5.0 the Public Consultation Event - November 8Th, 9Th and 10Th 2012

5.0 The Public Consultation Event - November 8th, 9th and 10th 2012

5.1 Context

The purpose of the consultation event was to introduce the emerging Masterplan which had to date, evolved following the stakeholder meetings and discussions held with key members of community groups in Chippenham. It was also an opportunity to speak to the public face to face, answering any of their questions.

During the event, the team had the opportunity to explain there were certain constraints affecting development of the site. This meant that not everybody’s ideas could physically be incorporated into the plans but there was a real opportunity to create a better environment for existing businesses at Langley Park, tenants of Hathaway Retail Park and the residents of Chippenham.

5.2 Constraints

The Masterplan identified the areas for different uses on the site, taking account of constraints such as the position of Invensys’ main operating buildings, points of access, proximity to the railway line, the boundary with adjoining residential properties, topography of the site and costs of demolition and decontamination.

5.3 Advertising of the consultation events

5.3.1 Leaflet drop

The consultation was advertised via a leaflet drop to approximately 500 dwellings in the immediately proximity to the site, see Appendix 5 for the leaflet drop area. Flyers (see below) were also sent to over 6,000 homes in Chippenham via the Wiltshire Star on 1st November.

5.3.2 Press Advertising

A full page advertisement was taken in the Wiltshire Gazette and Herald on Thursday 25th October and on Thursday 1st November and a strip advertisement was taken in the ‘Weekend’ section of the Gazette and Herald on Thursday 8th November.

There was also editorial coverage in the Gazette and Herald regarding the event on 25th October and follow up coverage on 14th November, see Appendix 6.

5.3.3 Radio Coverage

Heart Radio FM recorded an interview with Wayne Locke, mentioning the consultation event. This was played on Friday 9th November 2012

5.3.4 Invitations

The following were also invited to the November consultation event:-

 Chippenham Town Councillors  Wiltshire Councillors for Chippenham  Chippenham Area Board Members  Wessex Chamber of Commerce Members  Chippenham Chamber of Commerce Members  Chippenham Vision  Chippenham Local Traders Group  Wiltshire College representatives  Parents and students of Hardenhuish School  Planning Officers of Wiltshire Council  Leader of Wiltshire Council  Cabinet Member for Development Control, Wiltshire Council  Cabinet Member for Economic Development, Wiltshire Council

5.3.5 Website

A website, www.centralchippenhampartnership.co.uk, was set up in August 2012. This advertised the consultation event and all of the exhibition materials were available to view straight away. The website was regularly updated and contains all the material available to the public through the consultations.

There have been 1 863 hits on the web site since it was created in August 2012 , initially inviting people to express their leisure preferences via an online poll, which continued throughout the consultation event.

Top of the list was a cinema, with almost 80% ranking it as favourite. A bowling alley was next with 58%. The remainder of the options, hotel, restaurant, coffee shop and foodstore attracted a range between 27% and 21%.

26 people submitted comments on the proposal via the website. Some of these were general observations and suggestions 23%, with 54% supporting and 23% objecting. Objections were limited to traffic impact on the town centre. Strong support was expressed for the scheme in general, with investment welcomed and encouraged.

Suggestions were made for preferred occupiers and sustainable designs. Support was given for improved links to the town centre with investment encouraged and welcomed.

A reference was also made to linking with the proposed Chippenham Campus and development of Chippenham Community Voice.

Objections concentrated on traffic and impact on the town centre.

A summary of the responses made through the web site is included in Appendix 7 of this report.

5.3.6 Twitter

CCP launched its Twitter account on Thursday 25th October 2012 and began following influential people and Tweeters in the region, tweeting a pipeline of CCP news and information regarding the consultation events through the following months.

From October 2012 to the end of January 2013, CCP followed 943 twitter accounts/people and has developed 320 followers. There were 43 mentions and 45 retweets throughout the period.

Most importantly, Twitter was used to respond to queries from the public regarding the proposals for Langley Park and Hathaway Retail Park.

Examples of tweets include:

5.4 Venues for Consultation Events

5.4.1 Due to the potential widespread interest in this strategic allocation for development set out in the Council’s Core Strategy, it was decided to hold the consultation event in two venues over three days, St Pauls Church Hall and Chippenham Town Hall.

5.4.2 The availability of suitable venues influenced the timing and days on which the events could be held. It was also important to avoid clashing with any other significant community or Council events.

Both venues have accessible parking and disabled access. Directional signage boards were erected outside to guide people to the events, together with direction arrows.

The consultation events were held on:-

 Thursday 8th November, 5:30pm-8:30pm, St Paul’s Church Hall, Malmesbury Road, Chippenham.

 Friday 9th November, 11am-5:30pm, St Paul’s Church Hall, Malmesbury Road, Chippenham

 Saturday 10th November, 10am-4pm, The Town Hall, High Street, Chippenham

5.4.3 Town Crier

A Town Crier was employed on Saturday 10th November to walk up and down Chippenham High Street, advising visitors and shoppers of the consultation event in the Town Hall.

5.5 Format of the events

Upon entering the display area in the venues, attendees were invited to sign a visitors’ book. They were then handed a frequently asked questions sheet and a feedback form. Attendees were encouraged to complete the feedback form at the event, or to send the form back via freepost, e-mail or to insert their comments on the website. A copy of the response form and question and answer hand-out is included in Appendix 8.

5.6 The Display

The main display comprised eight pop-up banners providing the following information:-

1. Who are CCP? Where is the site? What is the intention? 2. A brief history of previous proposals, 2007-2012 3. Key bullet points addressing retail and employment issues 4. Opportunities and constraints 5 & 6. A summary of the consultation feedback so far. 7. Details of the emerging Masterplan. 8. Request to receive opinions and views on the proposals.

The display banners exhibited are reproduced in Appendix 9 of this report.

A split screen television display was also set up to illustrate the traffic study which had been commissioned by CCP. The display showed congested areas within Chippenham and how these traffic hot spots could be alleviated through the plans for alterations to the existing highway network put forward by CCP.

5.7 The consultation events were attended by members of the development team as follows:-

 Wayne Locke, Director. Ashtenne Industrial Fund  Jo Davis, Director. GVA  Ian Monachino-Ayres, Director. IMA Transport  Suzanne Nixon, Transport Consultant. IMA Transport  Graeme Warriner, Director. Turley Associates  Sarah Foster, Director. SF Planning Link with support staff  Anna Heyes, Managing Director, Active Profile, with support staff

5.8 Over 350 people attended the consultation event over the three day period. Written responses were received either by completed feedback forms at the event, e-mail, freepost or the website. A total of 210 written responses were received and analysed.

5.9 Many respondents raised points on several different issues, giving a total of 506 responses on individual topics. Each respondent was given a reference number. Each comment was categorised under a heading and a summary note of the comment made. These comments were then collated under individual headings.

5.10 The event resulted in representations from Chippenham Civic Society, member of the Town Council and Youth Worker. The working documents have been summarised to provide a comprehensive summary detailing the topics of responses and the number of comments on each topic, a summary of the comments and CCP’s response to them.

Section 7 sets out the consultation responses .The summary of responses received to the November 2012 consultation with a response to these from CCP is included in this report as Appendix 10.

6.0 Student Input

6.1 CCP began engaging with Chippenham secondary school students in July 2012. On behalf of CCP, SF Planning Link approached Hardenhuish, Sheldon and Abbeyfield Schools and received positive responses to our invitation to engage from Hardenhuish and Abbeyfield Schools.

6.2 Informal meetings were held with chosen representatives, accompanied by a senior teacher, in July 2012. The students ranged from 12 to 17 years.

6.3 The students were briefed on the proposal and the objectives to redevelop the Langley Park site and upgrade Hathaway Retail Park.

The meetings focused on obtaining information from the students on the following:-

i) frequency of use by students and their families of Hathaway Retail Park

ii) student’s opinion on current provision of activities for youth to engage in Chippenham

iv) how students currently spend their leisure time. What? Where? When?

As expected there were a wide range of comments with conversation sometimes producing “aspirational” suggestions for development of the site.

A summary of the students’ responses is set out below.

6.3.1 Response to current use of Hathaway Retail Park

 Infrequent  Used more by those living north of railway

 Would use more if more accessible  Used Blockbusters most

6.3.2 Student opinion on current youth activity provision in Chippenham.

This was generally negative. Students reported:-

 Low quality shops  Narrow range of goods available  Cinema outdated  Lack of attractive space/places to “hang-out”

Positive suggestions were made as follows:-

 Betters hops  KFC!!  Skateboard park  Good cinema  Improved sports facilities  Outdoor pursuit activity  Arcade with games e.g, air hockey, dance mats (as at Swindon Link centre).

6.3.3 How do students spend their leisure time?

Discussion was focussed on shopping and leisure activities. Few students considered “free” activities such as cycling.

Bath is a great attraction to those of senior school age. It is cheap £2.50 return), easily accessible, attractive, has wide range of shops, good skate park, new cinema. It was recognised that Chippenham could not compete with this choice but it was suggested that if Chippenham had better facilities, trips elsewhere could be less frequent.

Cinema was a big activity and frequency of use surprisingly high. Shopping, by both girls and boys, and generally “hanging out”, came next on the list.

6.4 Conclusion

The students were encouraged someone was actively taking an interest in their views and a developer was considering investing in the town. Connecting the site to the rest of the town by a “domed footbridge” was suggested. A new cinema,

family/student type eating place and public area for sitting/conversation would be very much welcomed.

6.5 Student Questionnaire. December 2012

6.5.1 It was very noticeable that the age range of respondents to the Public Consultation Event in November was heavily weighted by those over 40 years, with the highest age range in the over 60’s as shown in the graph below in paragraph 7.14.

In response to this CCP engaged SF Planning Link to carry out a survey of senior school students to seek views of Chippenham teenagers on leisure issues of Chippenham.

6.8.2 A questionnaire was produced and issued to tutor groups at Hardenhuish School in December 2012. See Appendix 11. Over 400 students in the age range 12-18 responded and these responses are summarised below.

1. What would students like?

When asked which of the following leisure uses they would use most, the results were as follows:

Cinema 207 Bowling Alley 160 Restaurant 48 Coffee Shop 29

Cinema was the most popular choice across 13 to 18 year olds, bowling alley being more popular with the youngest, 12 year old category. This matches the results given in the subsequent question about their current leisure habits.

2. How often do students go to Chippenham?

The students were asked how often they visit Chippenham for shopping/entertainment. This produced a range of answers from daily to never. The most popular was once or twice a month (130), with once a week at (119). The fact that a number of students in the 15 and 16 age ranges gave the answer “Never” suggests that Chippenham has an image problem for this age group.

3. Where do they go?

Bath 176 Swindon 173 Bristol/Longwell 99

Green

Across the age range, Bath and Swindon are virtually equal in popularity. However the 15 year olds and over are much more likely to go to Bath than Swindon. This could be because they are more likely to be making the trip with friends than as a family group, the train to Bath is easy and quick and affordable, and a range of entertainment is available in one place.

4. What do they go for?

Cinema (259) - more than 3 times as popular as anything else.

5. How often do they go?

Once a month (110 students, 31%) or less often (128 students, 36%)

Quotes from Hardenhuish School Students’ Questionnaire December 2012

 A nice cinema would be lovely! Thank you for thinking of use. Age 15  Make Chippenham better – it really lacks entertainment of teens. Age 16  I think a bigger cinema complex and bowling alley would bring more people to Chippenham. We could also do with some better shops in the town centre. Age 14  Chippenham is grotty and needs some TLC. It really needs some new stuff. Age 13  Please do this quickly. Age 17  Make Chippenham more fun or I will turn into a robot and destroy you! I don’t shop in Chippenham – it’s boring. Build a KFC. Age 14  Chippenham needs improvement immediately. Age 16  Chippenham is lacking in positivity. Age 16

7.0 Public Consultation Responses. November 2012

7.1 Response to questions

7.1.1 The following questions were asked on the response form:-

1. Do you support proposals for the redevelopment of Langley Park for a mix of uses and improvements to Hathaway Retail Park?

Yes or No

2. If deliverable, which of the following facilities do you believe would benefit Chippenham?

Restaurant Coffee Shop Cinema Hotel Bowling Alley Food Store

3. What age group are you?

10-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 Over 60

General comments and views were then invited on the proposals.

The response form advised that the report would be compiled using forms received by Monday 19th November 2012.

The responses to these questions are set out below.

7.1.2 Support for the redevelopment of Langley Park.

Do you support proposals for the redevelopment of Langley Park?

No 12%

Yes 88%

7.1.3 Which of the following facilities do you feel would benefit Chippenham?

Which of the following facilites do you feel would benefit Chippenham?

111 108

92 91 91

Cinema Bowling Restaurant Hotel Food Store Coffee shop Alley

7.1.4 Of those who ticked the age box, the following sets out the age of respondees:-

Age of respondees

77 80 70 60 50 42 40 29 30 21 20 10 5 10 0 10‐20 years 21‐30 years 31‐40 years 41‐50 years 51‐60 years 60+ years

7.2 Breakdown of topic responses raised on response form

7.2.1 Having identified the topics which were of interest to the general public, the following categories were identified and break down as follows:-

Topic No of Comments % of total Leisure 103 20.5 Masterplan 90 18 Traffic 53 10.5 Housing 40 8 Food Store 37 7 Little George roundabout 32 6 Parking 26 5 Design and layout 25 5 Retail/general 22 4.5 Town Centre 20 4 Pedestrian/cycleway 19 4 access Railway footbridge 18 3.5 Employment 17 3 Social infrastructure 3 0.5 Public toilets 1 0.2 TOTAL 506 99.7%

NB: Due to rounding of figures, total is not quite 100%

7.2.2 Topics raised in the General Public Consultation, NovemberSocial 2012 Railway Infrastucture Employment Footbridge Public Toilets Pedestrian/ Cycleway Access Town Centre Retail General Leisure

Design and Layout

Parking The Masterplan

Little George Food Store Roundabout Traffic Housing

A more detailed breakdown of these topics is set out in Appendix 10. The Appendix also sets out CCP’s response to the comments made.

7.2.3 Leisure

This attracted the most comments, 20.4% of the total.

The majority of the comments were supportive, encouraging new facilities for families and teenagers. Whilst the cinema was the most popular requirement, bowling, family restaurant, sport and a quality hotel were suggested. One person suggested a miniature railway and another a requirement for exhibition space.

Leisure Miniature Children/Youth Railway Exhibition Space Leisure:General support Nightclub/pub Sports Object Restaurant

Hotel Cinema Skate Park

Bowling Alley

The support is welcomed and the scheme does propose a site which could be marketed for leisure uses.

7.2.4 The Masterplan

This was the second most commented upon topic, 17.8% of the total.

85 of the 90 comments on this topic were in support. There is much encouragement for the development to happen quickly, together with the mix of uses suggested.

5 objectors wished the site to remain for 100% employment, or not to be built on.

The Masterplan

General comments Support 18% 77% Objections 5%

7.2.5 Traffic

This did not attract as many comments as might have been expected, particularly as it was highest on the list of objections for previous proposals. We believe that much of this was due to the explanations given by the Highway Consultants at the Consultation Event. They explained the current traffic movements in Chippenham through a model and how the proposed alterations to the junctions would improve the situation. In spite of the initial scepticism of many who attended the consultation, the explanations given were clearly understood and once explained accepted by the majority.

Of those who had concerns, they were generally about increased traffic movements through the town and the lack of opportunity to make major improvements, such as provision of a by-pass. Rat-running through Birch Grove and Greenway Park was an issue. There was generally support for improvements to the Little George roundabout.

Access and Parking

Little George Roundabout Support, 15 Traffic General, 57

Railway Footbridge, 18

Parking, 26 Little George Roundabout Pedestrian and Object, 17 Cycleway Access, 19