1. Agenda
What happened?
A Clean Sheet of paper.

2. Trust!
“Communicate with Honesty and Integrity and to allow the Community to have it’s voice heard.”

3. Jun 6th Meeting I 2 applications in. Sport England objected
Parish Council objected
Time to hear your voice.
We shared thoughts and received wisdom.

4. WBC Agreed with you! 135 Objections.
71%+ Households canvassed voiced objection.
WBC extended, then flawed applications were yanked before rejected.
Issues inc: Parking, Sport England, Urbanising AONB

5. Jun 6th Meeting II
We invited the Trustees to talks with Richard Benyon MP.
No talks have taken place – “BPAG don’t represent anyone" Trustees see little benefit in talks.
Trustees decided to press on with flawed plans in discussion with WBC.
No Plan B – No reflection on Village voice.

6. Review – Communications with Trustees
Less than 30% received replies or acknowledgements!

7. Saturday Market 9th July
Plans on display
Community Referendum
Trustees Mandate
Trustees membership
BPAG.
Don’t represent anyone who matters, as we don’t use the hall!
Have stirred up trouble with falsehoods via Social media!

8. A question of a referendum
2014 Public presentation.
Project FAQs
Project News July 2015.
PC Meeting May 2016.
v’s
Saturday Market July 2016

9. Referendum – who do you trust?
Trust requires vote of Parish.
Trustees advised that “recent Charity law excuses them any requirement”
Charities Act 2011 – is a housekeeping exercise: no new laws!

10. Covenant A “negative” covenant exists.
The Trustees advised “Benyon has no say on it”
They run with the land – pass the problem to the developer?

11. Trustees Original groups (Cricket, WI, Methodist Church etc)
“Social recreational and educational” groups
Up to 3 Co-optees representing Parish interests.

12. Mandate – cast your mind back…
Phones looked like this!
Olympics were in Beijing
Gordon Brown was Prime Minister
Bank bailout in full flow
PC 2008 “Would you support the building of a new village hall?”
66% of 75% Households = 49.5% pp51 Design & Access Statement
Top requirements – Shop(!), Internet Access, Sports Hall.
“Would you support the building of a new village hall on 2500m2 of your green space at the cost of £1.7m?”

13. Summary Issues galore still.
BPAG tried to engage on your behalf – this will continue.
Trustees barely communicating with us.
….but

14. What Size? What Cost? Which Location?
During Planning Application consultation, “too big, too costly, in the wrong location” emerges as community consensus.
Trustees dismissive (leaflet 15th June):
“Furthermore, this group (BPAG) has failed to put forward a coherent alternative plan”.
Trustees confirm (letter Chair to JA 13th July):
No alternative option, only current plans/proposal.
Do not consider any future costs incurred will be misspent.

15. Where to start? – “A Clean Sheet of Paper”
An Alternative Approach leaflet – distributed parish wide late May.
Woolton Hill Church Hall picked as the benchmark because:
80% grant funded for a refurbishment and new build extension (£347,000).
Providing 245 sq. m. internal space.
Cost per sq. m. was £1,735, project cost was £425,000.
Had clear Key Objectives, Project Aims and Project Phases.
Trustees dismissed Refurbishment + New Build option, why?
Village voice supports:
Retention of existing footprint.
Refurbish hall, not demolish hall.
Is this a good starting point?

16. Consultation paper - “A Clean Sheet of Paper”
Why are you doing it?
Who are you doing it for?
How are you going to do it?

17. Consultation paper – Key Objectives
For use by Community groups, Charities & Voluntary organisations.
Support wide variety of community, charity and social activities.
Parallel use for hall users, when and if required.
A hall development and enhancement that the community supports.
Should not include (but may still allow):
To provide a venue for
Sports facilities such as badminton.
Life/celebratory events, e.g. wedding receptions.
Business Conferences or meetings.
Commercial businesses to operate and compete with similar local businesses.
You can’t compete where you don’t compare!

18. Consultation paper – Hall Users Reqts
Current Hall Users (Weekdays - Jan to March 2016):
1 X Daily (1 hr + 3 hrs) = 24% hall usage
6 X Weekly (1 X 6 hrs, average 1.5 hrs) = 27% hall usage
3 X Monthly (average 3 hrs) = 2% hall usage
No usage at weekend
Size of Hall/room?
Facilities required (kitchen, light, heat)?
Security?
Disabled access?

19. Consultation paper – A Virtual Village Hall
Village hall = 53% week day utilisation, other facilities and venues < 20%
Links together facilities and venues in the village:
Bradfield Primary school hall - cost £850,000, 180 sq. m hall, modern sound system, lighting, projector and screen, sports equipment and storage space.
Bradfield Cricket club - cost £250,000, small bar area, changing rooms and space for meetings.
Bradfield Social Club - large bar and seating area, ideal location for celebratory and social events.
Could provide an innovative solution with
Greater community and shared economic benefit.
Opportunity to reduce cost and size of new village hall.
Minimal loss of green space.

20. Consultation paper – Project Aims
No sale of community land to fund project .
Minimise Loss of green space.
New facilities/Extension integrate to existing footprint.
Energy efficiency (lower heating and lighting costs ).
Adopt and implement “Virtual Village Hall”/Share economic benefit.

21. Conceptual Drawings - Briefs
Option B – Refurbish existing hall
New roof
New energy systems
Electrics & lighting
Drains, toilets
Make more attractive. 

22. Conceptual Drawings – Option B

23. From this, to this!

24. Conceptual Drawings - Briefs
Option C - Improve facilities + Option B.
Extend kitchen, committee room & storage area.
Add disabled toilet facilities.
Modernise and integrate into the main hall outline.
Access to kitchen from both halls, as present.   

25. Conceptual Drawings – Option C

26. From this, to this!

27. Comparison of Options
Accommodation
Existing (sq. m.)
Refurb + extension (sq. m.)
“Time for Change” (sq. m.)
Large Hall
140
170
Small Hall 64
Committee/Meeting Room 34 50 21
Foyer 6 75
Kitchen 12 24 26
Toilets
12 (no disabled)
15 (1 disabled)
38 (3 disabled)
Storage 10
1st Floor Storage 25 55
Total Internal Floor space
214
270 (+26%)
510 (+138%)
Virtual Village Hall could provide > 550 sq.m. combined floor space.

28. What Makes Refurbishment Attractive?
Only require Building Regulations permission for improvements.
Less time consuming, offers a fast track through planning.
No BREEAM requirement or CIL, adding to project costs.
No statutory consultees.
Only require Planning permission for extension (if required).
Minimal loss of green space approx. 36sq.m.
Statutory consultees, e.g. Sport England, should have no objection.
Project could be phased to minimise disruption.
Discrete, separate, work packages, e.g. roof, energy, electrics, new build.
Skills and capabilities in the community could contribute.
Builds community involvement.
Mitigates costs.
The Right Cost, Right Size and in the Right Location!

29. Vote Please vote for your preferred option:
Option B – Refurbish Hall.
Option C – Extension + Option B.
Opportunity to vote, for those unable to attend, available shortly via

30. Questions?