FOLLOWING a warning to dog walkers in Chilton from a reader about a suspicious individual, the police have issued the following:
With reference to 29/10/10….WARNING: Beward dog walkers in Chilton, please could you reassure your readers that Thames Valley Police are looking into the incident and should the public have any information on this male could they contact TVP on 08458505505, quoting reference number AL3695185/10.
Many thanks, PC 5823 Tom Chalk
THE final result of the poll held by Thame Town Council on the preferred site for 530 new homes allocated for the town, is now in.
Of the 573 residents whose votes were counted (any voting slips without a name or postcode were discounted), 308 voted for site D and 265 for the town council’s preferred option, site F.
The town council has now subitted its full response to the consultation carried out throughout October to South Oxfordshire District Council.
….AN interesting question posed by the Mayor of Thame in his recent letter to Thamenews.net. Norman Brand has written a letter in reply to that question.
Click on Letters to the Editor on the left hand side of the page to read his letter, as it is not really front page news warranting full publication here!
POWERBOAT CHAMPIONSHIP FOR THAME MAN – Neil Scarborough from Thame become a national champion recently after he won the Powerboat P1 SuperStock Championship in Hampshire, despite a collision on the last day of the championships.
Neil and his co-pilot co-pilot John Wilson failed to finish at the Lymington Grand Prix of the Sea after their boat came off second best in a collision with 150 Class rivals, Aztec Racing.
But because they already had seven victories in ten races under their belts, Neil and John were guaranteed the title.
THAME MAN FINED FOR POSSESSION OF DRUGS
Michael Parsons, 22, of High Street, Thame, admitted possession of cannabis at Thame, on August 19, and has been fined
A THAMENEWS reader has asked us to pass on this warning to anyone who may walk their dogs in the Chilton area.
“This incident in Chilton involved one of my dogwalking friends. She was in the fields a few days ago with her dog and a man, she described as tall and black, came out from behind a bush carrying a screwdriver – she managed to get away but understandably was absolutely terrified.
“Would you mind passing this on to anyone you know who goes out with/without dogs on their own?
The police have been advised but haven’t come up with anything yet.”
ADDED AT REQUST OF CORRESPONDANT 30/10/10: “This man was very menacing and clearly has some mental health issues. The police are worried that this incident could lead to something more violent.
Many thanks.”
Sara (full name and email address supplied, and the correspondant is known to Thamenews.net)
IMAGE: Courtesy of www.geographic.or, of fields in the Chilton area, for illustrative purposes only
SEE last paragraph for amendment.
HAVING made its views very clear on proposals for increased housing development on the edge of town, Thame Town Council has said today that it will ‘challenging the premise of the Core Strategy itself, every step of the way.’
*SEE LATEST VOTING FIGURES FOR SITE D OR SITE F BELOW
Claiming to represent the views of local residents, the council says on its website that it has: “…no option at this stage but to accept the approach being taken by South Oxfordshire District Council about future housing development in Thame.”But, it continues: The number of dwellings plus a one-site allocation are both inappropriate for the town. Dispersing smaller developments within the boundary of the town would make it much easier for the new property owners to be integrated into the community.
“Left with just the two site options on the table, D and F, it was suggested at Full Council on 26 October that the Town Council should respond that neither site is appropriate. This, however, would give the District Council carte blanche to allocate its own preference, which to date has been site D.
“The Town Council has always objected to D, being of the opinion that the best of a worst case scenario for accommodating 700+ homes would be Site C. This opinion is still held, but with the number of dwellings being allocated to Thame now reduced to 530, it brings Site F back in for consideration.
“Based on the 530 allocated at this time, the Town Council, after much debate and a close vote, decided that Site F was the preferred option if it had to accept a one-site allocation.”
SITE D HAS IT SO FAR
IN THE TOWN COUNCIL’S POLL, the number of votes cast up until 16.45 hrs today are: for site F (238), and for site D (256), but local people can still express their preference at the town hall until tomorrow at 16.30 hrs when the public consultation ends and all the polling slips and comments will be delivered to SODC.
FOLLOWING a split among Thame Town Councillors, the Mayor’s casting vote decided the vexed question of where the council thinks a new housing development should go in the town – if we have to have them.
At its meeting last night (26/10/10), the town council considered its formal response to South Oxfordshire District Council’s consultation on proposed changes to the Core Strategy, and whether the 530 new homes allocated for Thame should go on site D or TTC’s hitherto preferred option, site F.
After a very lengthy debate, during which the soundness of SODC’s methodology and judgement at coming up with numbers and its preferred site, Site D, was questioned, the council made its decision.
Basically, on the proposed changes to the Core Strategy, the council voted to oppose the 530 homes allocated to Thame, saying that the four week consultation was not long enough and that following from the reduction from 800 to 530 homes, other sites had not been sufficiently considered. On the advice of its Planning Consultant, Jake Collinge, the council would suggest in its response that only 280 would be appropriate, and the council’s preferred location for these is Site C.
On the thorny issue of where the homes should go if the town had to have the full 530, as its fall-back position the council finally voted for Site F, after a vote of six for and six against meant that Mayor Adam Buckland’s casting vote tipped the balance. There were two abstentions. Cllrs David Bretherton and David Dodds who are also District Councillors.
It was revealed during the meeting that from the responses received so far, following the distribution of voting sheets at the public meeting held on
Monday, 205 residents preferred site F, and 225 preferred site D. Some preferences were ignored because they did not include a name or postcode.
The pros and cons of both site D and site F were fully aired at the public meeting. In its Thame Assessment, available on SODC’s website, the district council states the following about site C:
THAME Town Council’s planning committee has come out against an application to sell coffee from a van in Montesson Square.
The vendor, Coffee King, has applied to South Oxfordshire District Council for a licence to sell fresh espresso coffee, tea, muffins, flapjacks, croissants and cold drinks.
The owner of Rumsey’s in the Upper High Street, opposite the proposed location, with the support of three other caf
IT was standing room only at last night?s public meeting in Thame to allow residents to vent their concerns and preferences for 530 new homes required to be built in the town between now and 2027 (the Core Strategy).
The meeting was a culmination of a week of social network discussion, emailing and a frenzied battle for which action group?s posters could stay up the longest before disappearing, the like of which Thame has not seen before.
Although the meeting was called by Thame Town Council to gauge whether site F on the Oxford Road or site D on the South East side of the town had the town?s support, some residents used the event to question whether the town needed that number at all.
The Town Council and some residents? groups have indicated that their preference is for site F, and held an exhibition last Monday, October 18, at the town hall to display a plan of the development, and close by a representation of site D. Option F is opposed by the Blot on Thame Action Group and some residents of the Renaissance development on the old Rycotewood site in Oxford Road.
The meeting, held at St Mary?s church, Thame, was more-or-less equally divided between the two sites, with concerns about flooding, access from the two sites and landscape concerns, dominating the questions.
The meeting was chaired by the Mayor of Thame, Adam Buckland and the panel included Town Cllr Mike Dyer, Thame Town Council?s Planning Consultant, Jake Collinge, SODC?s Cabinet Member for Planning, Angie Patterson and SODC Planning Officer, Beryl Guiver.
FLOODING
Ms Guiver said that with good drainage and the use of holding ponds, and the fact that no building would be allowed to take place on land liable to frequent flooding, neither site would lead to flooding of neighbouring properties.
ACCESS
There was some discussion about site F being a better choice because it could have more than one access (a negative point against site D some felt), one into the Oxford Road and another on to the A4188 by-pass. Ms Guiver replied that there would probably only be one access point from both sites, site F?s being into the Oxford Road.
LANDSCAPING
Several people were concerned about the effect on the landscape of both sites and Ms Guiver admitted that both options would have an impact, site F on the North side and site D to the South East, though as there was not now to be any develop in the South West Field because of the reduction from 800 to 530 homes, she stated, there would now be more scope for landscaping which would mitigate the problem for Moreton.
530 HOMES
Some speakers asked why the distribution of new homes required could not be spread in smaller parcels over the coming year and more be built in the villages. Ms Guiver said that 40% of the homes needed had been allocated to larger villages and a number to smaller villages. A benefit of one large site is, she said, that infrastructure has fixed costs which are too substantial for the gains of smaller developments.
?We have managed to get the number down from 800 to 530 and we cannot get the number any lower,? she said. ?We have to work within the current legislation and need to come up with a plan soon. We must allocate the site now otherwise we jeopardise control of where future development goes within the district and any developer can put in a plan.?
Other matters discussed were the possible effects on local schools, the effect on health provision, the effect on wildlife corridors eg for bats, and the effect of development near what one speaker called, ?The green lung of Thame,? the Phoenix Trail, site D.
The SODC representative indicated that the catchment area for Lord Williams?s School may have to preclude pupils from outside Thame in order to absorb more secondary pupils, but that primary school provision in the town was adequate for such growth. One more doctor would probably need to be employed to cope with the increase.
Thame Town council will be discussing their response to the consultation (which ends on Friday) tonight.
See: LINK for more information about the consultation and how to have your say.
THAME residents, Bee Gee Robin Gibb and his wife, Dwina Murphy-Gibb, have joined the fight to question why Thame Town Council has decided to switch its preferred site for the allocation of 530 homes to a site on the edge of the town.
Site F, currently a pig farm on the Oxford Road out of Thame, has consistently been ruled out by public inquiry inspectors in previous Local Plans and, as recently as June 2010, was deemed unsuitable by South Oxfordshire District Council?s planning professionals.
Mrs Murphy-Gibb said yesterday (20 October 2010): ?Many of my fellow residents of Thame have expressed their real concerns about the lack of consultation, the very short period for comments to be made and the way that Thame Town Council suddenly decided to change its option to Site F, which is in an isolated site on the north-western edge of our town.
?Anyone reading the web site of Thame Town Council, the local internet newspaper Thamenews.net and our two local newspapers The Thame Gazette and The Oxford Times, cannot fail to understand the utter frustration that people feel about a consultation which affects the future of our beautiful town. To say residents feel totally let down is a massive understatement.
?Many people are asking how was this decision reached? Why weren?t the people of Thame consulted before they asked South Oxfordshire District Council to go out to consultation on these two sites? Who are members of the town council?s working party on the core strategy? Is it right that these decisions were taken in private rather than public meetings? These questions needed to be answered.
?The best way for people to find out what is happening is to make a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and this I have done today.?
SOURCE: Press release