Mayor accuses developer of ‘bullying’ the town council

A planning application to build 42 retirement apartments on the current site of the Police Station, in Greyhound Lane, Thame, has been resoundingly rejected by Thame Town Councillors, who were ‘appalled’ at the lack of public consultation that had been done by the developer, and felt that the proposed designs were ‘highly unsuitable for the location’.

In a statement today, the council said: “The proposals did not include any appropriate measures to mitigate the effects of development on local infrastructure, services and facilities, as set out in the Neighbourhood Plan policies and those of the adopted Local Plan. “

During the discussions of the proposals at Tuesday’s full council meeting, councillors were not happy that the site, which is in the Conservation Area and currently designated for employment use, had not been appropriately marketed for the required period of one year, before the conclusion could be drawn that it is no longer economically viable for that use.

Despite this, an agreement to purchase the site had apparently been signed between the Police Crime Commissioner for Thames Valley Police, and Churchill Retirement Living, in November 2013 – before marketing of the site had begun in January 2014.

In his report to the town council, its Planning Consultant, Jake Collinge, said: “This, combined with the fact that inquiries of Lambert Smith Hampton indicate they are instructed by Churchill Retirement Living (who are not the freehold entity who are able to either sell or lease the premises) provides a clear indication of a limited intent, willingness or ability to robustly market, or deliver, a commercial use of the site. In short, and notwithstanding the fact that marketing has, at present, been less than the period required by Development Plan policy, the validity and robustness of the marketing that has been undertaken is highly questionable. “

The developer has proposed that having some affordable apartments will not be economical nor practical and has offered the town council money to provide affordable housing someone else in the town.

Councillors did not agree that the 14 parking spaces allowed for in the plan would be sufficient for 42 retirement dwellings for ‘independent living’, designed for people of 60 years-old, arguing that many of such residents would still be driving.

Councillors that had attended an informal presentation by Churchill Retirement Living, including Cllr Champken Woods, reported that when they had raised the subject of insufficient parking, the developer’s response was ‘they can park in Waitrose!’

Cllr Champkin Woods said: “Their attitude was ludicrous. Parking is at a premium in this town.” In fact, he said, he walked out of the meeting when one of Churchill’s officials said to him: “We are not hear to listen; we are hear to tell you what we are going to do.”

Councillors were unanimous is recommending to South Oxfordshire District Council that the proposal be rejected on the grounds of lack of sufficient parking, the scale, mass and bulk of the proposed building being contrary to the Conservation Area, lack of affordable housing and insufficient marketing of the existing building.

The Mayor, Peter Lambert concluded: “If they (Churchill Retirement Living) think they can bully this council, they’re wrong. This council is not for bullying!”