23 Feb 2011 - CYCLEWight

Go to content

Main menu:

23 Feb 2011

Campaigning > IW Cycle Forum

Isle of Wight Cycle Forum Minutes
23 February 2011 @ 6pm
Innovations Centre, St Cross Business Park, Newport.
Present:
Farnam Carty (FC) Bembridge Wheelers
Claire Critchison (CC) IWC Events Team
Kevin Burton (KB) IWC Highways Department
Martin Gibson (MB) Natural Enterprise
Louise Gray (LG) IW NHS Health Promotion
PC 1455 Hammersley RPU Shanklin
Sue Hawley (SH) IW Estuaries Project
Margaret Hopkinson-Woolley (MH) Cyclewight & Bembridge Wheelers
Alexander Hopkinson-Woolley (AH) Cyclewight & Bembridge Wheelers
Alex Lawson (AL) Cyclewight & Wayfarers
Valerie Lawson (VGL) Cyclewight & Wayfarers
Andy Newman (AN) CTC Right to Right IW representative &
Wayfarer Cycle Touring Club
Malcolm Ross (MR) Cyclewight
Tim Thorne (TT) Cyclewight
Hilary Thorpe (HT) Cyclewight
Andrew White (AW) IWC Planning Department
1. Introduction
The meeting was chaired by Tim Thorne. Apologies were received from Councillor Edward Giles
(Council Business), from Steve Goodman, and from John Allen.
Previous minutes were accepted. Matters arising will be covered in agenda.
2. 106 Money
Andrew White from the Isle of Wight Council Planning Department described the administration of 106
money obtained from developers, and its allocation to planning policy objectives as determined by the
IWC. The principal objective of the planning system is to deliver sustainable development, through which
key Government social, environmental and economic objectives are achieved. The delivery of these
goals is provided for through a framework of national and local planning policies, and through a
transparent system of decision-making on individual planning applications. Each planning application is
dealt with on its own merits in accordance with relevant policies, unless there are material considerations
that indicate otherwise. Conditions and Section106 Agreements can be used to make the unacceptable
acceptable. S.106 can be used to prescribe the nature of development (e.g. by requiring a certain level
of Affordable Housing); or to secure a financial contribution to compensate for loss or damage caused
by development (e.g. loss of open space); or to mitigate a developmentfs impact (e.g. through increased
public transport provision). Any contributions which are determined necessary to spend on infrastructure
must be directly related to the development in question and must be fairly and reasonably related in
scale and kind to the development. There are adopted policies through the Unitary Development Plan
that set out requirements for contributions:
The tariff for sustainable transport, over a threshold of 10 dwellings, is ’750 per dwelling. The money sits
in a pot, and at present there is a six figure sum for highways infrastructure. He confirmed that there is
Wakes money unspent, and that some Waitrose money is yet to be collected. His department liaises with
FORUM CONTACTS:
A.Lawson (minutes) alec.lawson@virgin.net
T.Thorne (Cyclewight) emt.thorne@virgin.net
A.Newman (Wayfarers) Andrew.Newman@onwight.net 2011-02-23_Cycle_Forum_Minutes Page 1
others including Highways to determine how the money is spent. The Newport Traffic Model provides
another mechanism for requiring highway infrastructure contributions, which can be significant, but
depends on traffic flows associated with the proposal.
TT asked if the money must be spent within a set distance of the development. AW said not, but it must
go on a related project, e.g. the Newport to East Cowes Cycleway could benefit from 106 funding from
either town. There should be a functional or geographical link between the development and the item
being provided as part of the developerfs contribution.
AN asked who decides on and influences the expenditure. We don't feel we have influence over these
decisions. AW said many parties were involved including the developers themselves. In fact developers
could try to claw back their contribution if not spent in the time limit as planned.
KB said that Highways Department evaluate how their money is allocated according to an internal
process which is signed off by the Cabinet. This has regard to factors such as use of resources,
encouraging walking etc. The amount for cycling per se is relatively limited and the enthusiasm of cycling
groups is not enough on its own to secure more, but he believes we are all singing from the same hymn
sheet. We can also look to other sources. e.g. some Wakes money is allocated to the cross-Newport
route: this can be used as leverage to obtain further funding elsewhere. He mentioned that the cross
-Newport route needs to link to the Pan Estate development.
KB added that it can be better for the developer carry out the project himself, especially if there are
geological risks at the site.
MR asked if all 106 funding is fully utilised. KB said that they have found it to be more effective if the
Council owns or control any land concerned. The Council's delivery against targets is now much better
than in the past. Also prioritisation of spending has improved dramatically.
FC asked if funds are available which could be used for Bembridge to Brading cycleway. AW said he
would be happy to answer this through the Forum but his information at the meeting did not say which
funds were already allocated. Action TT/FC
There is a project to develop the road junction at the bottom of Hunny Hill: ’500k could be required.
Sainsbury's funding yet to be agreed could apply to 3 of the 4 legs of the crossing.
Describing future changes to the planning system, AW said the Communities Bill introduces a
Community Infrastructure Levy to be incorporated by 2014, which would provide for contributions per
square metre of development. There would be charging schedules and all spending departments would
decide collectively on expenditure. There would be an oportunity beforehand for the Cycle Forum to
make representations to secure a slice of the cake.
MG asked what the process will be. TT asked how the decisions will be made. AW replied that the
process is 2-3 years away and would be determined by the Councillors and Officers of each council.
Parish Councils and neighbourhood groups may be involved, and groups like Cyclewight could be
consulted to determine strategy and areas to target.
VGL said a list of priorities had already been made available at past Forum consultations.
MG suggested that the Forum should go further in producing a gCommunity Listh with support which
could be demonstrated to the Council.
MH asked if any councillors or officers cycle. KB said it was known that the Council Chief Executive and
Leader are great supporters of cycling, and that several members of Highways Department have taken
up cycling to work (perhaps for frugality rather than to keep fit). However Integrated Transport budget
(including cycling) is less than a quarter of what it was 3 years ago. The views of the broader community
have to be taken into account: the car driver in the traffic jam may think a junction improvement should
take priority over a cycling scheme.
FORUM CONTACTS:
A.Lawson (minutes) alec.lawson@virgin.net
T.Thorne (Cyclewight) emt.thorne@virgin.net
A.Newman (Wayfarers) Andrew.Newman@onwight.net 2011-02-23_Cycle_Forum_Minutes Page 2
AH suggested that visitors were attracted to the Island by the cycling possibilities, but the Council needs
to allocate higher priority to cycling to increase the attraction.
AW recalled that the Unitary Development Plan was prepared in 2001. The new Island Plan was subject
now to consultation. Things were changing, and policies becoming less disjointed e.g. housing and
transport requirements were being integrated.
CC said that Tourism hear some of the same problems time & time again, e.g. cross-Newport and roundthe-
Island signage.
3. East Cowes Cycleway
Sue Hawley described the project for a rural cycleway from East Cowes to Newport as a long term
aspiration. It would be a partnership between Isle of Wight Council and Cowes Harbour Commissioners.
A feasibility study was completed in 2008. The route was envisaged as three sections which could be
funded separately if necessary. These are
1) Newport to Island Harbour
2) Island harbour to Folly Inn Road
3) Folly Inn Road to East Cowes
Since the study talks have continued with landowners to establish where problems may arise.
Unfortunately Island Harbour, who were sympathetic, went bankrupt. The plan is for a rural character
route which follows the edge of the water, using board walks where required, as birds nest in the middle
of fields. Sustrans are preparing a design and build document, which they hope to receive soon, which
will lead to estimated costings. Sources of finance can then be pursued. It is unfortunate that SEEDA is
to be terminated. Sue Cracknell who has been involved is leaving council employment but Nick Farthing
of Sustrans is involved.
KB said the project could be included in a future matched funding bid, subject to evaluation of the
Sustrans proposals by his department.
TT said the combination with the existing West Cowes -Newport cycle path would make an excellent
circular route. SH said the project was envisaged as a ggreen wayh off-road route into Newport for
recreational cycling as well as for mountain bike commuting.
AN said he knew GKN staff who would welcome the route for commuting, and VL said staff at St Mary's
Hospital also would use the route. AN asked if section 106 money would be negotiated against the
developments in East Cowes. SH said this would be the case, and referred to developments at the
bottom of Folly Lane and at Beatrice Avenue.
SH added that the narrow access close to Whippingham Church was a sticking point but it was hoped to
resolve this through negotiation. TT asked if members of the Forum could write letters in support, and if
English Heritage or Osborne House can do likewise. SH replied that the more parties who can be seen
to benefit the better. Action TT/AN
AN said GKN had a parking problem at their sites, and could be asked to support the project. VL said the
same applied to St Mary's. AN pointed out that the Redjet does not transport bikes but the car ferry
does ; this makes the route fit into the Island cycle network. SH commented that links between the
existing safer cycle routes are important given the hazard from traffic on heavily used main roads.
KB said they were keen to include the project in the Sustainable Transport Funding bids but need to
determine that is not a dream but it is physically possible to deliver.
4. Wight Wheels Cycle Challenge
Louise Gray IWNHS Health Promotion said the Wight Wheels Cycle Challenge would take place from
FORUM CONTACTS:
A.Lawson (minutes) alec.lawson@virgin.net
T.Thorne (Cyclewight) emt.thorne@virgin.net
A.Newman (Wayfarers) Andrew.Newman@onwight.net 2011-02-23_Cycle_Forum_Minutes Page 3
the 7th May for three weeks. It was targeted at work places including major companies, the NHS and the
Council. Employees were to be encouraged to get back on cycles even for as little as 10 minutes. They
could then log on and add their contribution and compare their company with others. There are rewards
and incentives for the best performance included cinema tickets. Funding came from the Department of
Health and from the CTC. Last year the IW had only received half funding due to our small size in
comparison to other participants, but our results had been good.
Will Ainslie will be employed soon in order to approach employers and organise the challenge. It was
hoped to build on last year, and NHS staff would be a target. There will be a networking meeting in
March. VL offered to help within St Mary's, and said that staff doing 12 hour shifts may not be able to
participate but many staff would be able to do so. MG said that the cycling entries need not be to work
but could be at any time.
TT commented that the web site is excellent. (www.wightwheelschallenge.org.uk).
5. Sustainable Transport Fund Bid
KB said his department recently attended a meeting with DfT to explore various bid possibilities. The
best received idea related to sustainable accessibility for tourism. They were planning a bid on this basis
but he warned that Councillors had yet to endorse any plans as the current budget discussions occupied
their time. A bid could be entered in late May, and its success could be known in June. Bids were
classed as major (over ’5 million) or minor and they would go for the latter. The Government was keen
to ensure that every local authority gets some money.
They want to make infrastructure bids which will stimulate the local economy. However they need to
know that any land issues can be resolved to bring a project to conclusion: project milestones must be
realistically achievable.
The Rights of Way team will move from Ventnor into the Highways Department office and will come
under the department management. The Events team will also be involved. He is optimistic that more
joined up thinking will be the result. The broad brush concept is to significantly improve the cycle
network, especially off-road. There will be transport hubs e.g. in the east of the Island Sandown would be
a transport hub leading into town or on to Wroxall or Cowes. Routes must exist at present but need
joining up. Opposition will come, but they will do everything in their power to realise the schemes. A
paper has been drafted for members on the basis of the DfT meeting, but details are confidential as
there has not been time to present it. Sustainability beyond the end of the project must be demonstrated.
The tourism theme will be key: access to Osborne House is one idea as it is the single biggest tourist
attraction on the Island.
Cycling organisations will be asked to write in support in order to demonstrate community involvement.
Organised rides with visitors invited would contribute to this.
MR asked if KB had a mental map of IW land owned by the council. KB said there is an electronic map
available. Any suggestions for connections are welcome. There are 26000 vehicles per day on the road
by Parkhurst, and the traffic density is such that one cyclist can cause hold ups and lead to annoyance.
FC asked about a route from Bembridge to St Helens. KB said plans for the Brading to St Helens route
were well advanced, including negotiations with the Water Board over land they control. However the
onward route to Bembridge would be on-road at present.
KB said the role of cycling officer would be replaced by a new post including the task to develop new
schemes and ensure that all the bits fit.
CC asked how much detail will be confirmed by May when the bid is made. KB said plans will not be
finalised at that stage but there must be reasonable confidence in the deliverability and in the cost.
MB asked about developer involvement. KB said they identify network improvements to the developer
FORUM CONTACTS:
A.Lawson (minutes) alec.lawson@virgin.net
T.Thorne (Cyclewight) emt.thorne@virgin.net
A.Newman (Wayfarers) Andrew.Newman@onwight.net 2011-02-23_Cycle_Forum_Minutes Page 4
so that he would be easier to persuade regarding his contribution.
KB identified sums and costs involved in various schemes and added that he now needs to go through
existing 106 agreements to source the shortfall.
Embargoed maps:
Newport Central Cycle Track
Newport Shide Cycle Link
Blackhouse Quay Cycle Link
6. PFI
KB said that route 22 and 23 were included under the Private Finance Initiative and would be
maintained. Other parts of the network are not formally included at present: it is hoped they will be
included but funding must be identified. This will be a task for the Rights of Way section when they
become part of Highways Department.
MR asked if the Newport-Wootton-Ryde route would achieve PFI status. KB said no commitment could
be given. The highest standards of construction must be followed for any cycleway development. He was
aware that the farm in the Fairlee area was for sale.
MG asked about use of the Fairlee Road footpath for permissive cycling. KB said it could not be formally
designated as it could never be upgraded to the minimum standard for cycleway.
KB added that the Ramblers Association will be consulted regarding off-road developments. Everyone
should be aware that give and take will be involved.
8. Any Other Business
CC said the IW Council Cycling Festival would be held from 17-25th September. She said more family
ride leaders are required, and she can be emailed at claire.critchison@iow.gov.uk A leaflet was passed
round for distribution, listing the Festival Launch, Wight Challenge, Cycle the Wight, Hills Killer, and West
Wight Triathlon.
AN said the IW Council had been officially informed of the Wayfarer's Randonnee on Sunday 1st May, in
anti-clockwise direction.
9. Date of next meeting
Wednesday¨ 27th July at 6pm, Innovations Centre, St Cross Business Park, Newport.
FORUM CONTACTS:
A.Lawson (minutes) alec.lawson@virgin.net
T.Thorne (Cyclewight) emt.thorne@virgin.net
A.Newman (Wayfarers) Andrew.Newman@onwight.net 2011-02-23_Cycle_Forum_Minutes Page 5

 
Back to content | Back to main menu