Using Access Control will place a cookie onto your machine - More info
Access Controls: | High Contrast | - Large Text - Default Text |

Myddle & Broughton Parish Council

Shropshire, UK

Home / Latest News

Latest News

For the latest news click on links below




Councillors: R. Jeffrey (Chairman); C. Ruck; G. Harding; R. Jones and R. Purslow. 
Parish Clerk
Eleven Members of the public.
1. Apologies: 
Apologies were presented and accepted from Councillors J. Heath; P. Keyse; S. Parker and Mrs. E. Hodge.
2. Purpose of Meeting:
The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting, stating that it had been called to deal with matters concerning the use of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) money, which the Parish could access.
3. Definition of CIL:
The Chairman briefly explained what CIL is and how the money is divided between various heads, stating that one of the heads, called the Neighbourhood Fund, can be used by the Parish Council to fund local projects agreed by the local electorate. To date the Council had received a Neighbourhood Fund sum of £12,950.00
He then explained that the major element of CIL money is held by Shropshire Council, to be used to improve the local infrastructure as a result of the housing development that has taken place. Use of this money has to be negotiated with and agreed by Shropshire. With local agreement some of the Neighbourhood Fund money can be used to fund part of an identified project.
4. Projects:
The Chairman then stated that the Parish Council had for some time been considering and prioritising projects that they wished to see progressed and now needed public support before taking them forward to Shropshire Council.
The project receiving unanimous support from the Council was the improvement of road safety measures for children attending Myddle School. This had received the support of the School Governors; the Head Teacher; a number of parents and the local Shropshire Councillor, Mr. Brian Williams.
Discussions had taken place with Shropshire Council’s Area Road Safety Officer who had suggested that the most appropriate system would be to use a raised platform in the road, as this would control all forms of road transport. 
Various Council Members then outlined the following projects for consideration: 
Footpath from the Bridgewater Arms to Pimhill Junction.
Improvements to the Ellesmere Road/The Hollow junction.
Reduced speed limits and traffic calming on roads in Harmer Hill.
Improved pathway to Myddle Children’s Play Area.
Play Area development in Harmer Hill.
Bus shelter by Myddle School.
Various questions and comments were made and responded to. However, there were no further proposals tabled by Members of the public.
5. Resolutions:
The following resolutions were proposed and unanimously approved:
1. Priority should be given to the improvement of road safety measures for children attending Myddle School.
2. All projects identified by Councillors should be processed when funds were available.
3. Neighbourhood Fund money could be used to develop the School Road Safety Project.


Councillor R. Jeffrey (Chairman)
Councillor R. Tiernan
Mr. D. Gradwell (Shropshire Council)
The Parish Clerk
1. Purpose of the meeting:
The Chairman outlined the reasons for requesting the meeting, pointing out that the Council felt that there should be a more formal approach to the issue of road safety concerns. Many reports had been made but it appeared that very few had been resolved and a meeting of this nature would help to clarify the situation and enable the Parish Council to keep residents better informed.
Mr. Gradwell stated that he was happy to meet up with council representatives discuss safety issues which had been made and help where possible.
He then outlined his responsibilities, which were for the whole of north Shropshire and said that he received many requests from Parish Councils throughout the area at the identified times. He had to record, prioritise and cost these requests and make an assessment based on real need. These assessments were then forwarded to the Transport Planning Department, who considered them alongside reports received from the other areas of the County and eventually prepared a list for inclusion in the programme for the next financial year. Unfortunately Government money for this type of work had been severely reduced and further cuts were in the pipeline for the next few years, which resulted in most of the requests either being delayed or turned down.
2. Safety Concerns raised by the Council:
The Chairman then itemised the outstanding issues which had been raised by the Council over the past two years:
(a)Safety of children attending Myddle Primary School:
This had been identified by the Council as its highest priority, with many children having to cross a busy road to access the school, where traffic speed was frequently excessive and it was felt that there was a need for traffic calming measures. A traffic survey had been carried out on the Myddle to Baschurch Road which had shown that the 85th percentile recorded was 35mph. Mr. Gradwell agreed that it was a high priority and pointed out that certain measures had already been undertaken – the erection of a VAR sign; the construction of a roundabout and extensions to the 30mph limit. However he agreed that there was still a priority issue by the school and he had put this forward but had been unable to secure funding this year to even carry out a speed survey in the vicinity of the school. He had estimated that the cost of a speed survey would be £600 and any effective speed calming measures in the region of £30,000.
It was agreed that the realistic way to control the speed of vehicles would be to place ‘cushions’ in the road although these were unpopular with many road users.  Mr. Gradwell agreed that it could speed up any action if the Parish could use CIL money for all or part of the project and he agreed to propose a realistic estimate of the costs of the project.  Council would then be in a position to consider, see how much CIL money was available and consult with residents about the proposed system of control.
Mr. Gradwell agreed to write to the parish council outlining the problems, proposing the potential solutions and giving an approximate cost of the solutions proposed.
(b) Myddle to Baschurch Road:
It was agreed that extensive work had been carried out at the accident black spot near Myddlewood and that no further action could be taken.
(c) Brookside, Myddle:
An order had been placed with Ringway for the erection of ‘Unsuitable for HGV’ signs. Mr. Gradwell will push for completion of the order. A prohibition sign could be used but it would require a special order, take much longer to get agreement and cost considerably more.
(d) Entrance to Myddle Hill from Ellesmere Road:
Mr. Gradwell agreed to arrange for ‘SLOW’ signage to be put in place.
(e) Myddle Hill:
It was agreed that that section of the road was not suitable for road calming measures.
(f) Bus Stop opposite Garage on A528 at Myddle:
An order had been placed with Ringway for the erection of a ‘PEDESTRIANS CROSSING’ sign to be erected.
(g) Lower Road, Harmer Hill:
(i)Mr. Gradwell agreed to get the verge stones removed by the team headed up by Mr. Fisher (Highways area Engineer).
ii. The Clerk agreed to investigate whether the extension of the 30mph limit was included as part of the 106 agreement when The Pines was developed. If so there should be money available in that budget 
(h) Extension of 30mph limit on the A528 at Harmer Hill:
Request had been recorded but would require a ‘Road Transport Order’ for the change and unlikely to secure funding.
(i)Excessive Speed on many roads:
It was noted that the Safer Road Partnership were continuing to carry out checks and  had forwarded some useful data but there was a need to check if their actions were having any effect on the overall speed of traffic. Clerk to make further  contact with Mr. Connolly at the Safer Road Partnership.
(j) Entrance to the Hollow:
Agreed that the Highways maintenance team should see if improvements could be made – any extensive work would be very costly.
(k) Junction by the Bridgewater Arms:
It was agreed that the improvements carried out had greatly improved the junction.
3. Further Meeting:
It was agreed to meet again on June 8th. at 10.00am to review developments.
The Chairman thanked Mr. Gradwell for attending and stated that he felt that the meeting had been worthwhile and had clarified a number of issues.

Latest News

<< Previous | Next >>

Website by Parish Council Websites