Saturday, 19 July 2008

Update on Shire Hall development


On 24th July the Bury St Edmunds Area Working Party will consider the revised Development Brief. (See previous posts for background on this.) Full details will be available on the Borough Council's website shortly. In the meantime here are the main changes as a result of the consultation:


1. A new principle has been introduced, requiring any new development to 'protect the privacy and amenities of existing properties in the vicinity'.


2. Clarification that dwelling numbers indicated reflect the highway capacity rather than those which can be delivered.


3. A requirement for any proposals to make a positive contribution to the streetscape.


The Brief will later go to Cabinet and then Full Council. If adopted it will establish the context which will be used to determine any future planning applications.

10 comments:

Bury Boy said...

What buildings are involved?, does the paln account for the later sales of "other" council property, and the impact this will have or are we looking at some thing in isolation.

Here too this application within the Historic Core of Bury should in my opinion have a link to a 20mph zone for southgate street, And an increased local parking allocation, based on 2 cars per household rather than current policy or less than one per house hold.

Paul F said...

The plan involves other buildings BB (follow my links back to the SCC link on my first post about it) but it is only a concept for that area, and sadly can't be used to get what we might both want in nearby streets.

Bury Boy said...

Think outside the box Paul, Of course it can be used to try and acheive a safe local walking enviroment. Some one some where sitting at a council desk, is drawing up a blue print of the area for re development. You as our elected official HAVE A RIGHT to influence this blue print, We as electors and residents have rights to our enviroment. In theory we could locally en bloc object, and that within a democracy is the end of it. Is it not.

Mark G. Hardy said...

Bury St Edmunds Working Party? Meeting on July 24th? Papers public 5 days beforehand?

Can't seem to find the existence of the Committee or its papers on public display.

Now why is that?

If the committee exists and if you are a member, are you actually going to consider whether or not there should be further public consultation?

Do you have a copy of your "Dear Leader"'s letter to me dated 14th July? If not, might I be sobold as to suggest you ask him for a copy before you reply? But then that gives you an excuse not to post this on your blog!

Paul F said...

BB - It's at the planning application stage that local ward members can have an influence. I can assure you I will be involved

The public have already been consulted on the plan and several of your neighbours nearer the area submitted responses. Their comments have been published.

MH - Good thing I posted this then. Councillors and press will have received papers with due notice; the web takes a little longer. I do not understand the rest of your comment and I doubt anyone else will.

Mark G. Hardy said...

Still can't see anything on the StEBC web site other than the cancellation of the sole prior meeting in order to go on a bus trip to Cambridge.

Given that the Dear Leader states "the process is .....the draft final document to be considered by the Bury St Edmunds Area Working Party(July 24), the Cabinet (July 30?) and then full Council (special and urgent meeting to be called perhaps?)", can someone please explain how that fits with SCC's statement that it is for the Sustainable Development Panel to review it before Cabinet? After all the SCC and Bidwells pitch a few weeks ago was to that committee and not the Area Working Party (if such exists).

Can you share with us whether, as we were told by SCC, the Officers at StEBC have already "concluded that no further public consultation is necessary"? Particularly in the light of the Dear Leader's comment in his letter of July 14th that the Officers were "still assessing the results".

I know things move at lightning pace in BSE, but someone seems to have put a torch under this one given that all of you - without exception - thought at the Council meeting on July 1st that SCC had not submitted the Brief for consideration. Seems to me that ahell of alot was going on undercover in May.

On the Highway numbers, do you agree that the number should be based on the inclusion of the Police Station redevelopment in due course, as well as the proposed (so I am told) closure of the Magistrates Court and the presumption of residential conversion? That should halve the proposed SCC permitted delevopment numbers by my rough and ready calculation.

Paul F said...

MH - If you look carefully you will see that the previous BSEAWP was cancelled due to lack of business: the fact-finding visit to the grand arcade at Cambridge, which did go ahead, was always to be followed by the meeting.

I am assured (and believe)that the required legal notice for this week' meeting was given, as per my previous comment. Notice is also posted in the Angel Hill offices reception.

Scanning the papers electronically and posting on the website (which is a bonus) can take time, especially when there are a number of meetings due.

The route for this brief changed from SDP-Cabinet-Council to BSEAWP - Cabinet - Council when the terms of reference of some committees and panels were revised in May/June. It makes no difference to the final timetable, since the breif cannot become planning policy until the September full meeting of Council.

If you want a copy of the agenda papers sent to you in France this may be possible. Please email democratic.services@stedsbc.gov.uk.

Mark G. Hardy said...

Thanks for the post and your email.

But we still have the problem that no-one except the Councillors and the press can see the agenda or papers before the meeting as it is the only occassion I can see where the meeting doesn't even show up as being scheduled.

Please have someone provide a copy of the paperwork that must already exist in pdf form and I'll host it if necessary.

Most of St. Mary's Square is interested in seeing it before the meeting - that is presumably open to the public - and were expecting to be able to see it on the web before the meeting as happens with every other meeting.

Could you also address the issues of the last and pre-penultimate para's of my earlier post?

Bury Boy said...

Scanning the papers electronically and posting on the website (which is a bonus) can take time, especially when there are a number of meetings due.

Thats a fudge Paul, and I think you know it. communications can and should be posted the same day in paper and electronic form. The offices open restrictive times, and after the move become less accesible. The internet works for ALL other businesses and "other" councils why do we have to wait, unless its not in the public interest to communicate the sale, and planning matters concerning publicly owned buildings and assets.

I not an expert but is not the typred and printed version taken from the same eletronic file which could in turn be published, or are we typing this on a old fasion type writer ?, then running it thro the photo copier, and pinning in on the notice board at 4.59pm.

Your France quip is cheap, what ever view you hold on Mark..

Paul F said...

MH - I have now answered your points in an email.

BB - I am not an expert either and don't know exactly how its done, but you should find the information by the end of the day. The France offer was genuine and suggested by an officer in Democratic Services.