Pyrford Neighbourhood Forum
MINUTES OF MEETING REF: PNFM260214
DATE: Tuesday 26th February 2014
VENUE: 8pm Pyrford War Memorial Village Hall
PRESENT: Martin Doyle (Chairman)
Graham Christie (Borough Councillor)
Liz Bowes (County Councillor)
Derek Berriman, Cliff Bolton (Publicity officer),Brian Dodd, Carole Gale (Secretary), Ivan Gale, Geoff Geaves, Ian Makowski, Tony Pratt, Barbara Provis, Brian Wilson, Steve Wright
APOLOGIES: Angela Doyle, Julian Walker, Ian Whittle
|1.0||MD asked those attending to introduce themselves. MD then summarised some key meetings – the meeting with West Byfleet Forum at which the boundary was agreed, the council meeting on 13th February when the council approved the Forum as the authorised body to produce the plan and the council meeting the previous Tuesday where Martin was able to represent the Forum view that Pyrford should not be split into two wards. Members were urged to make known to the council their opposition to the ward boundary proposal.|
|2.0||The timescale for production of the plan was discussed. MD suggested that the plan should be ready to be submitted soon after the summer. It would then have to be approved by an Inspector, be subject to a referendum by electors and put to bed by the end of the year. This would necessitate a draft being ready by June. Martin explained that we can choose what goes into it, there is no written guidance. We can use other plans already produced as guidance. Some useful plans mentioned were Tattenhall, Hook Heath, Burpham, Highgate (who have also produced a ‘things to do’ list).
We need to work out how many times we wish to involve the entire population, which involves publicity and venue booking. Publicity may involve visiting coffee mornings and leaflet drops.
Cliff stated that we need something concrete before we involve the wider population.
|2.1||MD stated that we will need to produce a questionnaire which will be delivered to every household.|
|3.0||Councillor GC raised the issue of finance. We can make an application for finance from the government up to a sum of £7000. Councillor LB pledged £1000. This is on top of £1500 allocated by the 3 villages Residents Association.|
MD IM GG
|3.1||MD mentioned that we would need to consider whether we could continue using the Residents’ Association to handle our finances, or whether this was the time to look to set up a bank account. GG suggested using CAF, the Charity Commissioners bank, if the organisation adopted charity status.|
|4.0||GG said that it was important to establish the scope of the plan. The effect of the ward boundary issue was discussed. It was pointed out that the Forum is independent of the Borough boundaries, it may simply mean that we will have multiple councillors. IM asked how many people were included in the Forum area. MD said around 5,000 electors so approximately 7,000 people.|
|5.0||The subject of the greenbelt was discussed. Rumours of development threats to the fields either side of Upshott lane have surfaced again. CG asked if greenbelt land had any legal protection. Councillor LB said that certain types of development is allowed, such as building of schools, but other types of development have to meet very specific criteria. Councillor GC said the good news is that Woking’s housing targets have been met by existing site allocations until 2021/22.
BW mentioned some areas of the village which are run down and neglected, including farm buildings. The neglected historic fabric of the village, such as John Donne’s boathouse and the old granary near Traditions were mentioned.
|6.0||The importance of involving local organisations was mentioned, including, business, social clubs, cricket and football clubs. We should think about putting together a wish list, as there will be Communities Infrastructure Levy money available from approved developments such as the Oakfield school site.|
|7.0||The question of the relationship between the Forum and the council was raised. Councillor GC said that there will be a number of designated officers for Pyrford. It was stated that the Forum should have a formal written agreement between the Forums and the council to define the relationship. IM asked if the council had an obligation to inform Forums of any discussions it was entering into with developers. Councillor GC said that planners were keen to communicate with the Forum. GG said we need to be incorporated into these processes.|
|8.0||MD said that he would like to amend the constitution to allow associate members of the Forum. This was agreed, but change would have to be made at a public meeting.|
|9.0||Groups. The working groups proposed by MD were approved:
Social and Community: GG(leader) and BW
Local infrastructure group TP and BD (leader)
Open Space Group CG (leader) BW, BP and GG with GC
Built Environment. No members as yet.
These were just the initial members and it was agreed that more members will be actively sought. MD will distribute spreadsheet showing members areas of interest.
It was recognised that Woking’s listed building data was out-of-date and we need to create our own list.
Method of data collection was also mentioned as an issue to be addressed.
|10.00||Councillor LB said we should start thinking about wish lists. The old village school is likely to become available, perhaps to turned into an old persons day centre, for example.
A newsletter was proposed as a means of keeping the community informed. The Residents Association is a resource that may be exploited sparingly. The possibility of the two groups being confused was mentioned.
|11.00||Any Other Business. A community meeting was proposed for the end of March. Residents will need two weeks’ notice. SW informed us that all the information given to members was available on the website. MD said the members database still needs lots of work – email addresses and telephone numbers adding.|
|Meeting ended at 10.00pm
Next Meeting date – it was agreed that the committee members will meet every Tuesday evening at 8pm in the village hall for the next few weeks.
Leave a Reply