Two areas of former green belt land, including one which straddles a village conservation area, have been approved for housing by Rotherham Council after they were made available for development as part of the authority’s recently adopted local plan. The … Continue reading
This gallery contains 2 photos.
The Advertiser and theCouncil have today published on their websites these two articles: .
Published on Sunday 12 August 2012 09:12
RESIDENTS have met with council chiefs to renew calls for green fields between South Yorkshire villages to be removed from a list of potential sites earmarked for up to 1,100 new homes.
People living around Anston, Woodsetts and Dinnington are unhappy the area is still included in Rotherham Council’s Core Strategy document for future development despite objections during consultation.
The protesters’ concerns have been raised by Rother Valley MP Kevin Barron. Read on…..
A new round of consultations is due to be launched by Rotherham MBC on the future of Rotherham’s Green Belt. With the consultation set to commence soon, Rotherham Politics has been told that, “things are hotting up a bit on the issue!”
Part of the Dinnington and Anston groups preparations, is the creation by the campaign of their own Facebook page:
From the Advertiser website: Rotherham new homes target slashed.
A Rotherham Politics reader brings us news on the feedback resulting from the consultation on the LDF:
I’ve just found out that the consultation process of 2011 feedback report has been published: link, http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/downloads/file/6243/feedback_report_january_2012.
I’ve had a quick look and it is obvious that the majority of points raised for Dinnington East (Page 17 onwards), if not all, come from the ‘Save Our Greenbelt Dinnington and Anston Action Group‘ letter of objection (of which over 1700 were handed in) but with two omissions (must be considered too trivial to include, perhaps) viz:
“Pressure will increase on emergency services, schools, doctors’ surgeries and local hospitals” and
“In the unfortunate event of Yorkshire Water’s pumps failing (as happened in Goole on the 3 August 2011), the traditional pond will no doubt form, as now, in the bottom of the fields LDF216 and LDF220 with potential flooding to homes in Birkdale Avenue, Wentworth Way, Turnberry Way, Moortown Avenue and Belfry Way”.
The objection letter of the group can be found here:
It can be reported that the plans to build a school off Todwick Road with Common Road, Anston have been withdrawn!!!!!!
The advice from officers was for rejection. The decidedly unwelcome application was being fought by the the local community. The planning application, made on behalf of a religious ‘cult’ has now been withdrawn ahead of the planning meeting scheduled for next Thursday. Hooray once again!!!! The rejection advice should be interesting, bring it to you when we have it.
Is it too much to hope that the Brethren have forsaken Rotherham for good? Wherever they turn their attention to next, perhaps they will do it without destroying more of God’s wonderful World and certainly not on Rotherham’s precious green belt!
This must be a disappointment to Darren Hughes, as he was assiduous in their cause assisting them everywhere he could! Darren Hughes is a RMBC Councillor for the Anston & Woodsetts Ward and was prepared to destroy important green belt land for a bunch of rather undesirable religious ‘cultists’, they are not called the Exclusive Brethren for nothing!
Darren’s constituents should remember this, when it comes to casting their votes this May.
A Christian group, with some pretty unchristian practises, has applied to RMBC for planning permission to build a place of worship and a school on greenbelt land at Anston. This application has received the backing of Labour or so it would appear, but for the locals, this application is distinctly unwelcome.
Firstly, this application, if successful, will be sited on greenbelt land at Anston!
This aspect alone will galvanise the community to oppose the scheme and the rumblings of increased community activity and organisation are plain for all to see. To find out more and to make your voice heard, see the Save our Greenbelt Dinnington & Anston Action Group website. Every inch of greenbelt use must be opposed, lest they just pick each piece off, one at a time! Going for the weakest first! The divide and rule tactic has been tried and didn’t work, leaving slices of the greenbelt apparently undefended will rebound on those that allow this to happen! Anston residents do this at their peril!
Clive Jepson has learned that all three Anston & Woodsetts councillors are in favour and in Darren ‘the defector’ Hughes case, has been working with them on planning issues for the last year!
Quite outrageous! Does he not understand the feelings of Anston residents? Well he wouldn’t would he? Darren lives in Catcliffe! Has he not consistently said, he opposed using greenbelt land. What a hypocrite!!!! But then, he has been a turncoat in the past!
Secondly, The nature of the applicants!
Ultimately, whoever they call themselves on a planning application, the applicants and those who will be running the school are variously called the Exclusive Brethren, the Brethren as on the original planning application or sometimes the Raven/Taylor Brethren.
It is alarming that this group should now appear to be hiding behind nominees, to confuse the casual observer at least, as to who is behind this project. Indeed, this lack of candour is a worrying development and goes to their basic honesty! It they fail on the basic honesty question, can anything they say, possibly be trusted?
Christian friends have told me, that even for a bunch of Christians they are distinctly left-field! Mostly active in the UK and Australia they have been accused of ‘cult’ practises, unfortunately, not without good reason!
The term ‘Exclusive’ refers to the fact that this group demands separation from the rest of society, even refusing to live in semi-detached properties unless the other is also occupied by a fellow adherent.
This school will only accept the children of members, so it is unlikely that any local children will be welcomed to their ‘exclusive’ school.
Their approach to education has been followed by trenchant denunciation where ever they have operated schools. Not the least for their treatment of science which tends to ignore all scientific developments since 1848! The access of students to books of all kinds is severely limited and those that are allowed them, heavily censored.
This group are apparently given to controlling their own members in similar ways that cults operate and is aimed at ensuring total domination of the individual to the group.
The Exclusive Brethren are not an open and welcoming bunch of Christians at all. Quite the reverse in fact! I find it incredible that this proposal should gather support from any Labour politician and very worrying that they appear to have been actively helping this project along, in contradiction to their public utterances on the greenbelt! But that’s Darren Hughes for you!
Where is Kevin Barron, the MP for Rother Valley constituency on this proposal? He surely cannot be in favour too! We shall see?
Vic opened the meeting with a report and presentation that brought the meeting up to date on activities so far which included:
Overview of what we have done so far:
Persuaded local councillors set up a meeting to take questions from the community
Collected over 1700 letters of objection and delivered them to the Council
Sent questions to the Council
Emailed the Chief Executive to request his help in obtaining answers to our questions (28/09/11).
Problems we have faced:
Council assuming that individuals from our area were Group representatives
Delay in replying to questions raised – 3 weeks for the majority
Poor quality of answers to our questions including efficient use of the truth
Six questions together with their answers were presented in detail, highlighting the imprecise answers and the lack of any answers at all in some cases. These questions were a subset of questions we had prepared earlier for a meeting with the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive. The purpose of these questions and answers was to illustrate the poor response by, and reasons for lack of trust in the Borough.
Consultation demonstrated to be ineffective – eg:
0nly 1500 people attended ‘drop-ins’ Borough wide
At the meeting at Laughton Common Community Centre only 4 or 5 found out from Council advertising
There should be more emphasis on developing Brownfield land to reduce pressure on Greenfield sites
Lack of trust and confidence in the Council
We had a meeting scheduled for earlier in the week with the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive but this was postponed because of annual leave.
Raise awareness locally:
All public info to be posted on web site
Hold meetings when necessary
Stage charity events
Nationally – eg WI, National Trust
Residents – volunteering, spreading the word, sending letters.
Letters for signing.
Those present agreed in principle the following:
The content of a letter to be sent to the Council.
“To protect Greenbelt land and other green spaces from non-essential development.
To encourage development of Brownfield sites as a priority.
To support the development of social and affordable housing for the residents of Rotherham Borough.”
Questions, statements and suggestions from the floor:
A great deal of support came from this session. Many volunteers were recruited to join the club.
There was a feeling that the Borough had chosen the Dinnington area on which to dump ‘that, which wouldn’t be tolerated elsewhere in the Borough’.
Again, the issue of the of the ‘consultation process’ was ridiculed, particularly as only 1500 residents, Borough-wide, attended the drop-in sessions. The letter to be sent to the Council was revised to reflect this feeling.
There were two Ward Councillors present on the ‘floor’ who came under the ‘cosh’ occasionally, in the main, from Parish Councillors. Perhaps more importantly, the question of ‘why aren’t the other Ward Councillors from Dinnington and Anston in attendance ’was raised?
Being at the fringe of the Borough, it was voiced that residents paid taxes and had nothing in return from the Borough except waste collection. The bus service was considered very poor yet better than the condition of the roads.
Many in the hall identified with the town of Worksop as opposed to Rotherham.
As Dinnington has town status, there was a call for Dinnington and surrounding villages to become independent of Rotherham Borough raise its own taxes, outsource services (eg road maintenance) to local councils and companies.
Rotherham Politics is grateful for these observations from an attendee who would prefer their name not to be used, I quote:
“What started as a presentation to urge the preservation of the Greenbelt and build on Brownfield sites was developed by the ‘floor’ into a discussion of the wide-ranging failure of RMBC in respect of the welfare of Dinnington and the surrounding area.
At the meeting at Dinnington it was very clear from the people that the Strategic Planning Team had given very little notice of the consultations in a media that tax payers accessed. This had also been very apparent at other consultations I have attended. Thorpe Hesley had no consultation and feeble excuses were offered by the council.
Kimberworth Park and Masbrough were belatedly added on with very little information published. Kimberworth Library had no posters to advertise time or place. Masbrough was held at as far distance as possible from the area that would be effected, at the other side of the Old Wortley Road dual carriage way, only 16 people signed in, 6 from Save our Greenbelt, one Labour Councillor, so do your sums.
The good people of Dinnington were very vocal and I am afraid some Parish Councillors had little to say, but at least they turned up, which is more than we can say for the Greasbrough Councillors, Keith Goulty, being the only one brave enough, although when asked if he supported the carnage of Bassingthorpe Farm his reply was a definite NO! When asked if he would vote against, he said he would have to vote with the Labour Party. Now forgive me if I am wrong, but I always thought that my councillor was there to represent me and the majority of the good people of Greasbrough who are against this carnage.
This fight is far from over and I am using this brilliant web site to appeal to the the tax payers of Rotherham to contact Save Our Greenbelt so we can help you in your fight to save your precious greenbelt, I know there are very concerned folk from Swinton, Thorpe Hesley, to mention a few. Dinnington only joined recently and our united front has the Council rattled to say the least!
Together we will have a very loud voice. Please help us shout for the future of our children.”
Any more amateur reporters out there? If you were present and want to share your viewpoint on the meeting, or would like to share you ideas? Please use the comment link below. Pseudonyms may be used, your email address will never be published.
This photograph, by Simon Collett, supplied by Vic to whom we are grateful, thanks, was taken at the end of last nights most successful Public Meeting. The meeting took place in the Middleton Hall (DART) on Barleycroft Lane, Dinnington. Click on image to enlarge.
As you can see for yourself the meeting was very well attended, 140 people turned up on a rather cold and wet Friday night. Can I spot Simon Tweed and Darren Hughes in the audience? Perhaps they might like to give us their impressions of the meeting?
Full detailed report as soon as I have one for readers.
Click on the images below to access the campaign websites, they are both excellent and have lots of very important information. Read them and if you are worried about the councils continual lack of candour, join them and make your voice heard!
You can also make your views known by leaving a comment on any post that takes your fancy on Rotherham Politics. Pseudonyms allowed, email address will never be published!