15 May 2013
You will recall that in the last edition of the Petuaria Press I wrote, with a high degree of frustration, that the ERYC had chosen not to involve the Town Council in discussions surrounding the problems associated with the granting of outline planning permission for the “Brough South” development. I will just remind you that in April 2012 the ERYC’s Strategic Planning Committee gave outline planning approval for the “Brough South” development, which is to include re-modelling of the BAE Systems site, a supermarket and retail and business units, plus an estimated 750 houses.
Whilst the Town Council’s objections are numerous, and wide ranging, our major concern centres on traffic volumes and traffic management. However, the ERYC (Highways) and the Highways Agency consider that only “minor improvements” are necessary to the road network; their most significant proposal being the replacement of the Welton Low Road/Welton Road traffic lights with a large roundabout, at the developer’s expense. We strongly disagree with their views and consider them to be wholly inadequate. It is obvious to us who live here that access to the A63 is the crucial issue given that it is the only way into, or out of, our community. We have repeatedly lobbied for improvements to the A63 slip roads, but the Highways Agency see no necessity. We have also repeatedly lobbied for access to be made from the “Brough South” development through to the Melton interchange, but the ERYC Highways dismiss this as being “impractical”. Note that the “Brough Relief Road” that is repeatedly quoted as being part of the planning approval, is NOT a link through to the Melton Interchange, but is simply the extension of Moor Road over the railway line to gain access to the “Brough South” development. The final stage in this planning fiasco is that the Secretary of State (Eric Pickles) chose not to intervene, so the “Brough South” development has now effectively been given full approval.
I am advised that the first stage of the development (ie the building of the bridge over the Hull to Doncaster railway line) should commence in the autumn of this year. This would suggest that the major construction of houses, retail units, business units etc. is unlikely to commence until late 2014.
So, we are where we are; “Brough South” has effectively been given outline approval and our concerns re traffic, infrastructure, service provision and quality of life have been ignored.
What next? - as a community, we need to pull together and get actively involved with the Liaison Group that the developers are required to set up. We need to let the developers know, at every stage, what the consequences of their actions will be. We need to ensure that they, and our ERYC Councillors, know what we think and what we want.
The Town Council will ensure that all residents of Elloughton & Brough are kept informed as to what is happening re “Brough South”, so please keep looking at our website or speak to any Town Councillor.
Chairman's update May 2011
At the Council’s full council meeting on 17 May 2011 it was noted that Brough, Elloughton, part of Welton (south of the A63) and part of Brantingham (Cave Road) are not included in East Riding of Yorkshire Council’s Village Task Force Team, nor are they included in any regular East Riding of Yorkshire Council town maintenance schedule, other than grass cutting.
Following prolonged and careful consideration it was proposed by the Chairman, seconded by Councillor Mrs Gill and agreed, under the power given by Section 245 of the Local Government Act (LGA) 1972, to rename Elloughton-cum-Brough Parish Council to Elloughton-cum-Brough Town Council.
Members felt that, although not giving the Council any additional powers, it should greatly raise the profile of the community. In recent years it is clear that the decision making processes that affect health, education, employment and infrastructure have greatly under estimated the needs and relevance of the community because strategic planning is focused around the recognised towns. The community’s population is now approaching 10,000, much larger than the majority of the recognised towns in the East Riding. Brough Town centre already serves a wider population of at least 15,000 so it is important that the community is seen, heard and recognised.
As a direct result of the name change and only a week after Council resolved to change the name from Parish to Town Council the community has been included in the East Riding of Yorkshire Council Town maintenance schedule. Members of the public are asked to monitor the service received and report any areas they feel are being missed to the Clerk to the Council.
Making this resolution automatically entitles the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Town Council respectively to be entitled Town Mayor and Deputy Town Mayor (LGA s245 (6b)). The Chairman and Vice-Chairman did not wish to take up this entitlement.
You will notice the change of title from Parish Council to Town Council, however, I must stress that the title ‘Town’ is in name only and Elloughton and Brough will always retain their individual identities. Whilst it does not give the Council any additional powers, it is my opinion that it will greatly raise the profile of our community. So often in recent years it is clear that the decision making processes that affect health, education, employment and infrastructure have greatly under estimated the needs and relevance of this community, because strategic planning is focused around the recognised Towns. Given that our population is now approaching 10,000 – much larger than the majority of the recognised Towns in the East Riding – and that Brough Town centre serves a wider population of at least 15,000, it is important that we are seen, heard and recognised. Please note that the title change, from Parish to Town, will not incur any costs – it is simply an expression of status.
Just when we thought that the expansion of Elloughton-cum-Brough, together with Welton, was beginning to slow down, we find ourselves presented with further significant expansion. As a community, we need to react to any formal planning applications in a positive and sensible way. Whilst few in the community want to see several hundred additional houses, outright opposition is likely to fail. However, sensible consideration of any positive benefits could be a way of addressing current shortfalls in school places, retail provision, service provision and general infrastructure. I will endeavor to keep you informed of any relevant planning proposals by whatever means are appropriate and I will, if necessary, facilitate public meetings so that issues, concerns and opinions can be voiced.