( Lead Executive Member- Cllr M J Hicks)
Minutes:
O&S.83/16
The Managing Director of Brookbanks Consulting Limited presented an update to the Panel that included reference to the following early findings:-
- There was proving to be insufficient space for water and a lack of climate change allowance;
- There were certain conflicts between the Masterplan and the topography of the landscape; and
- The rate of sales were presently too low. However, since visitor numbers were higher than anticipated and the calendar was moving into what was traditionally prime selling time, it was hoped that this trend would soon be reversed.
In its conclusion, the presentation highlighted the following next steps for the project:-
- to implement the Strategic Review;
- to develop the Community Trust;
- progression of the temporary/permanent primary school;
- progression of the Leisure Centre and the Local Centre; and
- the development of the western pitches.
In the subsequent discussion, reference was made to:-
(a) potential solutions to the water space issue. Whilst the answers were not known yet, the Managing Director did highlight that all best practice guidance suggested that water should be managed on the surface (e.g. via basins and/or swales). However, the Panel noted that any such decisions would have to be taken in the context of how they would fit into the vision of Sherford;
(b) the access off the A38. A Member raised the point that the works were still causing significant problems to local residents and there was a public perception that little work was taking place on the junction. In reply, the Managing Director expressed his sympathy for the situation, but was pleased to announce that the works in this area were now just about finished;
(c) potential reasons why sales had been low to date. Having attended the recent site tour, some Members cited the following reasons as being potentially contributing factors for the lower than anticipated sales:
o the use of community car parks and the consequent inability for residents to park outside their property;
o the ceilings being too high;
o the staircases being too steep; and
o the windows being too low.
In reply, the Managing Director welcomed these observations and reiterated that these features were within the Design Town Code for Sherford and it was his belief that the Code would need to be reviewed as the site continued to evolve. The Managing Director also emphasised that the use of modern building materials now resulted in a better end product and the Town Code was restricting the project by requiring the use of traditional materials;
(d) the delivery of on-site affordable housing. Members were advised that the 130 affordable houses that were part of phase 1 of the project had been secured by Devon and Cornwall Housing and they would be advertised imminently. Whilst this phase of affordable housing was situated within the Plymouth City Council geographical boundary, it was confirmed that these would be allocated on a 50/50 basis between the city and the South Hams;
(e) the Community Trust. In reply to a question, the Managing Director advised that the amount that each householder would have to pay would depend upon the effectiveness and the success of the Community Trust. As a worst case scenario, the Managing Director estimated that each property would pay between £250 and £300 per annum. In reply, one Member commented that this was likely to be a further reason why sales had been less than expected;
(f) the amount of green space. The Panel was assured that, regardless of how the development evolved, the amount of on-site green space would not change;
(g) renewable energy. Whilst the central government position had changed in relation to feed-in tariffs (thereby affecting the viability of certain sources of renewable energy), the project remained committed to achieving its overall aspirations, but via alternative means;
(h) progression of the primary school. The view was expressed that early establishment of the primary school would have been an incentive to prospective buyers. The Managing Director informed that it was the initial intention for the school to be developed during the early stages of the project. However, the uncertainty following the results of the EU Referendum last June had affected the delivery of the primary school. That being said, the Managing Director still hoped that the school could be developed early in the project and dialogue was taking place with Devon County Council to progress this matter.
In conclusion, the Chairman wished to thank the Managing Director for his informative presentation and responses to Member questions and, on behalf of the Panel, requested that the next project update be scheduled for six months’ time.