Any statements and/or petitions from the public under Standing Order 32 will be made or presented at the meeting.
Minutes:
(1) Anna Marlow made a statement on behalf of the Faringdon Area Project regarding the Supplementary Planning Guidance for the land between the A420 and Faringdon, to the north of Park Road. With regard to a performance venue, the Guidance had stated that a performance venue already existed. This was not the case. What existed was an old, small theatre in need of refurbishment and with no parking. Faringdon Area Project had identified the need for a multi-use performance venue, suitable for dance, drama, skating, cinema, concerts. There was not a suitable sized venue in the town. This was a prime opportunity for some money to be allocated that would enable grant funding to be sought.
Regarding a creche and car parking, the original Supplementary Planning Guidance had included an extension to the gym at the Leisure Centre. This had now been replaced with the need for a crèche and parking. Neither facility had been identified as needed by the Faringdon Healthcheck. The inclusion of a car park pre-empted the findings of the parking study that had been referred to in the Guidance. She suggested that both these items should be removed, pending investigation. These were of a lower priority than the facilities identified by Faringdon Area Project and the Town Council.
The need for a detailed parking study had been included covering ’on and off street parking in the town centre, car parks, leisure centre and local schools’. The work carried out by a member of Town Council and local people had been well documented. It was hoped that this would be used as a basis for the technical study.
The Faringdon Healthcheck had identified the need for better links to national transport services, hence the request to include a place for coaches to stop and turn on Park Road. The comment that it would be more appropriate for coaches to stop in the Market Place, took no account of the congestion often experienced in the town, or the fact that coach operators stopped coming into Faringdon for this very reason. She asked the Committee to reconsider this – a place where National Express coaches could stop would be of great advantage to existing and new residents. Now the town centre had been refurbished, it might be that tour operators would reconsider coming into the town centre.
Oxfordshire County Council would be seeking contributions from the developers to enhance the local bus service. This needed to be clarified. It seemed there was already a move to stop the Heyfordian service. A contribution to the community bus was included as a requirement in the Guidance. It was assumed that this was to support the existing service and therefore any contribution would go directly to the Faringdon bus group.
The Vale Council's Arts Strategy explained that the aim to use the arts to improve the physical environment would be developed and shared with planners, the private sector, artists and potential partners, including local people and communities. Throughout history, towns had been enhanced by the use of decorative arts, crafts and design, from historic monuments and sculptures to innovative designs of clocks, signs, fencing, gateways and decorative paving. Given the need to include some form of art, the Faringdon Area Project requested that the community was involved in deciding what this might be.
It was unclear what the Council was suggesting in terms of location of the skate park. If additional land from the developers (other than the country park extension) was required, it seemed likely that this would jeopardise the possibility of getting some of the other facilities, so needed by the town. In such a large area of land that the country park would cover, there should be a suitable place for a Skate Park.
(2) Gene Webb made a statement regarding the same Supplementary Planning Guidance referred to by Anna Marlow. It appeared that the Guidance was created some time ago. Government guidelines had suggested that Supplementary Planning Guidance should be produced in conjunction with the community, in Faringdon’s case this would have been the Town Council, the Faringdon Area Project, the Chamber of Commerce, and others. Had this been done, the guidance would have been more relevant and up to date, requiring less investigation and amendment. Given the importance of this development to Faringdon and the possible benefits that might arise, a more interactive consultation process was desirable.
She believed that her submission made in the consultation process appeared not to have been considered, as was her request that the Faringdon Area Project and other key groups could be involved with the development of the guidance. She had to ask for an acknowledgement of her submission and received one. She knew of at least one more submission from someone not mentioned in Appendix 11. She asked what the Committee intended to do about this.
She believed that the creche facilities and parking at the Leisure Centre should be removed in favour of a performance venue. The comment that Faringdon had a performance venue was erroneous. Faringdon had a small theatre at the rear of the Pump House. This was unsuitable as a multi function performance venue for the size of the town. The Community College was about to have a new science block with parking. Ideally this would be planned so that the car parking was available for wider use than just the school.
While the town bus service was useful to some people, in reality it was mostly used by older people, who did not have a car or no longer drove. It was unsuitable for some of those as they could not wait at bus stops, they needed to be picked up from their home. It was well known that the population needing dial-a-ride/in town bus services was diminishing as most people had cars. There did not appear to be a connection with the development and the community bus, unlike the Swan Lane development which was specifically for over 55s and had made a contribution to the community bus. While a modest contribution to the community bus might be appropriate, she thought it was a much lower priority than some of the other suggestions, especially those that would benefit the wider population.
A group of people in Faringdon had produced a map showing the cycle routes in the town, to encourage less car use. All households in Faringdon and the surrounding villages had been given a copy. The map had been annotated with suggestions for more cycle and dual purpose routes and had been passed to Oxfordshire County Council, which was currently reviewing cycleways. She urged that this information was taken into account when planning the housing development and in considering cycling needs.
The Chair thanked the two speakers for their statements and reported that the relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance would be discussed later in the meeting (minute DC.52 refers).