mayfly.net

Got this obituary via BoingBoing. I must say that I like a tribe that puts the back room staff at the top of the pile. Here’s to the Grateful Dead and Ramrod. I’m off to listen to Terrapin Station.

Did well on my first TMA for U316. 85%. Delighted about this. It is a challenging course that is unlike any other I have done. You have to stick pretty rigidly to the schedule and work through the activities religiously to score well. Less scope for ‘tactical’ studying than previous courses. This makes balancing it with work very challenging, but equally somehow more rewarding.

It works really well. Amazing! (Got a bit of help from here.)

I am playing with the Performancing extension for Firefox. It seems easy so far. Let’s see if this works!

I started my latest OU course today. U316. That’s officially another 18 hours a week to find. Yikes!

I did a project on the Brigstock Camp application for a recent Open University course, U216. I thought I’d publish some snippets here which may be useful. The topic of my project was “What impact will the development of a ‘learning disabilities hospital’ at Brigstock Camp have on its surrounding area and in particular the local village of Brigstock?”

The research was predominantly web based, with some local interviews. Bill Wilson’s report was an excellent resource though quite complex. I’d encourage everyone with an interest in this application to read it. I’d like to record thanks to Bill.

I concluded, perhaps rather predictably, that there was a convergence of views and a de-facto agreement that the impact on the local area and village would be significant and unwanted. There was shared agreement that the impact of the scale of the development, the size and location of some of the buildings, the security fencing and lighting, together with associated CCTV coverage, were not in keeping with what was a) acceptable to local people and b) in accordance with policy. Whilst reassuring that the values of local people are shared to some extent by the policy makers it is clear that the main deciding factors were policy led and that agreement with local views was a side effect, not a principal driver of the decision making process. It is also clear that the decision making process is in the hands of a relatively small group of experts and officials. This is a barrier to any alternative view of the future of the Camp. However, there was a refreshing level of openness to discussing the pros and cons of the application, and this is the first step towards much greater participation by local people in future decisions. Many local people are willing to challenge policy makers to make sure alternative values are considered. Finally, it is clear that local people need to ensure that their values are supported by significant evidence to enter the debate effectively, let alone wield sufficient power to have those values predominate in the decision making process. In the search for such evidence, some values will be revealed to be irrational. There were many such examples in this case.

I also recommended that a web site be used by local people to track the application. I hope someone has the energy to do this. Here are my ideas:

Audience: In light of the ongoing enquiry, a local village audience will remain engaged and interested in the topic. The experience of researching this report indicates they will be from a broad cross section of the local community with very differing interests.

Medium: Given the dynamic nature of an ongoing enquiry, and the various communication needs, a website is the logical way to communicate. The proposed site would be a tool that local villagers could use to track the progress of the enquiry.

Purpose: Reports and a suitable summaries would need to be published on the site. In particular, the message that real power in local decision making processes is in the hands of those that set policy needs to be reinforced; and that therefore, the local community should focus on the details of the numerous policy documents and their relevance to the immediate local situation as the enquiry unfolds. The site would be a useful gateway to policy documents and consistently strive to remove unnecessary jargon. Locals would benefit from the simplifying and synthesising of a great deal of complex information into accessible updates that would allow them to grasp the main issues. They would also benefit from a forum to express and record a variety of views on specific proposals as they emerge. Additionally, they would need some form of tool to promote their views to a wider audience as the enquiry proceeds. The promotion of local values often requires the help of the media and a good quality web site that journalists can access is the ideal way to achieve this.

Pudding Mill Lane smoke plume

Originally uploaded by mayfly.

Smoke plume from major fire near Pudding Mill Lane station, 25th August 2005, taken on an XDA2i.

An article in the Guardian dated August 4th 2004 about the “values” associated with Care Principles’ methodology in building hospitals such as the one proposed for Brigstock Camp. The analytical concepts of U216,

• time/space,
• values/power/action,
• risk/uncertainty,

are referred to in various ways in this article.

The recent planning application for the Camp was rejected by East Northamptonshire Council on 13th April 2005 (lucky 13 perhaps). The full report written by Bill Wilson, a consultant retained by the Council to investigate the application, is available on the Brigstock Camp Action Group website. The report should also be available on the Council website but their planning record search thingy is not working 🙁 It is worth a read.

The applicant subsequently appealed the rejection, as explained in a local paper.

Postscript, 17th October 2005. I have pinched the article from the Evening Telegraph and am copying it below. There were some problems linking to the article and I didn’t want local villagers to lose an opportunity to read it.

Fight goes on in care unit project
THE firm behind a plan to build a centre for teenagers with mental health problems has appealed against a council’s decision to refuse the scheme.
Last month East Northamptonshire Council’s planning committee turned down Care Principle’s application to build the centre at the former Army training camp site near the A6116 at Brigstock.
The firm has requested that a Government planning inspector decide the matter at a public inquiry.
A spokesman for Care Principles said: “We are appealing against the decision on planning and environmental grounds.
“There remains a small group of patients whose needs cannot be met in the community and who require treatment and care in large, secure hospitals.
“The development does not have a significant effect on the landscape.”
Care Principles, which manages five other units across the country, applied in August to build a home for 54 young men. The committee decided against granting permission for the camp to be built due to the environmental impact and because the development would be contrary to national healthcare policy.
Villagers opposed the proposals and the council received 88 letters of objection and two petitions containing a total of 518 signatures of residents.
Residents have vowed to continue the fight and chairman of the Brigstock Camp Action Group John Harca said: “The hub of the problem is that it was refused on planning grounds.
“The borough council, the parish council and the action group will continue to fight these proposals.”
If the planning inspectorate – the Government body in charge of planning appeals – decides to hold an inquiry, it should be heard early next year. If the scheme is turned down again, the firm can then appeal to the High Court.
An East Northamptonshire Council spokesman said: “The appeal has been confirmed but it may not take place until the end of the year.
“We have written to all of the objectors saying it’s gone to appeal and they will all be notified of the date.”
Article appeared in the Kettering Evening Telegraph on 25 May 2005.

I am going to write here about the planning application for a new “hospital” on the site of the old Brigstock Camp. There is an action group up and running which has made objections. The applicant, Care Priciples, also has a website, with a specific section on the application.

I’ll store links and other snippets here for a project on the application which will form part of the assessment for an Open University course I am studying this year (U216).

If you are involved in the application in any way, I’d love to hear from you – why not leave a comment here!