Countryside Properties - illegal flyposting danger to cyclists...

Rochdale has a problem with illegal flyposting on street furniture next to its busiest roads. Many of the culprits are building companies directing drivers to new multi-million pound developments.

Safety groups are concerned that drivers can be distracted by the illegal signs. Cyclists have expressed particular concern about Countryside Properties PLC advertising its Mayfield housing development.

Countryside Properties Mayfield development unlawful flyposting...

Countryside Properties danger to cyclists by flyposting dual carridgeway...

Countryside Properties Mayfield development unlawful flyposting hazard...

These photographs show Countryside Properties advertising on a busy dual carriageway that is a blackspot for cycling accidents.

Rochdale Council officers confirmed that Countryside Properties, or its advertising agents, did NOT have permission to put signs on this major road.

The Council’s Highways Department says it is fighting an unending battle. The companies cashing-in from the unlawful advertising often avoid punishment as it is up to the prosecuting authority to prove that the companies benefiting from such flyposting are involved in the unlawful activity.

At Council tax payers’ expense, workers spent a Saturday removing illegal advertising, including that promoting Countryside Properties PLC.

Countryside Properties prides itself on its ‘green’ and ‘ethical’ credentials. In the past, its Environmental Statements have boasted that they “have never been prosecuted for environmental malpractice”.

Countryside Properties were not prosecuted for the destruction of woodland in the Spodden Valley.

http://www.spodden-valley.co.uk/beforeandafter.htm

Over a year ago, young Rochdalians asked Countryside Properties to restore the damage to the broadleaf woodlands that had been destroyed.

http://www.spodden-valley.co.uk/childrenaskCoutryside-07-03-05.htm

Apart from a lame apology by the developers for their ‘past actions’ and ‘miscommunication’ – no environmental damage has been repaired.

Meanwhile back on our busy roads, Rochdale Council are considering charging £50 per unlawful sign they remove from its highways. Countryside Properties are to be asked to pay for the removal of the dangerous advertising signs they have been benefiting from.

Save Spodden Valley
e-mail: SaveSpoddenValley@hotmail.com
Homepage: http://www.Spodden-Valley.co.uk

Additions

Take the unauthorised signs down

19.03.2006 17:18

It's not just cyclists - unauthorised signage is a danger to everyone. The local authority highways department have limited resources to deal with this sort of thing but everyone can help.

The sooner an unauthorised sign is removed, the sooner the danger is removed. So take them down. To avoid any suggestion of theft, either leave the sign at the roadside or hand it to the local police or highways department (I'm sure they will be grateful...). If you see anyone putting unauthorised signs up report them - photographs and video make convincing evidence. Pressure your councillor for action - remind them that the council could be liable if unauthorised signage contributes to an accident. ASBOs have been used by some authorities against companies advertising by flyposting.

RVR800

Get 'em down.

20.03.2006 21:30

When we reported unauthorised banners on street furniture around Nottingham the council just told us that although it was illegal they 'normally turn a blind eye'! The companies in question were Asda and Mcdonald's who are enough of a scurge on the planet without the extra advertising. We pointed out that the banners were on railings at a crossing and made small kids about to cross completely obscured. The banners were not there the following day so it's worth the effort and even more rewarding when the company themselves have to remove or pay for removal of them. Just looking for a way to get rid of these 2 companies completely now.

Comments

Hide the following 2 comments

Make Countryside Properties pay up!

20.03.2006 23:32

Make sure this dodgy building company pays up if your council spent money on staff to remove the flyposting.

Although I'm not a fan of ASBO's - it would be justice for one to be served against this multi-million pound 'friend' of the ODPM that should know better. Countryside Properties should use their cash on environmental fines and new trees -but if they pay enough, who knows- it could be Lord Cherry of Brownfield in the House of Lords next?!

I just checked up on one of their recent environmental awards- it was awarded by HBoS -the same bank that arranged the corporate buyout for Countryside Properties. Cash for awards? That's novel!

Denny

Countryside Properties Mayfield... here's another field from May 2004...

17.08.2006 08:44

Is this another Countryside Properties May Field ?

Mayfield and a field in May.
Question: What is the connection?
Answer: Countryside Properties.

In May 2004 woodlands surrounding the former asbestos factory site in Spodden Valley were destroyed. Countryside Properties suggest that they had no involvement.

Countryside Properties have received praise from the WWF (World Wildlife Fund -not the World Wrestling Federation, but the way they appear to wriggle out compromising positions plus 'duck and dive' from answering public questions would have Giant Haystacks and Big Daddy weeping).

Countryside Properties describe themselves as a ‘key partner’ with WWF-UK in their “one million sustainable homes taskforce”.

Countryside Properties publish a glossy brochure called their "Environmental, Ethics and Social Report" The 2005 report published after the destruction of Spodden valley's woodlands proudly states:

"Countryside Properties has never been prosecuted for environmental malpractice".

In January 2005, Countryside Properties directors suggested to Save Spodden Valley campaigners that they only got involved with the site AFTER the woodlands were destroyed. A Land Registry search suggests this is not true. (This gets a bit tricky as CP subsidiaries seem to have a habit of changing their names on the Companies House Register) The predecessor-in-title to Countryside Properties (Northern) Ltd registered an Option for the 72 acre site in April 2004, several weeks BEFORE the woodlands were destroyed.

"Countryside Properties has never been prosecuted for environmental malpractice".

…is that phrase starting a ring a little hollow yet?

A Forestry Commission officer confirmed that the woodlands destroyed were in breach of criminal law- the 1967 Forestry Act.

The Forestry Commission’s criminal prosecution file was obtained under Freedom of Information. It contains a letter from “Woodrep Tree Surgeons” confirming that:

“It was my client’s intention to remove all trees from these areas unless an outstanding amenity case was made”

Later in the letter, Woodrep Tree Surgeons states:
“…the fellings of 17th May were probably a breach of the [1967 Forestry] Act.”.

Companies House confirms that Woodrep Tree Surgeons Limited (CRN 04929172), that traded from the same address, is now dissolved.

Save Spodden Valley campaigners vow to carry on their investigation over the destruction of the woodlands surrounding the asbestos factory.

Meanwhile, Countryside Properties market “Mayfield” in Castleton.
They describe “Healey Dell Nature Reserve is a wildlife sanctuary, rich in industrial archaeology” an within “easy reach” of Mayfield.

The advertising gloss omits to mention that Healey Dell is within the Spodden Valley. The nature Reserve starts borders the land that Countryside Properties registered an Option on weeks before woodlands were destroyed during nesting season.

That is why for many in Rochdale, seeing the phrases “Countryside Properties” and “Mayfield” have a twisted irony.

Save Spodden Valley