Second homes

Fri 15 Apr 2016, 22:08

I second Andrew's proposal!

Fri 15 Apr 2016, 08:17

I'd like the council to use its sinister power to 'co-opt' new members to do so with Miles. (I believe the process involves a blindfold, a large vat of blancmange and the Coldron Mill waterwheel.)

Thu 14 Apr 2016, 22:40

Not sure suggesting support for any measures which reduce second home ownership is "trouble-making" (but I do like the moniker). My interest in reducing second homes is not restricted, or even aimed, at Charlbury, and i have nothing against those who have them (some of my best friends...etc). I am merely interested in any actions which make the activity harder for, i would think, fairly obvious reasons, given the housing and wealth gaps in this country.

As for the Town council Richard, your not the first, or second, person to suggest this in the past few days...

Wed 13 Apr 2016, 12:26

Russell...get back on the naughty step ;)

Tue 12 Apr 2016, 21:57 (last edited on Tue 12 Apr 2016, 21:58)

Possibly too many mushrooms?!

I'm downstream of Walcot!

Tue 12 Apr 2016, 18:44

Russell, if you live over the water does that mean over Walcot way?

Tue 12 Apr 2016, 15:01

Sorry, I know I'm not Russell but that is so funny. I love this web site, so entertaining. :)

Tue 12 Apr 2016, 14:29

This is for Russell: https://www.badgerbadgerbadger.com/

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 20:23

I'm sorry Peter my glib puerile humour is probably not appropriate for this topic strand. However I to, am an auslander. I even live over the water so our family with never be local. I have also always steered well clear of the annual May Day basket making competition.

I shall now give myself a timeout and will go and tidy my bedroom.

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 20:03

Maybe we should award badges? (That's badges, Russell. Not badgers.)

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 19:26

I think Miles has at least one rival to the title of "forum trouble maker in chief"...

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 16:59

Whoops - strikes me after the few days shut down that you're all at it again!

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 13:37

May I add a little to the mischief-making please?!
There is a current resident of Dean, who, if we are to believe what he has said, may be resigning his governmental position (thank goodness) before too long. With a bit of luck, this will mean a spare house in Dean (I'm a poet and I didn't know it).

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 12:58

Indeed he is. I think the phrase "assume good faith" is relevant here - perhaps better just to ask "is that tongue-in-cheek?" and leave it there if you're unsure.

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 12:44

I'm sure Russell can defend himself, but just to make sure we don't disappear down a rabbit hole of mutual recrimination, let me reassure you that Russell is a nice, community-minded chap with a healthy sense of humour.

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 12:31 (last edited on Mon 11 Apr 2016, 12:38)

Do I detect a slight sense of humour failure here, Peter? A bit of light-hearted banter on the Forum is definitely preferable to the bad tempered complaints of late (thanks, Richard, for your monitoring of this)

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 12:06

Is the comment by Russell Robson meant to be "Tongue in cheek"? If not I find it utterly deploring. As Liz says "when is a newcomer a newcomer?" I have lived here for 42 years, am I still a newcomer? Please stop making these ridiculous statements and accept this lovely place as it is and accept newcomers with friendship and good grace

Mon 11 Apr 2016, 10:23 (last edited on Mon 11 Apr 2016, 10:31)

Russell, you may recall that there was a suggestion some years, and many threads, ago that newcomers to Charlbury (I can't remember the exact definition of a newcomer, it may well have included me which is why I haven't pursued this) should be made to leave, but there was a question raised about what we would do with the many children that have been born here, and therefore would have the right to live here. There was also a question raised about what would happen to their dogs. That was never resolved, so we are where we are. Pity the Neighbourhood Forum team didn't include this in their questionnaire.

Sun 10 Apr 2016, 21:17

The St Ives situation is interesting, but does it really solve anything?

If Mr Jones and Ms Smith live together in London during the week, in a property in his name, then spend the weekend in Charlbury at a property in her name are they second home owners? technically not!

As long as full Council tax is paid on BOTH properties (no single person occupancy reduction claimed) then neither council is out of pocket. These second home owners also put money into the local economy.

The appeal of Charlbury to commuting owners of just ONE home also distorts and inflates the housing market. Cause for apology or celebration? I guess that depends whether or not you are already on the property ownership ladder.

Sun 10 Apr 2016, 19:39

You know what, I blame people! There everywhere these days. In houses, in cars, on trains, in car parks, overhead making bangs, coming over here and stealing our garlic. They clog up everywhere. Perhaps if we start at the other end of the telescope with how we get less people, we could solve all the problems of Charlbury. Apart from Badgers dying outside the Pre School! That's too intractable.

Sun 10 Apr 2016, 17:33

"Analysis of the population v. homes in Charlbury indicates that actually the population is falling a bit whilst the number of homes has grown"

It doesn't.

Liz is comparing census data taken on Sunday March 27 2011 with data for the corresponding Sundays in 2001 and 1991. No-one I'm aware of has tried to analyse this, and there's no authoritative source for Charlbury's population anyway: both the census and the electoral register are known to be highly error-prone.

By law, heads of household must declare who was in a given house at midnight on each of those days. So an apparent fall could indeed be the result of an increase in second homes between March 1991 and March 2011. Or of an increase in going away in late spring, an increase in children away at college or an increase in householders not completing the form: a factor found to have been crucial in some areas where apparent population decline has been properly studied.

The likelihood is that all four explanations apply - as well as a fifth (greater life expectancy and more common divorce mean smaller average household size) a sixth (many people - especially empty-nesters - now believe they need more space than the inhabitants of their house 30 years ago did) and Leah's seventh explanation.

No doubt others can think of other possible reasons. Without detailed analysis of the circumstances of all the 2,800 declared to be here in 2011, no-one can credibly claim any real insight into the relevant importance of these seven factors.

But the shortage of affordable housing here can't be pinned onto just one group or just one factor.

Sun 10 Apr 2016, 13:57

There used to be about 8 people to every cottage and then someone invented THE PILL

Sun 10 Apr 2016, 13:10

Analysis of the population v. homes in Charlbury indicates that actually the population is falling a bit whilst the number of homes has grown. So what might that tell us?

Sun 10 Apr 2016, 12:03

Miles, given your role as forum troublemaker-in-chief, I'm sorely disappointed you didn't stand for the Town Council - it would have been exceptionally entertaining...!

St Ives is obviously a special case, but in Charlbury, second homes don't seem to me to be the important issue. The real challenge is finding affordable houses for young families and the less well-paid, and that's not particularly affected by a dozen older houses in the town centre only being in use two days out of seven.

It will be interesting to see what the people of Charlbury have to say on this in the Neighbourhood Plan questionnaire. Should we be thinking about "another Ticknell Piece" - an in-keeping development of houses that young families and long-time Charlbury dwellers can afford to buy - or do we fix the size of the town in (Cotswold) stone for evermore, inevitably meaning prices will only go up?

Interesting times ahead.

Sat 9 Apr 2016, 14:43

I would support anything preventing houses being bought as second homes.

Fri 8 Apr 2016, 11:19

As a second home owner in Charlbury all I can say is that during the 13 years we've been here we have met nothing but courtesy and friendliness from the permanent residents; nobody has ever mentioned anything negative about second home owners to us and we've never made a secret of the fact that we don't live here all the time.

Tue 5 Apr 2016, 12:08 (last edited on Tue 5 Apr 2016, 12:08)

St Ives residents voting on a policy of preventing outsiders from buying second homes there. Seems scatty to me, but proving popular down there. I wonder how people would react to a similar initiative in Charlbury, with the Community-Led Plan under discussion?

Beeb story here: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35958649