Category: Other Information (Page 1 of 2)
All meetings are held at Albury Village Hall and start at 7.15pm
2025
8th April
13th May
10th June
8th July
9th September
14th October
11th November
Construction of a 50MW battery energy storage system facility and associated access, landscaping and other infrastructure works.|Land At Greens Farm East End Stocking Pelham Buntingford Hertfordshire SG9 0JU
Albury Parish Council strongly OBJECTS to this planning application.
The Albury Road from Little Hadham through Albury is designated as a construction traffic route to the site of this application. Whilst stated as temporary on the application, this is an irrelevant statement in our view. Whether temporary or permanent, the risk to life for all road users is real and underestimated within this proposal.
Whilst a traffic survey was conducted (September and February) the results do not reflect the serious risk posed. The majority of pedestrian, cyclist and equestrian road use occurs during the summer months and given that the survey was conducted outside of this timeframe, we dispute the results. Also, the survey sites were not within the populated areas of the Albury Road where most of the more vulnerable road users tend to use the road.
The applicant concluding that the road network is able to accommodate the proposed construction traffic is misleading. Albury Parish Council has not at any stage been approached for their opinion on the impact of this proposal. Therefore, we have concluded that Albury residents’ safety and quality of life has been deemed an acceptable level of ‘collateral damage’, and that the parish was not worthy of direct consultation.
We OBJECT to this proposal based on the life-threatening risk to the residents of Albury Parish and anyone using the road through our parish.
The proposed route is wholly unsuitable for large construction vehicles, in particular at Gravesend and Clapgate. Agricultural vehicles already have significant difficulty navigating these narrow rural roads, not just tractors, but the numerous daily HGV vehicles delivering feeds etc, to the various farms on the route.
80% of the route has no footpaths and there are two bus stop areas in the road in Albury. The public using these bus stops (many of them school children) will be put at risk of serious injury or death by being in dangerously close proximity to large construction vehicles.
There are several listed and conservation buildings at Gravesend and Clapgate which will be placed at risk of damage. There are not sufficient passing places on the route to avoid daily congestion and safe passing, and cars parked on the route will also be placed at risk of damage.
This planning application based on ‘green’ credentials and how important this facility is for the push for ‘net zero’ within government directives, fails to observe the ecological damage that will result for the local area.
Therefore, we conclude Albury Parishes flora and fauna is also considered as acceptable ‘collateral damage’. Mature trees, established hedgerows and verges filled with cow slips and native plants are all disposable and any damage just an inconvenience – rather than an ecological disaster. The destruction of any habitat, but especially within the geographical scope of this facility is surely at complete odds with the rationale of this proposal.
There is no real benefit to the local or Albury community provided by this project, yet we will be significantly impacted by the noise, traffic and long-term unsightly appearance of this project.
Albury Parish Council MAG Stansted Airport Night Flights Objection
We are writing to you regarding the MAG request to seek relaxation of the current night flight restrictions for its operations at Stansted Airport from October 2026.
After careful consideration and with a balanced view on the employment and business benefits Stansted Airport contributes to the area. As a Parish Council representing the views of residents that live under the BUZAD NPR we hereby tender our objection to the MAG request to relax the current night flight restrictions.
Our view as a Parish Council is as follows:
Proposed Option 1 – to remove all restrictions for night flights on October 2026 would be catastrophic to the health and well-being of residents. Whilst the government study and paper is due to be published in 2025, which will conclude the outcome of a comprehensive study into night flight impact on health, we conclude based on lived experience, that night flights already impact residents’ health. Given the fact that CDA is not used for any flights when using BUZAD, the residents are already subjected to noise levels higher than those at Heathrow and Gatwick. With the parish being in a rural area, this noise is amplified by the quiet ambience with no background traffic or urban noise to counterbalance the effects. Therefore, it would seem logical that any flights throughout the night would wake residents, disrupt sleep and impact in a negative manner on those affected.
WE STRONGLY OBJECT TO OPTION 1.
Proposed Option 2 – Remove the controls on October 2025 whilst keeping noise level limits. Whilst this option does keep noise level limits in place, due to the lack of CDA for BUZAD NPR and the night aircraft being predominantly 777 cargo planes, the limit would simply be for data purposes. The night flights would still impact negatively, with the 777 cargo planes, known within the industry as being particularly noisy with a piercing whine, the limit will not stop this disrupting noise.
WE STRONGLY OBJECT TO OPTION 2.
Proposed Option 3 – Keep all existing controls and limits.
WE STRONGLY URGE THAT OPTION 3 IS CHOSEN.
It is our opinion that restrictions to night flights should remain in place in the absence of convincing evidence that night flights are safer than current evidence and live experience suggest. We also note that the MAG application is also in direct contrast to Section 106 agreement with Uttlesford District Council planning agreement, that the airport under any owner/operator cannot seek a relaxation of night flight restrictions. As such, we find that the application is disingenuous and seeks profit over people and their health. Stansted already has 13,700 night flights permitted per year, versus 5,800 at Heathrow and as such this level seems already to Stansted Airport’s advantage and we urge MAG to improve the efficiency of their operations, rather than apply for more flights that will not only blight residents and rural areas but would be in direct contrast to the UK government target to reduce emissions by 68% by 2030.
This reponse relates to the Stansted Airport Draft Noise Action Plan 2024-2028 (click to view in new window)Albury Parish lies within BUZAD NPR. Within the proposed Noise Action Plan (the “Plan”), we do highlight that many points of the Plan refer to the areas within noise contours of the airport ground handling with less focus on the NPR areas. We would like to request that for the Plan to be more effective in those rural residential areas in NPR’s, the following points require consideration, planning and implementation.
Chapter 8.
In regard to the question for responses to how adequate noise controls are within the Plan, we submit the following:
Incentives for airlines to provide quieter fleets should be implemented over the Plan period, with a fixed start and end number of fleet upgrades, for both passenger and cargo. A target needs to be set for a % improvement of a quieter fleet at a minimum of 25%. The airlines should set these targets and strong financial incentives put in place to encourage compliance, such as increased fines for noise infringements/use of an older aircraft fleet and regular measurement of noise on NPR routes via monitors.
Night flights should cease within the Plan period, this action would immediately act as the most impactful noise control.
Albury Parish Council and Albury parishioners, expect the airport to demonstrate year-on-year improvements against empirical targets.
Chapter 9.
NAP 4 -In regard to the question, are arriving aircraft noise controls adequate within the Plan, we submit the following:
Arrivals on BUZAD NPR only benefit from CDA with 65% of night flights CDA being compliant and hardly any CDA on day flights. As the CDA can be an issue due to other aircraft, we are to understand from the consultation that CDA would not be achievable during the day until the Future Airspace modernisation is complete. This is not an action point, just a statement of fact. We believe that CDA should be a focus within this Plan, irrespective of future modernisation and all endeavours are made to increase CDA on a daily basis. Therefore, this Plan lacks any credible focus for improvement in our view. For the Plan to be of real, measurable benefit, other measures should be implemented ahead of the modernisation program. Setting targets and improving the number of CDA arrivals during the day to a minimum of 25% of flights for example and then increasing CDA at night from 65% to 90% would be a specific goal that would improve the noise issues. Within the Plan as stated, more effort should be placed in order to increase CDA on day flights. However, if this action point is challenging, then we also believe that the noise controls placed on night flights to decrease noise, such as the pilot-specific actions used within the restrictive period, should therefore be applied to the day flights as an immediate mitigation.
Chapter 11.
NAP 15 – In regards to the question of departing aircraft noise controls being adequate within the plan, we submit the following:
There is no mention within this area of the Plan to add/create respite periods for NPR areas. Respite is planned in Heathrow, Gatwick and other airport NPR areas. We believe this Plan should include an appropriate respite provision, with particular focus on the main overflown path of all NPR swathes.
The BUZAD NPR has most flights concentrated on the western flank of the centre line If respite cannot be achieved, another important action point to add to the Plan would be to review the residential areas within the swathe as indicated on an OS map. Use of PBN to create the concentration of aircraft over the agricultural not residential areas could be achieved. We believe that there are opportunities within an NPR to use PBN with particularly good effect in rural areas. This is a proven action point that Stansted itself has achieved in another location. This action we believe, would remove a significant part of the population from the biggest impact of noise. We believe that by using PBN within this Plan, a potential 6,500 population of the villages of Little Hadham, Hadham Ford, Much Hadham, Albury and Furneux Pelham could be potentially removed from the worst impacts. Albury Parish Council would be willing and give full support to trial this, including the placement of permanent noise monitors within the Parish and active participation in any trial implemented.
The measurement needs to be relevant to the village locations (BUZAD NPR), as opposed to the airport) as this is where Albury Parish is experiencing issues/concerns and with year-on-year targets for reduction and including frequency of occurrence, loudness.
NAP 17 – NO fly zones. We challenge the proposal to continue to have a NO fly zone over St Elizabeth’s Centre, on the basis that whilst it has been appropriate on previous plans when the centre had permanent residents, since November 2022 all residents are now removed. Removing this site from the NO fly zone would aid PBN and the improvements as previously detailed. The fact that the NO fly zones have remained unchanged over the previous two plans demonstrates that a comprehensive review of what is happening at ground level has not taken place. This is of great concern, as the SSSI within our Parish, clearly alongside other potentially new and current sensitive sites are not flagged, considered or protected.
The airport needs to spread the burden of noise equitably across those affected.
NAP 19 – Within the Plan, the limit of daytime noise has not been adjusted, therefore it provides no impact on noise levels. The limit should be adjusted to lessen the noise impact in line with the anticipated fleet change over to quieter aircraft. To surely have an actual positive effect, each action point must set targets to improve on the previous one.
Chapter 12.
In regard to the question of night noise controls and are they adequate within the Plan, we submit the following:
All night flights should be phased out within the Plan. Whilst this phasing period is in operation, CDA should be in use on night flights 90% of the time as detailed in our response to NAP 14.
Chapter 13.
In regard to the question, if mitigation controls are adequate within the Plan, we submit the following:
Mitigation controls within the Plan require more focus on real targets to improve, with real measures of improvements in percentage terms. We do not believe the current controls to be adequate. Mitigation controls require SMART KPIs governing noise in Albury Parish, i.e. an empirical data capture that measures the duration, frequency, and loudness of noise, coupled with a set of targets that demonstrate a year-on-year improvement in noise performance.
Chapter 14.
In regards to the questions on monitoring and reporting controls being adequate within the Plan, we submit the following:
NAP 34 – The Plan to place more noise monitors is welcomed, each NPR should have a permanent noise monitor available on Webtrak and feedback periodically. The current suite of noise monitors is concentrated within the airport contour area. As Albury Parish has a SSSI, it would be appropriate that a monitor within this area is permanently installed to fully monitor the impact on this protected sensitive site. There should also be provisions to measure noise elsewhere in the Parish.
NAP 36 – All information from noise monitoring should be emailed to stakeholders as well as made available on the Website. This information should be clear and specific to each NPR and airport noise contour area.
NAP 38 – Within the Plan, the information regarding the independent auditor requires clarification. We would also remark that NPR areas should have the opportunity to converse with the independent auditor at regular intervals for a transparent and objective audit to take place.
Chapter 15.
In regards to the question on the effectiveness of communication within the Plan, we submit the following:
NPR routes, in particular those within East Herts, have not had the level of communication from Stansted that we feel is adequate. The public and/or their representatives should have a quarterly face-to-face opportunity to discuss, share and understand the current and future plans of the airport.
The complaints procedure set by the airport leans heavily on a complainant being competent to report issues via links and emails. The addition of an option to speak with a representative more easily would be more inclusive and welcomed. Whilst complaints are responded to within adequate timeframes, the information provided can be extremely technical. A more user-friendly response, with less technical language and clear maps, would be preferential. It is also noted that complainants that submit more than one complaint within certain timescales set by the airport are flagged as potentially ” NIMBY” public. It is logical that NPR areas would generate more complaints than non NPR areas, and we ask to have greater tolerance of complaint numbers in NPR areas. Complaints from NPR’s should be seen as crucial feedback from the communities who are the best placed to monitor if the Plan is working effectively. The grounds for legitimate complaints should also be re-evaluated; currently, residents are discouraged from submitting complaints where aircraft are within noise targets and guidelines, but the frequency and loudness of overflight are materially impacting the quality of life.
There has been a significant increase in the number of complaints made to the Albury Parish Council over the last two years regarding aircraft noise, location, height and flight paths and especially frequency of overflight.
Albury Parish Plan 2005 (click the link to view in a new tab)
This accessibility statement applies to alburyvillage.co.uk
This website is run by Albury parish council. We want as many people as possible to be able to use this website. For example, that means you should be able to:
- change colours, contrast levels and fonts
- zoom in up to 300% without the text spilling off the screen
- navigate most of the website using just a keyboard
- navigate most of the website using speech recognition software
- listen to most of the website using a screen reader (including the most recent versions of JAWS, NVDA and VoiceOver)
We’ve also made the website text as simple as possible to understand.
AbilityNet has advice on making your device easier to use if you have a disability.
How accessible this website is
We know some parts of this website are not fully accessible:
- the text will not reflow in a single column when you change the size of the browser window
- you cannot modify the line height or spacing of text
- most older PDF documents are not fully accessible to screen reader software
- live video streams do not have captions
- some of our online forms are difficult to navigate using just a keyboard
- you cannot skip to the main content when using a screen reader
Feedback and contact information
If you need information on this website in a different format like accessible PDF, large print, easy read, audio recording or braille or if you cannot view the map on our ‘contact us’ page:
- email: alburyparishclerk@hotmail.co.uk
- call: 07811 110159
We’ll consider your request and get back to you within 5 working days.
Reporting accessibility problems with this website
We’re always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, please let us know:
- email: alburyparishclerk@hotmail.co.uk
- call: 07811 110159
Enforcement procedure
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the ‘accessibility regulations’). If you’re not happy with how we respond to your complaint, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS)
Technical information about this website’s accessibility
Albury parish council is committed to making its website accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.
Compliance status
This website is not compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard. The [insert one of the following: ‘non-compliances’, ‘exemptions’ or ‘non-compliances and exemptions’] are listed below.
Non-accessible content
The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons.
Non-compliance with the accessibility regulations
Some images do not have a text alternative, so people using a screen reader cannot access the information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (non-text content).
We plan to add text alternatives for all images by December 2020. When we publish new content we’ll make sure our use of images meets accessibility standards.
Disproportionate burden
Navigation and accessing information
There’s no way to skip the repeated content in the page header (for example, a ‘skip to main content’ option).
It’s not always possible to change the device orientation from horizontal to vertical without making it more difficult to view the content.
It’s not possible for users to change text size without some of the content overlapping.
Interactive tools and transactions
Some of our interactive forms are difficult to navigate using a keyboard. For example, because some form controls are missing a ‘label’ tag.
We’ve assessed the cost of fixing the issues with navigation and accessing information, and with interactive tools and transactions. We believe that doing so now would be a disproportionate burden within the meaning of the accessibility regulations. We will make another assessment in October 2020.
Content that’s not within the scope of the accessibility regulations
PDFs and other documents
Some of our PDFs and Word documents are essential to providing our services. For example, we have PDFs with information on how users can access our services, and forms published as Word documents. We plan to either fix these or replace them with accessible HTML pages by December 2020.
The accessibility regulations do not require us to fix PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018 if they’re not essential to providing our services. For example, we do not plan to fix financial statements published prior to this date.
Any new PDFs or Word documents we publish will meet accessibility standards.
What we’re doing to improve accessibility
We are obtaining quotes for the development of a new fully-complaint website.
Preparation of this accessibility statement
This statement was prepared on 24th September 2020. It was last reviewed on 24th September 2020.
This website was last tested on 21st September 2020. The test was carried out Albury parish council.
We used browser checking tools which established we were not compliant.
Annual Report 2019
DRAFT ALBURY ANNUAL MEETING OF THE PARISH
Minutes of a meeting held Tuesday 14th May 2019 at 8.30 pm at the Village Hall
Present: Cllr Kent, Cllr Murdoch, Cllr Walne and Cllr Waples
In attendance: Mrs J Pettitt (parish clerk)
The chair opened the meeting at 7:40 pm
1. To receive and accept apologies for absence
None
2. To confirm the minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Parish held 15th May 2018
These were confirmed by the chair.
3. To receive the Albury Annual Report
The chair read out the following annual update:
The Parish Council would like to thank the following people:
• Ray Murdoch, Tracey Waples and Keith Wheatley for all their hard work on the parish council. We shall miss them!
• Ray Murdoch for his role as Chair during the last year and particularly for liaising with Herts County Council to resolve speeding issues and HGV issues in the village
• Tracey Waples for her role as Vice-chair and for her obtaining planning permission for our new sign as well as organising its design, ordering and safe delivery.
• Keith Wheatley for the various things he does free of charge throughout the village, especially the first phase of the clearance at the new village sign site.
• Councillor Davis for looking after our allotment gardens and for ordering and installing the water harvesting system at the village hall
• Pam Wright for her fantastic service to the village, editing and producing the village newsletter for so many years
• Maggie Vicary and Bella Clayden-Smith for litter picking to keep the village tidy
• Anne Sargisson for taking over Pam’s role and continuing to produce the Albury Newsletter every month
• Judi Murdoch for looking after our telephone kiosk library
• Herts County Council for contributing £5100 towards our new radar speed signs
• The new playground committee for organising the first phase of the playground refurbishment
Parish Council activities 2018-19 have included
• Providing a £10,000 grant towards the playground refurbishment which is being organised by a committee of residents
• Providing a £300 grant to Albury 60 Plus towards their Christmas lunch
• Installing a water harvester at the village hall for use by allotment holders
• Arranging the annual safety inspection of the playground
• Organising the fifth Annual Easter Egg Hunt
• Maintaining the allotment gardens and hedges in the village hall carpark
• Clearing the area by the white railings and repainting of the railings
• Contributing £5100 towards two radar speed signs recently installed in the village
• Organising the traditional village sign to be installed in May 2019
4. Question time
None
The chair closed the meeting at 7.50 pm