New Statesman – Acknowledging the scale and urgency of the challenge we face

An article from John Broderick from the Tyndall Centre raising awareness that to combat Climate Change, we urgently need to reduce our energy consumption and how we use that energy.  Something the Government and Manchester City Council do not seem to understand.  Manchester City Council continue to let property developers build to the lower energy efficiency standards and ensure they include measure like rain water harvesting and grey water recycling.  Walk around Manchester after midnight and see all the wasted energy from unnecessary lighting on, in buildings and outside them.  The profusion of illuminated and automated advertising hoardings.  And yet, the Council still talk about their ‘Manchester – A Certain Future’, without taking any real action.

New Statesman – Acknowledging the scale and urgency of the challenge we face.

In Manchester we have the council investing in the expansion of Manchester Airport, promising it will bring jobs and improve the local economy. Neither is true, especially when the majority of people who work at the Airport do not come from Manchester. And Airports suck money out of the local economy, with people flying and spending their money abroad. Manchester City Council has made very little progress towards a low carbon future, even though Siemens has it one of it’s Headquarters in Manchester.

Green Alliance blog's avatarInside track

This post is by Nick Mabey, chief executive and a founder director of E3G. It was first published on Guardian Sustainable Business.

Walking into Westminister tube station, members of parliament currently find themselves surrounded by a phalanx of purple adverts announcing that “The road to economic growth is … a flight path”. This is just the most visible manifestation of a massive business-led campaign arguing the importance of increased airport capacity to the UK economy.

At one level you have to admire the chutzpah of the British Airports Authority (BAA) in making this argument. New airport capacity is irrelevant to UK economic recovery and will not provide a single additional job before the end of the decade. With business passengers making up only 12% of total UK flights it is also clear that absolute capacity constraints are not a material business issue. But at least BAA’s opportunism is understandable…

View original post 781 more words

A plea from a concerned resident of Hulme.

The Manchester Metropolitan University promised to keep Hulme residents informed of the MMU's plans.  This has not happened since their marketing exercise ended in November 2010.  They have felled all the large mature trees in defiance of resident's objections.  They now want to extinguish all right-of-way for Hulme residents, even though they promised this will not happened.  Below is a post from a Hulme resident urging residents to put objections in against this betrayal of Hulme residents by Manchester Metropolitan University and Manchester City Council and Hulme's councillors.

From; our-hulme@googlegroups.com :

There are just 27 days left for Hulme residents to object to
MMU's bid to turn Birley Fields into a quasi-private estate. It's bad
enough the Council have given MMU the valuable land - don't let them
privatise the streets too! Don't be fooled by their assurances about
'accessibility' for the local public mentioned in their plans - all
PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY are to be extinguished.

I would like to urge all on this group to use your right under
the Town and Country Planning Act to ask the secretary of state to
'reserve'  the PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY of Bonsall Street for pedestrians
and cyclists. Otherwise residents will have no appeal if a couple of
years down the line MMU erect barriers, or put up signs saying 'no
cycling' or walking accross the campus. Just wait until a student gets
raped and you will see fences and gating go up... If you think this is
a silly objection about something not likely to happen - read on..

This happened at Manchester Science Park when they erected gates
accross a path and started locking them at 7pm every night. It
happened when they built Cambridge Hall on Lloyd Street and MMU
security jobsworths started telling local people they could not walk
through to All Saints. And it happened back in the 1960's when MMU
were allowed to build accross the Easternmost end of Cavendish
Street... there are now signs there telling you that you have 'No
Public Right Of Way' to Oxford Rd... (Recently re-worded, but it means
the same thing). Ok, so you can walk through - but isn't the sign so
damned annoying?  It's like, "You may breathe near our property but it
is not our intention to grant you a human RIGHT to life".

Lets give them some annoyance back! Come on people, if enough
residents object it may trigger a public enquiry into the whole
proposal, delay it, and give further opportunity to raise concerns
about the knock-on effect of increased traffic on Stretford Rd (unsafe
for cyclists). Yes, some of the trees are gone. Yes, the land is gone.
But it's not too late to save PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY accross it.

See the notices on Bonsall Street for full details. The most
important part is this:"

"Any person may object to the making of the proposed order within the
period of 28 days commencing on 20th April 2012 by notice to the
Secretary of State, quoting the above reference*, addressed to the
National Transport Casework Team, 2nd Floor, Lancaster House,
Hampshire Court, Newcastle Business Park, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4
7YH"

*reference 095557/FO/2011/S1

Quick Guidance on Objecting (by Eddie)

The closure of Bonsall Street is not essential to the campus plan.

You can object outright to ANY stopping up of Bonsall St if you wish,
or just argue to 'reserve' the Public Rights for just bikes and
pedestrians

The criss-crossing paths on the grass are covered by the stopping up
order too, but these are not recorded 'public rights of way' anyway,
so I don't think there is any mileage in objecting to this - they are
just included to prevent any 'potential' claim that they ought to be
'created' as Public Rights Of  Way...

Personally, I am not bothering to object to the bit of 'Archway' they
want to stop up cost I just can't be bothered... but you can if you
wish.

You don't have to live in Hulme to object. Eg, if you drive through
Hulme to Stretford or Chorlton, you can object.

I think the strongest argument is that travelling East-West or West-
East accross Hulme cyclists will have to brave the increased traffic
either on Stretford Road or Greenheys Lane West (also soon to have
increased traffic when the Manchester Cronyidor Partnership thing re-
routes vehicular traffic into Hulme from Oxford Rd)

Another is access into Hulme for emergency services which may get
stuck in the gridlock on Stretford Rd.

Don't be put off by the confusing complexity of Rights Of Way law.  If
you object, just say so in simple terms. The more objections received,
the more likely there will have to be a 'public enquiry" for all
objections to be properly heard.

I will post the full text of the notice in next couple of days time.
And my own objection as an example. I think there is still a lot of
mileage in the Rights Of Way thing to win concessions for local
residents about the campus plan. The planning permission is just stage
one. "It ain't over until the fat lady sings", as they say...

annoying eddie 🙂

low-cost-low-impact-housing-2012-high-res.pdf (application/pdf Object)

Here is a report into low-cost-low-impact housing.  Unfortunately, here in Manchester, the council has demolished council housing, instead of retro-fitting the houses to improve their energy efficiency.  And then handed the land over to property developers, with the stipulation that the new homes  should meet code 5 of the national standards.  Code 6, is the new minimum standard they should be building to, though I believe they should be built to  the superior Passivhaus standards.

low-cost-low-impact-housing-2012-high-res.pdf (application/pdf Object).

Manchester Airport : Measuring Our Success

This is Manchester Airport’s idea of measuring it’s success with assessing their impact on local communities, 60 local stakeholders.  The council does not count local residents as ‘stakeholder’, even though it is they who are negatively impacted by the airport and its expansion.  Wythenshawe was the largest council estate in Europe, and they are being represented by 60 stakeholders, who no doubt, do not live in the area.  This is a constant problem in Manchester with the City Council, they do not consult or involve the local community.  It is as if, they do not exist.

Manchester Airport : Measuring Our Success.