Bowburn & Parkhill Community Partnership
Charity Number 1112151
GENERAL MEETING
Tuesday 18 July 2006 from 6.30pm to 8.30pm
Present: W Bates, M Bell, J Blackburn, J Blakey, K Calvert, S Colquhoun, P Dawe, M Dee, N Dixon, K Haigh, J Halford, J Kane, G Ovington, S Raine, A Richardson, Maggie Robinson, Maureen Robinson, W Stainthorpe, M Syer, S Thompson, R Walsh, D Whittaker, A Wilson, J Wilson
In Attendance: D Butters (Hallam Land Management), G Choat (Commercial Estates Group), M Hepburn (Nathaniel Litchfield), P Herbert and G Scott (City of Durham Planning), B Cockburn, C Feenan, M Ridley
1. Apologies for absence: R Cowen, G Hutchinson, R Jackson, R Millerchip, PSinclair, A Shutt, G Stoker
2. PC Cockburn: Incidents to 21 June; Cassop–None, Parkhill–1 assault, 1 criminal damage;
Bowburn-2 burglary, 3 theft, 3 criminal damage. Youth nuisance is monitored, and alcohol seized.
A member queried powers of police outside the Co-op. It was explained that the voluntary Over 21 Scheme operates on Friday and Saturday, but the problems in Bowburn do not warrant a Dispersal Order.
Another member felt that so called minor incidents i.e. dog-bin fires should be reported as criminal damage.
PC Cockburn said that such incidents were not seen as ‘minor’. A dog-bin fire was reported at Parkhill.
A member asked if there had been a report of an assault in Bowburn, but PC Cockburn was not aware of any.
3. Cape Site Planning proposals: M Hepburn explained that the Cape site was cleared 15 years ago but the cost of decontamination had prevented development. The plan is for industrial use, and housing which would pay for the cost of clearance. There have been 2 community consultations where opposition had been addressed. The industrial access is via Henderson. A copy of the Outline Planning Application is in the library.
G Scott made it known that the plans are a departure from the Local Plan, where the Cape site is for industrial use, and the City would have to refer the plans to GONE. The statutory authorities would advise on Highways and Water. He said there are benefits in developing the site and the City is keen to get rid of the eyesore.
P Herbert explained also that as there were over 100 houses the plans would have to be referred to GONE.
Private funding, the safeness of the play area, and traffic implications were queried. DB answered there was no private funding and the playing area would be covered by the provision for a crossing with light controls.
A member asked who owned the land and how much would decontamination cost the owners? DB replied that Hallam Land and Commercial Estates owned the land, and decontamination would cost approximately £2M. The land on its own has a negative value. A member queried the feedback from Shincliffe: the reply was none, but their interest is in Bowburn which is directly affected. It was mentioned that Helios Industry did not go ahead with the plans for Cape. G Scott explained this was because there was no subsidy from the City.
A shopping area was asked about; DB thought increased housing should increase the prospect for shops.
On the size of employment it was thought that 380 people could be employed. The proposed Business Park was raised, creating 5000 jobs, with traffic implications and competition for employment. GC said Highways will assess the affect on traffic flow and Commercial Estates was in a different market for jobs.
There was a concern that houses would be built but the industrial estate would not, however DB did not think it was economical to build units and leave them empty. A member noted that to keep the site viable the planners required the owners to price sensibly.
There was a worry that places in Durham Johnston School would be under threat, but another member noted that Coxhoe had many new houses but there were no extra children.
It was felt that Shincliffe would gain monetarily, however GC thinks that a developed site benefits Bowburn.
P Herbert would give the proposal careful consideration and see if he could address concerns.
4. Carol Brown – Community Development Officer: The apprenticeship scheme has a possible 90 recruits and notices will be sent out by the end of July in the City News and by a mailshot. There is an open day on 17 August in the community Centre. LSC funding will pay recruits whilst they are on the scheme.
The best option for flexible use of CCTV is a mobile unit costing about £100 000. The BT Hub would be in the village, say the Community Centre, and the scheme could be expanded to Parkhill and the Co-op by Wireless Meshing Nodes attached to lamp posts. A member mentioned that there had been problems with Wireless Meshing Nodes when the Youth Centre wanted broadband.
Another member asked where match funding would be found and Carol said she had some ideas for this.
A member noted that Parkhill did not have a community centre therefore there was no point in discussing the idea for that area, but Carol would investigate this.
Masterplan – Leader of each priority group to give monthly update.
Highways: No change. Carol informed the meeting that street lights may impact on the Masterplan.
Environment: M Syer asked for a Project Manager, which he had raised at the Working Regeneration Group. He had a high regard for Carol but she was expected to do too much. In his view all the options for the £1.8M should be fully costed and timed so that all the bids can be presented together and important items could not be the responsibility of small groups. It was thought that F Brettwood would project manage the Masterplan.
Carol said that her role was to bring all the projects together with the groups coming to her and other staff may take on small projects. Members felt that the PARC development had been well handled by Carol and that she was in control of the projects and perhaps we should speak to J Tindale to free her from the other villages to become the dedicated worker for Bowburn. Asked for her views, Carol answered that she had no problem becoming the dedicated worker for Bowburn, nor would she be offended if a project manager was brought in.
It was discussed and agreed to request that Carol be the dedicated worker for the whole of the Masterplan.
Unadopted Roads: Carol has a contact in County Hall and will fix up a meeting with R Jackson.
Recreation/PARC: The consultation event was well attended and the final one is on 23 July then all the information will be analysed ready for a meeting in September. There is a possibility of funding for the Sensory Garden, Biodiversity area and the clean up of the beck.
Community Centre: Discussion took place with A White concerning the plans for the Durham Green Business Park off the Tursdale roundabout. The decision was made to inform the City Council that the committee would like them to handle the stages of the Community Association plans. Members agreed to a refurbishment of the centre with some major changes to the building.
Church: New plans are being considered. It is difficult to get funding for a temporary building.
Parkhill: They are waiting for new plans for the park.
Youth: No plans at the moment.
Heritage: The group have met Carol and W Lavelle is now in charge of the case.
Centenary: The Centenary Medals have been distributed and a member asked if the children from Coxhoe and Sedgefield, attending the Junior School, had been given medals. However the Community Chest limits the medals to children in the area of benefit. The schools were merely an easy way to source the children and the ruling could not be changed. The secretary asked for the names of children who attended schools not visited. Medals are available for sale at £5.00 as extra medals were purchased as requested. Discussion took place on the preparations for the Birthday Party on Sunday, 23 July.
5. Minutes of last general meeting and matters arising – 16 May 2006:
The minutes were accepted as a true record by M Syer and K Calvert.
A Wilson provided the second quote for the Community Chest, which was more expensive than the original.
The secretary apologised for not giving the Website report.
6. Report and matters arising – Trustees 30 May/14 June 2006:
Reply from D Marrs concerning PARC project, now regenerating the whole of the Park. The City Council have tenure of the land via a 20 year lease dated 2001 which may be sub-let, if required. In a legal sense the Partnership would be the commissioning body. Apart from external funding, monies would come from the ringfenced financial allocation. Firstly the Partnership would agree the project, followed by the DVRC board, and finally the City Council’s Cabinet. The Partnership has agreed that the City Council will deliver the project.
The trustees were broadly happy with the reply that:
The Partnership would be a commissioning body for the project;
The City Council would appoint a Planning Supervisor as duty holder;
A management fee of 8%, which covers the full delivery of the project;
The project team would keep the Partnership informed;
The City Council would form a view of the design regardless of who delivers the project. If the City delivers the project they would be responsible for the design, audit it and pay designers out of the 8%;
The City Council would maintain PARC and add it to their insurance policy under Third Party Claims.
Estimating match funding is difficult until there is agreement on the final project. Once complete the Funding Officer can produce an approximation of external funding and the impact Partnership funding.
Questions were put forward for next meeting (13 July) of the Regeneration Working Group:.
7. Items of Any Other Business – Register title of issue for item 13: 2 items were presented.
8. Treasurer’s Report:
Bank charges and room hire has been paid from the general fund leaving £281.30; the community chest and DUCK funds increase the centenary fund to £8 277.71; and the Home Front Recall fund remains at £106.67.
A member thought that the excess HFR funds should be absorbed into the General Fund.
There were 3 entries that tied on 64 out of 65 correct answers for the Sweetmeats Quiz. The result of the draw was as follows: 1st J Miller sold by the Oak Tree; 2nd K Usher; 3rd J Kane. There will be a new quiz in August.
9. Community Chest: None. The payments should be made on Saturday from the last round of bids.
10. Correspondence: Letter to Baydales and the City Council to ask for three quotes for the use of CCTV.
Letter from D Marrs answering questions concerning the PARC project, see Item 6 for details.
Letter from the Parish Council asking where the partnership intends to set up notice boards and how much of the cost and installation it wishes to provide.
Card and letter of thanks from the Infant & Nursery School for the community chest funds.
Letter of thanks from Maureen Robinson for the sundial bought for her resignation present.
Notice of the Disability –‘Have Your Say’ event on 21 July in County Hall.
11. Reports:
> Regeneration Working Group: Carol has already reported on the apprenticeship scheme. There are 2 bungalows still occupied in Horton Crescent, but demolition should start within a fortnight on the remaining properties. A draft Masterplan of 30 pages with pictures should be ready in August. An application will be made to GONE for the Prince Charles/Horton Crescent site for change of use as it departs from the Local Plan as a Greenfield site. The reason for this is because it is part of the global regeneration of Bowburn and is therefore necessary. CCTV will operate on the Philip Avenue site by the end of July which does away with the need for manned security. Within 8 weeks the Lawson Road site should be complete and there should be tarmac on Philip Avenue by September. There is a further 15 months of work on site and the Sales Office should be located there in September.
A member asked about renting properties in Philip and the 3 Rivers’ bungalows and flats were described.
A member commented on the fact that if Lawson Road was completed then the Regeneration money should be coming on line. It was noted that such money was released in yearly and quarterly amounts.
Complaints were registered about heavy plant going between sites; need for dropped kerbs; and the closeness of the houses. It was suggested that residents should write into the City Council.
> Parish Council: M Harlow, City Heritage Design Manager, reported on the Bowburn Appraisal-Conservation Area saying that it did not matter whether the allotments were taken in or not. He left copies of the draft report.
The damaged saplings are to be replaced in the Doorstep Green; flower tubs and baskets were put up along the A177 and at the entrance to Old Quarrington; clerk to write to Partnership about notice boards; the Parkhill Stone has been damaged by a driver without insurance so the Parish will have it to pay for; footpaths are being inspected and there may be more signs and styles; hope to relocate the gate on B/Way 37 to prevent fly tipping; more grassing is to be done by the city Council. Request to name and shame those who are stealing flowers from the tubs.
> Quarry Liaison Committee: The committee met and looked round the quarry and the channels of communication have been opened.
> LSP: Will report next meeting.
> 12 Villages/SRB6 Representative: Ushaw Moor Banner Group has first meeting tonight and the School Sport’s Hall is opened by B Robson on 21 July; Brandon Fun Day went well; Ludworth’s ‘No drinking’ signs are high up on the lamp posts; Q Hill heritage walk was well supported; second round of bids for the Sensory Trail in Brandon; board meeting in New Brancepeth on achievements of SRB6; Infant School welcomed funding information, which is now on-line; food & hygiene course last week; funding finders course on Saturday; Basic Maths in Ludworth; Quarry to donate stone for stone wall course. The next meeting is 14 August.
12. Group Noticeboard:
Banner: Congratulations to everyone for a successful Gala Day. The Edith Cavell Banner unveiled on 8 Sept.
BVC: The next meeting is Thursday when the new edition of the Interchange will be discussed.
Football Teams: Presentation of trophies on 21/07 in Bowburn WMC. The Under 10’s Girls play the Under 10’s Boys on 23 July for the Centenary Cup.
Bowburn WMC team starts their season on 13 August, although there is a concern about the state of the pitch.
History: There next meeting is on Thursday.
Website: the monthly summary for July is 5 new topics, 41 new posts, 5 new members, 25 were the most on line and there have been 3825 hits so far this month proving that the village website is getting stronger.
Youth Centre: All the evening sessions are very popular, with about 50 young people involved in a variety of activities every week for which they will gain a national accreditation. The Wednesday pm Not in Education Employment or Training (NEET) has been hard to reach but Connexions and Johnston are helping to make contacts. Joanne is taking a group for a residential week to Hamsterley Forest. The club is open 14 August for 3 weeks from Monday to Wednesday at 11.00pm to 1.00pm and Tuesday evening for the sports project from 5.00pm to 7.00pm. Joanne has secured a grant to tidy the garden and all volunteers are welcome.
The secretary offered her thanks to Joanne for the wonderful work she is doing with all the young people.
13. Any Other Business: the questions had been dealt with throughout the meeting.
14. Date and Time of Next Meeting:
Meetings are held on the third Tuesday of each month
Next meeting is 15 August 2006