We are experiencing a fairly rapid thaw of the snow in the Wansbeck catchment. Apparently it's nothing to worry about, though.
The last time there was a flood in Morpeth because of snow melt was in March 1963. Then there was twice as much snow, it melted over 2 to 3 days and it was accompanied by heavy rain. And the ground was frozen so it couldn't soak up any of the melt.
Today there is only the equivalent of 3" of rain held in the snow, there is no rain forecast and it will probably take 2-3 days at these temperatures for a total melt (we are in December, not March, so the average temperature is a lot lower).
75mm of rain over 3 days equates to approximately 1mm/hr. We are told that the Wansbeck can cope with more than 4mm/hr before there is any worry of possible flooding - even before the flood alleviation measures are built. For it to flood ALL the snow would have to melt within 15 hours and enter the river!
I'm told that the river level may rise a foot or so, but that is all.
Watching the water level.... http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/floods/riverlevels/120694.aspx?stationId=8139
Friday, 10 December 2010
Wednesday, 8 December 2010
Fair for All or Free for All?
Thought I’d better put in my two penn’orth on the Council’s car parking strategy as the consultation comes to an end:
The Morpeth Herald campaign – like all press-run, yes-no, petition-led campaigns – does oversimplify things, but the principle that car parking should be charged for is basically correct.
On the other hand, the Council needs to be more careful about why it is charging for car parking: from my fading memories of Castle Morpeth BC, I recall that if charges are simply to raise revenue, they are liable to VAT (20% from next month), but they aren’t liable of they are part of a comprehensive traffic management strategy. And, if it is revenue raising, they do need to recognise they are in competition with free private sector car parking in Cramlington, Ponteland and elsewhere.
I put forward a compromise position – that all county-run car parks in Northumberland should by liable to charging, but some could be ‘zero-rated’ – for inclusion in the Morpeth TC response, but my fellow councillors didn’t appreciate the subtlety of the position.
Then again – the pattern of shopping imposed on us by supermarkets and malls almost requires the use of a car. Which is why you have people living within 20min of Morpeth town centre driving in to do their shopping. A car parking strategy which – integrated with other planning and transport strategies – tried to modify this would certainly get my support.
The Chamber of Trade continue to get way with their classic 1984 ‘doublethink’ arguments: i) car park charging in Morpeth is keeping people away and ii) there is not enough car parking provision in Morpeth to cater for all the shoppers. The end result is that Morpeth has a reputation as ‘the town with car parking charges’ when Hexham, Alnwick, Corbridge etc have equal or greater charges – not to mention Newcastle.
Given that the RAC reckons it costs average £113 a week to run a car, 50p an hour or £2 a day doesn’t seem an awful lot extra, even if you don’t get a permit. So – it must be the principle not the amount, or the inconvenience – and the time restrictions. I guess people don’t idly browse or take a leisurely coffee if they are limited to ‘two hours on the meter’.
But – on a third hand (?): car parks in town centres are very valuable properties, and a hard-strapped Council has a responsibility to maximise the return on their assets. Car park charges generating anything less than a reasonable return on the asset value of the site – let alone free car parking - are effectively a Council subsidy for car users. Council tax from non-car users, who are generally less well off than car users (especially if they are paying full fare on public transport!), is subsidising car users.
I am looking forward to the introduction of civil enforcement of on-street parking – ie car park attendants rather than traffic wardens giving out parking tickets – which goes with the strategy, though.
The Morpeth Herald campaign – like all press-run, yes-no, petition-led campaigns – does oversimplify things, but the principle that car parking should be charged for is basically correct.
On the other hand, the Council needs to be more careful about why it is charging for car parking: from my fading memories of Castle Morpeth BC, I recall that if charges are simply to raise revenue, they are liable to VAT (20% from next month), but they aren’t liable of they are part of a comprehensive traffic management strategy. And, if it is revenue raising, they do need to recognise they are in competition with free private sector car parking in Cramlington, Ponteland and elsewhere.
I put forward a compromise position – that all county-run car parks in Northumberland should by liable to charging, but some could be ‘zero-rated’ – for inclusion in the Morpeth TC response, but my fellow councillors didn’t appreciate the subtlety of the position.
Then again – the pattern of shopping imposed on us by supermarkets and malls almost requires the use of a car. Which is why you have people living within 20min of Morpeth town centre driving in to do their shopping. A car parking strategy which – integrated with other planning and transport strategies – tried to modify this would certainly get my support.
The Chamber of Trade continue to get way with their classic 1984 ‘doublethink’ arguments: i) car park charging in Morpeth is keeping people away and ii) there is not enough car parking provision in Morpeth to cater for all the shoppers. The end result is that Morpeth has a reputation as ‘the town with car parking charges’ when Hexham, Alnwick, Corbridge etc have equal or greater charges – not to mention Newcastle.
Given that the RAC reckons it costs average £113 a week to run a car, 50p an hour or £2 a day doesn’t seem an awful lot extra, even if you don’t get a permit. So – it must be the principle not the amount, or the inconvenience – and the time restrictions. I guess people don’t idly browse or take a leisurely coffee if they are limited to ‘two hours on the meter’.
But – on a third hand (?): car parks in town centres are very valuable properties, and a hard-strapped Council has a responsibility to maximise the return on their assets. Car park charges generating anything less than a reasonable return on the asset value of the site – let alone free car parking - are effectively a Council subsidy for car users. Council tax from non-car users, who are generally less well off than car users (especially if they are paying full fare on public transport!), is subsidising car users.
I am looking forward to the introduction of civil enforcement of on-street parking – ie car park attendants rather than traffic wardens giving out parking tickets – which goes with the strategy, though.
Sunday, 28 November 2010
Legislating for Happiness?
As Ken Dodd reminds us, happiness is a gift, so it is odd that a Government making ‘state gifts’ - grants and benefits – more conditional, is keen to start measuring happiness.
Yes, as we Greens have been saying for sometime, measuring economic wellbeing by the rate at which we consume resources is shortsighted in a world with limited resources. It doesn’t make sense that a flood or an oil spill mark increases in economic activity.
And a financial system which depends on ‘market confidence’ remains subjective, even if those subjective view are ‘anonymised’ by the abstraction of ‘the market’. As someone said, money was created to obviate the need for trust between people - but you still need to be able to trust in the system.
So yes – the present method of measuring the economy is obsolete and needs to be replaced.
And – yes, we need efficient and productive use of resources, but in an engineering rather than an economic sense, and we need systems which conserve and re-use resources, and draw more heavily on renewable resources.
But we also need to assess ‘social and environmental’ well-being, and the New Economics Foundation, amongst others, has developed several indicators for this. But the aggregating and weighting of the various components of these indicators carries embedded policy decisions (a bit like the Index of Multiple Deprivation).
Then again, we need to recognise the difference between standard of living and quality of life. Studies show that above a certain level of income, subjective contentment does not correlate with income. On the other hand, a high quality of life can be achieved when living quite simply.
Happiness and contentment are states of mind, like tranquillity, and all we can do is try to create the conditions which bring about those mental states. But – we need to identify those conditions first.
Yes, as we Greens have been saying for sometime, measuring economic wellbeing by the rate at which we consume resources is shortsighted in a world with limited resources. It doesn’t make sense that a flood or an oil spill mark increases in economic activity.
And a financial system which depends on ‘market confidence’ remains subjective, even if those subjective view are ‘anonymised’ by the abstraction of ‘the market’. As someone said, money was created to obviate the need for trust between people - but you still need to be able to trust in the system.
So yes – the present method of measuring the economy is obsolete and needs to be replaced.
And – yes, we need efficient and productive use of resources, but in an engineering rather than an economic sense, and we need systems which conserve and re-use resources, and draw more heavily on renewable resources.
But we also need to assess ‘social and environmental’ well-being, and the New Economics Foundation, amongst others, has developed several indicators for this. But the aggregating and weighting of the various components of these indicators carries embedded policy decisions (a bit like the Index of Multiple Deprivation).
Then again, we need to recognise the difference between standard of living and quality of life. Studies show that above a certain level of income, subjective contentment does not correlate with income. On the other hand, a high quality of life can be achieved when living quite simply.
Happiness and contentment are states of mind, like tranquillity, and all we can do is try to create the conditions which bring about those mental states. But – we need to identify those conditions first.
Friday, 12 November 2010
Even more reasons...
Further to my last post - Morrison's are applying for extended licenses for all their non-24 hr stores across the country, as a step towards getting 24 hour 7-day a week oening.
So, although NCC report that:
"Morrison’s have now re-submitted the application and the formal 28 day consultation period will commence form today and finish on the 9th December 2010" - the parallel applications elsewhere in the county have not been delayed, and the NCC Licensing Committee will be hard pushed to come up with reasons why Morpeth Morrison's should be treated differently.
The only grounds for objecting to licensing applications are:
prevention of crime and disorder public safety prevention of public nuisance protection of children from harm
So, although NCC report that:
"Morrison’s have now re-submitted the application and the formal 28 day consultation period will commence form today and finish on the 9th December 2010" - the parallel applications elsewhere in the county have not been delayed, and the NCC Licensing Committee will be hard pushed to come up with reasons why Morpeth Morrison's should be treated differently.
The only grounds for objecting to licensing applications are:
I think that my argument that this subverts the PubWatch network and that supermarket cashiers are not trained to deal with 'people under the influence' in the way that bar staff are - should hold up, but concerns about light pollution and boy racers in well-lit carparks would be stronger if it were a variation on a planning permission rather than a license.
And that is where Morrison's are manipulating the system - as well as the sheer weight of a national move, they are using the narrower licensing regulations to pre-empt a variation in planning permission, to move towards 24-hour opening.
And they are not the only ones: word has reached me that M&S in Sandersons Arcade have applied for a 24-hour alcohol sales license, and an acohol license for their restaurant - also a move towards 24-hour opening.
Tuesday, 9 November 2010
More reasons to drink?
I gather that Morrisons have (rather quietly) applied to be able to sell alcohol 6am-11pm seven days a week from their Morpeth store...
This seems a bit excessive to me on a number of fronts:
i) buying cut price alcohol and drinking at home is already damaging the pub trade in Morpeth and elsewhere, the habit of 'preloading' or drinking before you go out is particularly pernicious
ii) who wants to buy alcohol at six in the morning? Or from a supermarket at 10 or 11pm at night? Are we going to have people popping in to Morrisons for a carry-out on their way home from the pub? Pub staff are used to managing customers who have had too much, and will refuse to serve them. Can we expect supermarket checkout staff to do the same?
iii) And why seven days a week? That's longer than the current opening hours? Ah! Is this part of a cunning plan to extend the opening hours of the supermarket? Are we going to have a 17-hour supermarket in Morpeth?
Anyway - they applied (to NCC) so quietly, that no one has objected so far - and the objection period runs out on Friday (12th). So the Town Council will be discussing it at their meeting tomorrow (Weds 10th) and will probably ask NCC to extend the consultation period.
This seems a bit excessive to me on a number of fronts:
i) buying cut price alcohol and drinking at home is already damaging the pub trade in Morpeth and elsewhere, the habit of 'preloading' or drinking before you go out is particularly pernicious
ii) who wants to buy alcohol at six in the morning? Or from a supermarket at 10 or 11pm at night? Are we going to have people popping in to Morrisons for a carry-out on their way home from the pub? Pub staff are used to managing customers who have had too much, and will refuse to serve them. Can we expect supermarket checkout staff to do the same?
iii) And why seven days a week? That's longer than the current opening hours? Ah! Is this part of a cunning plan to extend the opening hours of the supermarket? Are we going to have a 17-hour supermarket in Morpeth?
Anyway - they applied (to NCC) so quietly, that no one has objected so far - and the objection period runs out on Friday (12th). So the Town Council will be discussing it at their meeting tomorrow (Weds 10th) and will probably ask NCC to extend the consultation period.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)