Stonebridge Public Meeting: 7 March 2007

It was quickly apparent as I entered the main hall at 7 p.m that the turn out was better than expected with the room full to capacity, about 150, perhaps more were present. It was better organised with a speaker system and radio microphones allowing locals in the room to be heard when asking questions, while the presentation was audible to everyone.

In this summery of the meeting I only intend to summarise the main points of the speakers, as it was clear decisions had been made to clarify a number of points raised during the recent consultation process.

The main emphasis was to say that the consultation had been an overwhelming success with 78% of locals being consulted, and 74% in favour of the regeneration scheme and wanted it to go ahead; about 4% had reservations. The total number of residences on the Stonebridge Park Estate being 437.

We were told that all of the officers of Nottingham City Council, City Homes, and LHA_ASRA were “excited” by the scheme and the new plans for the estate.

There were some problems highlighted during the recent consultation process that needed to be addressed, and a number of these had led to changes on the Master Plan, the new plan was on the main wall to be viewed by those at the meeting, although it was just A4 in size and no copies had been handed out to all of those present.

There were concerns about roads and new access roads becoming ‘rat-runs.’ The closure of half of the estate’s interlocking footpaths that made access to the rear of properties quite difficult, and the height of the new perimeter fences, which some people felt, was going to be too low to facilitate good security.

The hazardous Beacon Hill Rise Road then got a mention. With all of the pedestrian subways going to be filled in and bricked-up, it was important that road safety be considered, and new pedestrian crossings will be introduced on Beacon Hill Rise, and St Matthias Roads. Money had now been found from “funds held by the Highways Dept of the City Council.” The meeting was not told how much money, and which financial year?

Both City Homes retained houses, and owner-occupier homes, would benefit from external improvements. All new windows & doors (“double-glazing” was not mentioned); external insulated cladding of properties will be carried out. Every property would have a new perimeter wall.

Work to bring all Stonebridge estate properties up to the government set ‘decent homes standard’ would begin in May this year. It is not known what part of the estate would be done first.

Internal improvements were the homeowner’s responsibility for new bathrooms, kitchen, or District Heating etc., the on site contractors would need to be paid prior to the work, and for those with difficulty paying the full price in one go, the City Council would provide a facility for financial loans.

At least two properties were fitted with old obsolete district heating that was too expensive to run, however, owner-occupiers still had to cover the full replacement cost of the system (I understand, in the region of £1,400). In addition, the meeting was told that those properties that did not have district heating; the owners would not be compelled to be connected to the heating system.

In questions from the floor it was pointed out that a number tenants had respiratory illnesses of bronchitis or asthma. Others were concerned about the dust, chemicals & dirt raised during the slum clearance of the blocks of flats & maisonettes, and build programme. Dirt or mud being brought into their homes soiling carpets and decorations.

The dust and dirt would be kept to a minimum, they were told, however, it was inevitable some dirt/mud would be around from when the work actually began, and over the next few years. Asked whether there would be any compensation to cover such eventualities, the speaker bluntly said “NO,” and stepped away from the microphone.

Beryl Whitehead took the stand to talk about improving children’s facilities at the Bluebell Hill Community centre, while Rocket Park would need to be filled and levelled to provide better visibility and children’s playground equipment.

One woman from the floor pointed out that there are presently nowhere for teenage children & youths to go and socialise, such as a youth club, or things to do. Russell Youth club was then mentioned, accept this is only open two days a week, and not situated on the Stonebridge Park Estate.

Would there be any small playgrounds on the Stonebridge Park Estate? With the large number of new houses being built, that it is hoped working class families with children, or new couples wanting to start a family would buy to finance the Regeneration Scheme, surely, there would need to be some attraction.

“There is no playground or children’s play facilities included in the Master Plan for the estate,” we were told. “All houses would have a perimeter wall as standard.” We were all left wondering how the new family houses would sell if this is all there is to attract families to the Stonebridge Park Estate. After all, the sale of all of the newly built houses & apartments was central to the financial success of the scheme.

A brief mention to the setting up of the new Stonebridge Board was then given. The next meeting of the Stonebridge Steering Committee to launch the new board is 12 March 2007.

The meeting ended at 8 40 p.m.