11/11/10…Thame residents state their views to council scrutineers

THAME interest groups with views on the proposed draft plan for housing development in the town to 2027, have helped the Core Strategy over the first hurdle of its adoption.

The Draft Core Stategy went before South Oxfordshire’s Scrutiny committee on Tuesday (November 9), before it is recommended to the Cabinet on November 16, and then to full council.

So many speakers from the four towns in the district wanted to be heard, that they were limited to three minutes each and the huge numbers in the public gallery spilled into an adjoining room where they were able to view the proceedings as a Web cast.

On the Core Strategy itself, Mr Matthew Clifton from Didcot, reflected the concern of other speakers and some councillors when he queried whether the numbers of new homes proposed were now out of date because of the economic downturn. He called for the CS to be dropped in favour of an interim planning policy until the Localism Bill comes in at the end of 2011, as other areas like Aylesbury Vale have done, a point supported by Cllr Sue Cooper.

Miles Thompson, SODC’s Planning Policy Manager said that Aylesbury was in different position because it has enough sites already identified for the next five years, whereas South Oxfordshire does not.

Speaking on behalf of Thame Town Council, Cllr Mike Dyer described the draft Core Strategy as: ?…seriously flawed and unfit for purpose,? and as a ?box-ticking exercise.”

He added: “Aside from polarised opinions on the choice of site, we (the town council) have the full support of the community in challenging the methodology, the numbers, the one site option, and even the very evidence on which the strategy is based. No part of these proposals even pretend to identify the specific development needs of Thame.”

Cllr Dyer remarked that no reference in the Core Strategy document included any reference to what the Town Council consider one of the most significant factors, which is the potential to unite Lord Williams?s School on a single campus.

“This vision requires that part of site F be set aside and protected from the early phases of development to allow time for a full study into this option, but no such provision is allowed for.”

Robin Storey, representing the Moreton Residents, asked why no consideration had been given to dispersing the housing around the villages first. He was however content that site F had been chosen over site D (on land to the south of Town between Thame and Moreton)which he said, would have destroyed amenity landscape.

He told councillors that he had been a member of a Core Strategy Working Group, put together by Thame Town Council, which consisted of 15 different amentity and residents’ groups.

Angela Wilson, representing the Lea Park Residents’ group (also part of the Core Strategy Working Group), said that she was happy that a site that will limit further expansion had been chosen but that the all the local authorities needed to work together to come up with a plan that would enhance the area, particularly ensuring that the houses were not too high.

Oxford Road resident, Judi Robinson, said that she appreciated that Thame needed to expand but that she would like to make the following points:

1. That inadequate consideration has been given to the value of site F, in relation to the long-term development of the community, specifically if lower Lord Williams’s school potentially moved up, the re-siting of the fire station, and, what she called: “muted discussions about a health centre and a hotel.

“If site F is released now,” she said, “it would be like selling the family silver. That site should be kept in abeyance for the future of the children of Thame, and development on site D be allowed to go ahead.”

2. “Considering the potential growth of the town in the next 10 years,” she continued, “and bearing in mind that the current facilities at the Thame Leisure Centre are woefully inadequate, we will then require more leisure facilities. So it makes sense to link them in with the current facilities then, keeping it all in one place. We will also then require more parking for cars and more space for buses to support the increased leisure facilities and pupils.

“It would be stupid to develop that site now when there is an alternative,” she concluded.

The other speaker from Thame was Jeffery Emmett, Agent for the landowner of site F, Charles Castle. His speech and the full representations made by all the other speakers, can be viewed on the Web cast of the meeting available on South Oxfordshire District Council’s website. WebCast

Other notable contributions:

Cllr Anne Purse asked for the proposal to build on the edge of Wheatley on what is Greeen Belt land, to be dropped. It was pointed out that the Core Strategy makes provision for a Green belt review at the Site Allocations stage of its progress.

The meeting heard that 520 affordable homes are needed across the district per year! Having small numbers of new homes would not help here because the district only gets affordable homes built on the back of market value homes. The current policy is that developers must provide 40% affordable homes on any development over three homes.