Return to Blewbury Home Page Return to List of Minutes
BLEWBURY PARISH COUNCIL
Minutes
Of the special Parish Council meeting of Blewbury Parish Council.
Held on Tuesday, 5 August 2008 in the Benefice Centre
Councillors present: Mr A Cooper (Chairman), Mr C Whatmore, Ms J Gibson, Ms C Duckett
Also present: Ms Anna Kennedy (Rural Housing Enabler, ORCC), Ms Helen Novelle (Principal Housing Enabling Officer, VWHDC), Stephen Methven (Development Manager, Sovereign Housing Group) Elaine Smit (Parish Clerk)
Actions arising from the meeting:
1. Clerk to contact Ms Kennedy with details for the survey.
2. Clerk & CW to distribute survey to the Bulletin
3. CW to write an explanatory note for the Bulletin
4. CD to draft letter to OCC re Parish Council’s support of the project and the Parish Council’s willingness to talk about issues relating to access and speeding.
1. Apologies for absence
Dr P Whitehead, Ms E Austin, Mr R Farrell, Mr M Brassell, Ms A Barclay-Watt
2. Declarations of interest
No declarations of interest were made
3. Affordable Housing – meeting with ORCC
Ms Kennedy started the meeting by giving some background. They started the process back in 2005 of looking at a rural exception site for affordable housing in Blewbury. She came to look at various sites with CW and they have since been looking at these sites’ suitability in planning terms and whether or not the owners would be willing to sell the land at exception site prices. Various sites have been ruled out but exception site no 5 (pony paddock next to Whites Orchard) have been identified as a good possibility and there has been some talks between Mr Methven and the owner, who has in principle agreed the sale of the land for affordable housing for local people. Ms Kennedy went on to explain that the housing needs survey would probably need to be updated seeing that the economic climate has changed and to confirm the number of people looking for affordable housing. The balance of rented and shared ownership properties would also need to be confirmed. These issues would need to be clarified before planning permission could be sought. The amount of land the owner is willing to sell is more than is necessary but according to the previous survey the need for affordable housing was quite low for a village of Blewbury’s size. In order to make this economically viable, they might consider building a few more units provided that the Parish Council agreed that if units were not all taken up by Blewbury residents, Upton could also be considered.
Mr Methven reported that the survey initially showed a need for 16 homes. This figure gets halved to ensure that all units would be taken up by Blewbury residents. The owner of the site was approached to enquire if she would consider selling land to have 8 or 9 units built. The owner’s initial answer was no, but after negotiations she agreed that she would sell an acre of land, which was more than was needed, and the price was higher than what they could pay for 9 units. Financially this could only be an option if they could build 14 units. Mr Methven furthermore confirmed that if they were to put in an application they would have to be able to justify the 14 units by a housing needs survey. In theory they could build 8 or 9 units to start with and more units at a later date, but it would make more sense to build all the units at the same time.
The main problem with the site would be access. Ideally they would like the access to be where a current agricultural access already exists. The planners preferred Bridus Way but Mr Methven pointed out that this was an unadopted road which was not made up and would not be suitable. To have the access further along meant that the 30 mile an hour zone would have to be extended. If it were to be 60 then a turning lane would have to be provided. CD pointed out that the access to the allotments has proven to be dangerous due to speeding and an extension of the 30 mile an hour zone would be highly desirable. AC agreed that speed has been a long standing problem on that road and that the Parish Council would support any efforts to reduce the speed along that road. Mr Methven asked if the Parish Council would support traffic calming measures coming into the village, e.g. a chicane. AC replied that the Parish Council would support this. CD confirmed this as pointed out that families with young children already living along this road would welcome any effort to reduce speed and that it would be an issue for families in the new homes as well. She also pointed out that rumble strips would not be acceptable as it caused problems in the past.
CD mentioned that good access into the village via a footpath would be essential, especially to get to village amenities and the school. AC confirmed that the Bridus Way footpath was due to be improved in the autumn. It was also mentioned that the new units should not form an island outside the village and should be integrated into the village. CD pointed out that as this site was in reality the only site with any hope of happening and therefore the Parish Council should support it and not give the planners reason to refuse or prejudice them against it. Suggestions should therefore be made to help improve the plan and not to criticize. As an example the extension of the 30 mile an hour zone could be seen as a traffic calming measure which would benefit the whole village. CW pointed out that clarification needed to be sought about the need for street lighting if a barrier/chicane was installed, as Blewbury would not approve of having street lighting. Mr Methven replied that he would investigate this.
Mr Methven summarised that if the Parish Council agrees in principle they would go ahead and seek permission, also to have the access where the agricultural access was and not through Bridus Way. He confirmed that they would not want to have access through Bridus Way as they believe they would not get permission to use it. AC explained the background to this bridleway (a B.O.A.T.) and that it was owned by the OCC. All agreed that it would be better to use the existing access.
Mr Methven wanted to know how the Parish Council would feel about including Upton residents if they could not justify all the units based on Blewbury’s needs. CD suggested a 2-part approach: to do surveys both in Blewbury and in Upton, without making any promises to the latter. She also pointed out that some families in Eastfields might need bigger houses than the 2- or 3-bedroomed units talked about. She also mentioned that some tenants in the Ladycroft Park might be interested but should they move, it could leave those remaining in a more vulnerable position. Ms Novelle confirmed that some Ladycroft residents may qualify for housing under this scheme, which confirmed that a new survey was needed.
CW asked that it should be explained to Blewbury residents why the new survey was different to the survey done previously. An example of the survey was given to the council. Ms Novelle explained that another survey has been sent to 10% of houses in the Vale. The rural housing needs survey to be conducted in order for this project to go ahead would be sent to every single household in Blewbury. CD mentioned that it should be made clear in the Bulletin that these surveys are different. Ms Kennedy explained that the second survey, to be distributed through the Bulletin should only be completed if the person wanted to be considered for a home. It was confirmed that the survey needed to be with CW by Monday the 18th of August to be included in the Bulletin.
Mr Methven confirmed that it would not be a gated community and that a full detailed planning application would be made.
CD asked for a list of criteria to be included on the list to be eligible for these houses, which was provided by Ms Novelle.
CD asked if it can be ensured that both shared ownership and rented houses will be for local people only. The Parish Council was showed and extract of the wording and was assured that this was the case. Ms Novelle reminded the council that intention of the housing needs survey was to closely match the existing needs and therefore it would be highly unlikely that units would be filled with people from outside the designated area. Mr Methven added that the configuration of units (1 bed units, 2 bedded units, etc) was also not set in stone and would be reconsidered once the survey has been received.
CD asked whether people currently in Housing Association accommodation would be considered for the new units, especially if they experienced problems with neighbours. Ms Novelle replied that the Housing Association would in the first instance try to resolve the matter and would only consider re-housing if the situation cannot be resolved. In most instances the parties causing the problem would be asked to leave before innocent parties are re-housed.
JG asked about the landscaping and gardens, and the maintaining of it. Each of the units will have a garden, and the flats will have a communal garden. Mr Methven replied that they hoped the communal areas would be low maintenance and that it would be ideal if it could be maintained by residents without having to raise a charge. He also added that each unit would have 2 parking spaces, apart from the 1 bedroomed flats which would have only on parking space. No visitor parking spaces are provided for in the current plan, but the plan would change after the survey. A refuse collection point would also be added.
CD asked whether it would help to write to the OCC Highways to express the Parish Council’s support of this project, and to say that the Parish Council would be happy to talk about any issue relating to access. Mr Methven welcomed any support from Parish Council. It was suggested that the problems with the entrance to the allotments and the issues surrounding speeding should also be mentioned to strengthen the case.
AC reminded Mr Methven that drainage would be a problem and this should be kept in mind when the final plans were drawn up. AC also mentioned that water pressure was a problem and that it might be necessary to put in a new mains water pipe.
CD summarised that the Parish Council would be delighted if this was to go ahead as they have campaigned for this for many years.
Mr Methven showed the Parish Council draft plans for the units, and confirmed that 3 bedroomed units would be 88 square meters (+/- 900 square feet), 76 square meters for 2 bedrooms. AC also pointed out that the OS map was not up to date.
CW mentioned that on a practical note it might be better if the clerk was the first point of contact for all, to ensure that information was passed on to everyone. The clerk would also make arrangements with Ms Kennedy for the delivery of the surveys prior to the Bulletin deadline. CW asked to see the draft of the survey before it was printed. The clerk would email Ms Kennedy to provide her with the necessary contact details.
4. Any Other Business
The clerk mentioned that an invoice was received for the first instalment of the cemetery development. As the quote was approved at the June meeting, it was agreed that payment could be made.
5. Details of the next meeting.
No further special meeting was deemed necessary. The next formal Parish Council meeting would be on the 10th of September 2008.
Meeting closed 19h40.