West Cheltenham Neighbourhood Development Forum Meeting
Wednesday 12th July 2017
5.30 -7pm
Hesters Way Resource Centre
Present / Rob Garnham Springbank Consortium / Giles Brockbank Springbank ConsortiumCharmian Sheppard, Resident, Chair / Hope Thornton, TCV
Andy Hayes, HWP / Kevin Devaney HWNP
Rachel Shingler, HWP / Sharon Arbuckle, Resident
Georgina Austin, Resident / Lizzie George – Cheltenham Coworking, Create on the Square
Frank Austin, Resident / Frank Beattie, Resident
Martin Voracity Resident
Agenda Item 1 –Welcome, apologies and matters arising
Charmian Sheppard welcomed everyone to the meeting and introductions were made. Apologies received from: Philip Smith, Lucy Smith, (Liz Penwill), Anne Holderness, Lloyd Kilford,
Agenda Item 2 - Matters arising / actions from previous meeting;
- Investigate a specific WCF email address, complete ()
- Review engaging communities document. Done
- Contact the new Springbank Forum if appropriate; Adrian Kingsbury had contacted the WCF steering group; see agenda
- Update group re WCF new Springbank Forum developments; see agenda
- Charmian to go to CBC for advice on how to proceed if appropriate; pending discussion below
Agenda Item 3West Cheltenham Development Presentation
Rob Garnham and Giles Brockbank described their findings from the consultation at Springbank CR on 16 / 17 June and presented a masterplan
120 approx. people came to the consultation at Springbank CRC on 16 / 17 June to give their views.
Master plan on the board, JCS will feed in, and another public exhibition due to take place in the autumn, late September, early October.
Comments out of 130, 19 gave comments to the comments box, 1028 hits on the website.
Mixed views about the development; some only want employment, not housing, 50/50 response on whether area should be developed.
50/50 split on whether it should, and whether it shouldn’t be built.
Giles showed a map giving an idea of how the area could be developed, and asked what would the group like to see as part of the master plan for the area. Which included 46 hectares of employment land, (possible cyber industry), potential 1,100 houses, 37 hectares of housing including playing pitches, and wildlife areas including enhancing the ecological features of the area, eg Hatherley Brook.
.
A series of meetings with both CBC and TBC will follow, including discussions about the access roads to the site, (dashed lines indicate these). The highway modelling of the site still needs examining, and will take account of the redevelopment of junction 10.
Creating a new community area within this urban extension (top of plan). Key to foster good links with the existing community, West and North West Cheltenham, key that development works well with the existing community.
Springbank forum, particularly residents of Henley Road and adjacent streets indicated their desire to designate greenspace on part of the site, It was noted that greenspace is important for the whole of Hesters Way including green spaces that have been allocated for housing in West Cheltenham at St Marks and Rowanfield.
Many answers from the first round of consultation.
How things will work with existing highways, particularly parking issues as GCHQ issues
Website question – scale relationship to Cheltenham, shows development is a large. Clear that area will need its own amenities, is this going to happen? Do you think this will impact on Coronation Square or Springbank amenities? (e.g. Springbank surgery relocation). Existing community regeneration met with Alison at CBH who had suggested,improvements to existing housing stock, and thus possibly that less affordable housing on the site, but providing money to enable existing stock to be regenerated. One or two roads to link to Coronation square but mainly will be foot and cycle paths, and hopefully bus links.
Frank asked if the link road would be PE Way size, or would it be normal housing estate road. Unknown at this stage, traffic survey will be carried out to determine this. Feeling is that another PE Way is not wanted as it does divide a community. Footpaths are rat runs for criminals, police trying to diminish these? Paths would need to be well lit, and how existingpaths can be improved, lighting etc. walking from the new to the existing area, needs to be safe, well lit, and under surveillance. (Tom Price Close an example how design can lead to unsafe areas not overlooked)
Realistic use of footpaths, people don’t use them, especially when ill, elderly or with younger children. Electric car impact, car will be sustainable. No one will want the roads but they are needed. A network of roads is needed.
Cavendish park road another example of poorly linked development. People prefer to drive and don’t use facilities because they are effectively distanced by poor road access.
Junction 10, will likely alleviate pressure on PE Way, and other junctions
Doctors want to expand into new development, potentially a satellite surgery. Existing surgery is expanding, but eventually it could expand further into the park.
Frank, need for buses for people like him, 85, visually impaired, unable to drive. Buses are needed. Andy – roads need to be designed to take account of least walking distance to bus stops. Will look at existing bus routes. Social housing and bus routes need to be planned and coincide, as the 4bed, 2 car families will likely use their car instead of the bus. Important to consider where the different types of housing go. All types of housing do need to be integrated though.
Frank – is this development necessary given all the other developments in Cheltenham? GB explained that JCS reflects demographics to 2030, population projections have been worked out. Some developmentse.g. Bishops Cleeve, lack of development here inrecent years, and now the development taking place reflects the lack of development, they were won on appeal due to lack of earlier developments and failure to meet targets Had these been met the JCS numbers may have been less.
Greenbelt and AONB – future proof, councils thinking ahead to the next 20 – 30 years, housing provision in each development reflects provision to adjacent councils, CBC TBC etc.
Plan led development is important.
Greenspace designations within West Cheltenhamhave been turned down suffocating the town.
How is the site managed once it is developed? Community spaces? Community motivated, rather than politically motivated.
The use of spaces and the use of public buildings.
Provision of another primary school, what will it generate in terms of future pupils. Financial contribution to all future schools, road links to schools, and to All Saints Academy.
New church in that area too? Multi faith – pop up church idea, utilize other buildings in the area for church purposes. Need would need to be effectively demonstrated for 106 money to be used for this. Oasis model is way forward, 24hr use, including Sunday church use. Also St Silas church is a good example.
What can we do that will sustain the existing services?
Library considered? Elms Park development, no library provision. Library contribution needs to go to the local library, not the central library, as in previous cases. Section 106 money is reinvested in the local community
CIL (community infrastructure levy) payment per square meter of development, different charges for employment and housing development.
Participatory democracy. Frustration from developers that money goes elsewhere and not the local area.
Invite back to meeting in the autumn Action RS / RS
Agenda Item 4/ 5 / 6 - Springbank Neighbourhood Forum application – designation update plus West Cheltenham action planning and Next steps discussion;
CS explained that the Springbank Neighbourhood Forum and area application was unexpected and stunned members who lived in the local area. It was designated by the council after Cllr Wendy Flynn had called application in to scrutiny committee. The committee voted overwhelmingly that the decision was both conceived and ought to be reviewed by CBC cabinet. However, the cabinet claimed that it had not breached any of the regulations and upheld the original decision. CS informed the group that no further appeal is possible.
It was generally felt that the Springbank Forum was set up to prevent development in the greenbelt west of the residential edge of Cheltenham and as such may not be best placed to prepare a NDP. The group felt that the WCF having consulted with many local people from across the area and worked on profiling of the area was still well placed to develop a plan.
It seemed that the original bid was too big, and that the Borough would favour areas such as district wards, or combined wards. Way forward may be to redraw the lines. But it is difficult to redefine boundaries.
The group were made aware of a conversation between Lloyd Kilford (a WCF member) and Cllr Coleman at which he suggested that he look favorably upon a NDP for St Marks ward or possible a combination of St Marks and St Peters wards.
The group discussed the possible boundaries with view to choosing an area that would be accepted whilst also taking account of discussions it had had previously about boundaries.
The area wards considered were:Hesters Way (HW), St Marks (SM) and St Peters (PS)
Discussion of areas;
- HW and SM considered likely partners.
- SM and SP adjacent but some of SP had been ruled out earlier due to wishes of locals in the Moors and West End.
- Attendance at meetings included people from SM and HW and this should be borne in mind. This needs emphasis and should perhaps be focus
- Some spoke of all 3 areas being included
The group discussed sharing their ideas for an area with Councillorsindicating what we are proposing, and asking what do you think? What will you accept?
Action for RS; invite all to the meeting on the 13th September to decide the new area to propose for designation.
A letter from Adrian Kingsbury from the Springbank Forum was circulated, which group read. He suggested that the WCF supported the SNF in opposing the development of the greenbelt land at Springbank. A way forward was then discussed and it was decided that the steering group should meet Adrian and other representatives of the SNF to find a way to work together.
Action Chairman and Steering group to meet members of the Springbank Forum,
Agenda Item 6 – Any Other Business
None
The meeting closed at 7.30pm
Date of next scheduled meeting
Weds13thSeptember 2017 from5.30pm – 7pm
Hesters Way Resource Centre, Cheltenham
Signed…………………………………………………..
Name……………………………………………………. Dated…………………………………………………….
1 / Action for RS; invite all to the meeting on the 13th September to decide the new area to propose for designation. / RS2 / Action Chairman and Steering group to meet members of the Springbank Forum, / CS
NDP minutes 12thJuly- 1 -