South Marston Village Strategy Presentation

Transcription

1 South Marston Village Strategy Presentation Village Strategy Working Party 16 th March

2 Main Presentation Agenda Purpose Vision & Objectives Context PEST, SWOT Key areas housing, roads, infrastructure Options Summary Questions Next Steps 2

3 Introduction Why this has come about? Swindon/Crown Timber Survey Public meeting Working party 73% (233/318) households responded 90% were happy to rely on Parish Council to pursue a planned approach to development 3

4 Purpose To create and protect a long term Village Community within South Marston To plan the infrastructure for an active and sustainable village community in the context of the development requirements of Swindon To distil the views of 677 villagers into a single plan that will provide a basis for us to engage with the planners and developers 96% of the 73% of village households who responded to last year s survey said it was important South Marston should remain as a separate community. 4

5 Goal and Objective To establish strong majority agreement around the size, shape and structure for the Village over the next 30 years including: Housing Roads Support Services Community facilities 5

6 An ideal recognising It is a wish list Not a fait accomplit Suppositions, ifs & buts Wide spread & experienced input Something around which our Parish Council can then engage with the Borough / Developers etc. 6

7 Hilltops Our Own Unique Perspective Perception How we perceive the world perspectives Values, Position, Tenant / Home Owner / Land owner 7

8 View it from each other s perspective 8

9 Context An extra 35,000 houses to be built around Swindon by 2026 of which: A total of c.12,000 houses to be built South of A420 & to the North of the Village as part of the Eastern Development Area (Source: Regional Spatial Strategy) 9

10 Regional Spatial Strategy 10

11 Impact upon Traffic Sewage Trade Aesthetics Community spirit Youth Development Senior Citizens Local facilities 11

12 Strengths Village Rural Settlement Boundary (The Red Line) Defined Rural Buffer Community involvement Core elements to protect (Church, School, Village Hall, Green) 12

13 Weaknesses Diminishing Community Integration Current size cannot sustain certain key facilities that the village could do with Poorly planned add on developments 13

14 Opportunities Integrated design Tidy up Brown Field Sites Cash for new Village Facilities Become of a size to sustain other facilities without losing identity 14

15 Threats Someone will always be affected by change NIMBY Failure to compromise Inertia, apathy Reduced community involvement / integration Noise & traffic pollution Swindon engulfs the village 15

16 Evolution - Not Revolution 10% % South of A420 development 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% Where We Want to Be 10% South Marston doubles its size 10% Where Now 16

17 Key Areas - options Housing Roads Infrastructure Other 17

18 Housing Fairly wide - spread agreement to the following developments: Crown Timber 69 homes inc 18 flats 75% of survey responses supported development of Crown Timber Site 18

19 N Crown Trading Estate Development c 69 houses 19

20 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback Crown Timber 83/85 = 97.6% said they were comfortable with the development of Crown Timber for housing No one said no, with 1 no view and 1 conditional on quantity 20

21 Housing Fairly wide - spread agreement to the following developments: Crown Timber 69 homes inc 18 flats Thornhill Industrial Park (with area of Green along frontage & around the bend) 180 mixed grade and Purpose housing with affordable stock being majored on 61% of survey responses supported development of Thornhill Industrial Park 21

22 N Crown Trading Estate Development c 69 houses Thornhill Ind Estate Devt c. 180 houses 22

23 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback Thornhill Industrial Estate 76/85 = 89.4% said they were comfortable with the development of Thornhill for housing 7 said No and 2 others said Yes conditional on quantity Total in favour with or without conditions 91.8% 23

24 Housing Fairly wide - spread agreement to the following developments: Crown Timber 69 homes inc 18 flats Thornhill Industrial Park (with area of Green along frontage & around the bend) 180 mixed grade housing with affordable stock being majored on With some openness to understand more about: Manor Farm & the land at the foot of Nightingale Hotel 60 houses If a redeployment of land behind Bell Gardens was secured for recreational purposes it may enhance the vision of the village and open up other opportunities for community facilities 24

25 N Crown Trading Estate Development c 60 houses Dev t Relief Road (2 way) Manor Farm development, less clear as to boundaries Thornhill Ind Estate Devt c. 120 houses 25

26 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback Manor Farm Housing Development 54 / 85 = 63.5% in favour 25 / 85 = 29.4% not in favour 1 / 85 on conditional of quantity 5 / 85 = unsure Overall 64.7% in general favour and up to 70.6% in favour or needing more information as to the detail 26

27 Roads What to do about safety at Pound Corner? What to do about safety at Thornhill Bend & Highworth Road bends? Widely agreed as a significant problem which will become a very major one in the future if we don t act. 94% said something needed to be done around traffic and traffic control 27

28 Road Options Leave as it is Leave as it is but use technology & speed controls By pass Traffic control around Pound Corner, close Pound Corner Block Highworth Road One way system with relief road Combination 28

29 Leave as is Positives Convenience of access to Highworth, local villages and their facilities Emergency services maintain direct access Passing trade not affected and may increase (economic benefit) No cost Incoming services florists/take-aways Bus routes Concerns Escalating traffic from new development within the village Escalating traffic from development south of A420 using it as a thoroughfare to Highworth Escalating traffic from the North through to Sainsburys No solution / escalation of problems at the bends, Pound Corner or speeding traffic down Old Vicarage Lane 29

30 Leave as is & use technology & speed controls Average speed monitors with plate recognition & flashing signs Include 20 mph limits Increase number of pinch points not bumps (Old Vicarage Lane, Thornhill Road) 30

31 Leave as is with technology / speed controls Positives Same benefits as before Greater chance of slowing traffic through all points of the village Possible reduction in incentive to be a rat run Negatives Traffic volumes will still rise - will it be that much of a disincentive relative to traffic build up elsewhere? Associated noise from bumps and pinch points ONLY OF USE IF POLICE WOULD PROSECUTE & CURRENT EXPERIENCE SUGGESTS UNLIKELY 31

32 By-pass 32

33 By-pass with current Highworth Road closed. Not illustrative of the exact points of join & closure N 33

34 By-pass Positives Reduced traffic through bends, heart of village and Pound Corner Removes all through traffic from Keypoint end of Village Reduce traffic down Old Vicarage Lane Concerns Cost (c. 1.82m to 2.15m excluding pavements etc.) Honda & farmer approval required as partly on their land Route through Farmland and thus could lead to further development of land West of Greenfields Becomes an even more attractive high speed route to Highworth. Due to industrial buildings would have to link back up in the middle of the bends, partly defeating the object and creating a new junction / bottleneck. Unless possibility of cut through Honda land and sharing 34 of cost as some mutual benefit of access maybe derived

35 Honda complete by-pass Positives Reduced traffic through bends, heart of village and Pound Corner Removes all through traffic from Keypoint end of Village Reduce traffic down Old Vicarage Lane Discourage traffic from any new development South of A420 Concerns Cost (c. 1.82m to 2.15m excluding pavements etc.) MAYBE REDUCED Honda approval required as partly on their land Route through Farmland and thus could lead to further development of land West of Greenfields Reduced risk if route more directly away from Village Becomes an even more attractive high speed route to Highworth but not necessarily running along the back of the village Due to industrial buildings would have to link back up in the middle of the bends, partly defeating the object and creating a new junction / bottle-kneck. not applicable 35

36 Close Pound Corner, Relief Road & Lights either side of Pound Corner 36

37 N Close Pound Corner Lights Relief Road 37

38 Traffic lights either side of Pound Corner & close Pound Corner (plus relief road) Positives Relatively low cost Leaves Highworth Road open Improves safety enabling pavements installed Reduce traffic around the school Concerns Need a relief road (but potential down the side of Nightingale Hotel to Manor Farm, through to Thornhill road) Council s view of traffic lights in villages (urbanisation) Traffic from new Development South of A420 may reroute from Old Vic Lane through centre of village Thornhill Road (however lights would be a disincentive) Back log of traffic through village & increases pollution Positioning of lights close to houses & entrances for local residents 38

39 Road Options Leave as it is Leave as it is but use technology & speed controls By pass Traffic control around Pound Corner, close Pound Corner with relief road Block Highworth Road One way system with relief road Combination 46% supported the idea of road closure 39

40 Block Highworth Road (with Cycle Path / Access) Positives Cheap to do Reversible Borough Council say possible but with reservations Dramatically reduces through traffic Improved safety at bends & Pound Corner Reduced traffic speeding down Old Vicarage Lane Reclaims centre of the Village for Pedestrians & Cyclists Environment / health / community 40

41 Concerns Block Highworth Road (with Cycle Path / Access) Impact on local businesses (inside & outside) Inconvenience for Villagers needing access to Highworth and beyond (Schools, Medical, Post Office, Supermarine etc.) Create increased traffic on routes outside of the Village Cut off connection with other rural areas and open us up to being considered part of Swindon Emergency services impacted upon Bus / school bus routes Increase potential bottleneck at Gable Cross / Carpenters Arms exits (offset by no Blunsdon / Highworth / Sevenhampton etc. traffic cutting through) 41

42 Block road additional time & distance.. Outward would be To Supermarine To Highworth Mkt. Place Return would be From Supermarine From Highworth Mkt. Place Ave return trip Highworth Currently Would be Increase of Miles 1.2 to to to to % Minutes 2 ½ to 9 7 to 12 ½ 2 ½ to 7 ¼ 7 to ½ 68% Cycle Paths Nearby parking & walk to S- Marine 3 x return trip per week for 40 25p per mile = c 160 p.a.

43 One way & footpath round Pound Corner 43

44 One way & footpath round pound corner 44

45 Two way North of Pound Corner, but must turn Pound Corner coming south One way from Pound Corner up to School Entrance N Two way up to Pound Corner Two way down Old Vicarage Lane from Carpenters until School entrance. Possible one way system on single lane road back into centre of village 45

46 One way system in heart of village Positives Enables a pavement / footpath around Pound Corner Reduces volume of traffic through village one way Concerns A pavement would restrict turning circle for larger vehicles Inconvenience of long journey vs crow flies distance Increases traffic other ways Old Vicarage Lane & back up the centre of the Village 46

47 Road summary By-pass option least likely to be achievable & affordable, could create very high volumes of traffic and other bottle necks. Unless Honda give us a more viable option Lights in village unpopular tail backs, pollution, irritant Closure of Highworth road, easiest to do, most effective and lowest cost but at a certain inconvenience to a reasonable proportion of those within & outside the Village. Only solutions to Pound Corner involve closure or one way system enabling a pavement round one bend Speed calming measures ignored by many whilst unenforceable 47

48 A Road Proposal (see map next slide) IF HONDA BY-PASS OPTION NOT POSSIBLE IF POLICE NOT HAPPY TO ENFORCE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES Stage 1 close Highworth Road and see benefits & downsides (Buys time) Then trial one way round Pound Corner if and when relief roads are created Then look at footpath round Pound Corner 48

49 Close Highworth Road further Supermarine turn, with parking bay One way along Vicarage Lane from Pound Corner up School Entrance N Two way North of Pound Corner, but must turn Pound Corner coming south Two way up to Pound Corner Two way down Old Vicarage Lane from Carpenters until School. Two way to this point One way system on single lane road back into centre of village 49

50 Additional road requirements Traffic lights at Gable Cross Roundabout at Carpenters Arms turning onto A420 50

51 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback Q. I would support the closure of the Highworth Road if no viable by-pass option? 33 / 77 said yes = 42.9% 44 / 77 said no = 57.1% (2 non resident) 8 did not respond This is little to no difference from overall village survey last year 51

52 Other Sewage & drainage Pavements / cycle paths Parking Infrastructure 52

53 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback There was unanimous agreement that the Village had traffic problems and there was a concern about the growth in these problems. In certain parts it was a speeding problem, others a volume based issue and others a congestion based problem. Further alternatives proposed for the Parish Council to look into were: One way out of the Village on Highworth Rd going North with sectioned off cycle / footpath for safety & healthy option. Halving the problem, not exacerbating the Gable Cross & Carpenters Arms roundabouts and return trip via alternative route shorter and quicker than other way round Introduce a barrier system on Highworth Road for Villagers & Emergency Services only Re-approaching Police re attitude to enforce speeding fines on traffic tracking / camera systems if brought in 53

54 Sewage & drainage Increasing stress on existing infra-structure Water logging in many areas, e.g. behind Bell Gardens, Manor Cottages & many other areas. Need to review whole drainage system of Village Pumping station is overloaded total review of sewage system required now and definitely with any further development Possibility of creation of lakes and tree planting to absorb moisture to the South and East of the Village Need for an effective surface water drainage strategy 54

55 Footpaths / Cycle Paths Currently inadequate through the village, 90% of responses said they use existing footpaths and bridleways 55

56 Footpath N Gap opposite car park Pound Corner Ash Gardens to Hodinotts Corner Church Ground to Manor Cottages Other 56

57 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback Footpaths / cycle paths One proposed amendment which carried fairly strong favour was not to have a one way traffic route back through the middle of the village from Manor Farm through Bell Gardens, but that this should be part of a cycle / footpath system. 57

58 Parking Inadequate parking for current & future school / village recreational / church demand No parking close to present village hall whilst area in front of it could be made available, it has its uses especially for Tots n Toddlers & children s parties If Village Hall not required for child based activities, a few spaces could be created to serve whatever future function it might have If land behind Bell Gardens was adopted by the Village extending the current car park could be considered 56% of responses said there was a need for more off road parking 58

59 Infrastructure School size Community shop / Post Office Sports Changing Rooms Youth Club, Tots & Toddler Group, Friendly Club etc Village Hall Meeting Rooms Church Sports Hall Village use & school Recreational space (sports field) Hotel & pubs Allotments 80% responses said there should be better facilities for households 59

60 School Potential expansion of pupils from village (reduces availability to outside pupils - may reduce traffic & parking challenges) Lack of space for school gymnasium (therefore link to a Community Centre facility would be useful) School safe for foreseeable future but need to be aware: Local Gov t education strategy Health in school requirements 60

61 Community Shop / Post Office Questionable as to whether existing Village size could sustain, but a Village twice the size may do If other options are available to support the current requirements of the Village Hall, this would be an excellent location This could promote local produce / services / farmers market It could create first job opportunities for young villagers 90% saw a need for a Village shop 61

62 Recreational Facilities Recent changing room/ pavilion project on hold Recreational area currently adequate (although subject to conflicts of use), but would be reduced if any sizeable build on the land and car park extension created Acquisition of land behind Bell Gardens Protect land between The Nightingale Hotel and A420 by considering more Green Infrastructure, Forest, Lake etc. 80% saw recreational and play area as adequate for current needs 62

63 Friendly Club, Youth Club, Tots n Toddlers Important initiatives to develop and strengthen a sense of Community Village Hall too small to support current numbers and future potential demand Possible use of Church if pews were replaced with chairs. Existing facility not used to full potential. Church members open to suggestions. 58% expressed a need for a Community Centre 63

64 Village Hall Important to retain the building Its usage may alter over the years, but the exterior of the building should remain If all its current uses could be moved to the Church or a new multi-functional centre the Village Hall could be used (with Parking) as: A Post Office / Village Store Local Enterprise initiatives A couple of maisonettes sell off or let 64

65 Hotels & pubs Current number fine & expansion positive Village utilisation of the Hotel for meetings, youth club etc. would be good, but couldn t rely upon so felt need to create own facilities Wouldn t want to develop facilities that are in direct conflict i.e. Fully Licensed Bar / Squash / Gym etc. (Complement not conflict) 65

66 Sports Hall / Recreational Centre 79% said there needed to be improved recreational facilities 81% felt better facilities should be available for year olds General feel is to keep this for recreation, rather than over complicate it for more formal functions such as receptions / events Building requirements changing facilities, PE Hall (High Ceiling) 5-a-side size Stage? separate room / storage / access Social area with a self service coffee / soft drinks area (self licence bar capability) 66

67 Village Hall current uses move to New Centre, Church or Hotel Parish Meetings Tots n Toddlers Youth Club Friendly Club Children s Parties Village Charitable / Fund raising events Village Meetings 67

68 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback Q. I support the Recreational Centre idea as suggested? 73 / 85 answered yes = 85.9% 1 / 85 answered no = 1.3% 11 failed to answer Of those who answered 98.6% were in favour However 77% answered Yes to Is this conditional on additional land being available e.g. behind Bell Gardens? 68

69 Majority views seem to favour: Approval to Brown field site housing (possibly Manor Farm if can secure land behind Bell Gardens) Large Recreational facility accommodating a high ceiling hall, changing rooms, social room (self catering bar & vending) for use by school and community Trial closure of Highworth Road (reversible) If / once relief road put in beside the Nightingale Hotel implement one way system & pavement at Pound Corner Extend current car park area if Bell Garden land adopted Protect Village Hall, but be open to alternative viable uses Develop green infrastructure to support drainage and define and protect Parish boundaries (there was a reasonable minority for each) 69

70 Putting it all together 70

71 Close Highworth Road N Extra Parking New recreational facility Lakes to aid drainage New Housing e.g. Tree Planting Allotments 71

72 Public Meeting Attendee Feedback On a scale of 1 to 10 how important do you feel it is to keep the existing Green Field sites green? Not important / should develop 5/84 = 6% Low density housing positively favoured 16/84 = 19% Prefer no housing but at worst accept low density 14/84 = 16.7% Very important no development 18 / 84 = 21.4% Critical no development 31 / 84 = 36.9% 1 didn t respond 75% of those who responded said they were not in favour of Green Field Site development.. 72

73 Next Steps Feedback sheets complete and hand in Results Review & refine presentation Report to Borough Respond to Borough & Local Landowners / Developers as and when approached Keep you informed addresses? Thankyou 73