HHCSG

Hayfield Parish Council
Hayfield Heritage Ctr Steering Group

STRATEGY FOR TOURISM IN HAYFIELD

OBJECTIVE: To attract more visitors to the village, to help sustain local shops, pubs other businesses and services for the benefit of residents. Increased tourism can be one strand of local economic regeneration. To manage any pressures arising from current or future levels of tourism.

Key drivers for expansion

1. INFORMATION

Contact DCC to discuss the future of the Information Centre in the Old Station car park. Can we work in partnership with them to have more information about Hayfield in there, and to have extended opening hours or some access to information when the centre is not staffed?
Ensure that Hayfield tourism information is lodged and updated on all relevant websites (HPBC, DCC, PDNPA, EMTB, etc) as well as on the parish website.
We encourage and enable information leaflet racks to be installed and stocked in village centre shops, pubs or other businesses? And arrange for Hayfield leaflets to be stocked in other appropriate localities outside the village?
In the longer term, should we aspire to establishing an information/heritage/visitor/access centre of our own, in partnership with other key agencies?
Support the need for improved broad band internet into and distribution throughout the community.

2. UNIQUE SELLING POINTS FOR HAYFIELD

a. Kinder Trespass
The parish council have already approved in principle the application for a grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund. Some work is in progress to identify which aspects of the original proposals are most likely to attract a grant (max £50k); to take soundings from potential partnership agencies; and to recruit a small group of volunteers to help with this process.
The initial application is likely to focus on two aspects;

Collecting heritage material to be retained within the village; putting (some of) this material on display in a central village location which is accessible at weekends; commissioning art works that interpret the trespass; developing a Trespass website to replicate much of the heritage material.
Creating a Trespass Trail in and around the village; interpretation boards to be sited in key locations and incorporating reproductions of some of the best elements from the heritage collection (photographs, contemporary newspaper accounts etc). Key sites are Old station Yard, Recreation ground, Quarry, and former Lock-Up/parish council office. Brochures would be produced to advertise the trail, and these would refer to the location of the heritage collection/display material. It might be possible to incorporate a mural somewhere along or near to the route (under bridge?). The presence of a substantial interpretation board at Bowden Bridge quarry could bring the village centre attractions to the attention of the numerous walkers who park in that area and who rarely venture into the village itself.

A further strand to be explored perhaps as a second phase is promoting countryside access through guided walks of various kinds. The focus of this could be to encourage and enable less adventurous people to sample some of the easier shorter walks starting and finishing in the village centre.

3. Other USP’s
Arthur Lowe?
Sherwood Foresters?
Coronation St?

Neolithic Bowl Barrow on Kinder low
Industrial Archeology
John Wesley ... etc ...

4. SUPPORTING AND ADVERTISING WHAT WE HAVE
May Queen
Sheepdog Trials
Well Dressings
Calico Trail and other Civic Trust initiatives
Fell Races and Mountain bike events
Orchard Project
Sports that bring in visiting teams Cricket Club, Football Club, Climbing Club etc...
Further environmental improvements to the village centre, following Memorial Square.
Maintaining or improving infrastructure amenities car parking, public toilets, etc.

PROPOSAL
That the parish council approve this outline; and commission the Recreation, Leisure and Tourism sub committee to expand on it and to progress funding applications for 2010/11.

Philip Gee/John Harvey 25th November 2009.

"AS I TRUDGE THROUGH THE PEAT AT A PACE SO SLOW
THERE IS TIME TO REMEMBER THE DEBT WE OWE
TO THE "KINDER TRESPASS" AND THE RIGHTS THEY DID SEEK
ALLOWING US FREELY TO RAMBLE THE DARK PEAK"

The poem is one of fifty installed to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the setting up of the Ranger Service in 2003. A competition open to the public and school children was run and the best fifty were carved onto benches and installed at appropriate places.
The location of this one is in Bowden Bridge Hayfield.

Hayfield Parish Council 1st April 2009 AGENDA ITEM 10b)
The outline case for a Heritage Grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund.
HAYFIELD: from Kinder Trespass to Kinder Access
Hayfield is the location from which the historic Kinder Trespass set off in 1932, and where the leaders were arrested on their return. This event was highly significant in creating a countryside access movement and in paving the way to the setting up of National Parks – the first being the Peak District in 1951.
Hayfield is the gateway to the Kinder Scout plateau from the west. This is the highest and arguably the most important moorland area in the Peak Park, with its distinctive and dramatic landscape which incorporates the first (or last) section of the Pennine Way. Hayfield also provides the most direct access to Kinder’s most distinctive feature – the Downfall.
There is the potential within Hayfield to link these two factors, to make more people aware of the historical and current importance of access, and to enable a more diverse range of people to acquire the confidence and interest to access the high moorland areas of the High Peak.
A Heritage Grant from the Heritage lottery Fund could enable the Parish Council to set up a range of heritage and access attractions:

A village Trespass trail, using information boards to mark the key sites; old station site where the Manchester walkers arrived by train, the trespass meeting point at Bowden Bridge quarry, and the former police station or ‘lock up’ where the six arrested trespassers were taken.
A modest heritage centre somewhere in the village centre, to provide visual display material, and perhaps to act as a meeting place for guided walks. It might be possible to provide this within a cafe which is planning to open in the village.
A range of guided walks could be facilitated by local volunteers, aimed at different ability levels, possibly in partnership with other agencies.
Other volunteers could prepare and present heritage material to be displayed in the heritage centre, and give talks or advice to groups or individual visitors.
Specific links could be set up with particular areas of Manchester or specific social groups whose current usage of the National Park is low, to encourage and facilitate them in accessing countryside and moorland areas.
It would be useful to have a paid part time volunteer coordinator if funding permits.
Up to 25% of any Heritage grant could be used to improve the tourist infrastructure in the village, such as car parking, or possibly schemes to divert traffic from the village centre, or to make the village roads safer for visitors and residents.

The project would have to be carefully managed in such a way that it has a regenerative effect on the village, while ensuring that it does not swamp a location which already has parking and traffic issues. The heritage programme along with improvements to the village centre should attract more visitors, which in turn will keep more village businesses viable – especially shops, pubs and restaurants (and a cafe if we had one).
This project has the potential to have a unifying and regenerative effect on the village, encouraging participation by a range of local volunteers to achieve a package of non-controversial heritage related enhancements to the village. It would build on the existing cooperation between the Parish Council, the Civic Trust, The County Council, the Peak Park Authority, and many other local organisations, societies and businesses.
Criteria for Heritage Grants

Available for sums from £50,000 to £1 million.
Matched funding required is only 10%; so a total project expenditure of say £500,000 would only require £50,000 to be raised by the PC, and up to £125,000 of this could be spent on tourist infrastructure.
Projects must be essentially heritage based – it must help people to learn about their own or other people’s heritage.
The project must also do either or both of the following: (a) Conserve the UK’s diverse heritage for present or future generations to enjoy (b) Help more people, and a wider range of people, to take an active part in and make decisions about heritage.

In my view, the outline proposals fit quite well with these key criteria for grants. The Trespass was a major historical event, of which Hayfield has the right to take some ownership. And if the grant authorities accept the idea that enabling a more diverse group of people to access our local moorlands is both a heritage issue and a current access issue, then we could be on to a winner. The ideas outlined above are just a starting point, and if a project is confirmed as viable there will of course be a process of refining and clarifying the components, to be led by the Parish Council and its committees. In order to get more guidance from the HLF it is necessary to submit a formal document.
PROPOSAL
That the Parish Council should indicate its support for the pursuance of these heritage development proposals, and authorise the Chair of Finance to complete a pre-application advice request form for the Heritage Lottery Fund, to be submitted by the Parish Clerk, in order to obtain further guidance from HLF officers about the viability of such a project.

John Harvey, chair of Finance Committee, 23rd March 2009.

-------------------------------------

KINDER TRESPASS HERITAGE PROJECT
Progress report to Hayfield Parish Council
In April 2009 the Parish Council received a report on a proposal to apply to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) for a grant relating to celebrating the historical importance of the 1932 Kinder Trespass which took place within the parish of Hayfield. The Chair of Finance was authorised to complete a pre-application form to obtain further guidance from the HLF.

A written response to the pre-application form was received on 26th May. The HLF have advised us that the availability of Heritage grants for major funding (over £50,000) is extremely restricted now and for the foreseeable future. The purchase of a building in Hayfield to develop into a heritage and access centre is therefore not going to be a viable option. However, a more modest project to collect Trespass memories, information and ephemera could still attract a grant of up to £50,000 under their ‘Your Heritage’ scheme.

In order to qualify for a ‘Your Heritage’ grant we would need to demonstrate that there is a need and a demand for the project, and that a sufficient number of volunteers are available to undertake the necessary research. We would need to translate the research work into tangible outcomes which would enable people to learn about the heritage issues and to take an active part in the project.

It therefore appears to be feasible to proceed with many of the aims initially identified;

Collect Kinder Trespass heritage material.
Arrange a permanent display of key materials in a suitable location within the village.
Set up a Trespass Trail within the village using sign boards at key locations, and publish a leaflet encouraging people to walk the trail and visit the heritage display.
Plan and provide a range of educational opportunities to publicise the importance of the Access movement and the key role played by the trespassers.
Promote a range of guided walks that would enable a wider diversity of people to access countryside and moorland walks in and around Hayfield.

This work would need to be done in consultation and partnership with a range of other agencies and organisations. In respect of a location for the display material in item 2 above, the owner of the new cafe in Kinder Road (opening September?) would be very happy to provide a substantial area of wall space in the cafe for this purpose.

‘Your Heritage’ grants can be used to cover the costs of any of the items listed below;

Employment of project manager, volunteer manager, consultants or professionals.
Training of volunteers.
Equipment and materials.
Travel expenses.
Publicity and promotional material.
Website/DVDs/compiling research findings.

PROPOSAL
That the Chair of Finance be authorised to consult a range of potential partners including the Civic Trust, DCC, Borough Council and National Park, and then after seeking further guidance from the HLF to submit an application for a grant under the ‘Your Heritage’ scheme.

John Harvey, chair of Finance Committee, 14th August 2009.

Meeting to establish a Project steering group: Kinder Trespass heritage project – Hayfield.
Tuesday 23rd February, 2010 at 7.30pm, Hayfield Parish Council office.

AGENDA

Introductions and apologies: chairing and notes.

Consider and amend as necessary the draft project description and aims (sections 2a, 2b, 2c of the HLF application form).

Identify tasks to be carried out before an application can be made.

Identify individuals to carry out tasks in 3 above.

Clarify any further issues about role and composition of steering group.

Date of next meeting.

JH 16/02/10

--------------------------

Dear colleagues,
Formation of Project Steering Group: Hayfield Heritage Project -Kinder Trespass.
You are invited to attend an inaugural meeting of a steering group to be formed to progress an application for a Your Heritage lottery grant. The meeting has been scheduled for Tuesday 23rd February, 7.30pm, at Hayfield Parish Council office. It is fairly short notice, so please confirm whether you will be able to attend. If the level of attendance looks problematic we can reschedule, probably to week beginning 8th March.
In April last year the Parish council confirmed its support for the development of a heritage project in Hayfield to celebrate and publicise the Kinder Scout mass trespass of 1932 and its impact on countryside access rights. Initial guidance from the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) has indicated that major grants for the acquisition of buildings are unlikely to be available in the foreseeable future. However more modest grants of up to £50,000 under the Your Heritage scheme are still available. Very recently the council has agreed to explore the possibility of making the ground floor of the Parish council building available as a base for heritage related activities – it is currently used for storage. A preliminary survey has indicated the potential for building improvement works at costs that could be included within a Your Heritage grant application.
We would now like to form a project steering group to progress the grant application. Please find attached/enclosed the following documents:

A blank HLF application form (paper copies will be available at meeting).
Agenda for first meeting of steering group.
A first draft of the project description and aims (parts 2a,2b,2c of application form).
List of those invited to this inaugural meeting.

I look forward to seeing you at the meeting.
Yours sincerely,
John Harvey: parish councilor and chair of finance sub committee.

----------------------------------

Inaugural meeting of steering group; list of those invited to attend.
Kinder Trespass Heritage project: Hayfield

Sue McCall                      Chair of Parish Council.
John McCall                     Parish Councillor, chair of Built environment advisory committee.
Phil Gee                           Parish Councillor, chair of Recreation, Leisure and Tourism.
Mike Crompton                Parish council clerk.
Susan Wyatt                    Civic Trust member.
Neville Kirk                      Professor of history, Manchester Metropolitan University.
John Harvey                    Parish Councillor, chair of Finance sub committee.

JH 16/02/10

------------------

FIRST DRAFT

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND AIMS
NOTE: The draft is set out in the format needed to complete sections 2a, 2b, and 2c of the application form, pages 6,7.

2a: What is the heritage that your project focuses on?
Our subject is the mass trespass of Kinder Scout in 1932, which had a major impact on the development of National Parks and countryside access in the UK. The event was organised by rambling enthusiasts from Manchester and elsewhere, and it began and ended in the village of Hayfield.
Although this project is not principally about physical heritage, the room proposed to be converted into a heritage centre is the former village lock-up in which a group of trespassers were first detained after their arrest on returning to the village.
The historical importance of the event is summarised by Sir Martin Doughty and Roly Smith in their publication “Trespass Trail” which was produced as part of the 75th anniversary celebrations in 2007. (Jointly funded by the Peak District National Park, the Ramblers Association, and Natural England.) “It is now recognised as a major catalyst not only for the Right to Roam, but the creation of our National Parks, of which the Peak District was the first in 1951.”

2b: What is your project?

Collect Kinder Trespass heritage material; photographs, articles etc.
Arrange a permanent display of key materials in a suitable location within the village. Subject to funding availability it may also be possible to include some original artwork interpreting the mass trespass. The parish council is willing to make available to the project the ground floor room of its village centre office, to be converted into a small heritage and information centre. This happens to be the former village lock-up where the arrested trespassers were initially detained.
Set up a Trespass Trail within the village using sign boards at key locations, and publish a leaflet encouraging people to walk the trail and visit the heritage display.
Plan and provide a range of educational opportunities to publicise the importance of the Access movement and the key role played by the trespassers.
Promote a range of guided walks that would enable a wider diversity of people to access countryside and moorland walks in and around Hayfield.
All aspects of the project to be publicised on a dedicated website with links to all appropriate visitor information websites elsewhere. This site will store or have links to all the heritage archive material collected by the project.

2c: What are the aims of your project?

To celebrate and publicise the mass trespass so that more people will become aware of the importance of this event and its effect on access to moorlands, mountains and countryside in the local area and throughout the UK. The residents of Hayfield village and nearby areas of the High Peak, from schoolchildren to senior citizens, will be given the opportunity to appreciate this historic event which occurred in their locality. People who currently visit Hayfield and the High Peak area, many of whom come to walk, cycle or run on the local fells, will have this historical information brought to their attention. And publicising the project on our own and other related websites should attract potentially new visitors to Hayfield and its environs.

To establish a permanent base for the display and interpretation of some of the key visual heritage material, and to set up systems to enable the beneficial effects of the project to be sustained around this focal point.

To promote collaboration between key agencies with an interest in heritage, countryside access and tourism. To involve local volunteers in a variety of tasks to set up and run the project, including the staffing of the heritage centre, presenting and supplying information, the delivery of educational activities, and assisting people to access local walks at a range of levels to suit their abilities and aspirations.

JH 16/02/10.

NOTES OF MEETING
Steering group: Kinder Trespass heritage project – Hayfield.
Tuesday 23rd March, 7.30pm, Hayfield Parish Council office.
Present: Susan Wyatt, Neville Kirk, Derek Brumhead, Mike Crompton, John Harvey.
Item 1: Apologies: Sue McCall, John McCall, Philip Gee.
It was agreed that John would continue to chair and Mike offered to take notes.
Item 2: Notes of previous meeting, 23rd Feb 2010, agreed.
Item 3: Report back on agreed action points:

HPBC have confirmed that Dungeon Brow is not a listed building.
Nev has clarified that: the Working Class Movement Library in Salford has Benny Rothman’s papers; the People’s History Museum, Manchester, has a broad range of material on countryside access issues; Manchester Central Reference library has the Daily Herald and Daily worker; MACE film archive has nothing specific to the trespass but Heather Norris-Nicholson at MMU has offered to check out BFI Inview and Pathe News; Melanie Tebbitt of MMU Manchester Regional History Centre is a useful contact; Jessie Elms, head of New Mills school would be very interested in having the school participate in related educational projects.
Copy of office floor plan to John McCall – still outstanding – Action MC.
Clarification is ongoing re whether Parish Council is under any statutory duty to provide a WC for its employees – Action John H.
Draft letter to agencies, seeking letters of support for the project, was discussed in the meeting, and some amendments suggested. Six additional agencies were added to the list, making twelve in all:

Peak District National Park Authority
Derbyshire County Council
High Peak Borough Council
Natural England
Hayfield Civic Trust
Ramblers Association
New Mills School
Hayfield Development Trust
Kinder Mountain Rescue
People’s History Museum
New Mills Heritage Centre
U3A
In addition, two key individuals were added: Tom Levitt MP; and Tony Hams, former Chair of PDNPA and of East Midlands HLF.
Action: John H and MC to get amended letters out as soon as possible.
Item 4: Further aspects of grant application
John H is working on a draft detailed project plan, and will get copies out to steering group members before the next meeting. The aim is to try to get the draft application approved at the next meeting, so that the submission can go ahead as soon as we get enough letters of support from the agencies contacted.
Item 5: Further sources of heritage material.
Various other potential sources of heritage material were identified during discussions.

National newspaper archives, Collingwood
Local newspaper archives, via DCC website.
Hayfield family links.
Chatsworth Estate.

We do need to ensure that we have not commenced the project as such, as this would prejudice funding availability, but further clarification of sources and potential scope of the project would be useful. Action: Nev, Derek.
Item 6: Other action agreed. MC to check whether HPBC are offering funding for an ‘information kiosk’.
Item 7: Agreed to keep current composition of steering group and review when grant approval obtained.
Date of next meeting: Monday 26th April 2010, 7.30pm, Parish Council office.
JH: 26th March 2010.

--------------------

Hayfield Parish Council
Council Offices, Dungeon Brow, Market Street, Hayfield, High Peak, Derbyshire, SK22 2EP
Tel. 01663 744550 & 744248: mobile 07964 606 709 email parishclerk@hayfield.info

KINDER TRESPASS HERITAGE PROJECT – HAYFIELD

Hayfield Parish Council is in the process of preparing an application for a Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) grant to set up a Kinder Trespass Heritage Centre in the village. The purpose of the centre will be to mark the significance of the 1932 mass trespass on Kinder Scout, and to provide information about present day access opportunities. The trespass took place largely within the parish of Hayfield, starting and finishing in the village itself. The building we plan to use is in the heart of the village, and is the very place where the arrested trespassers were first locked up at the end of their walk. The funding required to implement the proposals should be fairly modest, as the building is already in the ownership of the Parish Council.

We are now seeking the active endorsement of potential partnership agencies like yourselves, and the other agencies listed below. The HLF require us to send letters of support at this early stage, to be submitted with our grant application form. Their guidance for Your Heritage grants states that “They should not be general letters of support.” The letters should set out the supporting organisation’s “.. specific contribution to your project, the specific value of the project to the community, or reasons why they have a need to see your project go ahead.”

Please see the attached ‘draft project description’ for further details about our proposals. The primary aim is that the Heritage Centre and the village trespass trail will celebrate and publicise the importance of the mass trespass in paving the way for the development of National Parks and increased access to moorland and countryside. An important additional aim is to encourage and enable a greater diversity of people to take advantage of their right to access the footpaths and high moorland areas around Hayfield. There are already many initiatives of this kind going on around the Peak District, not least the programme of guided walks organised by the Peak Park Authority. The Heritage Centre could play an important role in collecting and publicising information about existing opportunities and programmes, and go on to try to develop additional guided walking programmes in partnership with those agencies who have the necessary expertise and experience.

I would stress that our proposals are at this stage draft initial ideas, and can be developed or amended to accommodate the views and interests of partner agencies, and in the light of any other feedback received.

We would very much appreciate it if you would feel able to provide us with a letter of support for our project along the lines outlined above. The support and involvement of other agencies with an interest in the subject matter is an important requirement in attracting funding from the HLF. If you would like to discuss any aspects of the proposals or process please call me at the parish council office, or Councillor John Harvey, chair of the project steering group, on 07789906915.

I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Yours sincerely,

Mike Crompton,
Clerk, Hayfield Parish Council.

circulation list:

Kinder Trespass heritage project – Hayfield.
STEERING GROUP MEETING
Monday 26th April 2010, 7.30pm, Hayfield Parish Council office.

AGENDA

Apologies.

Notes of previous meeting 23rd March.

Report back on action points.

Detailed project plan/task list. Do we need a paid project manager/coordinator for some of these tasks?

Grant options: discussion paper circulated.

Managing the project after grant funding expires (3 years approx).

HLF meeting, Nottingham, 27th May.

Any other business.

Date of next meeting (Mon 7th or Tues 8th June?).

JH 21/04/10

--------------------

GRANT OPTIONS: KTHP

Your Heritage grant (YH)
£50k max; for example, £10k buildings, £25k project manager over 3 years, £5k other prof fees (web design, graphic designer), £10k trespass trail boards and exhibition material for heritage centre.
ADVANTAGES: 6 week decision time, monthly committee meetings: simpler application form: relies partly on support letters from other agencies.
DISADVANTAGES: building and environmental works would need to be fairly basic, internal staff WC rather than external disabled public toilet: project management hours would need to be limited to around 15 per week at a salary of around £16k pa pro rata;: all other costings fairly tight.
Could ask Parish Council to make a capital contribution of up to £10k. Could ask for modest contributions from other agencies to try to bring in another £10k - £20k: such contributions would be a requirement under HG route.

Heritage grants (HG)
£50k minimum, going up to £1million. An application of say £70k-90k would be very much at the bottom end of the scale and might benefit if the vast majority of the HLF’s quarterly quota for HGs goes on a few large projects leaving a small surplus that is not enough for larger schemes.
ADVANTAGES: could go for more comprehensive capital works, disabled WC built on, more landscaping, etc, and still be able to fund more project manager time, professional fees, exhibition material, education packs, etc. Development period can be funded after round 1.
DISADVANTAGES: 3 months processing time for first round, 3 monthly Board meetings, second round forms and similar processing time again, more detailed information and planning needed than YH, support letters from other agencies not required. Financial contributions (10% min) needed from partner agencies.

Whichever we choose we need to have some proposals about how to manage the heritage centre and associated activities in the longer term, after the 3 years or so grant funding period is over. There is probably more scrutiny of this issue with the HG than the YH route.

Ideally we need guidance from an HLF development officer before we make this choice. (John has had a conversation with Jeremy Fenn, and had email invitation to meet Leslie Owen Jones in Nottingham, 27th May.)
JH 21/04/10.

STEERING GROUP MEETING
Tuesday 8th June 2010, 7.30pm, Hayfield Parish Council office.

AGENDA

Apologies.

Notes of previous meeting 26th April.
Report back on action points.
Mike to try to progress DWP application for archive research assistant to begin in September/October 2010.
John H to contact High Peak Community Arts for advice re sources of funding for task list items 14 and 15. (Could they be the applicant – another partner agency in the overall project?)
John M to prepare some sketch plans of the building and environmental works; and to consider the potential for a Community Spaces application.
John H to plan and coordinate the Nottingham visit.
John H to draft a low cost minimalist option for what happens at the end of the funding period, in case more ambitious plans do not come to fruition.
Report back from Nottingham visit.
Latest feedback re letters of support, and any follow up contact.
Clarify next steps – preparing for the grant application submission.
Any other business.
Date of next meeting (Wed 11th Aug, or Wed 8th Sept?).

JH 04/06/10

--------------------------------

NOTES OF MEETING
Steering group: Kinder Trespass heritage project – Hayfield.
Monday 26th April, 7.30pm, Hayfield Parish Council office.
Present: Susan Wyatt, Neville Kirk, Derek Brumhead, John McCall, Mike Crompton, John Harvey.
Item 1: Apologies: Sue McCall (present for last half hour), Philip Gee.
Item 2: Notes of previous meeting, 23rd March 2010, agreed.
Item 3: Report back on agreed action points:

John McCall now has office floor plans.
Parish Council has a duty to provide a WC for its employees, but HPBC Environmental Health allow some flexibility around alternative arrangements, subject to risk assessment, where own provision is not feasible. Own provision therefore highly desirable but not absolute requirement.
Letter to 12 agencies, seeking letters of support for the project, were sent on 25th March. Several very positive replies have been received already, including from PDNPA, HPBC, New Mills Heritage Centre, and New Mills School.
Detailed Project Plan – on agenda today, below.
Nev has contacted the Chatsworth Estate Archive, had an encouraging response re diaries and letters, and followed this by drafting a letter officially requesting access to their records (subsequently sent on behalf of Parish Council). Nev has also found some references to an access related event in Bakewell in 1924, and to the raising of access problems in several late 19th century tourist guidebooks.
Mike has confirmed that HPBC do not currently have any grant funding available for ‘information kiosks’.

Item 4: Detailed Project Plan/Task list.
A draft detailed project plan was circulated at the meeting for discussion. The purpose of the draft is to progress our thinking in three areas:

Have we covered all the essential elements of the project? John McCall suggested that environmental improvements around the outside of the building should be listed as a separate task, and that we might attract specific funding from Community Spaces on the grounds that this is phase 2 of village centre improvements following on from Memorial Square. This was agreed. It was also agreed that ideally a disabled wc should be part of the scheme, built on to the exterior of the current ground floor space. (There might be a possibility of including this as part of the Community Spaces application.) Items 14 and 15 could be viewed as lower priority than the rest of the items listed, but might attract an arts grant in their own right.
Who would carry out each of these activities? Nev offered to supervise a temporary employee (DWP young persons scheme) to carry out tasks 1 and 2. Items 3 to 6 (and 14,15) could be approached similarly if we could get a DWP person with some graphic design skills, and we might also seek contributions from New Mills school pupils, from HPCA, or from Art colleges etc. Item 7 would have to be a specialist contractor. John McCall volunteered to lead on the design and planning of items 8 and 9 (and the additional environmental item identified in (1) above). Susan Wyatt will be the volunteer organiser for item 10. Items 11, 13, 17, 18, 19 were thought to need an administrator or project leader. Item 12 could be done by Susan’s heritage centre volunteers, perhaps jointly with the Civic Trust.
Do we need a paid, grant funded project coordinator for the duration of the grant? As well as the specific tasks identified in (2) above, a coordinator would be needed to recruit or bring together the other potential contributors identified there. It seems unrealistic to expect to recruit and retain somebody to give this amount of input on a voluntary basis, and it is equally unrealistic to expect the current steering group to undertake that amount of detailed work.

Item 5: Grant options discussion paper.
The ‘Your Heritage’ (YH) scheme has a maximum grant of £50,000. Ideally we need £70-80k, but with the potential for further grants identified this evening, and the possibility of seeking modest financial support from some of the other agencies we have approached about our project we might be able to get closer to that figure. Alternatively or additionally we can seek to trim estimated costs a bit lower. The advantage of the YH grant is that it is simpler and quicker to get processed, and there appears to be less emphasis on the need for the project to be fully sustainable in the longer term when funding ceases.
The alternative Heritage Grant (HG) is from a minimum of £50k going up to £1 million. This could provide for a more generously funded project, but would take considerably longer to process, and requires a cash contribution of at least 10% from partner agencies.
John has sounded out HLF over the phone about these options, and the initial response seems to suggest we should stick to the YH route. However, we do not need to decide yet, and can explore this further when we meet with HLF in Nottingham.

Item 6: Managing the project after grant funding expires.
Mike has produced a draft business plan to begin to address the question of what happens when the grant funding comes to an end, after 3 years or thereabouts. This was circulated at the meeting for discussion. Both YH and HG grants are inclusive of both revenue and capital items for the duration of the grant funding. The challenge is how to generate a revenue stream for the continuation of the project activities at the end of the grant period.
Derek provided some figures on the running costs of New Mills heritage centre, and the ongoing contribution required from the Town Council. It was agreed that it was not realistic to expect this level of input from Hayfield Parish Council to our project. Mike’s paper identifies a number of possible revenue sources, including donations of various types, sponsorship, fund raising events, and marketing and sales. All of these require a lot of time and effort, and therefore would probably require an ongoing paid project manager of some kind, who would have to begin by raising enough revenue to cover their own salary. It was agreed in the task list (item 4 above) that in the final year of the grant period work would be done to develop strategies for the continued use of the building and heritage material. By that time we should have a better idea of the potential long term commitment of other agencies, either in terms of cash or other resources.
John H noted that the YH grant does not appear to require the project to continue in the same format at the end of the funding period, but asks “What will happen to the things that your project has produced after the funding ends?” It might be acceptable to state that the building will remain available for community usage, will open periodically as a heritage centre when volunteers are available, could be handed over to another organisation to manage (e.g. Civic Trust), will store the Trespass heritage display material for periodic use (e.g. Trespass anniversaries etc). John will draft a short paper outlining this as a fall-back option in case more ambitious ideas do not come to fruition.

Item 7: HLF meeting Nottingham, 27th May
John submitted a pre-appliction form about two weeks ago, followed up by a telephone call. The outcome is that we are invited to meet with development officers at Nottingham regional office on 27th May (11am) to discuss our proposals and get further guidance before submitting our formal application. It was agreed that John, Mike and Derek would attend.
ACTION POINTS

Mike to try to progress DWP application for archive research assistant to begin in September/October 2010.
John H to contact High Peak Community Arts for advice re sources of funding for task list items 14 and 15. (Could they be the applicant – another partner agency in the overall project?)
John M to prepare some sketch plans of the building and environmental works; and to consider the potential for a Community Spaces application.
John H to plan and coordinate the Nottingham visit.
John H to draft a low cost minimalist option for what happens at the end of the funding period, in case more ambitious plans do not come to fruition.

Date of next meeting: Tuesday 8th June 2010, 7.30pm, Parish Council office.

Steering group: Kinder Trespass heritage project – Hayfield.
Tuesday 8th June 2010, 7.30pm, Hayfield Parish Council office.
Present: Susan Wyatt, Neville Kirk, Derek Brumhead, John McCall, Mike Crompton, Philip Gee, John Harvey.
Item 1: Apologies: Ann Seipp.
Item 2: Notes of previous meeting, 26th April 2010, agreed.
Item 3: Report back on action points:

Mike reported that DWP posts are available and an application could be made as soon as we are clear about the job description and timing etc (latest start date Oct 2010). Possibility of local volunteers doing archive research work was mentioned – and HLF are keen on broad participation from locals.
John H has mentioned our project to the administrator for High Peak Community Arts. We need to clarify what sites may be available for a mural, and how it might fit with other Hayfield mural proposals before pursuing this further. It could be seen as a detail to be clarified after the main trespass project is underway, and which the (paid) project coordinator could do some work on in due course.
John M has clarified that Community Spaces could consider a grant for environmental works around the building and adjacent paths etc, but could not fund the building of a wc. After a lengthy discussion it was decided that the wc should be built on but accessible from inside the heritage centre. It would be available for the public during the centre’s opening hours, but not at other times. (The alternative of access from inside and outside, via a shared lobby, was considered.) John to prepare broad itemised estimates of costs as soon as possible, as this is needed for HLF to give us feedback on before we complete the formal application. John also to prepare drawings and an outline planning application.
Nottingham visit – see item 4 below.
HLF have confirmed that we need to have the capacity to run the project for a total of 10 years – this is because a substantial part of the grant will be for capital rather than revenue items. John H has not yet written a paper on this subject as we need further clarification about possible contributions and requirements of partner agencies – John H to progress this.

Item 4: Report back from Nottingham visit.
DB, JH, and MC visited the Heritage Lottery Fund offices in Nottingham to discuss our proposals. The development officer was very encouraging about the core content and potential of our heritage material. They advised us to go for the Your Heritage grant, maximum £50,000, for its availability and relatively short processing period. They also advised that because of the capital content within the proposed grant, we would have to satisfy them that the project would run for a minimum of 10 years in total, at least in terms of making use of the building and heritage material which incurs the capital expenditure.
It was suggested that we send revised itemised cost estimates to them for feedback before submitting the application; and confirmation of how the Parish Council will be contributing to the project, and that it will be the grant applicant.

Item 5: Latest feedback re letters of support, and any follow up contact.
JH to meet with National Trust on 10th June. Similar follow up to be arranged with National Park and Natural England.
Ramblers Association HQ have expressed qualified support.
More detailed responses might be requested from Civic Trust and New Mills Heritage Centre.
Chatsworth Estate archives have confirmed that they have not been able to find any relevant material in the Duke’s diaries etc, but sent copy of an article in the Derbyshire Advertiser of June 1932.

Item 6: Clarify next steps – preparing for the grant application submission.
ACTION POINTS

Action JM. It was agreed that the building improvements, the environmental works, and the wc should be costed as 3 separate components of the project to give us the necessary flexibility about different grant sources and a range of total cost options.
Action JM. Prepare drawings for an outline planning application.
Action JM. Prepare a grant application to Community Spaces. (That would have to be from Development Trust rather than from PC?)
Action JH. A brief report to Parish Council in July will be prepared, to seek a resolution to demonstrate the PC’s commitment to making the building available, and to underwriting the basic running costs for a further 7 years after the grant expires.
Action JH. Have discussions with key agencies to clarify what details of the project they would have a particular interest in, and what contributions they might make in kind or financially, to include National Trust, National Park, and Natural England.
Action JH. Prepare revised cost estimates to forward to HLF for further guidance before the formal application is completed.

Item 7.
Date of next meeting: Wednesday 15th September 2010, 7.30pm, Parish Council office.

POSTSCRIPT
At an informal meeting on 10th June, National Trust have offered to put £10,000 into the project. They do not require a section of the display area for their own use, just recognition in terms of signage and acknowledgements that they are a contributing partner agency. They suggest a fourth Trespass Trail sign board at Williams Clough to mark the point where the trespassers were confronted by the gamekeepers, and as land owners are able to provide the necessary authorisation. They advise focussing on the main issue rather than diluting it with too much diverse material, given how much interest they know of in the trespass and the history of the access movement. They will also supply advice about possible other local funding sources with a particular interest in these matters. And they suggest we consider capitalising the 7 years subsequent running costs by adding a figure to the target funding for the project, on the basis that it is easier to get one-off capital contributions than ongoing revenue sums, however modest. (i.e. Add about £30k to our project target, and that would fund 7 years at £4k per year, enough to employ a heritage centre coordinator for about 8 hours a week after the 3 year grant funding expires.)
A letter of confirmation should be on its way to us soon.

JH: 14th June 2010.

Hayfield Parish Council 7th July 2010. Agenda item 10b)
Report to Hayfield Parish Council for decision on 5 proposals; 7th July 2010.
Kinder Trespass Heritage Project (KTHP): progress report and confirmation of Parish Council’s commitment.
KTHP steering group members met with Heritage Lottery fund (HLF) representatives in their Nottingham offices (May 27th) to discuss our proposals prior to submitting a formal application for a grant. Three key points were clarified:

The core heritage content of our project is good and there should be no problem in obtaining a grant if we get the details right.
It would be advisable for us to apply for a ‘Your Heritage’ (YH) grant, maximum £50,000, rather than for a larger ‘Heritage’ grant. For YH grants the money is available, the approval process is quicker and is done at officer level. The larger Heritage grants take months to process, decisions are at Board level, and there is more competition with other very major projects for limited funds.
Because there is a significant capital element to our project, the assets that are created need to be used for a ten year period, rather than for the standard 3-5 years duration for a YH project and its grant funding. (In practice, most are completed within 3 years.) The capital works include the building improvements, the permanent display material for the heritage centre, and the information boards for the Village Trespass Trail (VTT).

The estimated costs of setting up the project over 3 years, and then running it for a further 7 years, are set out below.
Project set up costs: years 1-3.
Paid coordinator:   £6k-8k per annum (part time)                        £18k - £24k
Building work, including wc:                                                        £12k - £20k
Heritage display material, including VTT boards:                         £8k - £10k
Furniture and equipment, including IT items:                              £4k -   £6k
Leaflets, posters, publicity, education packs:                              £6k -   £8k
Professional fees, e.g. website design, graphic design:              £2k - £4k
                                                                                                         ____________
TOTAL                                                                                                 £50k - £72k
                                                                                                         ____________
Project running costs: years 4-10.
Project Administrator: 6-8 hours per week, £3-4k per year:        £21k - £28k
Miscellaneous expenses, e.g. updates to display or IT items:       £2k - £5k
TOTAL                                                                                                £23K - £33K

In addition to the above, there will be running costs for the ground floor heritage room – heating, lighting, cleaning, council tax, repairs and maintenance. These could continue to be met by the Parish Council, as it owns the whole building and is already currently responsible for these items. Some of these costs will increase, but the amounts should be fairly small and within the range of £1k - £2k per annum. This would represent around 2-3% of the Council’s current basic annual revenue turnover.

FUNDING STRATEGY.
It is proposed that the full funding costs for the 10 year period should as far as possible be raised in advance or in the early months of the commencement of the project. Any subsequent opportunities for extra funding from newly identified sources could still be pursued, to increase the total budget above the minimum required, to allow for improved operating margins and possibly for some expansion to the range of the project.

The set up funding in years 1 – 3 will be the £50k YH grant, supplemented by any partnership funding left over after putting aside around £30k for funding years 4 – 10.

The total minimum funding needed is around £80k for the ten year project.

With a maximum of £50k from HLF/YH grant, this leaves £30k to be found from elsewhere.

£10k has been pledged by The National Trust (High Peak Estates) – confirmation letter awaited.
An initial application for £20k has been sent to the Sustainable Development Fund, which is administered by the Peak District National Park Authority (PDNPA). Positive feedback has been received about the suitability of our project for funding. The application will be formally considered by a panel in early September.
It may be possible to get a specific grant to fund more extensive environmental work around the heritage building, including paving. While this work would be highly desirable, it is not absolutely essential to the core project and so is not included in the cost estimates above. (They do include some basic external works such as signing and resiting the PC notice board.)
Further small capital grants may be available from other funding sources, as identified by ourselves or by our partner agencies.
In the later years of the ten year project, further funding opportunities will be explored to try to ensure the continuation of the project beyond the end of the ten year period.

FOR DECISION: It is proposed that the Parish Council confirm the following five points:

The Council agrees the outline funding proposals and will be the applicant for the HLF grant.
The ground floor of its office premises at Dungeon Brow, Market Street, will be made available to the Kinder Trespass Heritage Project for a period of at least 10 years, starting from the date of the Grant Notification letter from the HLF.
The Parish Council will meet the normal running costs of the Heritage Project building over this 10 year period.
The Parish Council agrees that the Project Coordinator, and subsequently the Project Administrator, will be managed by the Parish Clerk under the guidance of the Parish Council for the 10 year term of the Project.
In due course when the KTHP steering group has completed its work of defining the scope of the project and securing its funding, the Parish Council will set up a management committee for the project, comprising representatives from appropriate agencies and groups as well as some Parish Councillors.

John Harvey 5th July 2010.

CORE PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Kinder Trespass Heritage Project, Hayfield.
The estimated costs of setting up the project over 3 years, and then running it for a further 7 years, are set out below.

Project set up costs: years 1-3.

Paid coordinator:   £6k per annum (part time)                       £18,000
Core building work, details in separate document.                 £11,200
Heritage centre display material.                                            £3,000
Interpretation boards, Trespass Trail (4)                                £5,000
Furniture and storage equipment                                          £2,000
I.T. and office equipment.                                                     £2,800
Leaflets, posters, publicity.                                                   £3,000
Education packs.                                                                  £1,000
Professional fees, e.g. website design, graphic design:        £4,000
                                                                                                            ____________
TOTAL                                                                                                £50,000
                                                                                                             ____________

Project running costs: years 4-10.
Project Administrator: 6 hours per week, £3,000 per year:        £21,000
Contingencies and miscellaneous expenses.                                £2,000
                                                                                                              -----------------
TOTAL         years 4-10                                                                        £23,000
                                                                                                              ------------------

GRAND TOTAL: for setting up and running for 10 years £73,000

In addition to the above, there will be running costs for the ground floor heritage room – heating, lighting, cleaning, council tax, repairs and maintenance. These will continue to be met by the Parish Council, as it owns the whole building and is already currently responsible for these items. Some of these costs will increase, but the amounts should be fairly small and within the range of £1k - £2k per annum. Management of the Project coordinator and then the project administrator will be provided by the Parish Clerk, under the direction of the Parish Council and the Project Management Committee. The Parish council will set up and service the Management Committee, as well as being represented on it. It is estimated that a minimum of 15,000 hours of volunteer labour (30 hours per week) will go into the project, valued at around £80,000 at minimum wage levels.

John Harvey 3rd September 2010.

Amendments to Application YH-10-00230
KINDER TRESPASS HERITAGE PROJECT – HAYFIELD
Following discussions with Grants Officer Amanda Turner and with Hayfield Parish Clerk, I would like to submit the following amendments to page 16 of our application:

A: New staff. Revise the cost figure down from £39,000 to £36,000, comprising 3 years at £12,000 per year for the salary of the Project Coordinator. This should enable us to fund between 18 and 24 hours per week (depending on overheads, which might have to increase as a result of national regulations requiring parish councils to contribute to superannuation payments for their employees). The current figure of £6000 per year would only cover 9-12 hours per week, which really would not be adequate given the breadth and complexity of the work to be undertaken. The reference to ‘£3000 per year for 7 years’ to be deleted.
E: Purchase price of heritage items. Revise the cost figure up from £2,000 to £3,000, on the basis that it was pared down unrealistically low in the original submission.
M: Expenses for volunteers. Put in a figure of £500 to cover miscellaneous expenses that might arise.
N: Production of learning materials. Increase the cost figure from £1,000 to £2,500 to ensure that this important area of work is adequately funded. Although there is no doubt about the enthusiasm of the local primary and secondary schools to be deeply involved with the project, nevertheless given the general financial climate in the public sector we cannot be sure of exactly how much financial input they will be able to make to the production of learning packs.
S: Contingency. Leave in this figure of £2000, and change the description column entry to read simply ‘Miscellaneous and contingencies’.

The result of these changes is that the total cost estimates on page 16 still add up to the original figure of £73,000, and the amount we are requesting from HLF is still £50,000.

To compensate for not having funding in place in advance for an administrator for years 4 to 10, we will create revenue income for those years by developing merchandising opportunities relating to images of Kinder Trespass, such as posters, postcards, mugs, T towels, etc. We will also have 3 years in which to research other funding opportunities, such as grants from other less well known potential funding bodies. And just to be absolutely sure, we will ask the Parish Council to approve a resolution at its next meeting, 1st December, guaranteeing that it will underwrite any shortfall to ensure that there is £3000 per year available to pay a Project Administrator for years 4-10.

The increased hours for the Project Coordinator will ensure that the Project is well under way in time to host the 80th anniversary celebrations in April 2012. The current job description attached to the initial application is already very substantial. In addition we will now be able to ask the Coordinator to develop merchandising and other revenue initiatives well before the end of the 3 year grant period. There will also be more time to seek additional grants to expand the core project, such as commissioning some original interpretative art works.

John Harvey 16th November 2010.

AGENDA
Steering group:
8th December 2010, 7.30 pm, Parish Council Office.

Apologies.

Notes of previous meeting, 8th June 2010. (attached)

Summary of grant funding status (document attached).

Detailed Project description as submitted to HLF (attached).

Grant acceptance process.

Project management structure (draft doc attached).

Job description, Project Coordinator (draft doc attached).

Publicity and communication (letters to agencies).

Future of Steering Group.

Date of next meeting.

JH 4th December 2010.

----------------------------------------------------

NOTES OF MEETING
Steering group: Kinder Trespass heritage project – Hayfield.
Tuesday 8th June 2010, 7.30pm, Hayfield Parish Council office.
Present: Susan Wyatt, Neville Kirk, Derek Brumhead, John McCall, Mike Crompton, Philip Gee, John Harvey.
Item 1: Apologies: Ann Seipp.
Item 2: Notes of previous meeting, 26th April 2010, agreed.
Item 3: Report back on action points:

Mike reported that DWP posts are available and an application could be made as soon as we are clear about the job description and timing etc (latest start date Oct 2010). Possibility of local volunteers doing archive research work was mentioned – and HLF are keen on broad participation from locals.
John H has mentioned our project to the administrator for High Peak Community Arts. We need to clarify what sites may be available for a mural, and how it might fit with other Hayfield mural proposals before pursuing this further. It could be seen as a detail to be clarified after the main trespass project is underway, and which the (paid) project coordinator could do some work on in due course.
John M has clarified that Community Spaces could consider a grant for environmental works around the building and adjacent paths etc, but could not fund the building of a wc. After a lengthy discussion it was decided that the wc should be built on but accessible from inside the heritage centre. It would be available for the public during the centre’s opening hours, but not at other times. (The alternative of access from inside and outside, via a shared lobby, was considered.) John to prepare broad itemised estimates of costs as soon as possible, as this is needed for HLF to give us feedback on before we complete the formal application. John also to prepare drawings and an outline planning application.
Nottingham visit – see item 4 below.
HLF have confirmed that we need to have the capacity to run the project for a total of 10 years – this is because a substantial part of the grant will be for capital rather than revenue items. John H has not yet written a paper on this subject as we need further clarification about possible contributions and requirements of partner agencies – John H to progress this.

Item 6: Clarify next steps – preparing for the grant application submission.
ACTION POINTS

Action JM. It was agreed that the building improvements, the environmental works, and the wc should be costed as 3 separate components of the project to give us the necessary flexibility about different grant sources and a range of total cost options.
Action JM. Prepare drawings for an outline planning application.
Action JM. Prepare a grant application to Community Spaces. (That would have to be from Development Trust rather than from PC?)
Action JH. A brief report to Parish Council in July will be prepared, to seek a resolution to demonstrate the PC’s commitment to making the building available, and to underwriting the basic running costs for a further 7 years after the grant expires.
Action JH. Have discussions with key agencies to clarify what details of the project they would have a particular interest in, and what contributions they might make in kind or financially, to include National Trust, National Park, and Natural England.
Action JH. Prepare revised cost estimates to forward to HLF for further guidance before the formal application is completed.

Item 7.
Date of next meeting: Wednesday 15th September 2010, 7.30pm, Parish Council office.

JH: 14th June 2010.

------------------------

KTHP - Extract from HLF grant payment request form:

Project Definition
Listed below are the approved purposes (agreed with your case officer) of your grant.
To establish a permanent base for the interpretation of the Kinder trespass story
To celebrate and raise awareness of the significance of the mass trespass
To train and support volunteers to help set up and run the heritage centre and associated activities
Page: 3
Version 11 Your Heritage Delivery Phase - Permission to Start and Payment Request Form
Costs
Eligible costs
Cost heading Eligible costs (as agreed at the start of your project) Vat
New staff:       (Project coordinator for 3 years inc employer on-costs):   £36,000
Professional fees:                                                                                     £2,500
Recruitment:                                                                                               £500
Repair and conservation work:                                                                £11,200
Equipment and Materials:
      (furniture £1500, IT and office £2300, heritage collect/display £3000): £6,800
Training for volunteers:                                                                                 £500
Travel for staff:                                                                                          £2,000
Travel for volunteers:                                                                                  £500
Expenses for volunteers:                                                                               £500
Cost of producing learning materials:                                                         £2,500
Other: (4 interpretation boards for village trespass trail):                        £5,000
Publicity and promotion:                                                                           £3,000
Contingency:                                                                                            £2,000
                                                                                                                  --------------
Total Development Costs:                                                                         £73,000
                                                                                                                  --------------
Income
Income heading (as agreed by us at the start of your
project)
Amount (as agreed by us at the start of your
project)
Cash: (Sustainable Development Fund, confirmed):                                  £18,000
Cash: (National Trust – provisional):                                                          £5,000
HLF Grant Requested:                                                                               £50,000
                                                                                                                 ---------------
Total Income:                                                                                              £73,000
                                                                                                                 ----------------

-------------------------

PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE : Kinder Trespass Heritage Project: 1st draft:

PARISH COUNCIL

Agree initial remit for the Management Committee so that it can oversee the detailed implementation of the project without the need for detailed decision making at Parish Council meetings.
Take decisions about proposals for changes or additions to the project, and vary the remit as necessary.

STAKEHOLDER GROUP

Advisory role to Management Committee and Parish Council.
Meet 6 monthly or as required.
Membership: Peak District National Park; National Trust; Derbyshire County Council; High Peak Borough Council; Hayfield Civic Trust; Hayfield Development Trust; New Mills Heritage Centre; Heritage Advisor; Schools representatives; Management Committee members.

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Will have a clear remit from the Parish council to implement the detailed project plan in accordance with the requirements of the grant awarding bodies.
Refer to Parish Council for decision (a) any proposal for significant changes or additions to the project, and (b) if any matter voted on does not result in a clear majority decision.
Meet monthly, or as required, copy of minutes to Parish Council for information.
Membership: 3 Parish Councillors, one of whom should be chair or vice chair; Heritage advisor; 1 Stakeholder Group representative from 1 of the major agencies (if they wish to be involved at this level); 1 lead volunteer. Non voting: Project Coordinator; Parish clerk.

Parish clerk

Paid Project Coordinator

Lead Volunteers responsible for: (a) centre staffing and management; (b) heritage collection; (c) others as required.

NOTES OF MEETING: KTHP Steering group:
8th December 2010, 7.30 pm, Parish Council Office.

PRESENT: Susan Wyatt, Neville Kirk, Derek Brumhead , John McCall, Mike Crompton, Philip Gee, John Harvey. Apologies: Ann Seipp.
Notes of previous meeting, 8th June 2010: agreed.

Report back on Action Points.

JM provided breakdown of building estimates to facilitate the various grant applications.
JM prepared and submitted drawings, and confirmation later received that planning permission is not required.
Community Spaces application not pursued because Leader Project identified as a more suitable source of funding for the toilet and landscaping works.
JH reported to Parish Council and obtained agreement re making the building available and underwriting basic running costs for 7 years after the 3 year grant period.
Discussions with key agencies deferred until grant approvals obtained.
Full applications made to HLF and Sustainable Development Fund (September) and Expression of Interest form to the Leader Project.
Summary of grant funding status

HLF have approved a grant for the full £50,000 – the maximum for a Your Heritage grant.
SDF have approved a grant for the full £18,000 applied for – this again is currently the maximum obtainable under that scheme.
National Trust donation of £3-5000. (£5000 was the figure we used in grant applications).
This gives a core funding total of £73,000, which is enough to ensure that the project can go ahead.
In addition we have applied to the Leader Project (RDPE – Rural Development Programme England) for £28,000 to cover building a toilet and extensive landscaping works around the building. Detailed application by end of January for decision by end of February 2011.

Detailed Project description as submitted to HLF.

This document was circulated for information and should be a useful working tool.

Grant acceptance process.

50% of the HLF grant is payable in advance, as soon as we complete an acceptance form. Parish Council needs to consider setting up a separate bank account. Accounting and monitoring procedures will need careful attention to comply with requirements of the different funding bodies, and of the Parish Council.

Project management structure.

The draft document was discussed. There was broad agreement of the structure, the setting up of a management committee and a stakeholder group. When these are up and running the Steering Group will be disbanded, but it is hoped that current members will participate in the new management structure. Can be discussed further at our next meeting when the Parish Council have looked at it on December 9th.

Job description, Project Coordinator.

The draft document was discussed. Some members felt that the hourly rate should be pitched a lot higher than the £8 per hour that had earlier been suggested, even though this would result in the number of hours being reduced. It was accepted that it should be less than the clerk’s rate, which is around £24,000 a year (full time equivalent). Something equating to around £20,000 per year (fte) would seem a reasonable compromise. Employer overheads need to be estimated for the 3 year period of the contract, subtracted from the budget of £36,000, which should then confirm how many hours per week we can fund at the agreed rate. For further consideration at next meeting.

Publicity and communication (letters to agencies).

A press released has been drafted by Roly Smith, a journalist specialising in writing about countryside and National Parks, etc. Roly was formerly Information Manager for the Peak Park, and has been involved in organising some of the trespass anniversary celebrations, including the most recent (75th) in 2007. We are negotiating the draft with HLF who like to be involved but are very much in favour of publicity.
Discussion about whether to write to other interested agencies to report on the grant successes – it was decided to leave this until we are clearer about the project management proposals, then we can incorporate invitations to become members of the Stakeholder group.

Future of Steering Group.

To disband when the new management structure is in place; members should put themselves forward to serve within the new structure.

Date of next meeting.: Monday 24th January, 7.30 pm, Parish Council Office.

JH 15th December 2010.

----------------------------------------

Steering group:
24th January 2011, 7.30 pm, Parish Council Office.

Apologies.

Notes of previous meeting, 8th December 2010. (attached)

Report back from recent Civic Trust meeting (Susan Wyatt).

Identify any additional agenda items needed.

Summary of grant funding progress.

Grant acceptance process.

Project management structure (draft doc attached).

Job description, Project Coordinator (revised draft doc attached).

Public consultation event Feb/March.

Future of Steering Group.

Date of next meeting.

JH 14th January 2011..

NOTES OF MEETING: KTHP Steering group: 24th January 2011, 7.30 pm, Parish Council Office.
Present: Susan Wyatt, Derek Brumhead, Mike Crompton, Philip Gee, John Harvey.
1. Apologies. Ann Seipp, Neville Kirk, John McCall.
2. Notes of previous meeting. Held on 8th December 2010: agreed.
3. Report back from recent Civic Trust meeting (Susan Wyatt). SW confirmed that the Civic Trust has given its full backing to the heritage project, in response to a recent letter of complaint. A copy of their letter of reply has been received.
4. Identify any additional agenda items needed. It was agreed that a newsletter would be produced in February to report progress on the project, and to flag up an exhibition and consultation day, to be held probably in early April. (NOTE: Leader grant outcome will not be known until early March, so it might be better to leave the newsletter until we have that information.)
5. Summary of grant funding progress. The Leader grant application is more testing and complex than the other grants, probably because it is E.U. funding. A second draft, with business plan, has just gone off, and there is time for further feedback and revision before the deadline of 31st January. As well as the toilet and landscaping, we are now applying for an information kiosk, in response to comments from the panel at the expression of interest stage. Our strategy to attract more tourists sits well with items from our own Parish plan, and with the East Midlands tourist development strategy. The Leader panel also asked us to consider whether specific provision for disabled parking near the centre would be desirable. The Parish Council agreed on 12th January to consult DCC about what our options might be.
A condition of the HLF grant is that we operate the project for at least 10 years. The Council agreed to underwrite the running costs for years 4 to 10 in case we do not generate the necessary revenue of £3000 per year from other sources. Approved. Two councillors voted against, with 1 abstention.
6. Grant acceptance process. On 12th January the Parish Council also approved acceptance of the first half (£25,000) of the HLF grant, to be paid initially into the P.C. bank account, but then to be transferred as soon as possible to a separate bank account for the project. (JH and MC to finalise the paperwork and send to HLF.)
7. Project management structure . The Steering Group recommends that the draft management structure, which has been reported to the Parish Council’s previous two meetings in December and January, be now approved. This will require three or four councillors to be nominated for the management committee. Those councillors currently active in the Steering Group would be the obvious candidates, to provide continuity.
8. Job description, Project Coordinator . The Steering Group approved the draft job description, which has already been approved by the Parish council in January. (MC and JH to now action advertising the post.)
There was a discussion about the name of the project. Some people feel that the Trespass element is controversial, and others that it is a uniquely strong and important ‘brand’ name. Because all grant applications have been done in the name of Kinder Trespass Heritage Project this name is what we should run with, at least for the first 2 or 3 years. But there is nothing to stop us including other heritage items within the project, subject to limitations on space (this is made clear in the job description). The building will probably be referred to more generally as the heritage centre most of the time.
9. Public consultation event. Probably in early April, a Saturday morning in library or village hall. NK has agreed to try to get some trespass heritage material ready for a small display, and National Trust could be invited to display material about environmental issues on Kinder, of the type that they would want in the centre. Will need publicity, feedback forms, consult on some specific issues such as parking and type of kiosk, etc. Building plans to be on display. Invitations to agencies who provided support letters, etc.
10. Future of Steering Group. To hand over to management committee when it is formed, with opportunities for current members to be on that committee.
11. Date of next meeting. Monday 28th February, 7.30, council office.
JH 31st January 2011.

Steering group:
28th February 2011, 7.30 pm, Parish Council Office.

Apologies.

Notes of previous meeting, 24th January 2011 (attached).

Summary of grant funding progress.

Project Coordinator: Advert, interviews, etc.

Nev’s visit to Working class Movement library, and other updates.

Project management structure and future of Steering Group.

Exhibition and consultation event 2nd April. (Draft docs attached)

Date of next meeting.

JH 22nd February 2011..

NOTES OF MEETING: KTHP Steering group: 28th February 2011, 7.30 pm, Parish Council Office.
Present: Susan Wyatt, Derek Brumhead, Mike Crompton, Philip Gee, John McCall, John Harvey.

Apologies. Ann Seipp, Neville Kirk.
Notes of previous meeting. Held on 24th January 2011: agreed.
Summary of grant funding progress. The first instalment of the HLF grant, 50% upfront, amounting to £25,000, is now in the Parish Council bank account, following completion of the acceptance form, as approved by the PC (at the January 12th meeting). A separate bank account for heritage project funding is to be set up a.s.a.p. The Leader/RDPE grant local committee is meeting on 3rd March, but we may not be formally advised of the outcome of our application until about a week later.
Project Coordinator: Advert, interviews, etc.

The advert has been actioned, as agreed last meeting and by the PC on Jan 12th. The coverage in the Buxton Advertiser, Glossop Chronicle, and other syndicated publications appeared in the editions of 24th February, and have cost £400 total (approx) (£500 allowed in core funding budget sub heading).
Closing date 13th March: shortlisting 16th March 2pm: interviews 29th March, St Matthews hall, plus lobby area for a waiting room.
The group agreed that the interview panel should comprise 3 councillors (JH, JM, PG); MC as clerk; and 2x non councillors – DB and SW volunteered. (NK has also confirmed he would be available if needed.) This is a larger than usual panel, but we would expect a candidate of the calibre required for this post to be able to cope with that ‘ordeal’. So far we have had over 30 requests for the application form and job details.
JM (and others) have received some critical comments about our going ahead with the advert prior to the consultation meeting. However, the necessary approvals have been given; our grant applications contain timetables for the project, and we have already slipped a month on this first action; the whole project is under time pressure to get the centre open by April 2012; and grants could be revoked if we procrastinate. Those who see the consultation day as some kind of referendum on whether or not the project goes ahead are in the minority. The council committed to this direction of travel, developing a heritage project, a long time ago. Most of us would see the consultation to be about details, and about beginning to involve the public and our partner agencies in developing and implementing the project. Even so, we will know the outcome of the consultation day and feedback forms before any employment contract is issued, because there will be formalities such as taking up references to deal with after provisionally selecting a suitable appointee on 29th. JH clarified that we have full grant funding for this 3 year contract, £36k to include all employer overheads (NI and superan) as well as salary. The figure of £3000 per year that has been quoted is for years 4-10, to pay for an administrator for a few hours a week, if deemed necessary at the time. The PC has underwritten this, but we would expect to raise the money in other ways, or we might even get a volunteer to take it on.

Nev’s visit to Working Class Movement library.

Nev has obtained some photocopies and scans from Benny’s personal papers by visiting the library. There does not appear to be much ‘new’ material, and certainly no new photographs. Roly Smith has advised JH that the publisher of Benny’s book (1982) has the best collection of known photos, and Roly is trying to contact the publisher about the possibility of a revised edition – some grant funding may be available, if proceeds from publishing go to a worthy cause – to our heritage project perhaps? Derek advised that there are some relevant photos on the “Picture New Mills” site.

Project management structure and future of Steering Group.

The PC decided on Feb 9th not to progress this item until after the consultation day. This should not cause any problems – it means the Steering Group can continue to function for as long as needed.

Exhibition and Public Consultation event.

The venue is to be the Cricket Pavillion, Saturday 2nd April, publicised as 10am to 12.30 pm, but we will need the room from 9am and preferably until 1pm to allow for last minute setting up and then packing away. In addition it should be available Friday 6-9pm for the main setting up. The special edition Newsletter and Feedback form (insert) were broadly approved in principle, with pride of place going to JM’s excellent new drawing of the village centre, with “Heritage Place” complementing the improvements already made or committed around Memorial Square.

JM will take charge of display material regarding building works and overall village centre;

PG will assemble a display of other local heritage topics/material;

JH will try to provide some Mass Trespass display items;

National Trust will be invited to display re current Kinder management or ecology issues;

National Park might cover creation/importance of National Parks/Peak District.

All agencies involved with last year’s support letters to be invited to attend (with an option to exhibit if they wish); should also get specific invitations out to a wider range of groups or individuals – Sheffield Ramblers, Chapel Ramblers, Mountain Rescue teams, Pennine Fell runners, Rucksack Club (via Andy Howie), Roly and friends – and anyone else SG members can think of who might be interested. We all need to spread the word.
PG provided written amendments to Newsletter draft, mostly on the theme of including a range of other local heritage topics. The broadening out of heritage material is entirely accepted in principle by the Steering Group, and should attract a broader range of supporters and volunteers. It will need to be carefully managed in the immediate future, because the emphasis was almost entirely on the Trespass, current access and ecological issues in the grant applications. And the partner and supporting agencies have probably not really been introduced to that element yet.
ACTION. Sue M (and JM) to design layout of newsletter and feedback form, JH to re-edit text incorporating suggested changes. MC please be sure the venue booking is secure before we go to press. Final document revision to be after Leader grant outcome confirmed, to go to press somewhere between Fri 11th and Mon 14th March (absolute deadline 16th). JH to draft agency letters for distribution via Mike’s office around same time, possibly sooner.

Date of next meeting: Wed 30th March, 2pm, John and Sue’s house (Ashlar, Market St): to assemble display material, progress layout and setting up as far as possible, and consider any other preparation requirements for the 2nd April event.

JH 5th March 2011.

Hayfield Parish Council meeting, 6th April 2011.
Report on the Council’s financial contribution to the Heritage Project – for decision.
Agenda Item 11 Matters for Decision c

Grants totalling £96,000 have now been approved to enable the council to establish a heritage centre in the ground floor room of its premises. A donation of £5000 has also been offered, bringing the total external funding to £101,000.

The Heritage Lottery Fund: £50,000
The Sustainable Development Fund: £18,000
Donation offered by the National Trust: £5,000
Leader Grant (RDPE): £28,000
TOTAL £101,000

TERMS OF THE LEADER GRANT
This is the latest grant to be approved, on 3rd March (the day after the last council meeting). It is entirely for the provision of capital works – to construct a toilet extension, improve the roof and the thermal insulation, and to carry out extensive landscaping improvements around the building. The £28,000 is a ‘contribution’ to the total estimated cost of these works of £34,000 (inclusive of building regulation and all professional design and project management fees). We were fortunate to get the award, as the grant funder suffered budget cuts just before the panel met, and some applicants had to be turned down altogether. Our application for a Tourist Information system – or kiosk – was deferred. We might be invited to re-apply if there is any ‘slippage’ money available later in the year.
It has therefore now clear that a contribution of £6,000 is required from the Parish council as grant applicant for ‘matched funding’. The contribution is not a result of shortage of funds by the grant body, but because it is a normal condition of capital grants that the applicant contributes, generally not less than 15%, and often the requirement is higher. In this case it is just under 18%, not much above the minimum.
The sum of £6,000 is only 6% of the total grant funding for the project of £101,000, an outcome than many grant applicants would envy.
OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS ALREADY AGREED BY THE PARISH COUNCIL

Rental of storage space at St John’s; but this was already agreed as a necessity for the storage of increased quantities of grit. Provision of shelving etc for contents of Dungeon Brow store room: £650 (already funded and paid from 2010/11 budget).
Council tax, heating and lighting: nil or negligible costs as PC already pays these charges, and any increase in usage should be offset by vastly improved thermal insulation and damp proofing which are fully grant funded.
The council has agreed to underwrite the maintenance costs of the interpretation boards that will form the Village trespass Trail: we already have that responsibility for other similar items around the village, and in this case the likelihood is that any costs will be met by the heritage project’s own funds.
Time input of clerk and assistant: no extra hours have been allocated as such for this work, which has been accommodated as part of the overall work of the clerk’s office. The clerk has recently suggested a scheme whereby substantial savings might be made on the running costs of the clerk’s office over the next few years.

The item that appears most substantial of the commitments already agreed is that relating to the underwriting of running costs, if required, in years 4 to 10, by a maximum of £3000 per year, to pay an administrator if thought necessary at the time. However, it now appears extremely unlikely that this commitment would ever be called upon.

A volunteer could almost certainly be recruited to do this work (probably amounting to 6 hours per week). We have already had two offers from people who expect to be retired by the time this role is needed. More offers may arise from amongst the volunteers who get involved with the centre in various ways when the project gets under way.
Grants can be sought once the project is under way. There will be many opportunities, and pursuing these is part of the duties of the Project coordinator post, which is fully grant funded for 3 years.
Donations, legacies, fundraising.
Some modest merchandising, of goods that would not be in competition with other retailers in the village – possibly selling Mass Trespass images in various forms, if we can negotiate the necessary rights to do so.
Partner agencies might be able to offer resources/time in due course. (For example, the Civic Trust could be invited to consider taking over the running of the centre.)
The HLF grant conditions state that we have to make use of the building and the heritage collection for a period of 10 years. But reduced opening hours if necessary in years 4 to 10 could still comply with this requirement.

THE MATCHED FUNDING – VALUE FOR MONEY

There is a matched funding requirement for all grants. In the case of HLF and SDF we have satisfied these conditions by supplying resources other than cash. A huge value is placed on the time of the volunteers that we intend to recruit to make the project work – something like £100,000 over 10 years. The use of the room at no financial cost to the project is also an important component of the Council’s contribution.
The £6,000 matched capital funding required by the Leader grant is a normal requirement, and very much on the low side.
Apart from the benefits of the heritage project itself, the Parish Council gets for its £6,000 input the benefit of £45,000 worth of building work being carried out to its property and the immediate surroundings. (There is over £11,000 of building work included in the core funding from HLF and SDF for refurbishing the proposed heritage room.)
The building work provides a toilet which the building currently lacks. The Council is operating on the borderline of legal practice in not currently providing toilet facilities for its office staff. It is clearly already in breach of good employment practice and desirable health and safety standards. If complaints were to be made to the relevant authorities by staff, councillors, or the public, it is my belief that pressure could be put on the Parish Council requiring it to remedy this deficiency. To do so as a separate enterprise, if there was no heritage project and no grants, would cost a lot more than £6,000.
The environmental improvements will get rid of unsightly aspects of the current site (by for example screening the wheely bins), eliminate trip hazards and reduce future maintenance liabilities, and create a more level and accessible attractive public space in the heart of the village.
By contributing £6,000 the Council not only gets a toilet and a substantially improved building and environment, but also all the other benefits of the heritage project: an increase in visitors to the village; a resource for local schools and for people who will benefit from engaging in voluntary work; the capacity to promote walking for a wider range of participants which contributes to healthy living targets; a permanent home for local heritage material of all kinds, which can be built up over the years; an opportunity in partnership with the National Trust and other agencies to raise awareness about current environmental and access issues affecting our iconic local moorland areas; and the opportunity to document the history of the Trespass, its contribution to gaining access rights, and yes, to tell all sides of the story and confirm how controversial it was, and to some extent still is.

FINDING THE MONEY
The Parish council has sufficient reserves to be able to fund this sum of £6,000 from those reserves. However, the Clerk has very recently announced a scheme whereby we can make a saving of that amount, and possibly more, from the approved revenue budget for 2011/12.

For Decision:
It is proposed that the Parish Council accept the terms of the Leader Grant (Rural Development Programme , England) by agreeing to the required matched funding of £6,000, and authorise the Parish Clerk (or assistant clerk) to sign the necessary contract of agreement with the grant provider.

John Harvey 31st March 2011.

The Clerks scheme was not considered appropriate at this point in time

Agreed wihout dissent at the meeting no votes against

TBC

Hayfield Parish Council Hayfield Heritage Ctr Steering Group

Hayfield Parish Council
Hayfield Heritage Ctr Steering Group