Impressions, reflections and speculations

By Roger Ogle, publisher/editor, Swindon Link magazine and comments from those in attendance (see the end of this article)

Between 1,200 and 1,500 people attended the first 'public consultation' organised by St Modwen Properties plc and Swindon Town Football Club to view the plans for redeveloping Shaw Forest Country Park into a new football stadium and sports complex.

Several company representatives, including St Modwen's managing director Bill Oliver, were in attendance to be quizzed about the proposals, along with football club chief executive Mark Devlin, and consultant engineers from Halcrow Consulting.

Despite warnings earlier in April that Roughmoor Social Hall, with a capacity of only 50 people was inadequate, St Modwen insisted it was the right venue. A stream of people attended from 2pm, and between 6.30pm and 7.30pm the queue to get in was twenty deep. People emerged gasping for breath to continue discussions in the car park and also to question Mark Devlin who had stationed himself outside. 

There was no model to be seen as advertised, because the proposal had changed radically. Originally the idea was to redevelop the Shaw Forest Country Park site, which used to be called the Old Shaw Tip. Every square inch was to be built on, save for a tree planting belt around the edge.




The latest plans displayed show that the land-take proposal has significantly increased. Not only is the Shaw Forest Country Park site to be taken - leaving the raised, heavily tree planted area at the southern end and also in the north west corner, where the community tree planting events have taken place over the last ten years - the plan shows development of the adjacent Shaw Farm commercial tip which is still operational. This is designated phase 3 of the Shaw Forest Country Park in the Great Western Community Forest 30 year plan.

St Modwen representatives were pressed hard by visitors to give answers to their concerns, including 'why do you want to destroy a park that Swindon people have helped to develop.' The St Modwen man tried to explain that they were property developers and that's how they make their money. (And very successfully they do too: www.stmodwen.co.uk)

Under pressure from Julia Hinns of Nine Elms, St Modwen representative Rupert Joseland admitted at 7.15pm, in the presence of Andrew Dillon from Peatmoor, "I would not want this in my back garden."

Two new options are proposed. One shows the 22,000 seater stadium on the commercial tip site, furthest away from housing, the other shows it in the middle of the Shaw Forest site. The pictures here show the other elements, like cricket ground and athletics track, rugby pitches, hotels, fast food outlets, etc.

A dog racing track is shown, but no speedway because apparently St Modwen have been told that it is too intrusive in planning terms. (How that can be weighed against the noise and disruption caused by 22,000 football fans or people attending a summer pop concert makes one wonder). So what will happen to the present combined track at Blunsdon if the dogs are taken away, and what will happen to the Swindon Robins speedway team?

The Olympic size swimming pool has been replaced by a building labelled leisure, with climbing centre next door. For several years Swindon Council have discussed the future of the Oasis and Link Leisure Centres and pondered whether they can be combined into one larger centre. Could this be their future? Sell off the land at North Star and at the West Swindon Centre and draw everybody to West Swindon. It should be noted that Link Centre is barely 20 years old.

The transport and car parking arrangements proposed amazed people. Only 1,400 car parking spaces are suggested. The initial transport assessment plan drawn up by Halcrow suggests Shaw, Ramleaze, Nine Elms, Peatmoor and Sparcells be turned into a controlled car parking zone. (Ordnance Survey rules prevent us displaying it here without paying a hefty reproduction fee). Could this mean yellow lines on every road, permits which residents would have to pay for, or even the suggestion by a Halcrow engineer that a barrier could be put up on Mead Way to restrict access to non-residents?

The proposed Thamesdown Drive to Barnfield Road link road link is shown as a way of relieving traffic. This was already committed by the North Swindon Development Company in the early 1990s as a condition of getting planning permission to build 10,000 homes in North Swindon. No construction date has yet been announced.

A lot of people are wondering, what is the big picture? Is the proposal to build on Shaw Forest Country Park just part of creating fog before a planning application? Put it another way, try to sell them a mountain and buy the mole hill. Could the end game be that St Modwen, Swindon Town and Swindon Council are working to a plan which sees a stadium built on the still operational commercial tip, as in Option 2, with the other development proposals being scaled back or dropped?

Dinesh Patel from Peatmoor summed things up, "should a failing council be working with a bankrupt football club to boost the profits of a property development company by selling out on land owned by the people of Swindon?"

Most people attending were astonished by the biased, inadequate and inaccurate questionnaire they were asked to fill in. Presumably it was put forward by St Modwen, but there was no name on it.

The first question was: 'which site layout do you prefer? Option 1 or Option 2'. The majority of people wrote None or Neither.





It continued with questions about the type of facilities people want to see on the site, how the loss of community forest trees could be compensated for and what kind of development should take place at the County Ground. As Liz Johnson from Peatmoor said, pictured here with her family, "I dislike both main options and the survey is loaded with questions designed to give them the answers they want."



In response to the cynicism about the future of the questionnaires, Rupert Joseland of St Modwen told The Link, "the survey is a public document and copies of the forms will be made available to Swindon Council and The Link for the record."

Considering the number of people in attendance and the anger many feel, it was impressive how even tempered and reasonable everybody was. There was a sour note when Linda Jones from Sparcells said she was in favour of the proposal and was heckled by somebody in the crowd around her. She said, "I think the project is good for the area and will offer the community a great deal. Opinions from all sides should be heard, so it was not very nice to be booed by people."

The temperature in the already hot room shot up for a couple of minutes towards the end of the evening when John Ball from Grange Park lost it and shouted very loudly, 'do not touch our country park.' But John should be forgiven. For the last five years he has worked voluntarily and with a passion to make Swindon the butterfly centre of Europe by turning an acre of derelict ground at Cheney Manor about half a mile from the forest site into a butterfly friendly wildflower meadow which he has called The Haven.



Commenting as the doors closed at 8.30pm, Rupert Joseland said he was pleased with the considerable interest in the project; the responses and viewpoints will give his colleagues a great deal to consider.

The Shaw Forest Protection Group media representative Alan Hayward commented when the event closed, "the choice of venue was totally inadequate for the number of people who wanted to see the plans. Swindon Town FC and St Modwen are playing lip service to consultation."

Keith Williams, chair of Shaw Residents' Association, said he was very impressed by the turnout. "There is huge concern about these proposals, but I am very disappointed by the way the so-called consultation has been carried out."



As Bill Oliver departed in his chauffeur driven Jaguar, one had to wonder if he thought the event was par for the course and opposition would wither away, or if he had under-estimated the problems of getting into bed with Swindon Town FC and trying to do a deal with Swindon Council.

---

Did you attend the consultation on 29 April, what do you think, what did you hear and what questions do you still want answered?

Send your views to consultation@swindonlink.com to be posted below.



From: Marilyn Kempshall - 2 May 2004

Having attended the meeting we were horrified at the weighted questionnaire. We have got on St Modwen web site and complained about this and asked that it be updated to asking questions as to whether people want a stadium and village, and if they do where they feel it should be built - along with other questions that will give a much more balanced questionnaire.

The feeling of people was running very high. It would have been a lot better if there had been representation from the other parties involved. Obviously they hope the meeting would go away quietly without any problems - but it certainly will not.

Noise, pollution, wildlife, gridlocked roads, quality of life - were all the comments coming from people. Obviously the ideal place along the M4 is a prime site for residential and business - and a stadium would not bring in such a large amount of money.



From: Nicky Jeffrey - 2 May 2004

Well done for doing such a superb job in The Link magazine Forest not Stadium article.

Having just returned from the Roughmoor Social Hall to view the proposals I was furious to discover some facts from one of the Halcrow Team present.

These facts, I feel strongly, are VITAL bits of information that need to be urgently highlighted as they will represent the true problem for the people surrounding this site.

To keep in line with the Swindon Borough Councils parking policy they are only allowing one vehicle parking space per 15 seats in the stadium so they know there will be a serious overspill into the public roads on which we live.

Also, they will be giving out residents parking permits to those who live here and visitors permits on a limit per household to those friends visiting the people who live in West Swindon. Basically I will have to arrange permits for friends to visit me as I will be in the controlled parking area they have highlighted on their map. As will Peatmoor, Nine Elms and Sparcells and Shaw.

To summarise, they know we will be flooded with cars due to deliberate lack of parking spaces within the grounds. I think its outrageous and your magazine could do a fantastic job of highlighting these facts to make those who feel apathetic about this to act!



From: Alan Hayward - 3 May 2004

One gets the feeling that St Modwen expected just a few curious residents to attend the "consultation" who would coo and aah and excitedly fill in their blatantly biased "questionnaire".

On reflection I think that the developers have SERIOUSLY underestimated what a can of worms they have opened with their proposals to destroy the forest. If they thought that we would all just roll over onto our backs and that they could tickle our tummies then they are very naďve. I think that they, along with some senior members of Swindon Borough Council and the management (note - NOT the fans) of STFC are all going to get very, very badly burnt by what they have coming from the people of West Swindon.

For St Modwen to drop a bombshell like this proposal on us is one thing, to invite us to a joke "consultation" is something else - and to effectively laugh in our faces with their done-deal, "yeah, we are listening but we don't give a damn about you, your homes, your families, your environment, your trees", greedy and roughshod attitude will, I can promise, result in these OUTSIDERS being forcibly ejected by ALL of the people of Swindon. Our clock is now ticking too.



From: Phil Allen - 3 May 2004

As a resident of West Swindon for many years and a Swindonian born & breed, I write to complain regarding the obviously biased views your magazine has taken regarding the new stadium proposal. Whilst I recognise you are free to publish any material you wish, I believe you are doing a great disservice to your readership.

Only indicating the possible negative points of the development and attempting to give the impression that the vast majority of residents are against the proposal, surely goes against the values and the whole basis of a community magazine, which I assume is to represent all views in said community.

Without exception, the friends and neighbours I have spoken to have either been for the stadium because of the much needed sporting & leisure facilities it will bring for the whole town, or are simply indifferent to it, seeing it as another development in West Swindon along with Cell Ops, Skurrays and the recently completed warehouses in the area.

Whilst there are always positive & negative views on any development in any location, I find the coverage you are giving the opponents of this brown-field development in strange contrast to your silence on the green-field' development in northern Swindon. In fact your web-site even contains advertising from the developers in Priory Vale.

I wouldn't wish to accuse anyone of hypocrisy, but I would suggest your continued bias stance on this issue will only alienate or annoy a large number of your potential readers even further.

My personal view is that if we only have to sacrifice an area which is currently used as a rubbish tip in order to gain a state of the art sporting resource the whole town can enjoy, then we should grab it with both hands.



From: Kevin Fisher - 3 May 2004

I have to say what an astonishingly arrogant, rude, condescending man Bill Oliver is. He dared to tell me I "did not like change" and that is why I was against the development. How can he possibly know what sort of change I have experienced through my life?

He insulted me by telling me that the site is "dangerous" and he will make it safe for me (so SBC have been risking my life for the passed 12 years have they??). He refused to answer my questions about how a "residents" parking system would work.

Most of all, I was INSULTED that his company dared to steal the term "Community Forest" and use it to label some hedgerows on their plans - they are hedgerows Mr Oliver, not a forest! In preparation for the meeting, you would have thought Mr Oliver would have reviewed the SwindonLink and SFPG web sites - he had not. Just goes to show how much he gives a dam about public opinion.

Other representatives were inadequately prepared to say the least. When I asked what the decibel level of 4 motorbikes was compared to 24,000 people, I was told I was getting into too much detail! Apparently the public Consultation process on the Environmental Impact Assessment (which St Modwen inform me has already started) is also a "detail".

When I asked how they would stop traffic using Mead Way, I was told "there are ways". I asked for four examples, with the exception of a gate across Mead Way (well at least I had a good laugh at that one) there were no other suggestions.

This is the wrong place for the development for so many reasons, and now there is another reason for the development being a bad idea, no matter the location - the contractor St Modwen. How can we dare to allow our council tax to line the pockets of a company run by an individual with such an appalling lack of respect for anyone but himself.



From: Sheridan, Sparcells - 3 May 2004

I attended this consultation and St Modwen's representatives were totally unprepared and could give satisfactory answers to none of the questions I asked. In fact one of the consultants I spoke to continually reassured me that the development may not go ahead. I felt thoroughly disheartened.

The most distressing part was when I asked the Chief Executive, Bill Oliver, if he had visited our forest and he laughed at me, replying, "Yes, but you can't really call it a forest can you? It's just a pile of rubble which is unsafe to walk on. We intend to make it safe".

How ignorant to make such an insensitive comment about something which obviously means so much to so many of us. Now I read in the Evening Advertiser that he is also quoted as saying "People may be protesting about things they do not necessarily fully understand".

Unbelievable - clearly someone does not fully understand and I believe it's Mr. Oliver.



From: Cherri Matthews, Sparcells - 4 May 2004

The 'consultation' last Thursday 29 April was a bit of a joke. My husband and I went along at around 4.30pm and the hall was packed even then. The questionnaire was not fair or unbiased, it was just a tool for them to get us to agree to their plans. I too spoke to Rupert Joseland who seemed very surprised to be asked so many questions and was very ill prepared to answer any of them. I could get no specific answers out of him and most answers consisted of 'well, that's something we have to look into' or 'obviously that will be sorted out nearer the time', all of which left me even more worried than when I arrived.

When asked about parking I was told that only 1 parking space would be provided for every 15 people attending the stadium. When I asked Mr Joseland where the other 14 would park he replied, "There are plenty of park-and-ride facilities already in place in Swindon to take the overspill". When I asked him about people parking in the roads around the site he said that STFC would be paying for men to man barriers, which would be placed at the entrance to every road in Sparcells, Peatmoor and the surrounding area whenever there was a football match or pop concerts, etc.

I tried hard not to laugh, but instead asked him how we would come and go from our own roads, to which he replied that we would be issued with residents parking permits. Having lived in a residents parking zone in the town centre I know that they cost me (when I last had to buy one about 2 years ago) £15 for the parking permit each year and £7-8 for a book of 25 visitors permits, of which we were only allowed 4 books per household (if I remember correctly).

I cannot see SBC or STFC not asking us to pay for the administration of a residents parking scheme - so who else is not willing to pay for parking outside their own house? I run my own business from home and have clients visit me every day and so a residents parking scheme would effectively put me out of business, one of the reasons I moved from the town centre was because the council would not let me have enough permits to allow my clients to park outside my house.

My husband had to leave the hall, but I persevered and had a reasonable conversation with Mark Devlin who told me that it was a misconception that STFC are broke and also that Swindon Borough Council are the ones who suggested the site to him in the first place. He said that other sites were being looked at, but that the council had suggested that the Country Park was a suitable site.

I left the consultation not knowing who to believe or who was telling the truth, but knowing for sure the St Modwens are not to be trusted. I also felt that they have not properly thought through the solutions to the problems of traffic, parking, floodlighting, noise, the fact that they just want to finish the landfill and plonk the stadium on top, the waste under the site or what is going to happen to the wildlife (who I was told by Mr Joseland will simply wander off, find another home and be absolutely fine!). So for me the consultation raised more questions than it answered and made me feel the whole idea is poorly conceived.



From: John Doyle, Nine Elms - 4 May 2004

I emailed Bill Oliver at St Modwen and Mark Devlin at STFC to complain about the choice of venue - far too small. Unsurprisingly they didn't listen or reply and had parking problems and queues to get in. A hint of the future perhaps.

I asked Bill Oliver what would happen to the questionnaire's and his response was that they would be analysed internally and not made available to anyone else. At odds with the statement from another member of the St Modwen team.

I thought it very unprofessional that the questionnaire had no company logo on it, or a Thank You for completing it, a copyright statement or explanation of how it would be used. The loaded questions were no surprise. Altogether slapdash and amateur.

What happened to the nice shiny model we saw Mark Devlin proudly displaying in the Evening Advertiser and where on earth did the Olympic sized swimming pool disappear to?

Bill Oliver thinks protests are too early and we don't understand what's going on. I beg to differ - a community forest project is in danger of being destroyed and a possible fraudulent land speculation deal enacted.

St Modwen has a head start on us. The gap needs to be closed.

Protest, protest, protest and do it now!

Should be an interesting Local Election this year.



From: Darren Wheatley - 6 May 2004

I vote forest

Not sure what happened there!

I attended the recent public consultation at Roughmoor Hall in Peatmoor to view the proposals for developing the Shaw Forest / Tip site and I was dismayed at what I saw. The rationale of placing a major crowd-puller like this in a quiet residential area is beyond me. I can't think of a valid reason for abandoning the proposed motorway sites in favour of Shaw.

I fear that the true reasons might be along the lines of:

- Houses could be built on the motorway sites, but can't be built on Shaw Tip. There must be more money in putting the stadium at Shaw, rather than leaving the stadium at the motorway site and foregoing the revenue from new houses.

- The motorway site around J16 is prone to flooding. I would have thought that it would be cheaper to build houses on a flood plane rather than massive stadia, and would present less problems / cost should the area flood.

At the end of the day it appears that money is driving this development. Clearly the people backing this project don't live in the area. If it does go ahead the stadium site will destroy the forest, the local community, lower house prices, and will by the very nature of drawing tens of thousands of people to the area, increase crime.

This area has been a lovely place to live. Let's keep it that way.

---

Stadium Proposal Index | SwindonLink Home

---