City Farm riding arena (in the park)

[Deleted]

That is really despicable. There has been no consultation. I'd have thought that this should have been looked at by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, but they don't seem to know anything until they're told about it, by which time it's probably too late to stop bad things from happening. I went to the council and left a written question for their meeting last night, so they know about the matter now.

I wonder if the BTNP know about it. If they do, then they've not even tried to represent the views of the residents of the ward...no, that can't be right! LOL.

[Joe K]

At least one positive note. Although they haven't responded to my admonishment about addresses of commenters (including mine for my second comment, but not Tom Wilson, strangely), they have removed the addresses, belatedly.

I've decided to repost all the comments here for convenience, including my complaint:

I have a number of concerns about this application .the parking in Albany street is already a
big issue , when visitors come to the farm they park all down the street with no consideration
for the neighbours . it isn’t safe to park the car up near the St James entrance as I know well
because my car got vandalised so keeping the car as near to the house is important . I feel the
supposed garden that belongs to the farm would be more beneficial as a car park for visitors
to the farm , as the garden is just an area that is abused by drug dealers and takers .I would
also like to know exactly where the proposed building is going to be as my back garden backs
onto the park .where will the animals food be stored ? And where will the animal waste go? it
already smells around the area and I personally have spotted rats around the farm area .and
its not pleasant to have dirt and animal waste walked into your home .I don’t want to sound
all doom and gloom because I think it is a good idea if concerns that are raised are
addressed as i feel as a local resident we aren’t included in any decisions that are made
where the farm is concerned , it doesn’t feel very community spirited and the decisions that
are made do effect the residents , after all we have to live here when the staff get to lock up at
the end of the night and go home .
Miss Jessica Polson

Dear Sir, I am expressing my concerns of the possibility of a riding arena at the city farm.
Firstly, I would be interested to know if the arena is to be based on the existing field at the
rear of the farm or if this additional to that field. If it is the latter, I would ask you to
reconsider. St James Park is used by very many local residents; from mothers and toddlers to
dog walkers and some who just like to enjoy the park and find it a place of peace and
calmness in an otherwise busy city area. Local schools also use it. Also, I would like to raise
the concerns for the ponies/horses and their living accommodation. Where will they be
housed? If they are to be transported to the farm on a daily basis, it will cause enormous
amounts of congestion in Albany Street. Not to mention the stress for the animals having to
be loaded and unloaded every day or at weekends. We as residents have enough trouble
parking on the street. Whilst I understand that it is a public road, there are elderly residents
and families with small children who sometimes cannot safely get to their own homes, due to
lack of parking. Maybe a car park would be a better use of money and resources. If these
animals are to be stabled in Albany where are they to be stabled or is a new block being built
for them? I wonder if consideration has been given to the waste of these animals and the food
storage they will need. I would like to think I could walk home from work without bringing
debris (i.e. straw and the like) into my home or taking it to my place of work. Thank you for
your time and consideration, yours faithfully, Mrs H Major
Mrs H Major

13/00719/FUL
As vicar of St James Church, which is adjacent to the City Farm, I would like to confirm my
support for the proposal. St James Church has a close working relationship with the City Farm
and we would like to see the Farm prosper and develop.
Mr Tom Wilson

I struggle between 'Object' and 'Neutral' in the choices above, because the lack of any
notification of this proposal to the public makes me very wary of supporting it. In fact, having
looked at the Design and Access Statement, I feel pushed towards the former. I should say
that the point may be moot, as in theory the period during which comments could be made
has long since expired, but since two comments have now shown up, dated September 2nd,
although they cannot be viewed, perhaps it's not too late, due to the aforementioned absence
of notification? Well, my feelings, having read the D&A Statement, are that this proposal
may spell the end of St James' City Farm, and that in fact this may have been the long-term
objective. How long would it be before all other animals were removed, if the scheme went
ahead? The proposal is also out of date, as the carpark that used to belong to the Golden
Heart will now be needed by the Treddy, as the Heart has been re-named and re-opened.
Removal of public paths, trees and currently used allotments, none of this has been raised for
public discussion. There is also a question over who owns the land currently fenced off
between the Farm and St James' Church. Is it the city (county?) council's, or was it sold to
Gymnation? Again, such a transaction has never been put to consultation. We have an
upcoming meeting of the Tredworth Estate & Tenants Residents Association (TETRA), to be
held, as it happens, at the City Farm on Monday, 9th September, at 10am. It would be a very
helpful move if these details could be discussed at that meeting, before any further decisions
are made. Cheers.
Mr Joe Kilker

I have to object to the fact that the Riding Arena Adjustments plan is almost a blank page,
and the few notes are almost impossible to read. Also, I'm writing this sentence as a separate
paragraph, but when it is made available online (NOT 'immediately'), everything I have typed
will be scrunched up into a single slab of italicised text. Is this necessary? Cheers, Joe Kilker
Mr Joe Kilker

And you can take my address OFF the last comment, and do the same for Miss Polson and Mrs Major. Quote: We will not display your address, telephone number or email address to the public.
Mr Joe Kilker

This application has my full support! I go to City Farm regularly with my sons. It has always
been a great community resource. Since Gymnation took over the management, I have been
impressed with the many ways they are involving local people, and I feel that the farm is
going from strength to strength This proposed riding area could be extremely positive for the
children and young people of Tredworth. We live in an area of economic and social
deprivation where not every family has a car or money for riding lessons. Without this riding
school, most local children would not get to see a real horse or pony, let alone ride one. I
also like the way that Gymnation are planning to link the children and young people who use
the riding school with Hartpury College (which is a world class venue only a few miles from
here - but most residents of Tredworth would not be able to access this without the help of
City Farm). I understand the objections raised by residents of Albany St, as they would be
living right next to the riding school. I also realise that some people have concerns about the
welfare of the animals. However, I attended the committee meeting of TETRA today, and it is
very clear to me that all these issues have been carefully thought through. Staff at City Farm
have the experience and expertise to make a success of the riding school, and they have also
been working closely with other agencies to make sure that the animals are well cared for
and that foodstuffs and waste are managed appropriately. St James Park is generally very
well used, but the area of the park in question is currently not so busy as the rest of the park.
Allowing City Farm to make positive use of this area would help to draw people into City
Farm and the facilities on offer there, and would also help to increase 'informal supervision'
of the rest of the park as City Farm staff and volunteers would be more able to see what was
going on. I am sure that I speak for many friends and neighbours when I say that I hope this
application is granted, and that City Farm staff have the opportunity to build on the excellent
work they are already doing.
Mrs Karen Page

I do take issue with anyone claiming to speak for 'friends and neighbours', unless they are able back the claim with evidence. Those who are prepared to make the effort to speak, *will* speak.

[New para]Having said that, I would make an educated guess, from what people have been telling me, that the majority in Barton & Tredworth would say, if asked, that they have been told very little about this project, and certainly not that they had been asked how they felt about it before plans were finalised.

[New para]Regardless of what is revealed at a closed committee meeting (of a group which one would think the presence of any residents wishing to attend was essential to), it's actually the lack of that open consultation process, as a large chunk of the park is leased to Gymnasian UK which concerns me.

{New para]The last TETRA meeting *was* a committee meeting. My mistake. The next public meeting (for Tredworth residents only, unless Tony Ward changes his mind) is on October 7th, 6:30pm, at the Big Vic, on the High St. Perhaps that will be the opportunity for residents to be persuaded of the value of this project, or even just made aware of it in the first place.

[New para]Finally, nice to see that commenter's addresses have now been removed, and hope this continues to be the case.

Edited for new comment (not posted yet)

[Deleted]

I am absolutely horrified that a friend of mine has given her full support to the venture. We may well fall out over this.

[Joe K]

The 'View associated documents' link isn't working again. This is slightly vexing.

Karen Page was presumably tasked with providing a glowing reference for the project. It does come across as a tad presumptuous to me, speaking for 'friends and neighbours', who are surely more than capable of speaking for themselves.

Whoever does speak up in the next fortnight or so, and whatever the decision made (hopefully at an open meeting this time), it won't change the fact that that those 'friends and neighbours' were given very little opportunity to express a view about this project, which has to make one wonder if the applicants thought the public would be supportive?

[Joe K]

Site's working again now Pat Scannell has made a comment (although he has no computer connection):

TETRA (Tredworth Estate Tenants & Residents Association) As the chairman of TETRA I
fully support the application made by the St James City Farm for a new all weather riding
arena. We recently had a committee meeting where we discussed this plan made by the City
Farm and all the committee members agreed that this was a fantastic idea and will certainly
benefit the area immensely. The City Farm have done a really good job in getting the local
people in the area especially children to volunteer and learn about the different animals and
also about farming which is quite brilliant. There are people in this locality who are very
much interested in riding but don't know where to go. By having a riding arena right on their
doorstep they will be able to take riding lessons and learn so much more which will benefit
them if they would like to move on to Hartpury college and pursue this as a career. TETRA
would like to show their full support and wish St James City Farm the best of luck in your
application. Pat Scannell Chairman of TETRA

[Deleted]

You can be sure that this is supported by Gloucester City Homes, as it is exactly the type of thing that they absolutely love. Pat probably typed the comment on one of their computers after someone else found the correct page for him. Pat virtually always supports anything that GCH supports. He never uses St. James' Park, as far as I know, so the loss of public open space would not bother him. How about having the riding arena on the 'community' garden at the back of his flat? I've just compared the plots on a map, and they're about the same size, and they're both owned by the city council. Sorted!

[Deleted]

I've been trying unsuccessfully for two days to access the planning documents online. If the fault isn't fixed by tomorrow, I'll have to go into the council offices to look at them.

[Joe K]

I've had the same problems getting on today but it's not completely blocked, eventually the page comes up.

I will have to go in myself and ask to see the riding arena adjustment plan, because it's just as vague, despite me telling them a week ago. I'm also going to have to write another comment, making it very clear that concerns about the way residents were kept informed - or not - are at least as important as the opinion of somebody who doesn't even live in the ward that we can stand to lose a big chunk of our park...

[Joe K]

Well, this morning, just before midday, I turned up at the city council offices asking to 'inspect' the relevant documents. The notice actually says we can inspect 'copies' of the document, and the receptionist was very insistent that what I could see there was exactly what was viewable on the planning website. It seemed the only way I could get her to budge at at all was by asking, "So we can't look at documents here?", twice, perhaps three times. Then I had to wait. Then I had to wait again, after once more being told by Gavin Jones via the receptionist, that document would be just the same.

Eventually, they agreed to show me the documents, which meant printing up copies apparently, because they only had them stored electronically, as they were sent to them. Gavin Jones came down after ten minutes or so with these copies, which were much clearer, though there was some confusion about the text which was on the original riding arena adjustments plan. It isn't on the copy they gave me, although the adjustment to the path (the one that isn't recorded as a right of way) is.

I think that if a set of documents made available to the public isn't legible to the public in its entirety, that begs the question of whether the consultation period should be viewed as still counting down to a close, or whether it should begin from the point where the documents are made legible. I've put this point to the city council on Twitter, for what it's worth.

[Deleted]

I can access the documents now. I note that the application form states that there has been no pre-application advice from the local authority; I simply don't believe that. I also note that all six parking spaces will be going, although I can't think where they are at the moment.

[Deleted]

Oh, and the description of the site on the application form says that it is on the farm site adjacent to the park, rather than on the park itself. this is a lie if they DON'T already have ownership of the site, as Paul James has claimed to me.

[Joe K]

My last comment, although it was posted before Pat Scannell's, is now placed after his for some reason...

And now Saj Patel has chimed in, with some specious points:

> To whom it may concern,
>>
I am writing to inform you that I support the above mentioned planning application for the following
reasons:-
>>
• The open space for the proposed arena is not used much by the public/community.
>>
• There is sufficient open spaces available for public enjoyment adjoining the proposed site.
>>
• The proposed development is highly unlikely to increase any risk of flooding.
>>
• The proposed development is highly unlikely to result in any increase in crime and/or anti-social
problems.
>>
• A horse riding arena on this area of land will be both a positive and beneficial asset to the local
community and the area, particularly for the young children in this deprived inner city ward.
>>
• The proposed horse riding arena would make an excellent addition to the City Farm, which has
been truly thriving under the ownership of The Friendship Cafe/Gymnation.
>>>
Please kindly acknowledge this email.
>>

I guess he doesn't think any of the people who wrote this proposal up are 'incompetent', or 'liars'.

[Deleted]

It is now clear that Gymnasian already have control of all but a small bit of the land that they need.

The reason that the locals haven't been using much of the land earmarked for development is that it's been fenced off for years. I haven't been into the park recently, because my current dog tries to fight every other dog that he sees, and St. James' Park is small and heavily used, and it's impossible to keep him clear of other dogs (who find him attractive and insist on coming over to say hello), but the last time that I was there there were still paddocks in the park itself. They were erected years ago, supposedly as a temporary measure, when the city farm and Robinswood Farm were both overstocked. Since many of the animals have now been sold off, the paddocks should have been dismantled, but of course we now know why they weren't.

[Joe K]

Not sure if my latest comment has been put in yet ('automatically' my backside), but I've covered some of the issues...

We have a flurry of four supporting comments, and not a single one of them addresses the fact that a large chunk of St. James' Park is going to be withheld from residents, without any of them being invited to have a say in the matter. Well, Sajid Patel concludes airily that nobody uses that area, and that there's still the rest of the park to use. He bases the former statement on no evidence whatsoever, ignoring both the picnic bench and dogwalkers, and the latter on not facing up to the fact that a reduced park will affect everyone's enjoyment of it.

[New para]Besides this, there is a glaring problem with the plans, upon which we are supposed to rely to assure ourselves of the soundness of this project. The Riding Arena Adjustment plan is effectively a blank sheet, with a faint block of text in the top right corner. In this text, the applicants claim that the path leading from Upton St is not a public right of way, and they can therefore move (or remove?) it without seeking planning permission. Again, this opinion isn't supported with evidence.

[New para] That's not the glaring problem, though. That is that the council claim this plan, as viewable on the planning control website, is exactly what they were given by the applicants. When I went to the city council's offices, though, and asked to inspect copies of the plans, I was (after much insistence) give a photocopy of what they *do* have. Although in this photocopy the text referred to above is missing, it can be seen that the area of the park encroached upon is far larger than residents might imagine if they think the currently fenced off area is what is being discussed. At least twice that will be lost. The picnic table will have to go (or be put right next to where ball games are played), and the path, if it remains at all will have to be moved.

[New para] If this document isn't viewable to residents, when it clearly *could* be, if anyone could be bothered to upload the image that was copied for my benefit, then the plans aren't available to residents in their entirety, and until they are, the consultation period is invalid. If the postal addresses of commenters could be edited out of documents, legible plans can be edited in. When this happens, the consultation period should begin afresh.

[Joe K]

PS the site said that my comment would be 'truncated'...