Resident’s response to Elms Development Exhibition

Dear Editor, 

Last Friday I attended the Public Consultation on the imminent planning application for development of The Elms parkland but my fears for its future remain.

Proposal for development of land at The Elms for housing

 I witnessed heated exchanges between the public and the developer’s planning team (Barton Willmore); hardly surprising as nobody I have met approves of the development of the Elms, other than those who stand to gain financially or suffer loss of reputation for having persuaded Thame to adopt a Town Plan with The Elms Development woven into it. I was surprised by the abrasive manner of the Barton Willmore team, given the invitation to a public consultation, and their brief was clearly not to listen to public concerns, but rather to dismiss them as unfounded.

The event was lacking in detail with no information packs for the public to take away. Conceptual designs were unclear and scales of buildings were misleading (even the architect admitted this). The proposed new public footpath through the Thame Memorial Garden area had been removed from the display drawings but remained on the plans submitted with a Barton Wilmore/Rectory Homes report released in the Gazette on the same day.

Back in the spring of this year we were told that by voting for the Thame Town Plan we would be ensuring that we had a say in the future housing development of Thame. One has to ask is this being borne out? Do any Thame constituents want 44, or for that matter any, houses on The Elms parkland? Meanwhile the Town Plan continues to win planning awards and Thame Councillors pat themselves on their backs. It is ironic that an article was published on page 22 of the Gazette last week entitled “Another award for Thame’s popular plan”. After accepting the award Cllr Dyer apparently said “that it was further recognition of Thame’s leading role in planning, despite the Council (Thame Town Council) having little to no previous experience in the area”. This is rather worrying as the developer’s planning consultants, Barton Willmore, told me that the design of the proposed dwellings had been heavily influenced by Thame Town Councillors (and notably apparently not the Conservation Area Advisory Committee, English Heritage, SODC Planning Conservation, Thame Historical Society, the Neighbourhood Police Team or John Hampden School).

Certainly the integrity of the Town Plan is to be tested by the Elms planning application, which Barton Wilmore said will be submitted after Christmas. Do the people of Thame really want to lose valuable green space within the town to yet more infill overdevelopment? The developer is claiming that they will enhance Elms Park, when in reality they will be hijacking it to compensate the overdevelopment of their own site. The proposals include the moving of the multi-use games area, which is considered undesirable next to the prestigious development; excluding social housing, which will apparently be traded off for an investment in the Angus Fire site; and landscaping of the Elms Park, which is an innovative cover for disposing of excavated construction spoil at the cost of destroying the mediaeval ridge and furrow land archaeology which is still clearly visible in Elms Park.

Support can be lodged at elmspetition@hotmail.co.uk or leave your name and address at Petcare.
Richard Jeffries
Thame