ENTRY HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION 

Actions & Decisions

Meeting 27th July 2020 

Attendees:                                                                                   

Katina Beckett [KB] (Chair)

Dominic Wilson [DW] (Secretary & Treasurer)

Stella Williams [SW] 

Jo Reeves [JR]

David Liversidge [DL] 

Lorelei Hunt [LH]

Kirsty Winstanley KW

 

Apologies:

Brian Fookes [BF]  

Dave Rumble [DR] 

Natasha Kidd [NK] (due to difficulties on the connection)

1 Actions & decisions from previous meeting

1.1 No amendments were suggested to the actions and decisions recorded from the meeting on 26th May, previously circulated.  Actions were picked up as follows:

1.2 The communications letter had been completed and sent out.  We have received some responses and inow have 72 members including the Committee.  There are 199 houses in the Entry Hill area.

1.3 Katina fed back that Brian has also arranged a mailshot on “Nextdoor”, to make residents aware of the EHCA but has received no responses.

1.4 Website has been set up and Lorelei was thanked for her work on this by the Committee. Some members have refunded £10 towards the website hosting charge of £100 which Lorelei has already paid.  Katina is keeping a list of those outstanding. [KB]

1.5 The £2k grant which had been available was passed on to another area in the absence of suitable suggestions for its use at short notice.

The Future of Entry Hill Golf course

2.1  Katina fed back about the Cabinet Meeting on 22 July, where she spoke in favour of keeping the golf course as a golf course.

2.2 There was discussion that a Mountain Bike park was niche and not for a wider community use and would also lead to more traffic problems. It was noted that there had been encouragement on Mountain Bike websites to respond to the Lemon Gazelle online survey from across the UK. A committee member reported this and a resident on Entry Hill reported this as well.

2.3 Regarding the Avon Wildlife Trust & Forest of Imagination [AWT/FOI] proposal, the Committee is opposed to coaches, increased traffic and pollution on Entry Hill that would result from this proposal.   It was also noted that the infrastructure to make Wellsway the main vehicle route into the site would be costly and disruptive to Wellsway.

2.4 A letter is to be drafted to Paul Crosley asking that BANES the assessment criteria and weightings  they will use to assess the tenders, at the same time as we feedback suggestions that have come into the Community Association.  Aim to send this before the end of August.  We will also ask that the criteria in the tender process should require the bidder to make some sort of statement about their commitment to the community.  [KB]

2.5 Kirsty will contact Hansford Square to understand their intentions with regard to the golf course proposals. [KW]

 

3 Residents Parking Zone [RPZ]

3.1 Advice from the highways ddepartment was to request a Residents Parking Zone for lower Entry Hill, up to the bridge, in the first instance.  This is where parking issues predominantly exist currently. If a vote was to include the upper part of Entry Hill, there may be less chance of success.  Those in lower Entry Hill are very keen to have an RPZ and Upper Entry Hill could always join an RPZ at a later date if the majority of voting residents wished to do so.  Jo Reeves will contact Winston about residents parking at lower Entry Hill and push for being a separate RPZ (i.e. not an extension of the existing Bear Flat zone). [JR]  

 

4 Low Traffic Neighbourhood [LTN]

4.1 The highways department have said an LTN could be achieved through positioning of bollards either at the top of Entry Hill (by the golf course entrance as previously suggested) or on the bridge as an alternative option.  It had previously been thought turning may be an issue on either side of the bridge but the highways department agency have said a recycling lorry would be able to turn on either side.  The committee agreed it is better to have two options.

4.2 There should be a public consultation re Bath LTNs in six weeks time.

5 Pedestrian Safety Fund

5.1 It was agreed we should respond by making clear the area considered to be in greatest need of improvement is pedestrian safety across the bridge due to speed and proximity of vehicles.  Whilst suggestions were made around bollards, planters, give-way road markings and traffic lights, it was also agreed none of the committee members is an expert in what measures would morst successfully improve safety across the bridge. We would highlight the areas of most concern to  our ward councillor, Winston Duguid.      

                                                                                                                    [KB]

6 Social Media Presence

6.1 Setting up a Facebook and Twitter account were discussed.  It was agreed Katina would set up a Facebook “push-only” account in the first instance.  This is to allow residents to signup and receive automatic notifications regarding events and links added to the page, rather than having to check periodically for updates, as is the case with the static website. [KB]

7 FOBRA Membership Fee

7.1 FOBRA (Federation of Bath Resident's Association) membership is £25 per year (half that in the first year as EHCA will be joining part way through).  The Committee agreed to share the cost amongst themselves. [ALL]

FOBRA has adopted LTNs as part of their policy.

8 EHCA Membership Fee

8.1 It has been suggested by some members of EHCA that there should be a membership fee for EHCA, on the basis that people value more things which they pay for.  Following discussion the Committee concluded that, for the time being, expenditure is too small to warrant introduction of a fee.  It is felt that, on the whole, a free membership will encourage more people to join.  

9 AOB

9.1   The Assocation has received an email from a resident suggesting that parking on lower Entry Hill be reduced to allow easier and quicker throughflow of traffic.  This was discussed by the Committee, who concluded that residents on lower Entry Hill should have access to parking close to their homes and that the suggestion did not address central issues, such as overall reduction of traffic, safety and pollution.  These are fundamental goals for LTNs and many related issues are addressed in the FAQs on the EHCA website.

9.2 A “Local Traffic Only” sign had also been suggested.  The Committee is aware the one on Church Street in Widcombe is ineffective and did not support it as an alternative to an LTN. 

 

10 DATE & LOCATION OF NEXT MEETING

To be arranged