General News

He explained the procedure which starts with the application document, the constitution and a definition of the neighbourhood area.  Once this application has been formally accepted, it is loaded onto the council web site for a period of 6 weeks public consultation.   We would hope for it to be approved by February.   After that, the PNF will be the recognised body for developing a neighbourhood plan.   It is not straight forward and there will be a lot of work, gathering statistics, etc.   When the plan is submitted, there is again a period of public consultation.   Once that process is completed, the plan undergoes inspection by an independent examiner and then will be put to a popular vote of all electors in The Area.   Assuming popular approval, the plan will go to the Borough for the final endorsement.

GC added that neighbourhood boundaries are not a legal specification.   It is up to the residents to decide where they should be.   They do not need to relate to ward boundaries which are often decided purely on the need to balance populations.

Officers were elected at these meetings, but we still require Community and Business Liaison Officers to talk to voluntary organisations active in Pyrford and to businesses, shops, nursing homes, golf courses.  If anybody is interested in getting involved in the community, please let MD know.

All expenditure to date for hall hire, printing etc. has been provided by the Byfleet, West Byfleet and Pyrford Residents’ Association (BWBPRA) – for which we are most grateful.

From tonight’s attendance of the meeting MD feels confident we have passed the 200 membership level today.   This will help show the council that we have broad community support.   However, we still need to do more to attract members of the younger generation to join the Forum.   MD explained that it was important to progress the application quickly, in order to meet the tight timetable for recognition at next February’s Council meeting.   MD stated that the Neighbourhood Plan will not be able to stop all development but at least it will, hopefully, be able to ensure some reasonable control over developments.

Copies of the draft application had been distributed to everyone present.   MD explained that there were still two unfinished areas.   The boundary still needed to be finalised and also a section needed to give some statistics on the make up of the forum membership.   MD asked if anyone had any questions or suggestions about the wording.   As there were none, it was now time to decide on the boundary

MD explained that the map in the draft application pack basically uses the parish boundary, delineated by the red line.   The red line at the top end of the map cuts streets in half and also goes through houses.   This hardly ideal.   What we want is to submit a proposal which follows property boundaries and keeps streets together as much as possible.   This is what we need to agree tonight.

The main area of contention is the boundary between Pyrford and West Byfleet.   Initially, we thought to use the WBC Ward Boundary.   However, this excludes a number of GU postcode streets.   So, the postcode boundary was considered, but we found this excludes a number of streets within the Church Parish.   The Church Parish is not perfect either, notably because of the line cutting streets in half and across the middle of individual properties.

The problem has been discussed within the BWBPRA, and everyone agrees that the best judges of which community should represent individual streets are the residents directly affected.   Carole March, the deputy Chief District Representative for West Byfleet, confirmed that both villages want to be able to agree a common boundary and that we are looking to the residents to guide us.   With this in mind, we organised a leaflet drop to every household in the roads likely to be affected.    With the notable exception of Elmstead Road and its two cul-de-sacs, this produced rather mixed feedback, with about 60% for Pyrford and 40% for West Byfleet.   MD did not feel this vote was unequivocal enough of a mandate to proceed, without opening the question to discussion from the floor.

The residents of the Elmstead Road area felt that they have far more in common with Pyrford and a petition, with nearly 30 signatures, has been handed to MD requesting the inclusion of Elmstead Road and its cul-de-sacs within the PNF area.   Only one resident has indicated an opposing view.

About 7-8 people who were in the audience live from either Coldharbour, Oakcroft or Hollybank Road and agreed that it was the sense of being part of a community which was more important.   They are looking to PNF to represent their streets.

Stephen Temple, born in Pyrford, stated that one of Pyrfords’ greatest assets was its walks including around Providence Place so it would be better to push the boundaries out a little.   Pyrford has a distinct heritage.  So the village should organise itself.   For instance, the field at the back of the Arbor Youth Club would benefit the village, if used as a recreation ground.

In the light of the views expressed on the night, MD proposed that the boundary line be moved up to the Old Woking Road, along from Coldharbour Road and down Elmstead Road, (south side of Old Woking Road and both sides of Elmstead Rd).   A member of the audience pointed out that this excluded the north side of Old Woking Road, east of Hurst Way, in West Byfleet, which looks strange.   He proposed that the boundary line continue east along the golf course up to the Shearwater Road roundabout and then through the middle of Old Woking Road up to Elmstead Rd.   Attendees were asked to vote on this option.  This proposal was agreed unanimously, so that the resultant map be submitted as the proposed neighbourhood area.

MD stated that participants could also send their thoughts and suggestions to the web-site, or via Facebook or Twitter, or to him via e-mail if they wished.

Each of the teams then reported back on their discussions.

1.     What is happening with the land behind the Arbor Youth Club?

2.     How do we keep the youth in the village?

3.     Youth Officer – there used to be one.   It was pointed out there is a Church Youth Officer in the village.

4.     Could organise BMX cycling and some form of keep fit.

5.     Thriving cricket club, church etc.

We need to make sure these associations are maintained as we go forward.   It was noted that there is a very active youth club in the Church of the Good Shepherd and they have a very effective Youth Officer.

MD thanked Geoff Geaves for volunteering to help with Community Liaison.

1.     Concerned about possible development along Upshott Lane.

2.     Burhill Estates would like to sell some of their land.

3.     Concerns about speeding in Pyrford Road.

4.     Entrance to the village shops needs sorting out, maybe have to sacrifice a tree to widen / straighten the road and create safer parking.

5.     Greater emphasis on double yellow lines in certain places, for businesses and residential roads.  Council need to ease the situation.

6.      Woodlands Avenue car park is often half full, because people don’t know about it and it needs to be better advertised.   Business people could get reduced fees.

7.     Need to enlarge the parking Zone area.

8.     Poor lighting in some parts of the Old Woking Road.

9.     Floyds Lane needs parking restrictions.

10.  An area for commercial parking on the Rowley Bristow site would be useful.

11.  Recreation: Supplying of exercise stations, to be made available at the rear of the playground, Pyrford Common.

1.     Cycleways and pathways should be linked together.

2.     Traditions Golf Course – need a path alongside the west bank of the Wey Navigation.

3.     The Anchor – would be lovely to be able to cycle through to RHS Wisley in safety.

4.     Teggs Lane – surface is not too good.   At Abbey Close, the surface is poor; tree roots coming up to the surface.

5.     Talked about biodiversity – and the need for allotments in Pyrford.   Council may have some land they could release.

All information from the charts produced here will be made available on the web-site.

MD thanked everybody for their efforts this evening.   If anybody would like to form other working groups to continue the building of a Pyrford Wish List, then please do so.   We have until February, before work can start in earnest on producing a Plan.   If there is something important that you want to know, please contact MD.

Members were encouraged to take home blank membership forms to hand out to neighbours who might wish to join.

Meeting ended at 10.15 p.m.

Martin asked those attending to introduce themselves and to state briefly which planning issues particularly interested them.   PB stated that in canvassing opinions, she found that many people want a recreation ground.   JW explained that Burhill estates had offered this many years ago but the residents did not want one in the location proposed.   VK stated that a disabled access swing would be a good idea.   GC mentioned that in terms of Burhill estates ownership of land there is great sensitivity around Shey Copse, particularly as the stables only have 2^1/₂ years left on the lease.   GC pointed out that some sites in Pyrford are critical and some are not.   MW stated that the Forum should be open to new ideas and new initiatives from younger residents moving into the area.

The minutes of the last meeting were adopted.

MD ran through the changes that have been made to the constitution, as agreed at the last meeting.  The changes were accepted by all present.

MD pointed out the changes that have been made to the Pyrford Neighbourhood Forum boundaries.  This was done to include as many streets as possible considered to be in Pyrford and to rationalise the boundary in other areas.   The plan takes the Parish boundary in the North and the Borough boundary in the South.   There are a few changes to these boundaries in the west around areas such as Shey Copse to include cottages and to follow more natural boundaries.

MD stated that the boundary takes as large an area as possible as it is far easier to remove, if necessary, than to add them in at a later date.   Everyone present agreed with the boundary map demonstrated by Martin.

AD

VK

PB

MD stated that a membership secretary was needed.   AD volunteered for the membership secretary post.   VK offered to help with the role.   PB and VK agreed to volunteer to cover Community Liaison.

MD

The issue of membership was raised.   CG stated it would be helpful to have a form that could be handed out to people as a means of collecting crucial data such as age and expertise.   It was pointed out that there is such a form on the website.   TP stated that parents are a very motivated group and that they should be targeted.   Several members stated the importance of getting younger people involved.

CG

VK

MD

Next public meeting.   Barbara and Cliff have produced a leaflet for distribution around houses to advertise the meeting on 24^th October in the Church of the Good Shepherd annexe.   It was suggested that the 2,500 copies could be increased to allow for leaflets being placed in venues such as the church, shops, surgery, social club, etc.   VK suggested a few changes to the leaflet.   VK and CG agreed to work on changes as quickly as possible.

There was some discussion of who might print the leaflets.   Some suggestions, including Pyrford Press, were made.

The nature of the public meeting was discussed.   It was felt that the meeting should be about building interest, with emphasis on the issues that residents might wish to engage with.   Opportunities should be given for people to express their views in smaller groups.   Sourcing of display boards and flip charts was discussed.

MD has arranged a meeting with Ernest Amoako, WBC Planning Policy dept.

CG

VK

It was noted that Cliff Bolton had ensured coverage of our meetings in local newspapers.

The final item on the agenda was the Forum’s online presence.   The website pyrfordforum.org is up and running and Facebook and Twitter accounts have been created.   VK offered to contribute to the Twitter account.   CG will share password with VK.

1.   Introductions

2.   Constitution – agree revisions

3.   Election of Officers

Vice-Chairman

Hon Secretary

Treasurer

4.   Membership

·1  Contact List – need to fill in blanks

·2    New Members

5.   Pyrford neighbourhood boundary

·3    West Byfleet neighbourhood boundary

-0     Postcode vs. Parish

·4    Volunteers for knocking on doors

6.   Application to Woking Borough Council

·5    Proof-reading

·6    Compliance Checks

·7    Statistical info re members – locality / age / experience

·8    Affiliated organisations

·9    Meet with Ernest Amoako, WBC Planning Policy dept

7.   Publicity

·10Newspapers

·11Website – pyrfordforum.org

·12Social Networking Sites

8.   Any Other Business

It was suggested that canvassing local residents would have be necessary and needed to be organised.

MD

MD

Section 3.10 talked about holding an AGM in May – better to say we will normally hold it in September.

Amendments were also proposed in Section 5 : General policy and principles

Biodiversity to be added to 5.2.   5.3 “public realm” wording to be deleted.

5.5 – expand “supporting employment” to the wider community.   Additional section 5.10 re wider consultation with adjoining neighbourhoods.

Changes agreed unamimously .  Martin will make the changes and issue again.

Ernest Amoako has agreed to vet the Constitution before application.   Martin to book appointment

Martin Doyle was confirmed as chairman

Steve and Ian agreed to be Joint Vice Chairman

Joint Secretaries – Pat, Yvette and Carol

Treasurer – Joy Sashak

Publicity – Cliff Bolton

JW

ALL

CB/BP

Pyrford Forum are very happy to work with West Byfleet through discussion but to make separate applications.

We then have to have a vote of at least 50% of the original voters.  There is no set timescale for the plan which takes about 3-4 months to get through, therefore could be an official body by middle of February, then we have to make our plan ‘wish list’.

We need age support – Byfleet have a Youth Forum.  Julian Walker offered to talk to Suzanne who runs the church youth group.  The under 21’s have to live or work in Pyrford.

Contact List – Martin had about 60 names of whom 37 turned up for the first meeting.  These names were read out and different members agreed to contact them to prompt them to come along to the next meeting.

A Leaflet drop by street reps within next two weeks was discussed and leaflet will be put together by Cliff and Barbara.   A notice in the Parish Magazine would be a good idea.   A display stand at the Shepherds market and a drop in with more information were all discussed.

Graham Chrystie suggested an open evening in the Village Hall and he would try to get the MP along.

The leaflet drop would be the best solution.

Radio station – could get a mention on Surrey Radio.

MD

JW

-7    proof reading

-8    checking compliance with statutory policies

-9    gathering of statistics about Forum members

-10  Businesses will need to be contacted if they are included,

Julian suggested checking the Parish magazine.

CB

CG

Statistics for the membership – require name, telephone number, age range, and what you know about them (job experience / community interests).

Will need to contact the Cricket Club and social club (Mike agreed to talk to Cliff Butler).  Arbor Youth Club to be contacted, and Guides, Brownies and Scouts.  Vicar is very supportive.  Pyrford Court would like to know what they can do to support.

Next Meeting date – brief discussion but Friday evening was not