local council

20 petitions

Started 3 weeks ago


Stop the Closure of Burslem Gymnastics Centre

We oppose the transfer of the Burslem Gymnastics Centre to Fenton Manor for the following reasons.  This gymnastics centre building is a site of social significance  It was built in 1902 as a barracks for the 1st Volunteer Battalion - The Prince of Wales's (North Staffordshire) Regiment and also doubled as a public gymnasium, (source This is evidenced on various social media discussion sites throughout Stoke on Trent and Burslem . As with sites of social significance, there are special meanings attached to places by groups of people, rather than individuals that need to be taken account of in heritage terms.  This building is one of them and should remain open and used as a public gymnasium.  To improve the running of the centre, surely working with the City of Stoke Gymnastics Club to offer some help with the management of the facility could be provided along with sufficient no-cost social media marketing to raise the profile of and increase numbers attending. Also, using the building for other events should also be looked into as it is one of the only buildings in Burslem that has its own free parking facility. The local community group, Our Burslem, would be willing to help with this rather than lose this facility.  You state in the Budget Consultation Book that this would be "minimal impact on service delivery" however, it would be a detrimental impact on our already struggling town. You also state in your document that your medium term financial strategy is underpinned by your five "Stronger Together Priorities" We would like to comment on four of these priorities:- "Support vulnerable people in our communities to live their lives well" - Burslem Gymnastics Centre used to offers classes for people with disabilities and it is our understanding that funding is available to offer these classes in the future.  How is closing this facility "supporting the community to live their lives well".  How is this helping those people? "Support residents to fulfil their potential" -  how is the closure of this facility allowing the future gymnasts and athletes of Burslem and nearby areas who cannot afford to travel to Fenton fulfil their potential? "Support our businesses to thrive, delivering investment to our towns and communities" - how is this proposal supporting or delivering investment to Burslem? "Work with residents to make our towns and communities great places to live" - how are you making Burslem town and the community a great place to live by taking away such facilities? We suggest the following course of action: Not to move the facility to Fenton, but to take the time to help the facility run more efficiently and encourage people to use the facility in Burslem.To look at ways to increase footfall in the town rather than take away facilities that already bring people into the town.To look at "the bigger picture", not just at the Council's costs. To look at the detrimental impact this would have on the already struggling town and take the time and effort it requires to help the town to benefit its residents.

Our Burslem
7,857 supporters
Update posted 1 month ago

Petition to Councillor Nick Kemp

Put Nature on the Map in Newcastle

Nature is faring worse in the UK than in other countries. We must act locally - and nationally - to reverse this trend.  All local authorities are legally obliged to conserve biodiversity - the number and variety of plants and animals in a particular area. ·              Newcastle City Council's local plan removed 9% of Newcastle’s green belt - the biggest proportion of any UK city. ·             The destruction of one the largest areas of mature woodland in the city was permitted by Newcastle City Council in 2015 to make way for unnecessary millionaire houses. ·             Designated wildlife sites were considered as ‘parks and allotments’ in a recent Newcastle City Council consultation on the future of parks, with no reference to their nature conservation value. ·             Planning applications that disregard nature conservation, including those that threaten protected species and pave over wildlife corridors have been approved by Newcastle City Council. ·             Tree cover in Newcastle is well below the UK average. ·             There are only a handful of wildflower areas in the city and glyphosate-based herbicides are still used widely by Newcastle City Council, despite increasing evidence of the detrimental effect on bee populations and other pollinating insects - and humans.   ·              Havannah and Three Hills Local Nature Reserve is set to be hemmed in by residential development, threatening wildlife and protected species in and around the reserve and endangering a nationally significant red squirrel population. The Newcastle and North Tyneside Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) aims to safeguard priority habitats and species, considered under threat locally and nationally. But there is no evidence that targets are being met, nor that objectives are being measured.  We are therefore calling on Newcastle City Council to observe its duty to conserve biodiversity by maintaining and protecting existing wildlife corridors and designated wildlife sites from further destruction and degradation. We want to see the creation of new wildlife habitats through increased planting of trees, shrubs, hedgerows, green roofs and living walls, and the introduction of wildflower areas and weed killer free zones. Not only will this benefit wildlife, but will help to mitigate the effects of air pollution and climate change.  By 2018 we would like to see comprehensive monitoring of all targets in the BAP to ensure targets are met, in particular to guide decisions on planning applications that affect biodiversity and, in so doing, enhance biodiversity value across all habitats in the city.  2,500 signatures on this petition will trigger a full debate at council. Please sign to send a clear message to Newcastle City Council that Newcastle needs better protection for nature.  

Save Newcastle Wildlife
3,512 supporters
Update posted 2 months ago

Petition to Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council

Save Basingstoke Sports Centre

In order to meet the Council’s requirements, petitions may only be signed by people who live, work or study in the borough area, including those under 18 years of age. Please do not sign more than once (this includes if you have already signed a paper petition). We're aiming for 10,000 signatures.  Petition Summary The Council's proposal for a large leisure hotel at Basing View is the biggest threat in our 47-year history putting at risk the very existence of Basingstoke Sports Centre and the registered charity itself. Confidential Council papers (obtained through a Freedom of Information request) recognise this additional large scale leisure provision is unnecessary and will displace our own customers. This will have a devastating impact. The leisure hotel will only be viable because the Council is to spend £3,000,000 to enable the development and give Village Hotels a 250 year lease on a peppercorn rent. There will be a staggering loss of opportunity for regular physical activity for all ages, including the hundreds on our Cardiac and Cancer Rehabilitation programmes. Almost 1 million visits to the town centre would disappear every year, and more than 180 jobs could be lost. Whilst it may be two to three years before the hotel will open, we need your support now to ensure the community facilities of Basingstoke Sports Centre are available for generations to come. Please sign the petition or read on for more detailPlease note, your address will not be published on this petition, however we do require it to verify your identity. In October 2016 the Cabinet of Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council agreed a proposal to enable the development of a large leisure hotel at Basing View. The large leisure hotel, Village Hotels, would need to generate a third of its turnover from health and fitness. The Council already recognises that the town centre is well provided for in terms of health and fitness and this is referenced in two of their published documents – Leisure Recreation Needs Assessment (2015) and Built Sports Facility Strategy (2016). Through Freedom of Information requests, we have obtained a copy of a confidential Council report considered at Cabinet which states “the recent research carried out, strongly indicates that any new gym, or a significant expansion to an existing gym, would simply displace gym users from existing provision and undermine the viability of existing providers”. Furthermore, this same Council report also states “Certainly, significant displacement from Basingstoke Sports Centre could jeopardise not only the community health programmes, it may impact the viability of the Sports Trust Charity that operate the Basingstoke Sports Centre”. We understand that Village Hotels only regard Basingstoke as a marginally viable location and so the Council have agreed to spend £3million of Council money to help enable the development as well as giving Village Hotels a 250-year lease on a peppercorn rent, foregoing multiple millions of pounds of income to the Council in ground rent over the term of the lease. We have commissioned independent research which shows that up to 23% of our health and fitness membership could be displaced and that the impact on the charity’s income could be as high as £800,000 per year. This would lead to the winding up of the Charity; the closure of Basingstoke Sports Centre, and the loss of all that it adds to the town in terms of regular physical activity, health and wellbeing and children’s activities, and an economic impact on the town through loss of jobs and decrease in town centre visits. Basingstoke Sports Trust is a registered charity. Charity No. 301731. We, the undersigned, ask the Council to reverse their decision and stop this development from going ahead and to seek only those alternative proposals which do not include such a large leisure offering in order to protect the future of Basingstoke Sports Centre.

Basingstoke Sports Trust
3,383 supporters