Rugby About Turn
Second Meeting – 10 August 2016 – “Aims and Objectives”
Dunchurch Park Hotel
[The main record of the meeting is in black font – supporting notes are in blue.]
Attendance
Dawn / Cotton / Barby & Onley Parish CouncilNoreen / New / Councillor
Howard / Roberts / Councillor
Deepah / Roberts / Councillor
Bill / Lewis / Councillor
John / Robards / Friends of Lime Tree Avenue
Steve / Burton / Friends of Lime Tree Avenue
Adrian / Cooper / Onley Park Residents Association
Nick / Long / Onley Park Residents Association
Anne / Dahmash / Residents for preservation of Hillmorton
Pauline / Woodcock / Residents for preservation of Hillmorton
Derek / Hillman / Rugby Disability Forum
Sue / Hillman / Rugby Disability Forum
Dave / Ralph / SARD
Richard / Allanach / SHARE
Julian / Woolley / SHARE
Michael / Taylour / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Brian / Hall / Stand Against Lodge Farm
McAulley / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Tracey / Lennard / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Heather / McBreen / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Christopher / Ross? / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Carin / Jackson / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Adrian / Jackson / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Joe / Harris / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Richard / Hayward / Stand Against Lodge Farm
David / Thompson / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Carolyn / Thompson / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Stuart / Stand Against Lodge Farm
John / Tautu / Stand Against Lodge Farm
Edward / Palusinski / Sustainable Rugby
Roy / Bayliss / Sustainable Rugby
Hallam / Willoughby Parish Council
Kate / Aluze-Ela / Woodlands Residents Association
Bridget / Durrant / Woodlands Residents Association
Pam / Brockway / Woodlands Residents Association
Keith / Tilley / Woodlands Residents Association
Kevin / New
Steve / Fancourt
Jonathan / Durrant
Richard / Lee
Notes – for simplicity only one organisation is recorded against any individual although several people have multiple memberships. Members of parish councillors are also elected councillors but I have only used that description for those who are members of Rugby Borough Council. The four councillors present were not representing Rugby Borough Council and remain free to determine how they will vote on any particular measure on the Council based on the evidence available to them at the time of the vote.
Apologies
Bill Stubbins – Friends of Lime Tree Avenue
Sara Herrington – SHARE
Introductions
1Richard Allanach invited the various groups present at the meeting to identify themselves and welcomed them to the meeting.
Good News
2Residents for the preservation of Hillmorton persuaded the councillors on the planning committee to overturn Rugby Borough Council’s planning team’s recommendation that a 110 house development which would encroach on the Rainsbrook Valley should be given planning permission.
3On the night “About Turn” held a vigil outside the Town Hall Rugby Borough Council voted not to allow their planning team to rubber stamp the Draft Local Plan and send it off to the Planning Inspectorate – but rather it will have to be debated in full Council first.
4After 30 months of not having anything to do with local residents David Wilson Homes invited SARD to a meeting to discuss their plans for 860 houses on Ashlawn Fields. Sadly they did not make any concessions regarding their scheme but they do now acknowledge local residents concerns.
Announcements
5On Monday 15th August local residents are organsinga protest in Rokeby Fields at 7pm against the county council’s plans to build on the fields. Everyone is welcome to come to this event.
6On Wednesday 17th August SHARE are organising a traffic count along Dunchurch Road during the peak hour 8am-9pm.
7On Thursday 1st September Stand Against Lodge Farm Village Group are holding a public meeting in Grandborough Village Hall at 7.30pm.
Timetable for the local plan
7Rugby Borough Council’s planning department are supposed to have everything ready that they need to put the local plan to the Inspectorate before putting the “Publication Draft” out for consultation.Public Consultation starts on Monday 26 September and continues until Friday 11 November. About Turn has to make the case for the changes it wants to see in the Local Plan during that period. Unlike most consultations this one requires some technical skill on the part of respondents.
8The plan then has to go back to the Council – this might take place on Tuesday 13 December. If the plan is not improved then we will need to persuade sympathetic councillors to propose suitable amendments and persuade over half the Council to vote for them.
9The final line of defence is the “Examination in Public” which will take place in 2017.The government’s planning inspector decides who they want to listen to at an Examination in Public but if people have not responded to the consultation then they definitely will not be invited to put their case to the Examination in Public.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
10Richard Allanach explained that, at present, About Turn did not have a constitution, or a membership, therefore it had no formal way of making decisions so that the only way to proceed was to see what aims and objectives had broad agreement amongst those present.
General Aims and Objectives
11Julian Woolley and Steve Fancourt led the meeting through this section.
Table 1: General Aims and Objectives
About Turn willA / Challenge Rugby Borough Council’s assumptions leading to its predictions of housing need.
B / Insist on a balance between an increase in housing numbers and growth in infrastructure to support the additional housing.
C / Seek as a matter of priority relief for the Dun Cow crossroads in Dunchurch. This should occur regardless of any housing development.
D / Express its concern that the proposed South West Rugby “sustainable urban extension” is not as currently specified sustainable.
E / Recognise that the retail heart of the town has [unfortunately] moved north to the Elliotts Field/Junction 1/Tesco complex and it has therefore become necessary to provide improved connectivity with the new retail centre and the rest of the town.
Notes: There was a discussion about what infrastructure meant in planning terms. The term is a wide one and includes: schools, hospitals, GP surgeries, leisure facilities, roads and railways. [There is a further note at the end of the minutes.]
In the discussion Bill Lewis and Dave Ralph explained what SARD had been doing to measure traffic flowing through the Dun Cow junction at Dunchurch.
12In later discussions two other concepts came up which probably need to be rated as general aims and objectives. Cllr Howard Roberts spoke about identity and community spirit and the need to prevent urban sprawl destroying the distinctiveness of different communities within Rugby Borough. This probably leads to:
F: Supporting community identity through protecting boundaries eg the Rainsbrook Valley distinguishes Warwickshire from Northamptonshire and the fields to the West of Cock Robin Wood distinguishes Dunchurch from Rugby.
The other concept which is probably general is the principal that existing planning permissions should be delivered before new housing allocations are made. Which would make point G.
Note: Rugby has given planning permission for 6,200 houses on the Radio Masts site but is looking for additional housing land in its local plan because it does not believe that all 6,200 houses will be built before 2031 !!!
13Julian and Steve would have continued with a general point about transport but two members of sustainable Rugby had come along to present their ideas on this matter so we heard from Ed Palusinki and Roy Bayliss on transport. The general point is that the transport network should remove traffic from Rugby rather than drive traffic through it. We should:
(a)Support the proposals for a station for the Radio Masts settlement;
(b)Support the proposals for dualing the A5 to the east of Rugby and develop proposals for dualing the A426 between Gibbet Hill and junction 1 on the M6; and
(c)Provide a junction to the M45 east of Rugby.
There was a discussion about whether Rugby needed a second station with arguments about the capacity of the West Coast Main Line and the problems with travelling by car from the Rugby Radio Masts site into Rugby to catch a train.
Speaking about an extra junction to the M45 Cllr New expressed her concern about its impact on the Rainsbrook Valley and residents from Barby wanted an assurance that it would not impact on their village.
HS2. The first station on the proposed HS2 line after leaving London would be near junction 6 on the M42. Therefore it is not envisaged that anyone in the Rugby area would use the HS2 to travel either to Birmingham or London but the proponents of HS2 argue that it would reduce the pressure on the existing West Coast Main Line.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
14Having considered general objectives we then moved into a discussion of:
(a)Possible changes in the standards for development in the draft Local Plan;
(b)Matters which were in the draft Local Plan which should be removed; and
(c)Matters which should be added to the draft Local Plan.
Possible changes in the standards for development in the draft Local Plan
15We agreed that:
(a)We should review the standards for houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) to ensure that standards for parking provision reduced the pressure on parking in narrow residential streets. (Most HMOs are in central Rugby where the streets were not designed for large levels of motor traffic.);
(b)We should review the requirements for specialist (sheltered and supported) housing for new housing developments – in response to concerns that Rugby had too little housing of this type;
(c)Planning permissions for new developments should have more aggressive requirements regarding the speed at which these new developments should be brought into use;
(d)The proposed 30m protection buffer for Cawston Spinney was wholly inadequate and should be increased; and
(e)The Rainsbrook Valley merited special consideration in the draft Local Plan’s landscape protection measures.
Matters in the draft Local Plan which should be removed
16 We agreed that the following elements of the draft local plan should be removed:
(a)The idea that you should overplan for houses in excess of calculated need (thereby allowing developers to “cherry pick” developments rather than complete sites where planning permission had already been granted.)
(b)Roads through the fields between the A426/Northampton Lane and Montague Road.
[Although note the potential conflict between this and General Aim and Objective C as we do not yet have an agreed solution for the relief of pressure on the Dun Cow junction in Dunchurch.]
(c)The proposed development at Lodge Farm.
Matters which should be added to the Draft Local Plan
17We agreed that the following should be added to the draft local plan:
(a)Setting aside 5 hectares in the North of Rugby for a new secondary school; and
(b)Establishing a buffer zone between Rugby and Dunchurch.
There was a proposal from the floor that the villages to the south east of Rugby should work more closely together on common issues of concern – for example the withdrawal of rural bus services. This was outside the scope of About Turn but residents from those villages present at the meeting were urged to take the opportunity to discuss their common concerns.
OTHER MATTERS
Volunteers
18It was pointed out that volunteers from SARD (Bill Lewis, Sara Herrington and Richard Allanach) had undertaken most of the work in getting About Turn off the ground and additional help was required to keep it running. John Tautu volunteered to be one of the group’s spokespersons. [As can be seen there is scope for more volunteers.]
Date, time and place of the next meeting
19Monday, 12th September at 7.30. The Dun Cow in Dunchurch had volunteered to provide a room but this would only hold 25 people. At the next meeting the volunteer groups would be encouraged to send just two representatives per group. The main purpose of this meeting would be deciding how About Turn could best support local residents who wanted to make representations on the draft Local Plan. (Making representations on the publication draft of a Local Plan is a specialist task.)
I have provided some additional notes below to clarify some of the other points that were raised at the meeting.
Additional notes
- The limitations of the planning process
There were lots of comments at the meeting about how could the NHS cope with a rapidly growing population in Rugby. Similar comments could have been made about schools.
In essence the Local Plan can only make decisions about land use so there is in a draft policy DS8: South West Rugby a statement that the South West Rugby “sustainable urban extension” will include provision for a 3 GP surgery, rising to a 7 GP surgery. That is good news as it means that land should be made available for a surgery. However it does not mean that South West Rugby would get a GP surgery because the Local Plan cannot guarantee that a GP will want to set up shop in that area and it cannot guarantee that the NHS will offer enough money to a GP to tempt them to set up shop in that area.
The Local Plan can only do so much. Other arms of local government and national government also have to act in order to produce sustainable development.
- Who does what in government? Who is who in government?
Questions were asked at the meeting about who is responsible for what in government and these questions were particularly asked when representatives from Sustainable Rugby were presenting their ideas for traffic management.
The main roads running through our area: M1, M6, M45, A5, A45 and A46 are all the responsibility of national government and its quango Highways England, formerly the Highways Agency. Warwickshire County Council is responsible for all the other roads, bridleways, footpaths etc. Rugby Borough Council’s role is therefore limited to responding to planned changes in the road network – for example the Western Relief Road made it more likely that planning permission would be given for the Cawston development, advocating changes to the road network and safeguarding land for future road development.
To take some of the main issues responsibility is divided up like this:
National Government / NHSStrategic Road network eg A5
Railways
Warwickshire County Council / Transport – everything other than the strategic road network
Schools*
Social Services
Rugby Borough Council / Planning
Housing
Dustbins
[* Just to note that Warwickshire County Council is responsible for finding every child a school place but much of the power available to do this has now been taken by national government.]
Both Warwickshire County Council and Rugby Borough Council have opted for the “cabinet” system of local government which means that in both local authorities most of the responsibilities and powers have been given to a group of “top” councillors. Some of the key names are:
National Government / SajidJavid – Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. MP for Bromsgrove. He is responsible for the planning system nationally.Chris Grayling – Secretary of State for Transport and MP for Epsom & Ewell
Warwickshire County Council / IzziSeccombe – leader of the Council and councillor for the Stour
Peter Butlin – cabinet member with responsibility for Transport and councillor for Admirals and Cawston. (He is also a Rugby Borough Councillor)
Colin Hayfield – cabinet member with responsibility for education. Councillor for Arley
Rugby Borough Council / Peter Butlin – leader of the Council, councillor for Admirals and Cawston.
Heather Timms – cabinet member for planning and councillor for Binley Woods and the surrounding area.
Useful links:
About Turn -
The latest draft of the local plan -
What lies ahead – the examination in public -
A critique of the local housing needs assessment -
Organisations:
Barby and Onley Parish Council -
Friends of Lime Tree Avenue -
Rugby Disability Forum -
SARD -
SHARE -
Stand Against Lodge Farm -
Willoughby Parish Council -