Friends of the Evenlode Valley, etc

Tue 13 Jun 2017, 14:13

I would like to restate the position of the Cotswolds Conservation Board. We feel strongly that the edge of the settlement of Charlbury is this side of the railway line and then along Grammar School Hill and that any development further out than this would be regarded as having considerable impact on the AONB, Whychwood Forest or the Cornbury Park Estate.
The reasoning behind this is given in the Landscape Character Assessment below
www.cotswoldsaonb.org.uk/userfiles/file/landscape/june-2016/lct-16-broad-floodplain-valley-june-2016.pdf

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 16:44

In reply to concerns over the partiality of members of the CNF, all those involved in it are passionate about securing a really good future for Charlbury so it is inevitable that everyone will have their own views on all sorts of issues, including the Rushy Bank development. We have, however, continuously stressed that the CNF exists to reflect the views of the whole community, hence all the efforts put into surveys, public meeting etc. Whilst the CNF is a group of volunteers with no formal obligation to declare conflicts of interest we decided very early on that we should declare any potential conflicts at our meetings. If there is an evident conflict we will require the person concerned to withdraw from any CNF activities relating to that topic. Mere membership of a group such as the 'Friends of Evenlode Valley' does not however in our opinion amount to a conflict of interest affecting the work of the CNF any more than would say, membership of the CPRE or other voluntary organisation. Graham Terry, Co-chair Charlbury Neighbourhood forum

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 16:41

The Neighbourhood Plan Steering Committee will also respond
Full details of our funding and expenditure will be given
Also we are surprised that our status is being questioned as there is a complete record in the minutes of the Town Council and all meetings were open to the public. As correctly pointed out we are all busy volunteers so we find the questioning of commissioning a consultant to help with the plan and of the appointment of an administrator (a post that was advertised on this forum) hard to understand.
Those who are interested should look at the Town Council minutes or come along to one of our drop in sessions as held last Saturday to discuss matters with us.
A full explanation will follow however

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 12:25 (last edited on Mon 12 Jun 2017, 12:27)

A few responses needed:

Concerning the judicial review, anyone has a right to challenge the legality of decisions made by public bodies. If this decision is proven to be contrary to law I would have thought everyone will be pleased for that to be identified.

Regarding the letter, Liz (or…

Long post - click to read full text

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 18:31

All genuinely interesting, and hats off to those who spend time and energy keeping the Charlbury environment as lovely as it is.
However, I am perplexed by the status of the CNF. It is apparently simply a group of volunteers (with some worthy names), who have managed to secure the sponsorship of the Town Council.
Is that constitutional? If the Town Council wants a group of this nature shouldn't it be a formal sub-committee, which would then be accountable to the electorate?
I'm concerned to read in the Minutes of the CNF of March 2017 www.charlburyneighbourhoodforum.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/170310-NDPSG_Minutes_100317.pdf that it has been agreed to pay an "expert" £2,500 to prepare a Neighbourhood Plan. Also that an administrator is being sourced for 10 hours a week paid at between £10 - £15 an hour. So a minimum commitment of £400 a month.
Where is this money coming from, and who authorised the expenditure please?

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 14:50

Thank you for your reasoned response Paul. As a 'supporter' of the Friends , of course I do not expect you to sign into any sort of register.
Nevertheless, the Friends say in their letter that "we are a charitable company". If this is the case, should not the names of the directors and officials be in the public domain?
In my belief, the company's treasurer should be required to publish an audited account of subscriptions and on the expenditures incurred.
I cannot say that Liz or I are optimistic about getting these figures ("facts").
My original question stands: do the Friends have "a special interest" in opposing any development on the west bank of the Evenlode?

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 11:03

I'm slightly dumbfounded by Liz and Phil's objections to the information leaflet in question. It's not clear to me what you mean, Phil, when you refer to a 'semi-judicial tone' or a 'somewhat threatening stance'. Nor do I understand why you appear to want the names of everyone who, like myself, supports the aims of the Friends of Evenlode Valley. Where I do agree with you is your remark, in an earlier post about the Chipping Norton Hospital Action Group, that: 'Campaigning on issues is a long-standing community right'. We shouldn't be required to sign a register before expressing a social concern.

'Do we have a fact-checker please?', you ask, Liz. Isn't it more traditional to check the veracity of something before casting aspersions on it and suggesting that it needs 'handling with care'? And I'm not sure which 'we' you were referring to. I thought the whole forum was 'we', including those of us who have already checked the facts and are disturbed by them.

Sat 10 Jun 2017, 17:52

I'm concerned about the tone of the leaflet too. Do we have a fact-checker please? Otherwise the leaflet makes an excellent rumour-starting machine. Handle with care.

Sat 10 Jun 2017, 17:04

I also felt the tone and content of the letter rather unfortunate. I would rather live in a caring community happy to help those less fortunate than I am. Expansion is enevitable for progression.

Sat 10 Jun 2017, 16:24

At the risk of encouraging people to trawl back through all of the opinions which were aired on this forum last year, I still do not get what the 'Friends' find so objectionable about the Rushy Bank development.
What is it that makes the west bank a sacrosanct space and Rushy Bank so sinful?
Our river is called the Evenlode not the Rubicon. What makes it a natural boundary to the town of Charlbury? I would suggest that over the next 20 to 30 years there will be development and settlement on the west bank.
I would add that the letters sent to householders have a quasi-judicial tone which makes me feel that the Friends are taking a somewhat threatening stance. The mention of the Charlbury Football and Sports Club is particularly worrying.
Finally, the anonymity of the membership of the Friends' charity is also worrying. Should not the membership be transparent so that the townspeople can be assured that there is no special interest involved in this Judicial Review?

Fri 9 Jun 2017, 19:00

As a member of the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Committee and a Town Councillor I welcome this interest and constructive discussion and would like to comment further on some points.
The Neighbourhood Plan has to be completely impartial so there is no reason why representations by the Friends of the Evenlode Valley and West Oxfordshire Cotswolds should not be made to us. Equally we would also welcome representations from the Rushy Bank Consortium as both groups represent a significant number of Charlbury residents. Of course we welcome representation from individuals as well.
We have also sought opinions of local landowners such as Lord Rotherwick and I had informed him some time ago that we are undertaking a Neighbourhood Plan and believe that he or his agent will make a representation. If so then this would be made public as with any other representations made.
A Neighbourhood Plan if adopted, (which would only happen after a referendum) has a significant role in any planning applications and in practice it is unusual for any decision to be made which goes against local public opinion which is demonstrated through a Neighbourhood Plan
This does mean that the process is quite complicated but if you want to understand it I suggest you come along to one of our drop in sessions such as the one on Saturday 10th June 10.00 -12.00 where we will be present to explain more. There will be a number of other public involvement sessions taking place over the coming months.

Fri 9 Jun 2017, 17:11 (last edited on Fri 9 Jun 2017, 17:14)

Interestingly Lord Rotherwick was due to present the Enterprise Village proposal at the Chilson Parish Meeting in April but sent last minute apologies. Cornbury has made its commercial position on land behind the station clear to GWR. I think Cornbury's intentions are pretty clear, actions speaking louder than words and all that.

Friends of Evenlode has 140 supporters in Charlbury and as Hamish says they have as much right as anyone else to participate in the Forum without declaring this, though of course they might like to. The organisation is not anonymous - the directors of the Friends is a matter of public record as pointed out. None of our directors is currently involved in the Neighbourhood Plan but I assume there's some procedure for registering interests if one was. I also assume Helen would be keen to see disclosure of any involvement by persons with financial and personal interests in the Rushy Bank project, individually, through their companies, membership of sponsored clubs, as beneficiaries of large estates or otherwise. I am not aware that any of these is public.

While this project (or more precisely its predecessor behind the cricket club) gave rise to the group's formation, as we said in our letter we're active across a wide area and in different ways. I was talking to some people in Stonesfield today where an application for 68 homes has just been lodged. This represents about a 10% increase in the settlement in an AONB location where major development is only permitted in exceptional circumstances.

Fri 9 Jun 2017, 09:00

Given that the Neighbourhood Forum is run by volunteers their involvement with The Friends of the Evenlode shouldn't need to be declared the same way as their party political preference or their favourite breakfast cereal does not need to be known. Otherwise for parity then the Neighbourhood Forum volunteers would all also need to declare their support either way for every development application in our neighbourhood. If anyone feels strongly either way on local developments then I'm sure they can get involved with the Neighbourhood Forum, their website states "We welcome ANY member of the community who wants to take part, and all are welcome to attend meetings."

Fri 9 Jun 2017, 08:47

I have been concerned by the anonymity of The Friends of Evenlode Valley, which despite its name, was formed specifically to oppose the Rushy Bank development. I would like to know how many people on the Neighbourhood Forum are officials or members, past or present or supporters of Friends of Evenlode Valley. I think that any partiality should be made clear.

Fri 9 Jun 2017, 08:44

Much of the discussion concerning further development near Rushy Bank can be shut down if Cornbury Estate could state their long-term intentions. I am sure that they read the Forum, so I look forward to hearing from them publicly.

Thu 8 Jun 2017, 18:30

I would encourage everyone who is concerned about this or other development proposals for Charlbury to come along to the Neighbourhood Plan public drop in session this Saturday at 10-12 in the Corner House
This issue is central to neighbourhood plans and we need your views and inputs
If you can't make it this weekend then you can visit the website at www.charlburyneighbourhoodforum.org.uk/ or email charlburynp@gmail.com for information

Thu 8 Jun 2017, 10:05

You are almost certainly right Valou. All the same the Enterprise Village reveals Cornbury's plans and highlights the precedent they see in "the emergence of the land next to the station" (see proposal page 3). Bloombridge may put in a speculative application if ignored in the local plan process, or not. What should be clear if it wasn't before, is that, if Rushy Bank is built, at some point Cornbury, whether with Bloombridge or another developer, will put in an application for Walcot Field or other adjoining land and claim it meets policy because it adjoins Rushy Bank. If refused they will, like Vanderbilt, appeal the decision. Of course some people will think this is fine, or even a good idea, but at least the consequences are clear.

At the time of the application Rushy Bank Partners wrote to the Town Council and among other things said: "This development does not create a 'precedent', for development of Charlbury further along Forest Road either given the site-specific constraints such as the woodland to the south, the road to the west, the industrial estate to the north and the Cornbury Estate historic park to the east. This location is not open upland countryside but a discreet location, adjacent to Charlbury's only employment area and a main line railway station." I wonder if the author really believed that. And had no idea of Cornbury's plans. And why isn't the employment area a 'discreet location'...?

Wed 7 Jun 2017, 15:11

For the sake of clarity, I would like to add that the representation Arthur Smith is referring to is in no way a planning application, but a 'representation on the Proposed Modifications to the West Oxfordshire Local Plan'. More info at https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwig0Pvq8avUAhWMDcAKHTG9C4cQFggkMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fplanningconsultation.westoxon.gov.uk%2Fgf2.ti%2Faf%2F755298%2F119329%2FWIZ%2F-%2FCharlbury_161216_RAC_vFinal_2.doc&usg=AFQjCNFcWEw7iwUZz_n7PhpJyPp-LQUpJA
I have no doubt that this representation will not be taken into account in the new local plan.

Wed 7 Jun 2017, 10:46

I also support the Friends. Proposals are also afoot for 40 houses off The Green (I believe the landowner has £3m at stake here), while Blenheim are taking the Grammar School Hill/ Fiveways development to appeal. A walk further up Ditchley Road rather suggests that someone has some development in mind there too, doubtless easier to get approved now that Kearsey Court is built. And who bought the last field at the top of Woodstock Hill, and what do they want to do with it?

I imagine the next move(s) will be along the Spelsbury Road.

Wed 7 Jun 2017, 10:18

I support the Friends of the Evenlode in their attempt to stop Rushy Bank being built because if it is built it will provide a precedent for development on all the fields around it. Bloombridge LLB have already lodged a representation to the WODC for an entire enterprise village on the 6.25 hectare field next to Rushy Bank. Do you or the people of Charlbury really want a new town built west of the river?

Tue 6 Jun 2017, 22:01

Hi Phil, glad you received and read the letter. I'm one of the charity's directors. As the letter says we have a good number of supporters / Friends in the town. Please feel free to get in touch.

Tue 6 Jun 2017, 18:55 (last edited on Tue 6 Jun 2017, 18:56)

Hi Phil, maybe this might help:

www.whois.com/whois/friendsofevenlodevalley.co.uk

beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10001120

Tue 6 Jun 2017, 17:39

Thank you for your letter through my door about the Rushy Bank development. I have looked at your website as you invited.
The one thing I cannot find is the name of anybody who is a "Friend".
If anyone wants to identify themselves, please reply through this forum rather than to me personally.

In expectation, Phil.