Will people power help the council see sense?

Rubbish on Phase III at Shaw Forest Country Park, the last stated preferred site for a stadium.

Swindon councillors are preparing to debate two motions put to full council on Thursday 22 July which could see an end to Swindon Town FCs plan to move its stadium from the county ground to Shaw Forest Country Park.

West Swindon Conservative Councillor Nick Martin, supported by Coun Peter Greenhalgh, has proposed that the council continue to support the Great Western Community Forest and that both existing sites and those currently being developed on council owned land should be protected and retained. It reads:

"In 1991, Thamesdown Borough Council and 4 other local authorities joined a partnership with the Countryside Commission and the Forestry Commission to develop a community forest around Swindon. The Great Western Community Forest, as it was named, became part of a family of 12 Forests in England.

In 1994, following 3 years of public consultation the Council confirmed along with the other partners its support for a Forest Plan. This plan set out a 30 year vision for the Forest indicating possible future sites, where, in partnership with the community and other bodies they would be developed for woodland and open space.

This Council will continue to support the Great Western Community Forest plan and specifically resolves that both existing sites and those currently being developed on Council owned land should be protected and retained as Community Forest sites.

In a separate move, the Labour Group of councillors have backed a proposal from the its deputy leader Coun Barrie Thompson reaffirming the existing policy support for the Great Western Community Forest which specifically identifies Phases 1, 2, & 3 of Shaw Forest Park remain as public open space for the next century.

It reads: The Labour Group is concerned regarding the possible commercial development on the proposed site at Shaw Forest Park, which includes a new football stadium complex. We continue to listen to the views and opinions of local people from all sides of the debate, as the full plans are considered.

We are keen to ensure that Swindon Town Football Club has a continued and successful presence in the town and that this does not conflict with the preservation of open, and community forest, space for future generations.

"That this Council reaffirms its existing policy of support for the Great Western Community Forest and declares the land known as Shaw Forest Park (applicable to Phases 1, 2, & 3 of the site) be designated as public open space, with a covenant that it is so designated for 100 years".

The proposal is seconded by Coun Maurice Fanning, chairman of the Great Western Community Forest.

Should the majority of the 59 councillors vote for either or both the motions, it would be block further moves by the club and their development partners St Modwen Properties plc to press their claim to build for the stadium, first revealed four months ago, to be built on Shaw Forest Country Park which was first designated in 1994.

Coun Martin, commenting before the council meeting, said, "I stood for election in June with a commitment to protecting the community forest against development. I believe Swindon Council should stand by promises to create the forest in my area and also across the borough.

"Councillors of all parties are being asked to decide on the past commitments this council has made and the faith the citizens have in the integrity of those decisions."

Coun Thompson, said, "the council has a standing commitment to preserving this land as part of the community forest, we must resist development and be mindful of other valuable open spaces across Swindon."

Swindon Town and St Modwen are understood to be surprised and frustrated by the moves, given they were led to believe by leaders of the three main political parties that the council might entertain proposals to develop Shaw Forest.

Leading Forest Not a Stadium campaigner Alan Hayward, said, "the council has to listen to the views of people of Swindon. They do not want to see parts of their community forest built on. "We should be celebrating the tenth anniversary of Shaw Forest Country Park, not fighting to save it."

Key Questions being asked by the Swindon Labour Group about the commercial development proposals for Shaw Forest Park Proposals :


Shaw Forest Park

• Given that 50,000 trees have already been planted on the proposed site at Shaw Forest Park, with the aid of Forestry Commission Grants, will these grants have to be repaid if the current country park scheme is abandoned?
  
  
• Is the current total of grants received around £80k?
  
  
• What other compensation will be provided for those with trees planted in remembrance of family members?
  
  
• The "tipping" of "inert" material on the site was initially exempt from landfill tax, as it was determined to be a restoration project. Is it the case that Customs and Excise may require payment of this tax if a commercial development goes ahead?
  
  
• Given that such a repayment would be of the order of £1.2m, who will break this news to the local taxpayer?
  
  
• The complexity of developing the proposed site would necessitate advice from specialist consultants. In addition, it would be key to ensure that the Council "risk managed" the site if it transferred to another owner. What are the resource implications of this?
  
  
• As the original "polluter", can action be taken against Swindon Borough Council if the current owner cannot be identified, or does not have the resources to cover future claims?
  
  
• To what extent can liability for this site be transferred to future developers?
  
  
• What amount of extra resources would have to be committed to our public liability insurance payments to cover the potentially extra liability of future actions against the council in respect of pollutants tipped at the Shaw Forest Site?
  
  
• How does this development fit with the Council's contaminated land strategy?
  
  
• If the benefits to the community are outweighed by the loss of open space, to what extent with Swindon's Development Plan be re-drawn? The original does not include Shaw Forest Park.
  
  
• To date, how many letters of objection and protest have the Council received on this issue and when will it put the issue out to public consultation?
  
  
• Current proposals include what is known as "enabling development" (commercial development, profit from which would help cover the costs of the stadium). This currently includes a hotel, conference centre, restaurants, and car showrooms. To what extent does a development of this nature affect the viability of other sites, particularly in the town centre?
  
  
• How will developers effectively satisfy the Planner's sequential test (PPG6)? This has to be addressed whatever the development looks like.
  
  
• Is it possible to locate such a large-scale development on this prominent elevated site, and what would the visual impacts be on nearby residential development?
  
  
  

The County Ground

• If Sport England does not agree to the loss of the facilities at the GWR Ground without a suitable replacement being provided, would this then leave the area without any useable open space, and therefore, openly conflict with the Local Plan?
  
  
• Would the Council be liable if Section 106 money were invested in new facilities at the County Ground, but later redeveloped for residential use, as proposed by the developers?
  
  
• To compensate for residential development in Shrivenham Rd the proposed investment in sports facilities at the County Ground and St Marks Recreation Ground could be around £5m. How will the new stadium compensate this?
  
  
  

The Town Centre

• Would development at Shaw Forest Park prejudice or support regeneration of the Town Centre?
  
  
• Could the stadium be re-developed without 'enabling' development, which competed with the Town Centre?
  
  
• How would the Council provide leisure facilities close to the Town Centre if the Oasis site were to be re-developed ?
  
  
  

What next?

• What other sites have the developers identified?
  
  
• What studies have been carried out regarding the Shaw Forest Site, and how far progressed are they?
  
  
• How will elected Members from all Groups be consulted?
  
  
• What "pre-application" discussions have been had? Is there a difference between such discussions and simply "responding to enquiries"?