Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting EJ NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
Grass cutting in Powick and Kempsey could increase after resident concerns
A LARGER grass cutting area could fall under the responsibility of Powick Parish Council after maintenance concerns were raised by residents.
The council has vowed to consider taking on the upkeep of a grass verge in Pole Elm Close, Callow End - with other potential sites in the two villages - if it can balance the cost of maintenance and calls for it to be included in the official round from people living in the roads affected.
As the verge is currently not included the council's grass cutting route, the issue will now be referred to its finance group for consideration before it is brought back to full council.
Alan Turnball, who lives in Pole Elm Close and represented the residents at the meeting, believes the grass could be cut at a cost of £10 a time.
Mr Turnball said: "The problem is that strip of land is not owned by the residents, it's not on anyone's deeds. I don't know who owns it; nobody does, it would seem. The grass is only really cut by the residents because nobody cut it at the time going back to the 70s."
The council's chairman, Andy Lamb, said: "What makes this bit of grass different from the ones that aren't covered? Do we go for improving lots of bits of grass areas and make them part of the regular rounds?"
Some councillors raised concerns about the possibility of having to take on a number of areas traditionally cut by local residents.
Cllr John Liptrot said: "You are opening up a can of worms. We have got to make the place look tidy, so we have got to look into it but we have got to know what we are letting ourselves in for."
The issue of cutting the road's large hedgerow was also discussed and the council moved to investigate the Land Registry to discover who owns the patch of land and who is responsible for its ongoing maintenance.
Cllr Lamb added: "We have had the principle of not maintaining individual people's responsibilities. The only time we have gone against that principle is if there is a major safety issue of which we have been made aware."