Independent facilitator's report appendix

Appendix 3: Independent facilitators' appendix

Independent chairs’ report Whitehill Bordon engagement programme Autumn 2011

APPENDIX A STANDARD AGENDA FOR THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT EVENTS Below is the standard agenda for the public engagement events of October and November 2011, with a short description of each item.

Time 17:00

17:00

18:00 18:10

18:25

18:40

Item Registration At arrival attendees were asked to: • mark on the map of the area where they live or work • provide their contact details for the purpose of future engagement • collect a feedback form and view other information material.

INFORMAL SESSION Drop-in session This was an opportunity for attendees to: • informally view the exhibition of the current proposals for Whitehill Bordon Eco-Town • discuss the project one to one with facilitators • have their say on the proposed changes to the masterplan by writing comments on post its on exhibition boards.

FORMAL SESSION Welcome and introduction by independent chair (IC) Key presentation This presentation by the WB Project Team included an overview of: • previous consultations and concerns raised • main findings of recently completed studies • proposed amendments to the masterplan.

Q&A This was an opportunity for attendees to ask WB team any questions / clarification on specific issues and changes mentioned in the presentation.

Group workshop This activity was conducted in groups of up to eight, each facilitated by a member of WB Project team. Each table had a map of the area, the proposed masterplan and writing and drawing equipment.

Led by WB team

WB team

IC WB team

IC

The aim of this activity was to enable attendees to identify potential improvements in their neighbourhood that they would like to see as part of the Eco-town development and things they are concerned about generally and would like to be addressed (either things that are good about the neighbourhood and need to be protected and enhanced, things they wanted removed/changed or things that are missing all together).

Participants were asked to be as specific as possible and write down Page 1

96

19:20

19:30

19:45

20:00

up to five issues/ideas each. Guided by their facilitator they then discussed, grouped and marked these ideas, to agree a set of key improvements for their group.

Workshop feedback Nominated spokesperson from each group reported back to plenary on three key issues/priorities for improvement identified by their group.

Summing up The chair provided a brief summary of the key issues from the group workshop and once again gave contact details where further information can be found and where comments/feedback forms can be sent.

Time for informal discussion, exhibition, feedback forms After the formal close, attendees had 15 minutes for further informal discussions, to view the exhibition boards and fill in their event questionnaires.

Close

IC

IC

In four out of the ten public engagement events, no group workshop took place due to a long list of questions that attendees put forward and/or the preference expressed by the attendees to replace the workshop with a longer plenary Q&A.

97

APPENDIX B INDEPENDENT CHAIRS’ NOTES OF THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT EVENTS IN THE WHITEHILL BORDON AREA

Whitehill Deadwater event Forest Community Centre, 03 October 2011 Notes by Caroline Fraser General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community to Caroline Fraser while viewing the exhibition during the drop-in • Find it difficult to understand the masterplan drawing, the one with the proposed changes written on it. Would be easier to understand if there was a clear drawing of the masterplan, showing all the different uses, routes, spaces, with a key, and also to include the physical manifestation of the proposed changes on the drawing – not just written labels.

• It would be good to see more detail, maybe see the ideas for the new types of housing at bigger scale.

• Will the masterplan be built out in several phases? Have these phases been decided?

How will developers and design teams be appointed? Need to get interesting designers.

How is this being organised? Since I was last consulted, the level of detail that I am being shown is just the same.

• In general over the last 20 years, the area of Bordon and Whitehill has gradually improved, we now have good shops. Generally positive about the idea of development to continue to improve facilities, need to make sure that if the large quantity of houses are built then the promised jobs and facilities are provided as well.

• Worried that Chase Hospital is currently too small, predominantly for the elderly, and that there is no A&E (you have to travel to Basingstoke). This is a problem now, never mind when there are c.4,000 new houses.

• Will additional national grid power be provided? Already the area suffers power cuts.

• I am not convinced that the council will create all these jobs. Building any new houses without new jobs will just make the place even more of a dormitory type town.

• Concerned about the actual quality of the new houses, how will the council ensure the designs are high quality and meet the required eco-standards?

• What and where are good built examples of the types of housing proposed?

• Last thing we need is an ASDA supermarket on Viking Park. We already have three supermarkets.

• Paying for a new rail station won’t help many people – better to improve bus services – we need regular services to Farnham, Haslemere, Petersfield, Liphook.

Answers to chair’s questions at start formal session: 1. Do you live in WB? 7 2. Do you work in WB? 0 3. If you work, do you go to work: on foot 0 by bike 0 by car 2 98

by public transport 0 4. If you drive to work, do you ever share the car with someone else?

5. Have you taken advantage of the WB home retrofit scheme? 0

1

Q&A session, after Mandar Puranik’s presentation: • When will there be a referendum?

• How can the existing roads cope with all the additional cars?

• Please explain further how the figure for the number of new homes you have given is calculated? There was a different figure in the local press this week.

• What is being done to create new jobs?

• How do the council encourage the existing residents to start living in an eco-way?

Key issues agreed during the group workshop discussion Table 1 • Preserve green spaces.

• Create jobs before new houses.

• Use the Viking Park site for leisure and employment, as originally agreed.

• Establish a cut-off policy to halt development if any adverse effects are caused to jobs/traffic/pollution etc.

Table 2 • Improved bus links to local rail stations.

• Attract new business into the area - employment/retail.

• Provide recreation facilities, e.g. bowling green, teenage activities.

Table 3 • The image of Bordon as a proper town - why hasn’t it happened yet?

• Open a police station.

• Ensure Eveley Wood is fully protected as a Site of Importance to Nature Conservation (SINC) and not opened up widely for public access.

• Establish a reliable 10 minute frequency bus service from 6am to 10pm/11pm/12midnight serving through to the town centre.

Pinewood event Pinewood Village Hall, 06 October 2011 Notes by Biljana Savic General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community • We understand the council’s desire to prepare a plan in advance of MoD’s departure from the town, but the current masterplan lacks inspiration – a good example of what could be done here are the garden towns of the early 20th century such as Letchworth.

They are a good example in terms of the abundance of green space and how it is integrated within the town, not in large areas outside the town but integrated with streets and housing. Also the street layout currently shown in the masterplan is based on a rigid 99

•

• • • • • •

grid, which does not bring people to the town centre – it needs something like the radial routes leading directly from the residential areas towards the town centre, as in Letchworth.

Relief road – the alignment shown in the masterplan would create a barrier between the two sides of the new development – it should be moved to the western edge of the Ecotown instead.

It is absolutely important that the new homes have adequate gardens and enough space internally.

We are afraid that the new development will be of too high a density and that the town will have a totally different feel from what we think is appropriate here – green and quiet.

I am sceptical that 7,000 jobs will be attracted to WB, where are they to come from?

If ASDA comes to town it will be very difficult to get the new town centre working, so that should be resisted.

I am concerned about the effect of the new town centre on Forest Centre – it works well currently and is important for the local people.

There is an obvious conflict between the council wanting to create as many jobs locally as possible (to reduce commuting) and planning for improved public transport (including a new railway station) which would mean that commuting out will be easier. The emphasis should be on creating jobs and facilities here.

More specific comments related to Whitehill Pinewood made by members of the community • It would be good to retain as many of the existing garrison buildings as possible, they give the area the character. For example can some of the Louisburg Barracks buildings be converted into residential use, not only commercial?

• In terms of traffic the biggest problems are difficult crossing over A325 and noise from both A325 and Station Road.

• We want the existing green space in the neighbourhood (towards Budds Lane) to be retained as a recreational facility for the neighbourhood, so would not like the new secondary school to be developed here.

• The neighbourhood feels safe, and we want to keep it like that. Lots of green /recreational space and safer and less noisy A325 are a priority.

Whitehill Chase and Walldown wards event Forest Community Centre, 10 October 2011 Notes by Caroline Fraser General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community to Caroline Fraser while viewing the exhibition during the drop-in & after the formal presentation & Q&A slot • I am now retired and I have lived in Whitehill or in Bordon all my life. Worked for MoD on their three nearby sites for 40 years. This is a good area, friendly, convenient and rural.

It is a mixed population area – e.g. families of Polish Prisoners of War (PoW), traveller families. Beautiful countryside, some good MoD buildings, 2 swimming pools for people 100

•

• •

• • • •

• •

•

• •

to use. The MoD is leaving, and there is the need to plan for that. Bordon will be very different.

The new town should have a new name, I suggest ‘Bordon Heath’. And, if anything, it can not be ‘Whitehill Bordon’ but better it should be ‘Bordon Whitehill’. Whitehill is just a small village, Bordon is the existing town.

Officers’ Mess is a good building and is in a lovely setting, it could be converted to a hotel.

The proposed relief road will be a barrier, it should move to the west. Actually I am concerned that the new roads could be improved to lead in to the new town centre better.

How will A325 be traffic managed? What will it look like? I agree it has to be improved; it is too noisy and very difficult to cross.

Prince Phillip Barracks will make a good new square, glad these will be kept.

I think Quebec Barracks should be retained, but the nearby married quarters are too dilapidated and should be demolished.

Worried about Forest Centre – wish the council owned it – the owners are not looking after it. Worried it will fail once new development is up and running. Then there will be no walking distance shops, PO, etc. for a lot of local people.

Do not agree with an ASDA at Viking Park – as a result I expect the Forest Centre Co-op store to fail and close. I will really miss that, as it is within walking distance.

I have got the impression that East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) has already given outline planning to ASDA, and welcomes the ASDA scheme. I am confused. Can EHDC/Eco-town team state more clearly what the facts are on Viking Park?

I would like more information on the new housing areas and types that are currently proposed. Would like to see the footprint of the built house and the garden in each plot.

Worried it will be over developed, a concrete jungle. Want to keep the rural feel to the area.

How is the council working to appoint developers/architects?

I am confused by the studies and expense of the train station option – and reopening Bordon train station. Not many people need to travel to London regularly, most people need a better, reliable bus service to get to work in the local towns and to travel around the local area for school, college and visiting friends. I don’t think a new train station, which only goes the route to and from London, is worth the money.

Answers to chair’s questions at start formal session: 1. Do you live in WB? 4 2. Do you live in Whitehill Chase or Walldown wards?

0 3. Do you work in WB? 2 4. If you work, do you go to work: a. on foot 1 b. by bike 0 c. by car 1 d. by public transport 0 5. If you drive to work, do you ever share the car with someone else?

6. Have you taken advantage of the WB home retrofit scheme? 0 7. Have you attended one of the WB consultation events before?4 101

1

Q&A session, after Mandar Puranik’s presentation: • How will employment be encouraged? What is the council doing to create new jobs?

• Surely the existing local long term unemployed will get first chance at the new jobs (rather than people who have recently moved to the area)?

• For your information, 40 years ago ‘The Bordon Resource Group’ was established, and is still running, it was set up specifically to encourage local employment, would be good for the Eco-town Project Team to research this, in order to build on it.

• Who will be the landlord for new employment premises?

• Why is the Eco-house more expensive that the national average 2 bed house?

• Please explain further about the ASDA planning application on Viking Park.

Key issues agreed during the group workshop discussion • Improve public transport – particularly for school children and college students.

• Improve the viability and vitality of the Forest Shopping Centre.

• Green spaces to be protected and enhanced.

Lindford event Lindford Village Hall, 14 October 2011 Notes by Biljana Savic Initially seven people stayed for the workshop, all of whom live in Lindford and all of whom attended previous Eco-town consultation events. Another Lindford resident joined the workshop later. They were joined by two East Hampshire District Councillors. Local MP Damian Hinds attended the drop-in, the presentation and first part of the Q&A session.

General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community during Q&A • It is good to hear that there may be a new station in the town, but we need to get to it from Lindford. It would be good to have a shuttle bus to the station.

• We are worried about the impact of the new station on the town – it is a good thing for people from the town, but there will be many others from the surrounding villages who will be coming to town to catch a train from here. We are worried that that may cause congestion.

• It is good news that the Eco-town will encourage walking and cycling. Can we have charging points for electric bikes throughout the town?

• Lindford sewage treatment plant is working at capacity. Will it be extended to provide more capacity for the new town and what will the impact be on Lindford – the smell coming from it at times is already rather unpleasant so we are worried that it will get worse.

• My husband used to go to work in London by public transport. But, due to unreliable and inconvenient local busses and congested and expensive mainline trains, he started commuting by car two years ago. It is important for the town to get better local busses

102

and better train link to London and other big employment centres in order to encourage people to travel sustainably.

More specific comments related to Lindford made by members of the community • There is a definite change in appearance when you enter Lindford, it looks a bit drab, there is no art, no adequate street lighting, special landscaping features, no sign at the entrance to the village - for instance at the Highland Farm entrance. We really need to improve the appearance of the village, its identity.

• We want to keep Lindford as a distinctive part of the town, with its own identity, even when all the new development arrives.

• I am worried about the future of Watermeadow industrial estate in Lindford when the Eco-town gets developed. Its future should be considered as part of the Eco-town proposals and in the context of other proposed employment uses.

• We already lost the local garage with a shop, our post office is now much smaller, the remaining shopping parade is rather tired. We would like to have a local garage. Are there any proposed within the Eco-town? The shopping parade needs improving.

• There are no local facilities, especially for young people and children - we need new facilities in our village, not only in the new town centre.

• The Liphook Road junction by the ford, the historic heart of the village, is an important crossing point for children going to school. The crossing should be improved, made safer, and the footpaths from the junction towards the school widened. Also the lighting there should be improved – the existing solar panel lighting is not enough.

• The pathway along River Wey towards Bordon needs improving.

Key issues agreed during the group workshop discussion Table 1 • Royal Exchange pub has been Lindford’s landmark for decades. It closed down recently and is currently on sale. There is a real danger of it being converted into flats, just like so many other buildings that were important local facilities (e.g. the old post office). Do not want this to happen with the pub. It should be re-invented and kept as a family friendly, community pub, with eco-features.

• Walking and cycling is really important, we want the footpaths and cycle paths to be improved throughout the neighbourhood. For example provide a footbridge between Lindford and Bordon.

• The local bus service to the town needs to be improved – to be more reliable, convenient and comfortable.

• The new Eco-town centre should include a sports hub and more comparison shops.

Table 2 • Local bus services need improving, re-instate a viable bus service.

• The expansion of the sewage treatment plant needs careful consideration so that it does not affect the neighbourhood even more.

• Provide playgrounds for small children and something for teenagers.

• Provide easy access to community facilities in the town, e.g. improve lighting and footpaths to Mill Chase sports facilities.

103

Whitehill Hogmoor ward event Forest Community Centre, 17 October 2011 Notes by Caroline Fraser General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community to Caroline Fraser while viewing the exhibition during the drop-in • Need more activities for young people in the area – those who currently live here and also for the new residents.

• Can good community access be organised to the MoD swimming pool?

• We have read the exhibition information, why has public money been spent on so many consultants’ studies?

• Why has EHDC consistently neglected Bordon? It is always bottom of the pile. We’ve heard about this Eco-town for years, there is no progress.

• We do not want an ASDA on Viking Park. It would be better if one new food store is sited in the new designated town centre.

• Please can you cordon off one or two acres of Hogmoor Inclosure, so that kids can use their quad bikes there?

• I read in the paper that £350,000 is the cost of the eco-house. I am worried that this is too costly.

• Can we see detailed drawings for the new types of housing, including how much garden they will have?

• When will the first phase of building work start? Which part of the town will start first?

• We moved to Bordon six months ago. This proposed development will really improve the town. We would like to find out more about it and see more detailed drawings. We are not sure how the new roads will work and are already worried about the existing speeding traffic near our house.

Answers to chair’s questions at the start of the formal session: 1. Do you live in WB? 19 2. Do you work in WB? 1 3. Have you taken advantage of the WB home retrofit scheme? 4 4. Have you attended one of the WB consultation events before? 5 Q&A session, after Mandar Puranik’s presentation: • A Site of Importance to Nature Conservation (SINC) exists to the east of Hogmoor Inclosure, please can this area be included in the Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space (SANG)? (There was only one question.)

• Comment to the plenary from one attendee: if you are trying to create a low carbon town then using your car is nonsense.

Key issues agreed during the group workshop discussion Table 1 • Need improved public transport, especially bus services.

104

• • •

Good to have a nice town centre with everything in one place - services, shopping, cinema, theatre, etc.

Improve medical facilities, provide a general hospital and A&E. Do not encroach on any open space.

Table 2 • Improve public transport links, make them affordable, improve bus routes and timetable, including late in the evening. Run transit buses that loop East-West and North-South, ensure bus and train timetables co-ordinate.

• Improve facilities for careers, employment and education. Good career prospects will keep people in the area. Organise the schools to be linked to Higher Education research.

• Improve arts & culture. Create incentives for a theatre, restaurant and café culture in the town.

• Provide affordable housing for young people.

Table 3 • Improve Hogmoor Road – enforce 30mph speed limit, improve pavements, and streetlights.

• Improve public transport links to Petersfield, Alton, Liphook, in particular provide a bus service on Hogmoor Road.

• Improve maintenance and sport and leisure facilities at BOSC. • Set aside an area of about one hectare on Hogmoor Enclosure for the use of youngsters to ride bikes/quads, etc.

105

APPENDIX C INDEPENDENT CHAIRS’ NOTES OF THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT EVENTS IN THE VILLAGES SURROUNDING WHITEHILL BORDON

Blackmoor, Oakhanger and Selborne event Blackmoor Village Hall, 18 October 2011 Notes by Biljana Savic Over 25 people attended the drop in and stayed for the presentation and Q&A. Q&A ran over the allocated time, people expressed a preference for extending Q&A in plenary, rather than breaking into smaller groups. The Q&A lasted over 1.5 hours.

Only two attendees were not from Blackmoor, Oakhanger or Selborne (one from Whitehill Bordon and another from a village further away). Most of attendees had attended previous Eco-town consultation events.

A leaflet was handed around by an Oakhanger resident claiming that the Eco-town development will bring thousands of more cars through the village. The same resident left posters showing traffic problems in the village with Mandar Puranik from Whitehill Bordon Project Team.

General comments made by members of the community during the drop-in and Q&A • The proposed relief road is going to cut the new development in two halves, it should be routed to go around the western edge of the new development and designed to truly ease traffic through Bordon. This is important so that people do not go through Oakhanger because it is quicker than going through Bordon.

• The traffic pressure in Oakhanger is already very high, any additional pressure resulting from Eco-town development is simply unacceptable.

• We have no confidence in the Eco-town team and the Council in addressing our problems.

• Oakhanger is served by one road, very narrow in places, or with no pavement, with many lorries passing through as it is a shortcut between A325 and A3.

• Because A325 is so congested, many people use the road through Oakhanger as a shortcut /rat run.

• Closing A325 for traffic is unacceptable as it is the only relief road when the tunnel is closed (explained that A325 will not be closed for traffic).

• Will the houses in the Eco-town be built with cement and concrete? What will be the Code for Sustainable Homes level for the new houses? We have heard that the standard expected has been lowered from the highest to level 4? Does that mean that the original idea of highest sustainability standards will not be adhered to and that developers will be allowed to deliver lower standard housing?

• There has to be a better link between the two sides of A325 in Whitehill Bordon, particularly around the Chalet Hill junction. The existing shops on the eastern side of the junction should be preserved, improved and integrated into the new town centre.

106

•

• •

• • • • • • • •

•

• •

How will the price of housing be controlled to make it truly affordable for local people?

The income of Whitehill Bordon people is generally low, how will they afford the new houses?

Where is the evidence to show that the proposed development will work?

The traffic levels through Oakhanger used to be much lower, only 6 years ago. Now it is unbearable. I suggest a number of traffic measures such as: imposing a 20mph speed limit within the village and 40-50 mph outside the village, road humps and new signs signalling the weight restriction for lorries.

Even the existing speed limits in Oakhanger and its surroundings are not enforced. It is simply not enough to put up speed limit signs.

All the studies are inter-dependant and all based on supposed data (explained that issues they cover are inter-linked).

Is Selborne included in the traffic model?

The relief road is a positive measure.

Can you explain the traffic table figures? How much additional traffic will there be in our village?

I am very concerned about the loss of jobs in Bordon. Where are all those new jobs going to come from?

The traffic model shows only the junctions, why hasn’t it looked at flows between junctions, where is that evidence? That is the problem in Oakhanger.

Petersfield (the Council) wants to forget about Whitehill and Bordon. The best solution would be to move the Council offices to Viking Park, that way the problems of this area will be more visible to all those working for the Council.

The transport model is based on the provision of one car per household. It should be redone based on a more realistic provision (the Project Team explained that the provision assumed is more than one car per household).

Doing nothing is not an option for us, the existing situation with the traffic can no longer be tolerated.

I have been a Bordon resident all my life and am proud of it. I am shocked that people from outside Bordon have such a negative opinion of it. It needs to be improved and updated, and the Eco-town is an opportunity that we should not miss.

Hangers and Forest wards event Greatham Village Hall, 26 October 2011 Notes by Caroline Fraser General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community while viewing the exhibition during the drop-in Due to low attendance at Greatham there was no formal presentation and Q&A slot, and no group workshop discussion. Instead, members of the facilitation team engaged attendees in one to one discussions. Notes of these discussions will be typed up by the Project Team and made available as part of the full record of the event.

Summary of the discussions of members of the community with Caroline Fraser 107

• • •

•

•

I am pleased to hear about the trial bus service that will be started soon.

It will be good to have investment in Bordon, it has been neglected for years.

I have heard that residents of some of the outlying villages are worried about traffic, I am reassured to see the Eco-town project proposals and I will be supporting its aims; investment and improvements are urgently needed in Bordon.

There are already traffic problems during peak commuting periods and especially at school drop off times – traffic is a problem with or without the Eco-town. I am glad to hear about the Traffic Management Survey.

Some areas of Bordon are unsafe, vandalism happens, e.g. to cars and graffiti to property.

Kingsley and Sleaford event The Kingsley Centre, 02 November 2011 Notes by Biljana Savic Event attended by approximately 17 people, all from Kingsley, Sleaford and surrounding areas. Five of the 17 attendees also work in the area.

Q&A run over, people expressed preference for extending the Q&A in plenary, rather than breaking into smaller groups. The Q&A lasted over 1.5 hours.

General comments made by members of thencommunity during the drop-in and Q&A • Even the small increase in the traffic level through the village is a lot for us; it is currently used as a rat run.

• I question the validity of the traffic model and can not believe that there is not going to be more traffic.

• I am disappointed by the turnout, I was told that some people received a leaflet about this event but I didn’t (most but not all attendees confirmed they received the leaflet) • Rail link – people are much more likely to jump on a fast (and more frequent) Portsmouth train rather than to go to Bentley.

• How/why has the estimated cost of the new railway link come down by £40million?

• We’ve had traffic problems for years, this is a unique opportunity to get a new East -West link to reduce the amount of traffic going through villages.

• Is the new railway link going to run on an embankment, if so what is going to be its impact on the views from the village?

• If the estimated delivery target is 400 homes per year, where is the demand for that many homes going to come from? There were difficulties in selling new homes in Lindford already, so why do you think that new housing in Whitehill Bordon will be different?

• We are worried about the affordability of new homes - the age of average first time buyer these days is 37, so we have to make the new homes affordable for young people on average incomes. My daughter’s earnings are decent but she still can not afford to buy a house in the area.

• Is it possible to build an eco-house for the same price as other houses in the area? If they are more expensive there simply won’t be enough demand.

108

• •

•

• • • •

Has any consideration been given to self-build homes? This would be a good solution for providing more affordable homes.

Unless there are new jobs here, there will be nothing eco about the Eco-town. Where are people going to work? There should be financial incentives for new businesses, something to attract them to the area.

We already have many unemployed people in the area, enough to fill the 5,000 new jobs that you are proposing, so more jobs should be provided in order to improve the general employment level in the area.

We need good health facilities, are there plans to extend Chase Hospital?

We are worried about the amount of traffic that will be generated by the construction over so many years – this has to be looked at, not just the final levels once all is built.

What steps are being taken now to fill in empty employment spaces in Whitehill Bordon and in the surrounding villages?

Are there any proposals to extend the existing village cycle paths?

Headley event Headley Village Hall, 11 November 2011 Notes by Caroline Fraser General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community to Caroline Fraser while viewing the exhibition during the drop-in • Two attendees commented that their houses had not received event flyers. One said she had heard flyers had not been delivered to some houses in Hollywater, Standford, Passfield, Kingsley.

• Complaints that none of the proposed three new bus route options produced by the Project Team were useful.

• Complaints that the local school bus routes had recently been cancelled.

Answers to chair’s questions at the start of the formal session: Anyone here tonight not from Headley Down? 1 Have you attended one of the Whitehill Bordon consultation events before? 5 Q&A session, after Daphne Gardner’s presentation: • One attendee stood up and tried to read a prepared speech but the chair and other attendees asked him not to read the full two pages, they requested he asked specific questions and then allowed time for other attendees to do so as well. See below for information from the written submission that was handed in at the event.

• Why is 20% of Headley Down Parish in the Whitehill Bordon Eco-town Policy Zone?

• Please can the word ‘farm’ always be included when referring to ‘Stanford Grange Farm’ (SGF)?

• There are severe water problems – now and in the future – please can development proposals include building a new reservoir?

• Why is SGF included in the proposals – surely the open space should instead be located near the new housing, to the west of the A325?

109

•

• • • • •

•

The farmers present all asked that the overall and detailed proposals for SGF be reviewed – all advised that the proposed new grazing routine was impractical and so were moveable footpaths.

One attendee suggested that circular routes are planned, dog walkers and cyclists will prefer that. It was suggested Eveley Wood is included.

Another person stated Eveley Wood should not be included - that she would be worried if dog walkers used Eveley Wood.

How can the existing roads cope with all the additional cars? Several comments on car speeds now and in the future.

Comments on the proposed inner relief road, and its impact on the new housing.

One attendee commented that it was better for Headley if the new housing was to the west of the A325, this is where the new housing is proposed to be built on MoD land, rather than in Headley itself.

Councillor Williams summed up that the two key issues from the presentation and plenary Q&A for Headley are traffic and SGF. Current management proposals for SGF are unworkable, and he requests SGF is left out of the project.

Tim Wall, HCC, gave a detailed presentation on transport and traffic, and took questions. Tim informed attendees that transport and traffic consultants WSP would meet with Headley Parish Councillors on Mon 14 Nov. Key issues agreed during the group workshop discussion Table 1 • Concerned about the proposals for SGF. Do not mix the routes people can take with the animals’ areas on the farm.

• Sustainable transport links between Headley Down and Bordon are needed. There are currently no footpaths and the roads to Headley are unsuitable for cyclists.

• Suggest that the reservoir on the MoD area is used for back up open space and leisure activities for the Eco-town (rather than SGF) Table 2 • Jobs must be created before houses are built.

• SGF – the farm proposals won’t work for the position of the footpaths to constantly change, farming and walking won’t mix.

• Don’t want the increase in volume and speed of traffic locally.

Summary of the written submission by Jack Warshaw At the event the chair was handed a two page submission by one of the attendees, Jack Warshaw. This was handed on to the Project Team. The first page of the submission made various criticisms of the current public engagement programme. Comments included that participants’ views were not being thoroughly recorded and that it was a tick box exercise.

The submission states that the Referendum on the Eco-town should have taken place before this round of public engagement. The second page of the submission was a list of Eco-town issues from the minutes of the Headley Parish Council meeting of 23 August 2011. A summary of these issues is below.

110

•

•

• • • • •

Eco-town Policy Zone boundary. Concerns that half of Standford is included in the boundary, which may lead to that part of Headley Parish being transferred to Whitehill Bordon jurisdiction.

Stanford Grange Farm. Concerns that the masterplan proposes the farm becomes a park and will be run by a management company. Request for the masterplan to recognise the farm’s historic and agricultural character and its conservation status.

Concerns that the masterplan may propose that school sites expand onto Standford Grange Farm.

Road traffic. Concerns about the Eco-town development increasing the local road traffic problems.

New jobs. The new jobs proposed in the Eco-town may be taken up by incoming commuters, further worsening local traffic conditions.

Water shortages. Concerns about existing water shortages, which will be worse with further population increases.

Local bus services. Previous Eco-town consultation allocated minimum four buses per hour, the current consultation offers one bus per hour. In addition, the recent cancellation of the previous school bus service does not inspire confidence in any new service being economically feasible.

Hollywater, Standford and Passfield event Standford Hill Methodist Church, 23 November 2011 Notes by Caroline Fraser The Project Team set up this event at short notice at the request of the local community. It was a well-attended event, there was standing room only.

General comments on the masterplan made by members of the community to Caroline Fraser while viewing the exhibition during the drop-in • Surely if this is a meaningful ‘Eco-town’, it means it will have efficient, reliable, affordable public transport. Therefore, I do not understand why so much emphasis is put on car use, traffic etc - surely an ‘Eco-town’ by definition has very low car use, so why is so much of the consultants’ work on the project dealing with increased traffic flows, pinch points, models, options, etc.

• I am concerned in general about the future use of Standford Grange Farm (SGF). I am also specifically concerned about my driveway. It is next to SGF and I am concerned that it will become a public Right of Way when HCC changes the use of SGF. • I would like clarification on the meaning of the Eco-town Policy Zone and the relationship of the Policy Zone to the parish council boundaries and the conservation areas. I would also like more information on the Core Strategy process and how it is co-ordinated with the Eco-town project.

• Do not position the relief road on the old Drove Road.

• There is too much traffic on the A325, I suggest you stop the A325 at the roundabout immediately south of Bordon - this would stop all traffic coming through Bordon heading to destinations to the south of Bordon.

111

•

•

The Eco-town aims and standards may be achieved for the new homes built on the MoD land, to the west of the A325. However, it will not be possible to upgrade all the existing homes in Whitehill Bordon to Eco-town standards, it will just never happen. It seems that it will cost c. £40,000 for each existing home to be upgraded. Therefore there will not be an Eco-town over the currently proposed geographical area – it will just be on the old MoD land. This will create a split community.

I am worried about this project changing my family’s rural life style, which is why we live here. More residents and more access to SGF will mean I can not continue with my current life. There will be too much car traffic to ride and care for our horses as we do at the moment.

Answers to chair’s questions at the start of the formal session: Anyone here tonight not from Hollywater, Standford or Passfield? 2 Have you attended one of the Whitehill Bordon consultation events before? 16 Q&A session, during and after Mandar Puranik’s presentation: • Can we have more information on the sewage treatment proposals?

• Who will pay for the energy work?

• I have noticed a contradiction on the two consecutive slides on Green Infrastructure (GI).

• There is more local traffic since the Hindhead Tunnel on the A3 opened. So the traffic models you are working on will be flawed. There are queues at peak times at junctions and speeding in the narrow lanes at other times.

• Who is going to live in the 4,000 new homes in the Eco-town?

• The Core Strategy will be discussed by the EHDC development panel next week. Is it the case that they can change the Eco-town Policy Zone boundary, e.g. remove all of Standford from the Policy Zone? This is the preference for many of the residents of Headley, Hollywater, Standford and Passfield.

• How is the Whitehill Bordon Project Team co-ordinated with the EHDC core strategy planning policy team?

• How does the Eco-town Policy Zone boundary relate to parish council boundaries and conservation areas?

• What is the future use of Standford Grange Farm?

• We have concerns about public access to the farm; it currently has no public access and is surrounded by high fences. There have been regular incidences of vandalism over the years. We are concerned about public access requiring car parking and car access. We are concerned that the current tenant farmer will lose his livelihood.

• The recently built fitness trail in Bordon is not being well used, so why propose additional areas of recreation and public access.

• The B3004 is impossibly busy in the mornings now. I request a reduction in wait time now, regardless of the Eco-town project development.

• Why spend £130 million on rail transport for the Eco-town? I say it is better to spend the money in different, better ways. For example, buy new buses to transfer people to the station at Liphook, from there can access the centres of Guildford, Portsmouth, Gatwick Airport, London. Run these regularly to co-ordinate with trains. Research the type of bus – e.g. rapid transit. Another option is to spend the £130 million on building 2,500 new homes.

112

•

•

•

The postcode GU30 (the postcode for this area) was not included in the event mailing, so the GU30 area did not get any advance notice of the public events through their letterboxes. Many comments and complaints about this issue. There were strong requests for the Project Team to look into this mistake and to guarantee that this does not happen again.

What is the phasing of the Eco-town development? We prefer SGF is not included in the Eco-town, but if it is then we request that the work on SGF is undertaken in the last phase.

Several questions about who will live in the 4,000 new homes. How many of these will be affordable and how affordable will these actually be?

Summary of the key issues from the Q&A after the presentation • Road traffic. Concerns over the increase in road traffic that the proposed 4,000 new homes in the Eco-town would bring. Additional request to HCC/EHDC for immediate action to deal with current traffic problems.

• Expense of the possible new railway station. General agreement from attendees that the cost of this was prohibitive and that there were better ways to spend £130 million.

• Standford Grange Farm. Requests for residents’ involvement in options for the future use of the farm.

• Eco-town residents. Questions about who the Project Team expects to live in the 4,000 new homes, and how affordable the homes will be.

• Geographical relationship of the Eco-town Policy Zone to Headley, Hollywater, Standford and Passfield parishes. Questions about how and by whom the policy zone is determined, and how it relates to parish boundaries and conservation areas.

Key issues agreed during the group discussions after the presentation There were theme based group discussions after the presentations and Q&A. There were groups on traffic, Standford Grange Farm and any other issues. All these notes will be typed up by the Whitehill Bordon Project Team and made available as part of the full record of the event.

Comments from one of the group discussions, facilitated by Caroline Fraser • Existing roads will be swamped.

• Hollywater Road cut through from A3 will get worse after the Eco-town is built.

• Speed limits on B3004 need to be respected and enforced. Install speed cameras.

• I did not realise Hampshire County Council actually owned SGF, now that I do, I would be interested to hear more detail about the options for the future use of SGF. On balance I now feel all nearby residents, in the villages and the Eco-town, could have the benefits of walking, riding or cycling through the farm. There are Public Rights of Way across many English farms. However I do not think any car parking at all should be provided.

• I am concerned there is no clear understanding of who will live in the 4,000 new homes.

Without this information carefully thought through, why do we have the Eco-town project at all?

• Request from attendees to use a microphone in all future meetings.

113

APPENDIX D AGENDA FOR THE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT EVENT ON 16 NOVEMBER 2011 Time 09.30

09:45 09:50

10:20

10.40 10:45 11:00

11:35

Item Arrival and exhibition This was an opportunity for stakeholders to: • informally view the exhibition of the current proposals for Whitehill Bordon Eco-Town • discuss the project one to one with facilitators • give any comments to facilitator or write on post its and place on exhibition boards.

Welcome and introduction by independent chair (IC) Key presentation This presentation by the WB Project Team included an overview of: • the findings of each of the recent studies and proposed amendments to the masterplan • the activity and main issues emerging from current round of ward level neighbourhood engagement sessions • progress on the demonstration projects • project timeline, next steps.

Clarification questions Stakeholders asked questions related to specific issues and changes to the masterplan mentioned in the presentation.

Workshop instructions Refreshment break Workshop 1 - Issues and concerns (mixed groups) This activity was conducted in mixed groups of up to eight, each facilitated by a member of WB Project Team. Each table had a map of the area, the proposed masterplan and writing and drawing equipment.

The aim of this activity was to enable stakeholders to identify issues, concerns and gaps they noticed in the project. Participants were asked to be as specific as possible and write down up to five issues/ideas each that they would like to be addressed in the next phase of masterplan development. Guided by their facilitator they then discussed, grouped and marked these ideas, to agree a set of key improvements for their group.

Workshop feedback Nominated spokesperson from each group reported back to plenary on three key issues identified by their group.

114

Led by WB team

IC WB team

IC

IC IC

IC

11:50

12:25

12:45

13:00 13:30

Session 2 - Topical discussion & joint working opportunities (themed groups) Participants were asked to re-group and join one of six theme-based groups based on their interests and expertise: • Economy/jobs/retail (2 tables) • Community facilities incl education, health, culture, sport and leisure (2 tables) • Housing • Environmental • Traffic/ transport Groups were facilitated by the members of the Project Team in charge of relevant theme.

Participants were asked to use their knowledge to help resolve issues raised in the previous workshop related to their theme and highlight any additional gaps. The discussion was then focused on the tools and techniques to resolve issues, partnership working and next steps.

Workshop feedback Nominated spokesperson from each group reported back to plenary on key issues discussed by their group.

Summary The chair provided a brief summary of the key issues from the group workshops and once again gave contact details where further information can be found and where comments/feedback forms can be sent.

Lunch and exhibition Close

115

IC

IC

IC

APPENDIX E INDEPENDENT CHAIRS’ NOTES OF THE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT EVENT Forest Community Centre, Bordon, 16 November 2011 Notes by Biljana Savic and Caroline Fraser Clarification questions after the presentation Questions / clarification on specific issues and changes mentioned in the presentation.

Q: Cllr of Whitehill. Please clarify the relationship of the 5,500 new jobs planned and the total number of new homes.

A: Mandar Puranik. 4,000 new homes are planned, there is one job planned per new home and an additional 1,500 new jobs, this figure 1,500 is the estimated jobs that will be lost when the MoD vacate Bordon.

Q: Cllr Adam Carew, Mayor of Whitehill. Can you explain more about the new homes numbers, specifically if Annington Homes develop their sites and increase the total number of homes, will these be calculated as part of the 4,000 new homes?

A: Mandar Puranik. We are not currently expecting Annington Homes to redevelop their properties as set out in the Core Strategy and not included as part of the 4000 homes. The land is not available and if redeveloped, it will be in accordance with the current planning policies at the time.

Q: Cllr Adam Carew. Lindford should not be included in WB Eco-town new housing numbers.

A: Mandar Puranik. Lindford is considered in WB Eco-town new housing numbers, as it is in the Policy Zone.

Q: Attendee involved with community. How will young people access the new WB housing?

A: Mandar Puranik. In line with the district council’s policy for housing allocation and access.

Q: Have budgets been developed for WB Eco-town? It is now clear that there is unlikely to be any EU funds available.

A: Mandar Puranik. The project is planned to be self funding – that is why there need to be min 4,000 new homes. Estimated cost is between £80 to £90 million.

AIan Parker. Currently working up scheme so that the public sector can control the scheme.

Estimate the budget is £1.3 billion.

Q: Philip Mason, local resident. Can we have more information on potential walking and cycling routes?

A: Tim Wall. The aim is to integrate walking and cycling routes with the green loop, and to concentrate on the key desire lines and linking the different routes to each other. There will be a draft strategy by end December 2011, consultation period follows in early 2012, with the final strategy later in 2012.

Q: Nick Wilson, Chair Hants Community Partnership. Daphne Gardner said in her presentation that there would be ‘key milestones in the next few years’. My knowledge of the negative impact on the Medway Towns of the Navy vacating Chatham leads me to ask – 116

what are the key things to ensure there is an up hill trajectory for the Whitehill Bordon Ecotown?

A: Daphne Gardner. No. 1 is the key planning work – the development of the masterplan and the Core Strategy. No. 2 is securing the right private sector partners. No. 3 is assembling the land. I predict that in five years time residents will see a real difference on the ground.

Workshop 1 A nominated spokesperson from each group reported back to plenary on two or three key issues/ priorities for action identified by their group. All the issues for each of the seven groups were written on post its and grouped in themed columns. The Whitehill Bordon Project Team will type up these post its, and include them in their report of the event. See below the verbal plenary feedback of the key issues discussed.

Table 1(facilitated by Susan Robbins, WB and Gemma Harris, WB): 1. Invest in bus services now.

2. Investigate the implications of the BOSC housing access to Shortheath Common.

3. Water is not sufficient for the proposed development, request for this issue to be investigated further.

Table 2 (facilitated by Wendy Shillam, WB and Simon Beach, WB) 1. Take action now to create jobs and a better shopping choice for the town.

2. Leadership – who takes responsibility? The future delivery vehicle must have local elected representatives, i.e. local councillors.

3. Why would people come here? Affordable, green homes are needed for a young population. The town needs to house existing residents and attract new residents.

Table 3 (facilitated by Helen Mitchell, WB and Ian Parker, EHDC): Over riding request – that the project is developed with thorough and genuine community involvement.

1. Good design of housing is essential. Early demonstration projects need to excel in design and sustainability terms. All housing design needs real local community involvement.

2. Public transport needs to be well used. The service needs to be set up with thorough community involvement. In particular the rail service should be set up, without changing at Bentley.

Table 4 (facilitated by Mandar Puranik, WB) 1. Road traffic. What will be the impact of the Eco-town on roads outside East Hampshire?

And on local roads, A325, M3? Will there start to be in-commuting?

2. Economic development. Which industries will come? Why will they come to Bordon?

What supporting infrastructure will be provided?

3. Start-up businesses. Low cost start-up premises are needed in the project, existing buildings should be identified and allocated.

Table 5 (facilitated by Paul Ciniglio, Radian Housing and Stephanie Beggs, WB) 1. Economic development. How will the project attract new businesses to the town? Need to identify existing available commercial land/premises. Need to support existing local businesses and get their buy-in to the project.

117

2. Transport links. The project should reduce the need to travel and also provide sustainable travel options. Improvements to public transport should take effect immediately; this will help reduce local unemployment.

Table 6 (facilitated by Tim Hall, HCC) 1. The project will impact on the strategic road network. Increase in both in and out commuting from the town. Increase in traffic through surrounding villages, and on the A3 (Ham Barn roundabout to A325/A3 Longmoor was specifically mentioned).

2. Community facilities need to be thought through and built in the early phase of the project construction. Timing for new school places was discussed; three years needed from funding and development certainty until new school opens. These decisions should be progressed as soon as possible.

Table 7 (facilitated by Bruce Collinson, WB) 1. Affordable housing. The Eco-town should provide affordable housing for people in the surrounding villages. It would attract people to the area as East Hampshire is an expensive area.

2. Transport. The project should aim for a reduction in car use. Request that this is monitored and that there would be contingencies if it is found that the project has not in fact reduced car use.

3. Delivery / leadership. Need clear delivery plan for the project, should commit to a plan for the first five years, which includes early milestones. Strong leadership of the project is essential.

Workshop 2 During this workshop detailed comments were noted by the group facilitators. The Whitehill Bordon Project Team will type these up, and include in their report of the event. See below the verbal plenary feedback of the key issues discussed.

Environmental issues table (facilitators Bruce Collinson, WB and Jamie Cummins, Deadwater Trust) 1. Discussed the issues around sewerage plants producing electricity.

2. Request that any anaerobic digester is conditioned to use only local waste. Group members concerned about the digester in Southampton that imports waste from Tyneside.

3. Agree that local community management and ownership of energy production and use is essential, and noted that there is a need to undertake research to enable and establish this local role.

4. The local role can not conflict with national roles, e.g. the % of chlorine in water is set nationally.

5. The opportunities for this project include the community owning and managing the means of energy production.

6. Recommendation to investigate ground source heat.

7. On biodiversity, there needs to be baseline monitoring, species monitoring and protection at all geographical scales – local, regional, national and international. Need to work across landowners’ land – species move. Suggest talk to the local community and ask them to watch and monitor wildlife.

118

8.

Need to manage green space, water and energy locally. Need to research who the local community are.

9. Want decentralised energy production.

10. Recommend that the Eco-town is braver. Achieve carbon and water neutrality. Group recommends that more information is researched into exactly what these terms mean and how they can genuinely be achieved. Also, how these concepts can be communicated to the town’s existing residents. Be brave in the proposals for how water is used in the town.

Traffic and transport table (facilitator Tim Wall, HCC) 1. Discussed and reviewed work to date in more depth.

2. Discussed new routes for cycling and walking, existing development needs and the current work to produce a future strategy.

3. Discussed travel to and from Liphook, including school journeys, routes between Whitehill Bordon, Liphook, Alton.

4. The group requests that public transport is improved – and that it becomes reliable and affordable.

5. The group discussed the work that has/is being done on transport options and models.

This included road, rail and bus transport and demographics.

Housing table (facilitators Paul Ciniglio, Radian Housing and Stephanie Beggs, WB) 1. The tenure mix between masterplan and existing town housing to be adaptable. For example housing design to be adaptable over time, by extending into loft, providing home working and accessibility. Housing design to be excellent and innovative.

2. More work to be done on retrofit.

3. More work to be done to encourage residents to save energy.

4. Set up bulk procurement to bring down costs, reduce costs to lower than the current costs of the Green Deal.

5. In particular larger housing is needed. Lack of large size homes in current town’s housing stock. New houses can address and remedy this deficit. One benefit of large houses is they can accommodate home businesses.

Community facilities table (facilitators Mandar Puranik, WB and Helen Mitchell, WB) 1. Community facilities group also agreed with housing group that more large houses were needed in the project.

2. Sports - Proposed local management to be set up for sports facilities. Concerned that there is a lack of leadership in the management of facilities. Organise for existing residents to be able to use MoD land.

3. Young people -set up a hub for young people, look at all aspects of up to 19 years education – including community, culture, sport – do not just look at schools in isolation.

Investigate population and demographic projection to see if there will be a growth of the numbers of young people in the town.

4. Propose that any possible government or public kickstart funding is investigated.

5. The group agreed that the quality of education and schools, and community facilities are important for the town’s successful regeneration. They will attract a new type of resident.

6. Existing residents travel to Petersfield and Alton, they will not need to if there are more local facilities, including pubs.

119

Economic development table (facilitators Susan Robbins, WB and Gemma Harris, WB) 1. Address short and medium term issues, for example talk to MoD to set up opportunities to use their skills or materials before they vacate.

2. Contact high-tech businesses.

3. Use existing spaces as starter/incubator premises.

4. Plan for a choice of different sized office buildings, to stop businesses leaving the town when they expand.

5. Investigate new models of leasing and renting office space.

6. Retail ideas were discussed, including ideas to develop and re-energise the Forest Centre. It could be refurbished and specialist arts and crafts shops encouraged to set up there.

7. The group felt strongly that certainty was needed.

8. The group felt it was important to improve the visual appeal of the area and the town, and all agreed that was urgently needed in order to attract new businesses and residents – first impressions are all important.

Economic development table (facilitators Wendy Shillam, WB and Simon Beach, WB) 1. The group discussed the importance of skills which led to a discussion of education opportunities. Propose that the Eco-town development plans for jobs for whole families, at all stages of their careers.

2. Recommend that work is done to see if there are opportunities around the current MoD activities, facilities and contacts in the town. It may be that contacts, expertise or equipment can be handed over to the town. Important to do this before MoD vacate the town.

3. Consider links for the existing residents to the newly developed areas of the Eco-town, and vice versa; such as opportunities for socialising.

4. Need to ensure the town centre is well designed. Look at successful examples of modern town centres, e.g. Dutch.

5. The group had questioned the concept of the town centre over the next few years.

Should it be concentrated in one place or should facilities be scattered over the whole town? How would future use of on-line shopping affect the physical town centre proposals? Was a town centre even needed? It was agreed that the town centre proposal needed more discussion and research, and detailed design options.

Summary of the event by Biljana Savic, independent chair Brief summary of the issues that came up in the event - from approximately 250 post it notes produced in workshop 1, and the plenary feedback from both workshops.

1. ‘Local’ is the most repeated word in today’s event. Attendees recommend that more services, shops, jobs and homes are provided locally, for local people – this is indicating a strong preference for self-reliance, self-sufficiency, which is a fundamental principle of an eco-town (minimising travel and carbon footprint).

2. Other words that featured high on post its and in group discussions are: • Choice – increase the range of shops, homes, jobs.

• Delivery – one of the post its states that “a clear pathway” is needed to delivery, at least for the first 5 years. This emphasis on delivery reflects the profile of the 120

• • •

group, which includes technical, finance and management expertise. Requests for more detailed phasing plans were made, including assessment of the impact of phasing on security, traffic, and maintaining the balance between jobs and housing. More intensive and proactive involvement of landowners in developing more detailed delivery plan was seen as important.

Leadership – seen as an essential element in order to make plans happen on the ground.

Design - attendees have emphasised the importance of ensuring high design quality and protection of eco standards through delivery.

The town’s identity and Unique Selling Point (USP) – related to the previous point about the need for ensuring high quality of development, attendees said that the Eco-town needs a distinct identity, and a fresh way to communicate that identity and its USP to the existing community, and also to the people and businesses interested in relocating here. Some attendees suggested that a new name should be found for the Eco-town.

Next steps Information and input from attendees during both workshop sessions will be recorded in the engagement programme report by the Project Team and addressed through the next iteration of the masterplan.

121