Packed UCU meeting confirms extent of opposition to Chaucer Fields ‘development’

This report is from http://chaucerfieldspicnicsociety.wordpress.com/

Despite being a busy time for University staff and others, the open meeting hosted by the University of Kent’s main staff union, UCU, on Thursday 10 May drew a very large audience.  Many local people responded to the invitation to attend the event, as well as University staff, and a small number of students (the event was publicised by Kent Union).  The speakers were Professor Keith Mander, Deputy Vice-Chancellor and one of the architects of the ‘development’ proposals, who portrayed the University as essentially (and necessarily) an organisation focussed on maximising business activity, and claimed that job security was threatened if the scheme did not proceed.  At the same time, it emerged from Professor Mander’s speech that the University was now aware of the extent of opposition to the scheme, in particular because of the pending Village Green Application, and was in the process of exploring alternative development options .  It was stated clearly that the Chaucer Fields option was essentially on hold for 2012 and possibly well into 2013, at least until the Village Green Application situation was clarified. This was not least because the potential private financial backers were unwilling to proceed in these circumstances. In the meantime, other sites off campus were being considered.

Two speakers then argued against the proposal in principal, highlighting the value of Chaucer Fields as unspoilt space, and contesting Professor Mander’s account of the University’s priorities. First, Professor Richard Norman made the case on behalf of local residents for protecting the fields as unspoilt green space, emphasising its existing social and environmental value, and the harms anticipated to follow from ‘development’. Second, Professor Chris Rootes argued that it was not in the interests of the University to proceed with the development, given the uncertain and turbulent nature of the business and social environment to which it was having to adapt.

After thirty minutes for these presentations, the event’s chair, Professor John Fitzpatrick, facilitated questions from the audience. Contributors from the floor welcomed the University’s re-engagement with the search for further site options, and sought clarification on these and other issues raised by Professor Mander.  Several contributors also challenged and criticised the assertions made by Professor Mander concerning the priorities being pursued by the University. However, the main sentiment that emerged from those not persuaded by Professor Mander was that the issue of site selection had become confused with the issue of University capacity development. It was suggested that there were several reasons why University consolidation or growth need not require the destruction of Chaucer Fields as an unspoilt space. These included  the reaffirmation that alternative opportunities were available on campus and had been prematurely ruled out.

Together with the earlier acknowledgement of ongoing off-campus search activity, it therefore emerged that Chaucer Fields remained but one of several development options. There was nothing inevitable about ‘developing’ Chaucer Fields, and the choices available to the University were now revealed to be considerably wider than had been asserted in earlier statements of the University’s position. (This is a situation in line with the UCU motion endorsed earlier this year by the electronic poll  – urging further efforts by the University to find an appropriate site).

Professor Mander also received some support from the floor. Staff employed by the University’s hospitality and commercial services  were especially visible in expressing this position. They emphasised the extent to which they agreed the University must be understood only as a business, and concurred with Professor Mander  that objecting  to the proposals necessarily put  University jobs at risk. They also in turn challenged some of the claims and suggestions made by Professor Norman and Professor Rootes concerning the nature of the  University’s environment, and the range of alternative options available to it for development.  Professor Mander summed up his thinking by saying, in no uncertain terms, that when choosing between the ‘business case’ and the environment, he would always choose the business case.

The meeting finished with a show of hands. There was no formal tally of votes, but around 80% of those attending agreed with a motion that “This meeting is not persuaded that the Chaucer Fields development should proceed”.

Keith Mander to 'justify' Chaucer Field's development on 10 May

There’s a significant event on campus on thursday 10 may , 1pm – 2pm, Eliot lecture theatre 2. Professor Keith Mander, head of the Estates Department at the University of Kent and one of the co-architects of the proposal to ‘develop’ Chaucer Fields, will be putting forward his case for it. (The other person behind the idea, Denise Everitt, head of Finance, is not expected to attend). Other contributors will put forward the opposing view:  that ‘Chaucer Fields’ should be retained as unspoilt green space with great value to the University and the host community alike. These speakers will include Professor of philosophy Richard Norman and Professor of environmental social science Chris Rootes.

The debate, organised by the University and Colleges Union, the largest staff trade union at the University, is a follow up to earlier findings on staff sentiment about the proposal. It has been convened following the  electronic poll reported in an earlier blog, which revealed the overwhelming majority of staff respondents supported a motion in favour of protecting the fields and continuing to respect them as they are now for a range of amenity, social environmental, and heritage reasons. The debate aims to explore the issue further with both ‘sides’ (to use UCU terminology) putting forward their case. The intention seems to be that  the UCU members will vote again in the light of what the discussion reveals.

Please do try to attend this meeting, whether you are a UCU member, non-UCU staff, a student or a local resident (not employed by, or studying at, the University). UCU have said it is to be open to all. Read more at Save Chaucer Fields Picnic Society.

Navarro and Power make music track Concrete Lung

Gifted local musicians, including Richard Navarro and Brendan Power, have recorded a wonderful and moving track Concrete Lung (Big Yellow Taxi for Chaucer Fields) based on the well known Joni Mitchell song Big Yellow Taxi. The song addresses the consequences that the misguided development proposals will have on children and people living and working in Canterbury. You can also listen to the music and watch the video on Youtube.

Application for Village Green Status

Kent County Council are now looking at the application residents made last April to designate the area as a Village Green. If successful this would protect the land for future generations.
There is a 6 week consultation period, ending on 19th March.  For more information please visit the Village Green page.

Chaucer Fields is a beautiful scenic location on the southern slopes under The University of Kent, Canterbury. Developing this land will destroy this beauty spot and amenity space forever. Please support The Save Chaucer Fields campaign.
A great number of residents in Canterbury are opposed to the proposals for the development of a conference centre, hotel and student accommodation. The attractive green belt site separating the main University Campus from the town should remain. The proposed development is too big, too costly, too damaging to the local environment and in the wrong place at the wrong time. The University has other sites on brownfield land on central campus.

Planning application deferred

On 28th June 2011 the first planning meeting was due. However, the development planning committee agreed to defer the meetings at the University of Kent's request.

The council's official version is
"The Development Management Committee deferred the planning applications at the request of the Applicants (University). The Applicants had requested the deferral to enable further supplementary information to be provided in respect of the business case for co-locating the hotel / conference centre and the student accommodation together."

The University will submit further information, and we will again have the chance to submit any responses (we presume only 3 weeks to do this). So if anyone has any information or any ideas on how we can argue against the business case on the fields, and start getting evidence together please let us know (arguments that the hotel and student accommodation do not need to be together, other sites etc).

Other news

Kent County Council are now looking at the application residents made last April to designate the area as a Village Green.
Read the article on the National Trust's objections to government proposals to build on greenfield sites: Government reforms threaten green spaces

Video about Chaucer Fields on Youtube

savechaucerfields@hotmail.co.uk

Planning objections made

Thank you to everyone who made an objection to Canterbury City Council objecting to this development and to keep this important green space for future generations to enjoy.
385 objections were received about the removal of the hedgerows, and 466 to the building of the student accommodation and hotel and associated work.
We may have to make further objections when the University of Kent submits more evidence.

Thank you for your help, and we hope you will continue to play an essential part. Details of the applications are on Canterbury City Council's website.

CA//11/00531 Land to the east of Chaucer College, University Road, Canterbury, CT2 7LJ Removal of hedgerow

CA//11/00528 Land to the east of Chaucer College, University Road, Canterbury, CT2 7LJ Erection of a new mixed use complex comprising: hotel with 150 bedrooms and conference centre; five detached buildings 3 and 4 storeys to provide 501 student bed spaces in 7 person flats; two detached buildings 4 storeys to provide 261 student bed spaces in 12 person town houses; a 2 storey hub building comprising , catering and study spaces; bin and cycle storage and associated car parking, landscaping (including removing the established trees and replanting with saplings), CCTV and signage

Larger applications may take time to determine. It is worthwhile asking the Council if they can keep you informed of progress.