it before and I will say it again we have lost Democracy in Bridgwater if our local Councillors are told how to decide on planning matters by non elected officers. Believe me when I say the electorate will become detached from voting at the next local elections, I for one will never exercise my voting rights again until the democratic process is restored and Councillors are allowed to make decision based on what the wishes of the electorate.
[quote][p][bold]MartinB58[/bold] wrote: What remains unanswered, and I expect always will regardless of whether permission is granted tomorrow or not, is how a planning officer can decide that an application to build 186 homes now meets (amongst others) policy P1 of the Sedgemoor Districy Core Strategy and therefore justifies early release of the land when just six months ago an application to build 187 homes on the same land did not meet the same policy. This is not a case of nimbyism as I am not directly affected by this proposed development, it is a merely a question about how planning officers reach their sometimes questionable recommendations.[/p][/quote]Martin B58- Absolutely hit the nail on the head. Democratically elected Councillors are guided in their decisions by non elected Planning Officers who's decisions are at times open to interpretation. It appears the starting point for a major planning application seems to be approved it unless there's a good reason to refuse it, Seems a little biased in favour of a developer. I and many others have contributed to a so called consultation process with Sedgemoor planners over a period of 3 years, yet the Planning officers have ignored every possible point we have made and even to the point where we were told the Meads Eco park was nothing to do with the housing application! As we all now know this was not the case. Still waiting for a plausible explanation from the Principal Planning Officer as to why? Said it before and I will say it again we have lost Democracy in Bridgwater if our local Councillors are told how to decide on planning matters by non elected officers. Believe me when I say the electorate will become detached from voting at the next local elections, I for one will never exercise my voting rights again until the democratic process is restored and Councillors are allowed to make decision based on what the wishes of the electorate. Waterway
  • Score: 0

7:35pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

Waterway wrote:
MartinB58 wrote:
What remains unanswered, and I expect always will regardless of whether permission is granted tomorrow or not, is how a planning officer can decide that an application to build 186 homes now meets (amongst others) policy P1 of the Sedgemoor Districy Core Strategy and therefore justifies early release of the land when just six months ago an application to build 187 homes on the same land did not meet the same policy.

This is not a case of nimbyism as I am not directly affected by this proposed development, it is a merely a question about how planning officers reach their sometimes questionable recommendations.
Martin B58- Absolutely hit the nail on the head. Democratically elected Councillors are guided in their decisions by non elected Planning Officers who's decisions are at times open to interpretation. It appears the starting point for a major planning application seems to be approved it unless there's a good reason to refuse it, Seems a little biased in favour of a developer. I and many others have contributed to a so called consultation process with Sedgemoor planners over a period of 3 years, yet the Planning officers have ignored every possible point we have made and even to the point where we were told the Meads Eco park was nothing to do with the housing application! As we all now know this was not the case. Still waiting for a plausible explanation from the Principal Planning Officer as to why?
Said it before and I will say it again we have lost Democracy in Bridgwater if our local Councillors are told how to decide on planning matters by non elected officers. Believe me when I say the electorate will become detached from voting at the next local elections, I for one will never exercise my voting rights again until the democratic process is restored and Councillors are allowed to make decision based on what the wishes of the electorate.
Councillors are not told by Officers how to vote!, the Planning Officer makes the Case for or Against, the Commitee, then with the background information, taking on board or not the Planning, Highways, Legal Officers views, then make their individual decision, and vote, which is based on their own views or swayed by the information received during the process.
If as I've stated before the Commitee deem to vote the opposit to the Reccomendations, they have to give a valid planning reason, for this to be an acceptable planning outcome!!
Regards Blue-Owl.
Just the facts for Clarification on the Planning Commitee procedures.
[quote][p][bold]Waterway[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MartinB58[/bold] wrote: What remains unanswered, and I expect always will regardless of whether permission is granted tomorrow or not, is how a planning officer can decide that an application to build 186 homes now meets (amongst others) policy P1 of the Sedgemoor Districy Core Strategy and therefore justifies early release of the land when just six months ago an application to build 187 homes on the same land did not meet the same policy. This is not a case of nimbyism as I am not directly affected by this proposed development, it is a merely a question about how planning officers reach their sometimes questionable recommendations.[/p][/quote]Martin B58- Absolutely hit the nail on the head. Democratically elected Councillors are guided in their decisions by non elected Planning Officers who's decisions are at times open to interpretation. It appears the starting point for a major planning application seems to be approved it unless there's a good reason to refuse it, Seems a little biased in favour of a developer. I and many others have contributed to a so called consultation process with Sedgemoor planners over a period of 3 years, yet the Planning officers have ignored every possible point we have made and even to the point where we were told the Meads Eco park was nothing to do with the housing application! As we all now know this was not the case. Still waiting for a plausible explanation from the Principal Planning Officer as to why? Said it before and I will say it again we have lost Democracy in Bridgwater if our local Councillors are told how to decide on planning matters by non elected officers. Believe me when I say the electorate will become detached from voting at the next local elections, I for one will never exercise my voting rights again until the democratic process is restored and Councillors are allowed to make decision based on what the wishes of the electorate.[/p][/quote]Councillors are not told by Officers how to vote!, the Planning Officer makes the Case for or Against, the Commitee, then with the background information, taking on board or not the Planning, Highways, Legal Officers views, then make their individual decision, and vote, which is based on their own views or swayed by the information received during the process. If as I've stated before the Commitee deem to vote the opposit to the Reccomendations, they have to give a valid planning reason, for this to be an acceptable planning outcome!! Regards Blue-Owl. Just the facts for Clarification on the Planning Commitee procedures. Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

8:17pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

BaldCarl2 wrote:
And Blue Owl. What are your contributions to Bridgy? Let me think.

Oh yes, you voted to demolish the swimming pool.
BaldCarl yet another posting with Zero imput, from you !!
You've got the nerve to moan about me!!
You have paid no more than your house is Banded for Council Tax, therefore equal to everyone else in your Banding, so you cannot use that as a valid argument.
Yes I did Vote to build a New Swimming Pool for Bridgwater, opening March 1st, as against wasting Sedgemoors Residents, paying over the top for every swimmer who used the Splash, which was passed its life, in need of Major Financial repairs, within 12-18 months. So, these are some of the difficult decisions, as a Cllr you have to take, if you want our Leisure Facilities to be enhanced, or renewed, when faced with severe financial restraints.
Sedgemoor should be praised for delivering this new facility for Bridgwater and Sedgemoors residents, and in deed visitors to our Town.
Blue-Owl
[quote][p][bold]BaldCarl2[/bold] wrote: And Blue Owl. What are your contributions to Bridgy? Let me think. Oh yes, you voted to demolish the swimming pool.[/p][/quote]BaldCarl yet another posting with Zero imput, from you !! You've got the nerve to moan about me!! You have paid no more than your house is Banded for Council Tax, therefore equal to everyone else in your Banding, so you cannot use that as a valid argument. Yes I did Vote to build a New Swimming Pool for Bridgwater, opening March 1st, as against wasting Sedgemoors Residents, paying over the top for every swimmer who used the Splash, which was passed its life, in need of Major Financial repairs, within 12-18 months. So, these are some of the difficult decisions, as a Cllr you have to take, if you want our Leisure Facilities to be enhanced, or renewed, when faced with severe financial restraints. Sedgemoor should be praised for delivering this new facility for Bridgwater and Sedgemoors residents, and in deed visitors to our Town. Blue-Owl Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

8:50pm Mon 11 Feb 13

BaldCarl2 says...

So there you have it. If you are a law abiding, hard working tax payer you are not contributing anything to Bridgwater.
So there you have it. If you are a law abiding, hard working tax payer you are not contributing anything to Bridgwater. BaldCarl2
  • Score: 0

8:56pm Mon 11 Feb 13

windswept and interesting says...

See BalCarl2 - he never voted to demolish the swimming pool.......he voted to build a new one.

Now that's political speak for ya !
See BalCarl2 - he never voted to demolish the swimming pool.......he voted to build a new one. Now that's political speak for ya ! windswept and interesting
  • Score: 0

11:34pm Mon 11 Feb 13

notasnarrowmindedasmost says...

windswept and interesting wrote:
See BalCarl2 - he never voted to demolish the swimming pool.......he voted to build a new one.

Now that's political speak for ya !
Now come on lets stop picking on Blue Tit ......If we believe all we read here he has single-handedly kept Bridgwater going .....I have heard that they are taking down Admiral Blakes statue and erecting one of him .
[quote][p][bold]windswept and interesting[/bold] wrote: See BalCarl2 - he never voted to demolish the swimming pool.......he voted to build a new one. Now that's political speak for ya ![/p][/quote]Now come on lets stop picking on Blue Tit ......If we believe all we read here he has single-handedly kept Bridgwater going .....I have heard that they are taking down Admiral Blakes statue and erecting one of him . notasnarrowmindedasmost
  • Score: 0

6:16am Tue 12 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

BaldCarl2 wrote:
So there you have it. If you are a law abiding, hard working tax payer you are not contributing anything to Bridgwater.
Baldcarl, you are either just arrogant or ignorant, that is NOT what I posted, and u know it! . What I said was you paid no more than your fellow resident in Council Tax, or indeed myself, dependant as to which Taxband for housing you r in!!
I'm proud to have been part of the decision making over the 8 yrs as a Councillor. And I'm more than happy to defend my record, as to the way I actually voted on key issues. If, as notsonarrowminded posted, re the Admiral Blake Statue, as u mentioned it, it was one of my aims, if there had not been more important decisions to take, and implement, would have been to get support to move the Admiral Blake Statue replaced to its original position on the Cornhill, and to move the Carnival Statue onto the Plinth in the Fore St. I like many others thought that the moving of A Blake was an error. But, at a estimated cost of £50.000, the financial costs, could'nt be justified, unless the Town Council's Bridgwater Civic Enhancement Fund, sat in Nat West Bank, could be tapped into, after all this would be Civic Re- Enhancement. !!
What are the thoughts on this? Is it a possibility??
Blue-Owl
[quote][p][bold]BaldCarl2[/bold] wrote: So there you have it. If you are a law abiding, hard working tax payer you are not contributing anything to Bridgwater.[/p][/quote]Baldcarl, you are either just arrogant or ignorant, that is NOT what I posted, and u know it! . What I said was you paid no more than your fellow resident in Council Tax, or indeed myself, dependant as to which Taxband for housing you r in!! I'm proud to have been part of the decision making over the 8 yrs as a Councillor. And I'm more than happy to defend my record, as to the way I actually voted on key issues. If, as notsonarrowminded posted, re the Admiral Blake Statue, as u mentioned it, it was one of my aims, if there had not been more important decisions to take, and implement, would have been to get support to move the Admiral Blake Statue replaced to its original position on the Cornhill, and to move the Carnival Statue onto the Plinth in the Fore St. I like many others thought that the moving of A Blake was an error. But, at a estimated cost of £50.000, the financial costs, could'nt be justified, unless the Town Council's Bridgwater Civic Enhancement Fund, sat in Nat West Bank, could be tapped into, after all this would be Civic Re- Enhancement. !! What are the thoughts on this? Is it a possibility?? Blue-Owl Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

6:36am Tue 12 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

notasnarrowmindedasm
ost
wrote:
windswept and interesting wrote:
See BalCarl2 - he never voted to demolish the swimming pool.......he voted to build a new one.

Now that's political speak for ya !
Now come on lets stop picking on Blue Tit ......If we believe all we read here he has single-handedly kept Bridgwater going .....I have heard that they are taking down Admiral Blakes statue and erecting one of him .
Keep on having a 'pop' at me, I've got broad shoulders, as you said, as an ex Cllr,you get used to the Flack, and knives in the back ,it goes with the Territory,I have always said my fellow Collegues, and myself when discussing my role as an elected Councillor, only using I, when actually relevant!! To my input. With regard to Admiral Blakes statue, it was a want of mine to get it resisted onto its original site,on the Cornhill, and resisting perhaps the Carnival Statue, onto the Vacant Plinth in Fore St, if this was acceptable, to the Carnival Clubs. But with an estimated cost of £50.000 there just is'nt a justified reason @ this time. unless the BTC Civic Enhancement Fund, sat in Natwest Bank, could be used, as it is a Civic Enhancement, so would meet the funding criteria??
I wonder what Cllr John Turner Chairman of BTC Finance Commitee would say, if I proposed it ?! Still it would be 50k less to be spent on the Mayors Boudoir, oops I meant Parlour.
Upwards and Onwards.
Lesserspottedwoodpec
ker- Aka Blue-Owl
[quote][p][bold]notasnarrowmindedasm ost[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]windswept and interesting[/bold] wrote: See BalCarl2 - he never voted to demolish the swimming pool.......he voted to build a new one. Now that's political speak for ya ![/p][/quote]Now come on lets stop picking on Blue Tit ......If we believe all we read here he has single-handedly kept Bridgwater going .....I have heard that they are taking down Admiral Blakes statue and erecting one of him .[/p][/quote]Keep on having a 'pop' at me, I've got broad shoulders, as you said, as an ex Cllr,you get used to the Flack, and knives in the back ,it goes with the Territory,I have always said my fellow Collegues, and myself when discussing my role as an elected Councillor, only using I, when actually relevant!! To my input. With regard to Admiral Blakes statue, it was a want of mine to get it resisted onto its original site,on the Cornhill, and resisting perhaps the Carnival Statue, onto the Vacant Plinth in Fore St, if this was acceptable, to the Carnival Clubs. But with an estimated cost of £50.000 there just is'nt a justified reason @ this time. unless the BTC Civic Enhancement Fund, sat in Natwest Bank, could be used, as it is a Civic Enhancement, so would meet the funding criteria?? I wonder what Cllr John Turner Chairman of BTC Finance Commitee would say, if I proposed it ?! Still it would be 50k less to be spent on the Mayors Boudoir, oops I meant Parlour. Upwards and Onwards. Lesserspottedwoodpec ker- Aka Blue-Owl Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

3:06am Wed 13 Feb 13

BaldCarl2 says...

Joking and snipes aside....

If the council have got 50K to spend on something so worthless as moving a couple of statues around, why don't they not spend the money and reduce the council tax take by that amount.

Civic enhancement my arse!
Joking and snipes aside.... If the council have got 50K to spend on something so worthless as moving a couple of statues around, why don't they not spend the money and reduce the council tax take by that amount. Civic enhancement my arse! BaldCarl2
  • Score: 0

9:10am Wed 13 Feb 13

cidreman says...

Everyone this Enhancement Fund is Held @Nat-West in a Bond ..totals sum £247,000 pounds ..(Held in reserve for a rainy day ) Its controlled by the Labour group who control the Bridgwater Town Council ...Ask the Town Clerk ..The Local paper will not inform anybody about this fund ...
With all the mess the town centre is in you would of thought Bridgwater Town Council would of spent some of this fund reducing rents in some of the empty shops etc ...instead of fighting SDC all the time , help the Town
Everyone this Enhancement Fund is Held @Nat-West in a Bond ..totals sum £247,000 pounds ..(Held in reserve for a rainy day ) Its controlled by the Labour group who control the Bridgwater Town Council ...Ask the Town Clerk ..The Local paper will not inform anybody about this fund ... With all the mess the town centre is in you would of thought Bridgwater Town Council would of spent some of this fund reducing rents in some of the empty shops etc ...instead of fighting SDC all the time , help the Town cidreman
  • Score: 0

9:27am Wed 13 Feb 13

cidreman says...

Oh I forgot ...does anyone know what as happened to the BMX & Skatepark
Cllr Smedley seems to have gone quite about this ...but hey its only a leisure facility for teenagers ...maybe its not needed ...Clr Smedley seems to put all his energy into the Backwards forwards group and fighting SDC
Maybe it will get built @The Meads or The Fairfield ?....Last debated it was going in the YMCA
Bridgwater Town Council could of used the £247 , 000 from the Enhancement fund by now and it would of been built ...(It is a Labour controlled Town Council Bridgwater voted for ....)
Wasnt it part of the Bridgwater Labour party manifesto to stop tesco being built ...so if they have failed this shouldnt Bridgwater residents now ask for THEIR LABOUR WARD Cllrs to resign ....!
Oh I forgot ...does anyone know what as happened to the BMX & Skatepark Cllr Smedley seems to have gone quite about this ...but hey its only a leisure facility for teenagers ...maybe its not needed ...Clr Smedley seems to put all his energy into the Backwards forwards group and fighting SDC Maybe it will get built @The Meads or The Fairfield ?....Last debated it was going in the YMCA Bridgwater Town Council could of used the £247 , 000 from the Enhancement fund by now and it would of been built ...(It is a Labour controlled Town Council Bridgwater voted for ....) Wasnt it part of the Bridgwater Labour party manifesto to stop tesco being built ...so if they have failed this shouldnt Bridgwater residents now ask for THEIR LABOUR WARD Cllrs to resign ....! cidreman
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Wed 13 Feb 13

RobertHawkins says...

Ciderman, are you Blue Owl? you sound and type the same, or perhaps you are all the above, arguing with yourself:)
Ciderman, are you Blue Owl? you sound and type the same, or perhaps you are all the above, arguing with yourself:) RobertHawkins
  • Score: 0

2:23pm Wed 13 Feb 13

cidreman says...

Robert
Get it right ....cidreman not ciderman No Blue Owl as more expierance than me ..hes seen it all first hand , how it all works in the council chambers .
I know he can go on a bit ..but I have seen some of the stuff hes says makes sense ...
With the SDC run by the Conservatives ..adnd the Town Council run by the Labour Group ..these 2 are never going to agree ..Bridgwater residents are the losers ..
With a majority on the Town Council what as the Labour Group done for Bridgwater .
Robert Get it right ....cidreman not ciderman No Blue Owl as more expierance than me ..hes seen it all first hand , how it all works in the council chambers . I know he can go on a bit ..but I have seen some of the stuff hes says makes sense ... With the SDC run by the Conservatives ..adnd the Town Council run by the Labour Group ..these 2 are never going to agree ..Bridgwater residents are the losers .. With a majority on the Town Council what as the Labour Group done for Bridgwater . cidreman
  • Score: 0

7:59pm Wed 13 Feb 13

Bridgy old Boy says...

Cidreman don't let the truth get in the way of a good anti Labour rant. You know very well that the power of the town Council is very limited Allotments; Burials; some bus shelters and thats about it. The Labour controlled Town Council have saved the Blake Museum; Town Hall and Trinity Hall from closure following the withdrawal of funds by Tory Controlled Sedgemoor. I believe they should be applauded for that as should their support of the Christmas Lights; Carnival fire works flower borders etc. As you know they are in a minority on Sedgemoor and do not have the power or numbers to vote down the majority Tory control so your suggestion that they should resign is frankly laughable.
Cidreman don't let the truth get in the way of a good anti Labour rant. You know very well that the power of the town Council is very limited Allotments; Burials; some bus shelters and thats about it. The Labour controlled Town Council have saved the Blake Museum; Town Hall and Trinity Hall from closure following the withdrawal of funds by Tory Controlled Sedgemoor. I believe they should be applauded for that as should their support of the Christmas Lights; Carnival fire works flower borders etc. As you know they are in a minority on Sedgemoor and do not have the power or numbers to vote down the majority Tory control so your suggestion that they should resign is frankly laughable. Bridgy old Boy
  • Score: 0

8:57am Thu 14 Feb 13

cidreman says...

Bridgy Old Boy Didnt one of the Elected Labour town Cllrs voted in favour of the Building of the New Tesco ...And the leader of the Bridgwater Labour Group is not against building on the Meads ..
Bridgy Old Boy ...what revenue as the Trinity hall given back to the Taxpayers of Bridgwater ...
Applauded having £247,000 pounds sitting in a bank account ...and a Post office in a Portacabin
Bridgy Old Boy Didnt one of the Elected Labour town Cllrs voted in favour of the Building of the New Tesco ...And the leader of the Bridgwater Labour Group is not against building on the Meads .. Bridgy Old Boy ...what revenue as the Trinity hall given back to the Taxpayers of Bridgwater ... Applauded having £247,000 pounds sitting in a bank account ...and a Post office in a Portacabin cidreman
  • Score: 0

5:30pm Thu 14 Feb 13

Bridgy old Boy says...

You really are becoming non-sensical cidreman at point point in time did Town Council's become responsible for Post Offices? At the same time any responsible organisation or authority keeps a sensible level of reserves you would be foolish to max out on your credit card.
You really are becoming non-sensical cidreman at point point in time did Town Council's become responsible for Post Offices? At the same time any responsible organisation or authority keeps a sensible level of reserves you would be foolish to max out on your credit card. Bridgy old Boy
  • Score: 0

9:10pm Thu 14 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

Bridgy old Boy wrote:
You really are becoming non-sensical cidreman at point point in time did Town Council's become responsible for Post Offices? At the same time any responsible organisation or authority keeps a sensible level of reserves you would be foolish to max out on your credit card.
Well this seems to have reopened the can of worms, as to just what did the BT Council, collect this extra Tax on the Bridgwater residents for. At the time it was muted as being for Civic Enhancement fund??? Just what does that imply??bridgeoldboy, you say that any Resonable authority keeps a sensible level of funds.
I would agree with this, if the BTC were a Authority, it is nothing more than a Toy Regime, to the Labour Group in Bridgwater, who never forgave the Old Borough Council, for being abolished in favour of a District Authority.
This Town Council has now been re established for over 10 years, just what have they achieved, next to nothing, as the % required on the rate set, is taken away from Sedgemoors Tax Set, annually.
The Clerk, part time 20 hrs a week, gets over £20.000 per year+ the Secretaries Wages etc, that is over
£250.000 over the 10 year period. For doing exactly what!!, now I'm not condemning the Clerk, but if the Council is nothing more than a talking shop, costing us the residents, then to what point !!
SDC spent best part of £1.000,000 making the external structure safe , watertight for the next 30 years, why has not the Town Council, used the Civic Enhancement Fund, to refurb the internal auditorium and Stage???. That is what the Civic Fund is potentially there for, not a rainy day, or being spent on the Mayors Parlour.

Blue -Owl
[quote][p][bold]Bridgy old Boy[/bold] wrote: You really are becoming non-sensical cidreman at point point in time did Town Council's become responsible for Post Offices? At the same time any responsible organisation or authority keeps a sensible level of reserves you would be foolish to max out on your credit card.[/p][/quote]Well this seems to have reopened the can of worms, as to just what did the BT Council, collect this extra Tax on the Bridgwater residents for. At the time it was muted as being for Civic Enhancement fund??? Just what does that imply??bridgeoldboy, you say that any Resonable authority keeps a sensible level of funds. I would agree with this, if the BTC were a Authority, it is nothing more than a Toy Regime, to the Labour Group in Bridgwater, who never forgave the Old Borough Council, for being abolished in favour of a District Authority. This Town Council has now been re established for over 10 years, just what have they achieved, next to nothing, as the % required on the rate set, is taken away from Sedgemoors Tax Set, annually. The Clerk, part time 20 hrs a week, gets over £20.000 per year+ the Secretaries Wages etc, that is over £250.000 over the 10 year period. For doing exactly what!!, now I'm not condemning the Clerk, but if the Council is nothing more than a talking shop, costing us the residents, then to what point !! SDC spent best part of £1.000,000 making the external structure safe , watertight for the next 30 years, why has not the Town Council, used the Civic Enhancement Fund, to refurb the internal auditorium and Stage???. That is what the Civic Fund is potentially there for, not a rainy day, or being spent on the Mayors Parlour. Blue -Owl Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

9:18pm Thu 14 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

cidreman wrote:
Oh I forgot ...does anyone know what as happened to the BMX & Skatepark
Cllr Smedley seems to have gone quite about this ...but hey its only a leisure facility for teenagers ...maybe its not needed ...Clr Smedley seems to put all his energy into the Backwards forwards group and fighting SDC
Maybe it will get built @The Meads or The Fairfield ?....Last debated it was going in the YMCA
Bridgwater Town Council could of used the £247 , 000 from the Enhancement fund by now and it would of been built ...(It is a Labour controlled Town Council Bridgwater voted for ....)
Wasnt it part of the Bridgwater Labour party manifesto to stop tesco being built ...so if they have failed this shouldnt Bridgwater residents now ask for THEIR LABOUR WARD Cllrs to resign ....!
The skate parks, location has been agreed to be on the Land adjoining the rear of the Lidl's Store, and Sainsbury's, again SCC, are holding matters up. There is £20.000 earmarked from BTC, towards this Scheme, if and when it ever materialises, the Town Council would not contribute towards the 2 Tempory Skate Parks on Cranleigh and Victoria, so SDC, funded them.
The land is the old Cellophane Landfill site which, has been tested for any chemical exposure risk, and will be landscaped, and capped off, to enable safe usage of this's Site, as and when.
Blue-Owl
[quote][p][bold]cidreman[/bold] wrote: Oh I forgot ...does anyone know what as happened to the BMX & Skatepark Cllr Smedley seems to have gone quite about this ...but hey its only a leisure facility for teenagers ...maybe its not needed ...Clr Smedley seems to put all his energy into the Backwards forwards group and fighting SDC Maybe it will get built @The Meads or The Fairfield ?....Last debated it was going in the YMCA Bridgwater Town Council could of used the £247 , 000 from the Enhancement fund by now and it would of been built ...(It is a Labour controlled Town Council Bridgwater voted for ....) Wasnt it part of the Bridgwater Labour party manifesto to stop tesco being built ...so if they have failed this shouldnt Bridgwater residents now ask for THEIR LABOUR WARD Cllrs to resign ....![/p][/quote]The skate parks, location has been agreed to be on the Land adjoining the rear of the Lidl's Store, and Sainsbury's, again SCC, are holding matters up. There is £20.000 earmarked from BTC, towards this Scheme, if and when it ever materialises, the Town Council would not contribute towards the 2 Tempory Skate Parks on Cranleigh and Victoria, so SDC, funded them. The land is the old Cellophane Landfill site which, has been tested for any chemical exposure risk, and will be landscaped, and capped off, to enable safe usage of this's Site, as and when. Blue-Owl Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

9:29pm Thu 14 Feb 13

Blue Owl says...

Now you BaldCarl might understand why I have posted my comments re the waste of time Money, the BT C is, they were resurrected on a 50 vote margin, by a Poll run in this The Mercury Paper, undemocratic, no Governance that it was run Legally, and with only 1250 people out of the inhabitance of nearly 35000 Bridgwater residents.
So here we are Ten years on, yes, they have saved the Museum, funded the Xmas lights, Sqibbing Etc. But, remember it is our money the Bridgwater rate payer, they are spending with no redress from you or I.
Regards David Preece Aka Blue-Owl.
Now you BaldCarl might understand why I have posted my comments re the waste of time Money, the BT C is, they were resurrected on a 50 vote margin, by a Poll run in this The Mercury Paper, undemocratic, no Governance that it was run Legally, and with only 1250 people out of the inhabitance of nearly 35000 Bridgwater residents. So here we are Ten years on, yes, they have saved the Museum, funded the Xmas lights, Sqibbing Etc. But, remember it is our money the Bridgwater rate payer, they are spending with no redress from you or I. Regards David Preece Aka Blue-Owl. Blue Owl
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree