Category: Thame news

TWO very special Assistance dogs that support a disabled couple from Thame, have made it to the top five in the final of the Crufts Friends For Life competition 2013.

The Kennel Club?s Friends for Life competition, which has been running since 2006, celebrates heart-warming stories of friendship in adversity, where dogs have truly earned the title of man?s best friend, through bravery, support or companionship. The winning dog or dogs will be chosen by public votes as having the most deserving tale and will be presented with the trophy during a special ceremony in the main arena at the Birmingham NEC, on the final night of Crufts (Sunday, March 10,) which will be televised live by Channel 4.

Sue and Byron Harvey, who live in Wellington Street, Thame, are well-known in the town, with their Assistance dogs, Max and Ziggy often trotting alongside their wheelchairs attracting strokes and a fuss wherever they go.

The following extract from the Crufts website tells their story:

“Max and Ziggy (from Thame, Oxfordshire): Assistance dogs who helped owners on the brink to find love ? In a wheelchair and feeling isolated by disability caused by several life-threatening conditions including spinal surgery, brain tumour and double bilateral mastectomies leading to spinal bacterial meningitis, Sue Harvey almost gave up on life until her first assistance dog, Inka, arrived.

“She was then left heartbroken by her premature death. Byron Harvey, who has been in a wheelchair since boyhood due to polio, was devastated by the tragic loss of his childhood sweetheart and his assistance dog Isis was the only one to keep him going.

“In a truly inspiring story Sue and Byron were bought together because of the link between their two original assistance dogs, who were sisters. Their friendship blossomed into love and then marriage in 2008, and now they and their current dogs Max and Ziggy show a love and care for one another that can scarcely be matched. Bryon said: ?Both Sue and I had been through a lot of heartache due to our disabilities and the loss of ones closest to us. It was our original assistance dogs that bought us together and the journey to get our new assistance dogs helped cement that growing love. We share the knowledge of how life changing these dogs are, giving us independence and a second chance at life. We are now such a close knit family.?

All the information about the competition is on the website. To vote for Sue and Byron and MAX & ZIGGY, call: 0844 646 0202

IMAGE: Courtesy of http://www.crufts.org.uk (still taken from video)

FOLLOWING the Examination meeting for the Thame Neighbourhood Plan on February 19, and to record this historic occasion in Planning history, ThameNews.Net has been publishing notes from the meeting in instalments. However, before continuing, after a communication from a member of the public who was at the meeting, I should like to point out that, due to a family commitment, I was not present at the meeting for the first three speakers and so did not take notes of their representations.

I apologise if, by this omission, a misleading impression was given, that the meeting only covered those landowners/agents/developers who wished to see more development than the numbers allocated, on site F, (203 homes).

In fact, it has been pointed out to me that during the early part of the meeting:

(A) Lucy Murfett spoke on behalf of South Oxfordshire District Council, who fully supported the Neighbourhood Plan, and confirmed that SODC were content that the Plan met the required ?Basic Conditions?.
(B) David Broadley, for Aylesbury Vale District Council spoke about his council?s view about the unsuitability of site F, to house 203, let alone the 281 dwellings allocated (if the reserve contingency happens). He cited harmful landscape and visual impact on the countryside to the North of the A418, and expressed concern that the TNP did not include an assessment of any improvements that would have to be made to the roundabout at the junction with the A418/B3011/A4129 which would be impacted by future development.
(C) A representative of Hallum Land Management Ltd spoke against the choice of sites C and D for allocated houses in preference to site B. His view was that sites C and D did not meet the ?Basic Conditions? with regard to promoting sustainable travel as they are not served by buses, and that their deliverability depended too much on the provision of infrastructure off-site from uncertain amounts of funding from Section 106 contributions.

FOR INFORMATION: All the written representations that the Examination questioning was based upon can be read in full on SODC?s website HERE

Thame Neighbourhood Plan – Agenda item 4 (V) Shopping ? The Cattlemarket

Today’s notes refer to the part of the agenda devoted to the section on Working and Shopping, and in particular, the Cattlemarket site in North Street. Mr Bob Williams, who said that he spoke on behalf of the Thame Farmers Auction Mart and those in the wider, rural community, was the next speaker.

The Examiner, Mr McGurk, asked Mr Williams why the TNP?s policy on the Cattlemarket Site did not, in his view, meet the ?Basic Conditions? and why he considered a food supermarket would. He (Mr Williams) replied that the Cattlemarket needed to relocate to the Thame show ground to preserve both the market and the show. He said that over 12 years, it had become clear (to him) that a food supermarket was the only viable solution to get the cash needed for the move. He maintained that the TNP proposal for the Cattlemarket site did not meet the ?qualitative nor the quantitative? retail needs of the town and that no proper retail assessment or retail sustainability assessment had been made.

Mr Williams said of retail work for the Core Strategy, that it ?had not been properly tested and was therefore unreliable.?

Mr McGurk then asked Lucy Murfett of SODC if any requirement before 2016 (the Core Strategy period) was envisaged for anything beyond 3,000 sq ft of retail on this site. She replied that there was not, since Woolworths had become a Sainsbury store and fulfilled some of the requirement. She added that the plan aimed to attract larger chains for ?comparison? shopping (i.e. non-food items such as clothes, books and electrical goods).

Returning to Mr Williams, the Examiner asked him: ?In your view plans for the site do not meet the ?Basic Conditions? but that a supermarket would. Is there anything else you want to point out? Mr Williams replied: ?It is strange that Sainsbury?s own survey showed 43% tended to support a supermarket on that site, and that the Thame Neighbourhood Plan suggested overwhelming support for mixed use.?

The next speaker was Sue Rowlands of Tibbalds, speaking on behalf of the town council. She was asked by the Examiner to say why it was her view that the proposal for the Cattlemarket site does meet the ?Basic Conditions? and that a supermarket on the site would not. She replied: ?The plan is required to deliver what has been identified by the Core Strategy which is for ?comparison? goods rather than convenience. Also, on the matter of sustainability of the town centre, retail provision should ?be diverse and reflect the character of the town centre?.

?Thame is a real market town which is attractive as a tourist centre so we have to identify sites for ?comparative? shopping,? she added. Ms Rowlands concluded that the Cattlemarket was a key site and said that the town council was studying the role of a community facility as part of a viable development on that site.

TOMORROW: Mr Paul Earley?s presentation on ?The Choice of the Preferred Option? for housing development ? Agenda item 5.

PHOTO: Mr Bob Williams, an advocate for a supermarket on the Cattlemarket site in Thame.

ARTS WEEK 2013 at John Hampden School, in Thame, last week, was a fairy tale! The whole school went all ?far, far away in a time long ago?, when dragons roamed the Earth and princesses and knights were commonplace!

The fairy tale theme saw the school hall become an Arthurian castle, populated by fire breathing monsters and evil little goblins, intent on stealing princesses and first borne away! The castle walls were encircled with sharp, thorny bushes which knights on white horses must fight their way through to free the damsels in distress, aided by clever fairies and the feisty princesses themselves, with their inventive use of their crowning glory as a means to escape!

John Hampden School’s Arts Co-ordinators, J.E.Nichols and Clare Field(Arts Co-ordinators) take up the story: “Yet again John Hampden has seen an army of parents, grandparents, governors, guardians, teachers and teaching assistants old and new, volunteer to support the children in their fairy tale artwork – over sixty of them helping to bring our ideas to life!

“Our PTA saved the day with a generous donation of funds to enable the school to ‘pull out all the stops’ and provide a wealth of artistic experiences for the children to enjoy! These ranged from the now obligatory, enormous sculptures that Mr.Eyre helps the children to create, to mosaic shields, flying fairies, giant recycled knights in shining armour, pretty princess hats and the inevitable swords and shields that all well-armed knights are adorned with!

“The staff also set the children the challenge of identifying whose coat of arms is whose, in ?The Honourable Coat of Arms Quiz?, with an arty prize for the winning entry!

“The week proved ?a dream come true? with the happy ending of a Fair-trade Arts Caf

THE woman who died in a tragic house fire in Thame yesterday, has been named.

She was 62 year-old, mother-of-three, Christine Fullwood. Initial suspicions are that the fire was started by a cigarette but a full investigation into the blaze is on-going.

It is understood that the family’s two cats also died in the blaze, at Greenway, in Thame.

FOR those who could not make the public Examination meeting for the Thame Neighbourhood Plan, and to record this historic occasion in Planning history, ThameNews.Net has been publishing notes from the meeting in instalments. Today’s section is the part of the agenda devoted to the section on new employment land.

AT the start of the afternoon session of the Examination on Tuesday (19/02), the Examiner, Mr Nigel McGurk, reiterated that Neighbour Plans were a new way of planning, introduced by the Localism Act, which provided communities with the power to set priorities for local planning. ?Examinations are not forums for debates,? he explained, ?but are for the Examiner to obtain further clarification that the ?Basic Conditions? are being met by the plan and that it has regard to National planning policy, as well as being in accord with the general terms of the Core Strategy.?
He added that NPs must contribute to a community?s sustainability and Human Rights.

Mr McGurk then called Mr Murfitt, from SODC to the table. Mr Murfitt said that unemployment in Thame was 3.4%, half the national average, and that 34% of people work away from Thame. ?We want more people to work in Thame,? he said, and explained that three hectares of employment land was needed in the town. The Plan is for Use Classes type B1 and B2-type business he explained, but that this was not meant to restrict Class A1.

The next speaker was Mr Charles Castle, for the Castle Trust, whose representation was about Employment Land, Non-Allocated Site 16. The Examiner asked Mr Castle why his view was that Site B (allocated in the plan FOR Employment land) does not meet the ?Basic Conditions? but that his land, to the North West of Thame, does, and why?. Mr Castle replied that Sustainability requirements place special emphasis on transport and that his site offered excellent access to main roads, including the M40, and good bus services. He said that there was good scope for a Park and Ride facility and that there was an agreement with Oxfordshire County Council that if site F was developed, extra buses would be provided.

The Examiner asked him again why the Allocated site did not meet the Basic Conditions for employment. Mr Castle replied that it would pull heavy traffic movements into the area, particularly to the Ring Road, which he said currently only carries light traffic. He said that British Oxygen and the Thame Industrial estate were put there as a means of getting the Ring Road completed. Therefore, it was his view that, now that it was completed, there was no need for further development.
Mr Castle then said that since the NP (Neighbourhood Plan) programme had been put in place, his Trust had been approached by a national company (which he said he could not name) that needs five hectares of land.

Mr Castle was followed by Mr Mark Stitch, for Barton Wilmore/Stoford (pictured), promoting site B for employment land. He was asked to tell the Examiner why this site met the ?Basic Conditions?. Mr Stitch replied that his camp believed the site satisfied National policy and advice regarding Sustainable development. ?We consider that the site can deliver the employment, economy, social and environmental role needed by the local planning authority to meet the needs of the local area,? he said, concluding: ?We want to be on the site as soon as possible to meet market demand.?

Mr Sitch added that in his view, site B exploited alternative modes of transport; buses, pedestrian and cycling via the Phoenix Trail, to large, residential areas of the town, and that it lent itself for employment as it was not of high landscape value. He felt that a good business case had been made for site B, and that it had local support in that 63% of respondents supported the site for new employment. ?We have the opportunity to create employment and economic benefit to the town from a site that has links to existing employment areas,? he said. He concluded: ?Site F would encourage out-commuting, whereas our site B, would discourage it.?

Referring to the fact that part of site B is in the ?Blast Zone? of the British Oxygen works, the Examiner asked Mr Stitch if there were any Health & Safety issues that might impact on the site. Mr Stitch replied that there were not. One third of the proposed development is in the middle of the zone, he explained, but it would be compatible with the site?s use for employment, according to the HSE?s (Health and Safety Executive) response.

The Examiner then asked Mr Stitch about the reference to Warehousing in his representation, and if he considered the plan would be met equally by warehousing, as it would by Office and Hightec industries. Mr Stitch replied that a full range of uses had been tested and consulted upon and referred to the evidence in the NP.

Sue Rowlands, speaking for Thame Town Council, was asked by Mr McGurk why TTC considerrf that the planned principle uses of B1 and B2 for that site met the ?Basic Conditions?. ?We want to encourage the high quality, high Tech jobs that Thame is known for,? she replied. ?But we do not want to exclude B8.?

COMING SOON ? speakers: Shopping and The Cattlemarket ?Mr Bob Williams (For Thame Farmers Auction Mart) and Sue Rowlands, Tibbalds (For Thame Town Council)

At 3:25pm yesterday (20/02, Oxfordshire County Council Fire and Rescue Service were called to a house fire in Greenway, Thame in which a female occupant sadly lost her life.

Fire appliances from Thame, Wheatley and Slade attended the incident and on arrival were confronted with a fire in the living room of the property and heavy smoke throughout.

Firefighters wearing breathing apparatus quickly extinguished the fire and located the occupant but were unfortunately unable to save them.

The cause of the fire is not yet known and a joint investigation by Oxfordshire County Council Fire and Rescue Service and Thames Valley Police is ongoing.

Visit www.365alive.co.uk for fire safety advice. If you have a fire safety question please call the free phone community safety helpline on 08000 325 999 or email: community.safety@oxfordshire.gov.uk

FOLLOWING on from yesterday’s first report from the historic, first-ever, Examination in Public of a Neighbourhood Plan, here in Thame, the next item on the agenda was the proposed site at Lord Williams’s school, should it move to be amalgamated with the Upper school.

Bob Austin, representing the Thame East Residents Association was next to be call by the Examiner, Mr Nigel McGurk. Mr Austin told the Examiner: ?No one had taken the trouble to talk to us for nine months. Then the Neighbourhood Plan came to our rescue enabling us to form a view and respond to the needs of Thame as a whole. In the end we accepted that, given the situation in Thame and the threat of windfalls, we had to accept a compromise on the number of houses on the proposed Lord Williams?s School site. Allowances had been made for green space (which at the moment is mainly in the South and West of Thame) but if the school did move and windfalls did occur, there would be 775, plus as many more houses as would fit on the site.?

The Examiner said that a number of concerns had been raised around detail of the site. He asked Mr Austin: ?Are you satisfied that the planned approach to the site satisfies the protection of outlook and privacy (of existing residents)? Mr Austin replied that the right ?placing? and density of the houses would allow for some satisfaction on that front and that his association would appreciate a lower number of houses because there would then be a more acceptable level of green space. ?There is very little in the Lea Park area and to the East of the town,? he added.

The last speaker before a promised short break after two hours, was Sue Rowlands of Tibbalds, representing the town council. She was asked by the Examiner if she was satisfied that the planned approach to the school site satisfied existing residents. Ms Rowlands replied that she was satisfied, and that the plan provided an opportunity to bring new public amenity space to that part of Thame, and that they (the council) would look at density matching the existing development. She added that this was one of the possible sites for a new community centre.

The Examiner then asked Ms Rowlands why she was of the opinion that all the sites meet with the ?Basic Conditions?. She replied that the Neighbourhood plan process ensured that all the options had been tested for sustainability etc, tested against the Core Strategy and against the Consultation Vision of November 2011. It accorded with local people?s wishes she maintained, which is why site B had been rejected. She felt that all the options accorded with local and national planning policy, and with the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) requirements around viability, deliverability etc.

TOMORROW: Working and Shopping, Choice of ?preferred option? (for housing development) and Getting Around.

PHOTO: Mr Nigel McGurk, the Examiner in charge of Tuesday’s public Examination of the town’s Neighbourhood Plan. He will publish is Statement by the end of the month.

THAME made planning history on Tuesday (19/02) when the first ever Public Hearing on a Neighbourhood Plan took place at the Town Hall.

Nigel McGurk, the Independent Examiner, said that all the people involved in developing the Neighbourhood Plan should be congratulated. ?It is a very comprehensive and thorough document?, he said, and without prejudice to his report on the Plan, he thought the level of detail was very impressive.

The Hearing was to allow the Examiner to hear oral evidence from invited participants to assist with his examination into whether the Neighbourhood Plan had met the Basic Conditions. Representatives from landowners, developers, residents and the Town Council were invited to answer questions.

Mr McGurk will now consider all of the evidence before producing his report on whether Thame?s Neighbourhood Plan meets the Basic Conditions and proceeds to referendum.

The Examiner closed the Hearing by expressing his sincere thanks for the exemplary manner in which all participated and thanked everyone for sitting still.

The Examination last just under four hours and a selection of the spoken representations made at the hearing are made below.

Advocates of site F were asked by the Examiner about the sustainability and landscape aspects of their site. Mr Linnell, for Regeneration Thame, said that his group believed that site F could accommodate more than the 203 dwellings allocated, in fact 400 minimum, because in his view it is one of the most sustainable sites throughout Thame. ?We believe that to under deliver would mean that the conditions for sustainable growth in Thame would not be met,? he said. To further questioning about where the additional houses should come from, Mr Linnnell replied, from site C, because it is less sustainable because of its position to the South of the town against an industrial area. Site F, he said, would improve the approach to Thame from that direction and has good access to highways and public transport. ?We believe,? he said, ? that site C does have a part to play in the plan as a reserve site if the amalgamation of the two schools does not come to fruition.

The next speaker was Guy Bailey of Banner Homes, representing the interests of site D. The Examiner asked him why he would like to see more homes allocated to site D. His reply was: ?It (site D) has been shown to be nearer the town centre, particularly regarding the promotion of walking and cycling.?

The Examiner then asked him to confirm that he had suggested that site C does not meet the Basic Conditions and should be removed from the plan, and the houses allocated to site D, and to explain why he did not consider site C met the Basic Conditions.

Mr Bailey replied that priority should be given to transport and movement, and that it is a 20 minute walk to the town centre from site D, whereas from site C, it is longer. It was his contention that site D ?constantly performs better? and that there was ?no reasonable rationale or planning reason? why site D should not take these extra homes.

The next speaker was Adam Ross of Broadway, speaking on behalf of the interests for site C. He was asked to say how the site does meet the Basic Conditions. Mr Ross responded that the main criticism was one of transport and accessibility but that in his view most of site C is a 20 minute walk from the town centre, and that no objections had been raised from Oxfordshire County Council on either sustainability or transport.

The next speaker was Mr Preston, on behalf of SODC, talking about The Elms. The Examiner pointed out that this proposed development was for 45 dwellings, the whole within the Thame Conservation Area and in the grounds of a Listed building. Mr Preston said that there are other listed buildings, including The Poplars, The Barn and the War Memorial, that would be impacted.

The Examiner asked him to summarise his concerns, not about the principle but about the number of houses in the plan. Mr Preston said: ?This is a sensitive site which was added to the Conservation Area in 2006, along with the recreation ground. Its appearance and character is that of an open space and set in parkland, with a complex history of ownership. There was some potential for development he felt, but it was important to leave the sense of space and views, and to protect beeches and the Ha ha. ?A large scale development would have a harmful impact,? he concluded.

The Examiner asked Richard Peats, for English Heritage, whether he was content that the Elms development was not in danger of failing to ?preserve or enhance? the site as required by National Policy. He replied that good positioning should not harm the setting.

Following on from Mr Peats came the representatives for the Nash Partnership, promoting The Elms. They were told by the Examiner that he had received a significant number of objections to this proposed development, and asked why he thought it did meet the Basic Conditions.
Mr Peats responded that the site is sustainable in that it is close to services and amenoties, and that whilst he agreed it is a very important site, in his view it ?contributes very little to the town.? Whilst he thought heritage to be important, he thought ?significance? was open to interpretation. It was his understanding that the house was not originally built in park land, but for the views to the rear.

It was important, he felt, to consider the ?public benefit? from the development which would include new, public park land, enhancement of the access from the park to the High Street, the creation of walking and cycling routes, revealing local heritage and the renovation of the house itself.

The Examiner said that a number of representations had referred to accessibility in relation to cars and asked Mr Peats if he considered the plan met with the Basic Condition regarding Transportation. He (Mr Peats) replied that he considered The Elms to be the most sustainable of all the sites because it was close to the town centre. ?We would need to comply with parking standards i.e. Planning Policy 4,? he added.

MORE FROM THE MEETING TOMORROW

PHOTO: Standing room only at the UK’s first, ever Neighbourhood plan Examination in public (Taken by Peter Lambert)

IN an apparent contradiction to its own published Neighbourhood Plan, Thame Town Council told the Examiner into the plan today that it does not want a 200 plus person community centre included in the plan, despite this being one of its ‘core objectives’ in the published plan.

Speaking on behalf of the town council, Sue Rowlands, of Tibbalds, the Consultants brought in by the council to help it produce the plan, told the Examiner, Mr Nigel McGurk: “The need for a 200 plus community centre has not been identified yet, so no decision has been made about what such a facility should comprise. Therefore, it would not be helpful to include a 200 plus facility as a policy in the (Neighbourhood) plan.”

She added: “The TNP focuses on the wider needs of the community in the town centre.”

This statement seems to be at odds with the plan itself which states:

Community, leisure and wellbeing
Main comments raised by local people during the
consultation include:
■ providing a really large meeting room (200+ capacity)
■ creating more riverside walks
■ another primary school is needed if there is more
housing
■ supporting local people
■ needing to get more people living AND working in
Thame (i.e. reduce commuting)

And, further in the plan:

Community Facilities
5.8 The Plan identifies three alternatives sites that have the potential to accommodate a new community facility large enough to hold 200+ people. The three potential sites
are:
■ the Cattle Market site
■ retaining some existing facilities at Lord Williams?s Lower School should the site come forward for development
■ the northern end of the Southern Road Recreation Area

Dropping a large community facility from the TNP will not be welcomed by many local groups who, in a survey carried out by Cmag, the Thame Cattlemarket Action Group, stated a need for a larger facility.

THE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

The 92-page plan sets out a vision for Thame which, as well as locations for a community facility, includes the construction of an additional 775 homes, three hectares of new employment land and up to 5,700 square metres of new retail (excluding convenience food) within the town centre and plans for new and improved connections in and around the town and new and improved open spaces.
Read the full plan here: http://www.southoxon.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Thame%20Neighbourhood%20Development%20Plan-RD.pdf

TODAY’S EXAMINATION HEARING

Today’s hearing was basically the Examiner’s opportunity to hear oral evidence from some of those who had submitted written representations where he required clarification to help him establish whether the NP complied with required Basic Conditions. For this reason, he explained, Sainsburys had not been invited to speak, despite a legal request why they should not, because: “..There were no questions I needed qualification of. Their written representations were sufficient.”

MEETING THE BASIC CONDITIONS

The Basic Conditions for Neighbourhood Plans are specified by law:
? must be appropriate having regard to national policy
? must contribute to the achievement of sustainable
development
? must be in general conformity with the strategic
policies in the development plan for the local area
(SODC’s Core Strategy in this case)
? must be compatible with human rights requirements
? must be compatible with EU obligations.

MORE FROM THE PUBLIC MEETING TOMORROW – Including submissions from developers, land-owners, residents groups and others.

IMAGE: Part of a Concept Plan for a community centre on the Cattlemarket site, produced for Cmag

IT’S almost time for the annual Thame Tidy Day, planned for March 24, and the organising team or looking for volunteers to give the town a spring clean.

In previous years, teams of public-spirited volunteers have helped remove rubbish on the Phoenix Trail and other footpaths, cleared flower beds in the Co-op car park, painted the cricket pavillion, removed graffiti and generally given the town a spruce up.

Anyone interested in taking part is invited to a meeting this Thursday, February 21, at 7pm at the Town Hall. But don’t worry; if you can’t make the meeting, contact either Mary Stiles via: maryandstella@aol.com or Andy Gunn via: andygunn41@yahoo.co.uk

PHOTO: A team of pupils from Lord Williams’s school taking part in last year’s Thame Tidy Day