Very concerned about landfill plus the possible loss of an amenity coastal footpath walk used for nearly 100 years
T
Tania Walsh
11 years ago
I have read the planning application in great detail. I am used to detailed work and am of the opinion that the devil is in the detail. This application is at best confusing, with documentation being uploaded after the original consultation expiry date of the 25th December 2014. There is clearly landfill involved in the development of this golf course. I believe a number of people have received letters from their elected representatives. The one word that is used by the people who are supposed to represent them is "rumour" indeed two Consrvative candidates for West ward in Portishead have used "irresponsible rumour" in their campaign leaflets to describe the fears of people who are truly concerned about the future of their green spaces. I advise all prospective candidates to do as I did and read the planning application. When they have taken this action I do not think they would use inappropriate language to undermine the people whose votes they need on Thursday 7th May 2015.
I have serious concerns about the long term environmental damage the proposed landfill and re-engineering of the golf course will cause to that section of the channel. Especially the public coastal footpath which is likely to suffer from severe run-off and/or slippage which could totally impede access. I use the footpath regularly when walking my dog and during school holidays my children and grandchildren often join me on a stroll through to Clevedon along this route. It would be disastrous if for want of more an impact assessment this application approval was allowed to stand unchallenged and we lost this wonderful amenity.
B
Bob Mitchell
11 years ago
"for the record, NSC is not banning walkers from the Golf Course" I would beg to differ Mr Pasley. By not including a clause in the lease that protected the rights of way to walkers, you have effectively banned walkers. Your hypocrisy continues, and this is not a personal attack, but you have not been transparent at all on this matter from what I have witnessed. Would you like to confirm or deny that you were responsible for the comment another Councillor has claimed was said about the lease needed to be rushed through before local people realise what they are losing, or words to that effect? I have seen this happen all over the country and, though not living in the area these days, when I visit family there, I find it shocking to see how the green spaces are disappearing and the council do nothing to stop it, If you truly supported the people of Portishead who want to see that last area remain as it is, your name would be on this petition.
A
Ann Harrison
11 years ago
Let's preserve the natural scenery and no landfill please.
D
David Townsend
11 years ago
Response from Councilor Pasley to comments made on this i petition by David Townsend. on 4th April 2015
"Mr. Townsend,
for the record, NSC is not banning walkers from the Golf Course. I do not know where this information has been generated from but it is erroneous. The Lease-holder, as with previous leaseholders, is legally responsible for public liability and safety and will be duty-bound to mitigate undue risks or injury to members of the public from stray balls. How SAS Golf Design intend to manage this is, at present, not known to me and for the record I have never had a conversation with the leaseholder or their representative/agents. Additionally, North Somerset Council is yet to grant permission for the works requested so any perceived restrictions on public usage is premature. For the benefit of those not familiar with the background and how we are where we are I have outlined a summary of the events to date and hope the facts will enlighten those who are propagating a very different story.
North Somerset Council has an established planning process which is the same as every other council in England. A weekly planning register is issued which is published on the council’s website and in the local press for all to see. Both Town & District Councils also publish their agendas and Planning meetings are open, public meetings. Public notices are also issued and placed on or near land or property that are subject to a planning application.
On the 20th November 2014 an application was received from a company called SAS Golf Design for “improvements” to the golf course. The land is leased on a 25 yr. contract from the land owner North Somerset Council. As the ward councillor, I called in the application so it could be debated in public by the Planning Committee rather than decided by a planning officer behind closed doors. Initially, the planning case officer recommended refusal because the applicant did not provide information requested, however some day
V
Vanessa Bennett
11 years ago
This site is used on a daily basis by a very large number of walkers and runners.
V
Vanessa Dando
11 years ago
should receive status
V
Vanessa Dando
11 years ago
This site really deserves Town & Village Green status
G
Garry Hewitt
11 years ago
this would be the biggest mistake in such a lovely village!
D
David Pasley
11 years ago
Mr. Townsend,
For the record, NSC is not banning walkers from the Golf Course. I do not know where this information has been generated from but it is erroneous. The Lease-holder, as with previous leaseholders, is legally responsible for public liability and safety and will be duty-bound to mitigate undue risks or injury to members of the public from stray balls. How SAS Golf Design intend to manage this is, at present, not known to me and for the record I have never had a conversation with the leaseholder or their representative/agents. Additionally, North Somerset Council is yet to grant permission for the works requested so any perceived restrictions on public usage is premature. For the benefit of those not familiar with the background and how we are where we are I have outlined a summary of the events to date and hope the facts will enlighten those who are propagating a very different story.
North Somerset Council has an established planning process which is the same as every other council in England. A weekly planning register is issued which is published on the council’s website and in the local press for all to see. Both Town & District Councils also publish their agendas and Planning meetings are open, public meetings. Public notices are also issued and placed on or near land or property that are subject to a planning application.
On the 20th November 2014 an application was received from a company called SAS Golf Design for “improvements” to the golf course. The land is leased on a 25 yr. contract from the land owner North Somerset Council. As the ward councillor, I called in the application so it could be debated in public by the Planning Committee rather than decided by a planning officer behind closed doors. Initially, the planning case officer recommended refusal because the applicant did not provide information requested, however some days before the Committee meeting took place, the officer received the information from the applicant and t
M
Martyn Baker
11 years ago
Its all about land fill, thousands of tons of it, this will change the look of Portishead forever.
M
Mark Nelson
11 years ago
Keep the costal path open!
J
Jenny Brighton
11 years ago
I'm amazed that they have permission to dump landfill in such a lovely spot.
R
Robert Nagle
11 years ago
I live a stone’s throw from the golf course on Nore Road, living opposite the Windmill Public House and if anyone asks if I’ve sensed there has a fair consultation process I will vehemently refute this. I am very disappointed to read what I have today in becoming more aware of it and in particular learning that David Paisley the local councillor believes a transparent and open deliberation has taken place in a letter written 1st April this year. The golf club has been there for over a 100 years and indeed is part of our heritage and should remain this way for many years to come.
G
Greg Corrigan
11 years ago
Shouldn't local and district councillors be questioning the motivation of a short-term leaseholder in making massive landscaping changes to a golf course that is not generating a viable income nor is ever likely to. Our appointed representatives are not acting in the best interests of the residents of Portishead nor the District or Town Councils long term interests. The financial motivation behind this proposal should be made clear.
N
Nathan James
11 years ago
Leave it alone. There is nothing wrong with that course now. It is what it is and even if upgraded it will still be financial unviable for golf after its use for land fill has been extinguished.
D
Dot Donovan
11 years ago
66666666666666As a golfer I think that this golf course is for the beginner and young golfers who cannot afford to join one of the many local golf clubs so spending a lot of money to improve the lay out of the course seems rather pointless and financially unviable. However using the course as a means to get rid of unwanted soil/rubble waste does make more financial sense. I am therefore opposed to using Portishead's local amenity for this purpose.
Very concerned about landfill plus the possible loss of an amenity coastal footpath walk used for nearly 100 years
I have read the planning application in great detail. I am used to detailed work and am of the opinion that the devil is in the detail. This application is at best confusing, with documentation being uploaded after the original consultation expiry date of the 25th December 2014. There is clearly landfill involved in the development of this golf course. I believe a number of people have received letters from their elected representatives. The one word that is used by the people who are supposed to represent them is "rumour" indeed two Consrvative candidates for West ward in Portishead have used "irresponsible rumour" in their campaign leaflets to describe the fears of people who are truly concerned about the future of their green spaces. I advise all prospective candidates to do as I did and read the planning application. When they have taken this action I do not think they would use inappropriate language to undermine the people whose votes they need on Thursday 7th May 2015.
concerned about landfill
[email protected] - Lara Tully
I have serious concerns about the long term environmental damage the proposed landfill and re-engineering of the golf course will cause to that section of the channel. Especially the public coastal footpath which is likely to suffer from severe run-off and/or slippage which could totally impede access. I use the footpath regularly when walking my dog and during school holidays my children and grandchildren often join me on a stroll through to Clevedon along this route. It would be disastrous if for want of more an impact assessment this application approval was allowed to stand unchallenged and we lost this wonderful amenity.
"for the record, NSC is not banning walkers from the Golf Course" I would beg to differ Mr Pasley. By not including a clause in the lease that protected the rights of way to walkers, you have effectively banned walkers. Your hypocrisy continues, and this is not a personal attack, but you have not been transparent at all on this matter from what I have witnessed. Would you like to confirm or deny that you were responsible for the comment another Councillor has claimed was said about the lease needed to be rushed through before local people realise what they are losing, or words to that effect? I have seen this happen all over the country and, though not living in the area these days, when I visit family there, I find it shocking to see how the green spaces are disappearing and the council do nothing to stop it, If you truly supported the people of Portishead who want to see that last area remain as it is, your name would be on this petition.
Let's preserve the natural scenery and no landfill please.
Response from Councilor Pasley to comments made on this i petition by David Townsend. on 4th April 2015 "Mr. Townsend, for the record, NSC is not banning walkers from the Golf Course. I do not know where this information has been generated from but it is erroneous. The Lease-holder, as with previous leaseholders, is legally responsible for public liability and safety and will be duty-bound to mitigate undue risks or injury to members of the public from stray balls. How SAS Golf Design intend to manage this is, at present, not known to me and for the record I have never had a conversation with the leaseholder or their representative/agents. Additionally, North Somerset Council is yet to grant permission for the works requested so any perceived restrictions on public usage is premature. For the benefit of those not familiar with the background and how we are where we are I have outlined a summary of the events to date and hope the facts will enlighten those who are propagating a very different story. North Somerset Council has an established planning process which is the same as every other council in England. A weekly planning register is issued which is published on the council’s website and in the local press for all to see. Both Town & District Councils also publish their agendas and Planning meetings are open, public meetings. Public notices are also issued and placed on or near land or property that are subject to a planning application. On the 20th November 2014 an application was received from a company called SAS Golf Design for “improvements” to the golf course. The land is leased on a 25 yr. contract from the land owner North Somerset Council. As the ward councillor, I called in the application so it could be debated in public by the Planning Committee rather than decided by a planning officer behind closed doors. Initially, the planning case officer recommended refusal because the applicant did not provide information requested, however some day
This site is used on a daily basis by a very large number of walkers and runners.
should receive status
This site really deserves Town & Village Green status
this would be the biggest mistake in such a lovely village!
Mr. Townsend, For the record, NSC is not banning walkers from the Golf Course. I do not know where this information has been generated from but it is erroneous. The Lease-holder, as with previous leaseholders, is legally responsible for public liability and safety and will be duty-bound to mitigate undue risks or injury to members of the public from stray balls. How SAS Golf Design intend to manage this is, at present, not known to me and for the record I have never had a conversation with the leaseholder or their representative/agents. Additionally, North Somerset Council is yet to grant permission for the works requested so any perceived restrictions on public usage is premature. For the benefit of those not familiar with the background and how we are where we are I have outlined a summary of the events to date and hope the facts will enlighten those who are propagating a very different story. North Somerset Council has an established planning process which is the same as every other council in England. A weekly planning register is issued which is published on the council’s website and in the local press for all to see. Both Town & District Councils also publish their agendas and Planning meetings are open, public meetings. Public notices are also issued and placed on or near land or property that are subject to a planning application. On the 20th November 2014 an application was received from a company called SAS Golf Design for “improvements” to the golf course. The land is leased on a 25 yr. contract from the land owner North Somerset Council. As the ward councillor, I called in the application so it could be debated in public by the Planning Committee rather than decided by a planning officer behind closed doors. Initially, the planning case officer recommended refusal because the applicant did not provide information requested, however some days before the Committee meeting took place, the officer received the information from the applicant and t
Its all about land fill, thousands of tons of it, this will change the look of Portishead forever.
Keep the costal path open!
I'm amazed that they have permission to dump landfill in such a lovely spot.
I live a stone’s throw from the golf course on Nore Road, living opposite the Windmill Public House and if anyone asks if I’ve sensed there has a fair consultation process I will vehemently refute this. I am very disappointed to read what I have today in becoming more aware of it and in particular learning that David Paisley the local councillor believes a transparent and open deliberation has taken place in a letter written 1st April this year. The golf club has been there for over a 100 years and indeed is part of our heritage and should remain this way for many years to come.
Shouldn't local and district councillors be questioning the motivation of a short-term leaseholder in making massive landscaping changes to a golf course that is not generating a viable income nor is ever likely to. Our appointed representatives are not acting in the best interests of the residents of Portishead nor the District or Town Councils long term interests. The financial motivation behind this proposal should be made clear.
Leave it alone. There is nothing wrong with that course now. It is what it is and even if upgraded it will still be financial unviable for golf after its use for land fill has been extinguished.
66666666666666As a golfer I think that this golf course is for the beginner and young golfers who cannot afford to join one of the many local golf clubs so spending a lot of money to improve the lay out of the course seems rather pointless and financially unviable. However using the course as a means to get rid of unwanted soil/rubble waste does make more financial sense. I am therefore opposed to using Portishead's local amenity for this purpose.