FOI request (FOIR-126737550)

Heras fencing in Ecclesbourne Glen

Requested Tue 25 June 2019
Responded Tue 30 July 2019

I requested this information via my local councillor Cllr Bacon back in April. Cllr Bacon informs me he has still not had a response from HBC.

I now wish to formally request this information under EIR.

A Heras fence has been installed all along the southern border of Rocklands in Ecclesbourne Glen. The site is within the AONB, borders an SSSI/SAC and is protected by a raft of legislation.

The fence is similar to those usually used for building sites and is totally inappropriate for such a beautiful protected spot. It inflicts further damage on the glen. It is not understood why HBC has allowed such a construction on this sensitive site.

The fence further harms the visual amenity of the glen with the serried ranks of metal fencing stretching across the landslip. It is unclear what purpose the fence serves except to mark out Rocklands territory and keep imagined intruders out of the caravan site. It certainly does nothing for public safety nor for the aesthetics or stability of the glen.

The fence stretches across the entire southern border of Rocklands including the landslide area. The fence consists of a series of two metre high Heras panels secured in place by wooden piles driven into the unstable ground. At some points the fence is wired to the few remaining trees.

During the construction a two tonne digger was used across the unstable slopes of the landslip. Protected trees have been damaged by the installation of the fence.

How HBC could have accepted what has been erected in an AONB and places significant loads on the landslide area during construction is beyond us.

Why not insist on a significant hedge that would help stabilise the land, assist HBC to meet its statutory obligation to maintain and enhance biodiversity, screen the caravan bases and any rubbish on the lower slopes, and restore the AONB?

Construction of fences that border the SSSI/SAC should require consent from Natural England - we don't know whether Natural England have been consulted and given their consent.

The area is on the SSSI boundary. Operations in the SSSI require Natural England's consent include:

"19. Erection of sea defences or coast protection works, including cliff or landslip drainage or stabilisation measures.

21. Construction, removal or destruction of roads, tracks, walls, fences, hardstands, banks, ditches or other earthworks.

23. Erection of permanent or temporary structures, or the undertaking of engineering works, including drilling.

26. Use of vehicles or craft likely to disturb features of interest."

Heras fencing is usually used as a temporary measure to secure a site whilst development is carried out - It would be surprising if the fence satisfies the wording of the site licence conditions.

Is the fence likely to be a permanent fixture, or is there going to be a more permanent construction? We don't know and HBC do not and will not provide any information.

It is our understanding that the fencing was to be installed to stop people from gaining access to the lower slopes from the top of the slopes because of safety reasons.

We wonder whether Rocklands got a professional opinion before installing the fencing - the cavalier approach to installing the fencing does not seem to indicate that they did.

The caravan site licence for Rocklands states that:

"2) Within 6 weeks of the date of issue of this license (or any other timeframe subsequently agreed by the licensing authority), the licensee must submit suitable proposals to the licensing authority for the fencing and signage of the area hatched red on the site plan. Within 8 weeks of the licensing authority consenting to any such proposals (or any other timeframe subsequently agreed by the licensing authority), the licensee must erect the fencing and signage.

Note: The purpose of the fencing is to make it clear to people visiting the site that access to this area is generally prohibited, because it is subject to ground instability and therefore potentially dangerous. Any proposals submitted in relation to 2 above must comply with planning legislation and the licensee is advised to seek professional advice prior to submitting such proposals. The upper boundary of the area hatched red runs along the foot of the steep section of wooded slope."

The licence was issued in April 2018 and it is now April 2019 and this is the type of temporary fencing that has been agreed by the Council - We do not think that the fence is 'a suitable proposal' and believe that they have breached planning control and 'TPO' legislation by cutting down trees to install the fence.

My questions refer to this Heras Fencing that was installed by Rocklands across Ecclesbourne Glen in April please provide answers under EIR:

1. Is the fencing permanent or temporary?

2. What is the purpose of the fence?

3. Was planning permission applied and obtained for the works?

4. Do these works comply with site licence conditions? There are conditions stipulating that prior to any works being carried out a site stability survey must be carried out.

5. Does this sort of fencing comply with the terms of the site licence?

6. Does this sort of fencing comply with planning regulations for the site?

7. Were Natural England consulted (as is required by regulations) and have they given approval for these works on the border of the SSSI/SAC?

Operations in the SSSI require Natural England's consent include:

"19. Erection of sea defences or coast protection works, including cliff or landslip drainage or stabilisation measures.

21. Construction, removal or destruction of roads, tracks, walls, fences, hardstands, banks, ditches or other earthworks.

23. Erection of permanent or temporary structures, or the undertaking of engineering works, including drilling.

26. Use of vehicles or craft likely to disturb features of interest."

8. Were the AONB consulted concerning the impact of these works on the AONB?

9. Did HBC give consent for the use of a digger on the unstable lower slopes?

10. Was specialist geotechnical advice sought prior to allowing a digger on these unstable slopes? Coffey have advised no such works should be carried out until slope stability has been assessed.

11. Was specialist geotechnical advice sought prior to the pile driving on the sensitive lower slopes?

12. Was permission sought and granted for the works carried out on protected trees?

13. Did HBC consider an alternative less intrusive form of fencing?

14. Did HBC consider an alternative way to mark the borders such as planting a hedgerow?