Spring 2016
Oxfordshire www.cpreoxon.org.uk
voice
Oxfordshire Green Belt Study Councils lay waste to the Green Belt
Need not Greed Oxon Making our voices heard
The Oxford Flood Alleviation Channel The CPRE view
OXFORDSHIRE
Voice Spring 2016
Features 3 Save Port Meadow Campaign update 4 Oxfordshire Local Plan round-up 5 Bicester “Eco-Town” 6 Need not Greed – making our voices heard 8 Oxford Flood Alleviation Channel 9 Farming column 10 A donor and a well-known hedgehog 11 OGBW – 10 years on 12 CPRE Oxfordshire AGM DIRECTORY Views expressed in the Voice are not necessarily those of CPRE Oxfordshire, which welcomes independent comment. Editor: Helena Whall Cover: Cowslips on Castle Hill, Little Wittenham Photo: Rob Bowker Articles, letters, comments and suggestions for articles are welcome. Please contact the Branch Office below. Published May 2016 District Chairmen CPRE Oxfordshire Branch Brian Wood 01869 337904 Brianwood77@aol.com Cherwell North: Chris Hone 01295 265379 Cherwell South: John Broad (acting chair) 01869 324008 john.broad85@talktalk.net Henley & Mapledurham: Judith Crockett 01491 612801. judith.crockett@btinternet.com Oxford: Sietske Boeles 01865 728153 sietske.boeles@ntlworld.com Thame & Bullingdon: Vacant 01491 612079 administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk Vale of White Horse: Peter Collins St Edmund Hall, Oxford OX1 4AR Wallingford: Richard Harding 01491 836425 rjh@ceh.ac.uk West Oxfordshire: Justine Garbutt (acting Chair) 01993 837681 andrew.garbutt@btconnect.com Branch Office CPRE Oxfordshire, First Floor, 20 High Street, Watlington, Oxfordshire OX49 5PY (Registered office) T: 01491 612079 E: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk
www.cpreoxon.org.uk Follow us on Twitter @CPREOxfordshire and like us on www.facebook.com/CPREOxfordshire CPRE Oxfordshire is registered in England as Charity No.1093081 and Company No. 4443278.
2
Chairman’s voice On 9th February the Oxford City Council West Area Planning Committee voted to accept the first option to do something about the accommodation blocks overlooking Port Meadow. The options were put forward in the Environmental Impact Assessment report which was forced on the Council by CPRE’s legal action. The decision was disappointing, but rather expected as it was the cheapest of the actions proposed and was restricted to mitigation – cladding and tree planting. The planning application for this development will be monitored by both CPRE and the Save Port Meadow Campaign Group. Now that we have come pretty much to the end of the road with the campaign, I want to thank the Group, particularly Sietske Boeles, Chairman of CPRE Oxford, for their passion, professionalism and determination. The Group raised over £50,000 for the campaign, this funded the legal action which was carried out in CPRE’s name. We hope that notwithstanding the disappointing outcome, we have fired a shot across the bows of the University and City Council, and in future any proposal of this nature will be carried through with much more care and the correct amount of consultation. We continue to try to come to terms with the activity of the Oxfordshire
Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP), which proposes a level of development which nobody in the County has been asked about, let alone agreed to. The associated, extremely high, number of houses proposed continues to drive a coach and horses through the planning system. The houses are very often not the right sort of houses, and are not being built in the right places. The situation has led us to associate with over twenty other local community groups in an organisation called Need not Greed Oxfordshire. All coalition members are agreed that the level of development proposed is too high, and the amount of consultation with ordinary people is non-existent. Need not Greed Oxon appears to be having an influence. The AGM this year will see the retirement of Bruce Tremayne as chairman of Bicester district, and of Michael Tyce as chairman of Thame district. Bruce is a Deputy Chairman of Oxfordshire CPRE and will remain on the Trustee Board. Michael will be put forward as a Trustee in his own right. Bruce has been chairman of CPRE Oxfordshire for two periods, and Michael has been a member of the Branch Management Committee and is one of our most renowned campaigners. They have both been involved with CPRE for many years, and we thank them very much for all their efforts. Brian Wood Chairman, CPRE Oxfordshire
WANTED: ‘eyes & ears’ in West Oxon! Do you live in West Oxfordshire and have an interest in the local landscape and/ or planning issues? If you could spare an hour or two a month to help our local committee, then we would love to hear from you! Our CPRE West Oxfordshire District has a small committee of volunteers who monitor and respond to planning and landscape issues across the area, and provide advice and support to local communities. But we need your help! This is a volunteer role. The committee meets on a quarterly basis. The input in between can be as little or as much as you like, but we would ask for a minimum of a few hours per month. You don’t need any previous experience or expertise as we can provide information and training as required. Want to find out more? E: campaign@cpreoxon.org.uk T: 01491 612079
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Spring 2016
A big thank you to Bruce Tremayne Helen Marshall
years, including the battle against the government’s proposed eco-town at Weston on the Green and the ongoing challenge to Thames Water’s proposal to build a reservoir in the Vale.
Bruce Tremayne (right) and John Broad (left) at the Bicester district AGM, October 2015.
The AGM this year will see the retirement of Bruce Tremayne as chairman of Bicester district, but we are delighted that Bruce will continue as Deputy Chairman of the branch and will remain on the Trustee Board. Bruce has been chairman of CPRE Oxfordshire for two periods, and chairman of Bicester district for many years. Until recently, he was also the branch advisor on Water matters. Bruce has been engaged in many successful branch campaigns over the
Save Port Meadow Campaign – update Oxford City Council has accepted the University’s mitigation offer on Port Meadow, failing to tackle damage to landscape and heritage. At its meeting in February, Oxford City Council’s West Area Planning Committee voted to accept Oxford University’s offer of mitigation in relation to the damage caused by its obtrusive accommodation blocks at Port Meadow. Known as ‘Option 1’, this offer includes some cladding of the buildings and tree planting. However, even the University’s own retrospective
To mark his many campaigning achievements, Michael received a National CPRE award in 2010. Michael will continue to advise the branch on all matters concerning the Oxford Green Belt.
Helena Whall
CPRE is pleased to welcome John Broad who has agreed to stand in as the new Acting Chairman of Bicester District. He was elected at the AGM in October 2015 and has been on the committee for a number of years. We look forward to working with John over the years to come.
solar farms, and was also engaged in a long and successful campaign against advertising in the countryside.
…and another big thank you to Michael Tyce Michael Tyce will also be standing down as chairman of Thame district at the AGM, but he is to stand as a Branch Trustee. Michael has been a member of the Branch Management Committee and has been chairman of Thame district for a number of years. Michael is one of the branch’s most formidable campaigners, especially when it comes to defending the Oxford Green Belt. He has also campaigned tirelessly against the inappropriate siting of wind and
Environmental Impact Assessment (forced by the CPRE court case) says that this option will mean that the majority of landscape and visual impacts will still be ‘substantial’ with some reduced to ‘moderate’. Both CPRE and the Save Port Meadow Campaign Group argued strongly for more effective mitigation, but in the end it seems that councillors were too concerned about short-term costs to worry about long-term damage. The University did make a legal commitment to deliver the mitigation within a certain timeframe, and will bring forward a planning application for consultation before July, with a further round of public consultation beyond that. They also agreed to the
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
Michael Tyce receiving a National CPRE award from former CPRE branch President, Anne Kelaart.
Going forward, CPRE Bicester district is to be known as ‘South Cherwell’ district, while CPRE Banbury district will now be referred to as ‘North Cherwell’ district.
Planning Committee’s request that measures are included to address the sun-glare off the roofs, and the continuing night-time light pollution. We will clearly keep a watchful eye on the application as it comes forward. Sadly, we didn’t achieve the goal of getting a storey or two knocked off the buildings, but that was always going to be a challenge. And whilst Option 1 clearly does not deliver what we feel it should, it nonetheless provides what the University says will be £6million of improvements. An enormous thank you to all of you who have supported this groundbreaking campaign over the last three years!
3
Oxfordshire Local Plan round-up Cherwell With the sign off of the Cherwell District Council Local Plan Part 1, Cherwell rapidly produced the detail document of Local Plan Part 2 and sent this out for consultation; it included 96 questions. Whilst it was expected that Part 2 of the plan would include details of infrastructure, employment and housing sites, it has been sadly lacking in any real information. The document is more a question paper asking those consulted if they wish to add any further policies to the already burdensome and rather contradictory policies already in place. Asking for further potential development sites has done little to show the Council really had a plan in the first place. With the Bicester “masterplan” some years away from completion, there has however been released a “masterplan” for both Banbury and Kidlington in consultation format. How residents can even know about all this plethora of documentation to view, let alone have the time to do so, suggests a real failing of democracy.
Oxford City Oxfordshire’s local authorities have now agreed that the figure for unmet need in Oxford City should be a working assumption of 15,000 homes. This is to assist Oxford City in meeting its SHMA - Strategic Housing Market Assessment - target of 24,000 – 32,000 new homes by 2031. It is assumed that each of the local districts will get something in the order of 3-4,000 homes. All authorities have agreed to work towards this in good faith, which includes a review of Oxford City’s Local Plan (its Core Strategy was completed in 2011). It is not clear when the City will begin this review. In the meantime, the Grenoble Road development has reared its ugly head 4
again. In early April, the developer Savills submitted an Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Opinion for ‘South Oxford Garden Neighbourhood’ – 3,500 houses plus other services and facilities on land to the south of Grenoble Road. The land lies within South Oxfordshire District Council, which has long objected to the proposal to build on this stretch of the Green Belt. This is the first formal step in the planning application process. CPRE will be keeping a close eye on developments.
South Oxfordshire In February 2015, South Oxfordshire District Council published its second consultation document on its new Local Plan to 2013 – replacing the plan to 2026 adopted only three years earlier. The consultation responses were reported on last June – the vast majority said that there should be no tinkering with the Oxford Green Belt. The suggestion in the consultation that some housing need could be met with a new settlement (Son of Stone Bassett) is hardly mentioned in the report, and it is reasonable to hope that may now be off the table. The Final Draft of the Plan was expected this spring, but is now delayed until the end of the year. Meanwhile there will be another consultation on Preferred Options, in June.
Vale of White Horse Stage two of the hearings into the Vale Local Plan took place in February. While stage one of the hearings, held last September, focused on the overall housing numbers proposed and the strategic location of sites, phase two examined the appropriateness of each of the sites, and was supposed to take into account social and environmental considerations.
It was heartening to see so many local community groups and parish councils around the table, many adopting a similar position to that of CPRE’s, namely that the allocation of 1,510 homes in the Green Belt, and 1,400 in the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty were inappropriate and should be deleted from the plan. The Inspector is due to issue his report in May – he is expected to suggest several main modifications to the plan, which will require another round of public consultation.
West Oxfordshire At West Oxfordshire’s Draft Local Plan Public Inquiry last November, the dominance of the representation by developers was all too apparent, with all of them attempting to demonstrate that West Oxfordshire should increase their housing target. Meanwhile, there were one or two residents present, along with CPRE Oxfordshire, who were trying their best to point out biases and sharing with the Inspector views held by many residents of West Oxfordshire. They (and CPRE) supported West Oxfordshire’s stance, which is to apply some caution to the Strategic Housing Market Assessment. The other Districts may have followed the SHMA, but West Oxfordshire has tried to adjust for local factors in the spirit of the NPPF. All credit to them for trying, but the Inspector has paused the Plan and indicated that he expects a target between West Oxfordshire District Council’s and the SHMA figure and that by the time the Plan is ready for further examination, Oxford’s unmet need may also be known and may need to be catered for.
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Spring 2016
John Broad
Bicester “Eco-Town” – now called Bicester North West development Bicester Eco-Town Phase One
It is rather ironic that after all the press coverage extolling the virtues of Bicester having an “Eco-Town” ‘bolted’ onto the northwestern edge, that most residents always knew was just government spin for a massive housing development, that it has now been renamed the Bicester North West development. To be fair, the area that was destined for around 5,000 dwellings, but then increased to 6,000 as part of the revision for the Cherwell District Council (CDC) Local Plan Part 1, is trying to meet a high environmental standard. The Council still intends the area to have around 40% green space and to construct the developments in the form of new “villages”. These clusters are being named after the farms that used to be spread across the area such as Elmsbrook and Himley Village.
To date, the first phase of some 393 dwellings is nearing completion, being built to a high level (5) standard of construction and design. The area is just awaiting completion of its Gas powered Combined Heat and Power (CHP) equipment that will supply hot water and heating for this ‘exemplar’ section of the development before the new residents can move in. This CHP unit uses a generator to produce electricity and a heat pump to produce heat in a low carbon system. Construction of a primary school, shops, post office and “eco” pub are also rapidly nearing completion. All the roofs have Photo Voltaic (PV) panels that will supply each dwelling with excess power going into the national grid. The second phase that is further
along the B4100 has the ground work started and will start fully as phase one nears completion. All the houses will have access to electric vehicle charging points and the roads will have segregated cycle and footways to encourage cycling and walking. Bus routes are planned to serve the site with real time information available on when buses will arrive. The main employment area to the south east of the site, at the junction of Middleton Stoney Road and Howes Lane, is under further discussion after the initial planning application for giant warehouses was deferred by the CDC planning committee. John Broad Acting Chair, Cherwell South district
For more information see: http://nwbicester.co.uk
Councils lay waste to the Green Belt Last autumn, the County Council published a county-wide Green Belt Study it had expensively commissioned. Why was the Study done at all? It was not, its sponsors protested, to propose changes to the Green Belt, or to find bits to concrete over, but rather “to provide a picture of how well the Green Belt is serving the people of Oxfordshire”. Why it was necessary to spend large amounts of taxpayers’ money on proving that, when CPRE’s own opinion survey demonstrated that the people of Oxfordshire were well aware of the way the Green Belt was serving them, with an overwhelming majority for leaving it untouched, was not explained.
The actual plan, as it has turned out, was to circumvent Government Policy that housing demand it is not an “exceptional circumstance” justifying loss of Green Belt land, by finding spurious reasons for taking the land out of the Green Belt first and then building on it. The spurious reason was that, despite their study finding that every field in the Green Belt contributed to the Green Belt’s five purposes, any field that contributed less than other fields could be removed without harming the Green Belt as a whole. Not only is this wrong – the Green Belt operates as a whole, not field by field – but the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework does not require all
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
the purposes of Green Belt to be met simultaneously. Nevertheless, that is how our Local Authorities are now intending to proceed. It is easy to see that this could signal the eventual end of the Green Belt by the Death of a Thousand Cuts, since when there are only two fields left, one could be considered to serve the Green Belt purposes less than another. We are doing our best to expose and condemn this cynical destruction of the Green Belt and the abuse of the public’s clear will that it should be protected.
Michael Tyce Chairman, CPRE Thame district
5
Need not Greed Oxon – making our voices heard!
In the last issue of the Voice we announced that CPRE was working with a range of campaign groups to challenge the forced economic growth strategy in Oxfordshire. Today, CPRE is one of twenty-six local community groups, from across the county, that have joined forces as Need not Greed Oxon – Planning for Real Need not Speculator Greed, a campaign dedicated to protecting Oxfordshire’s rural environment, whilst recognising the development and infrastructure needs of our residents.
The Issue
A “growth at all costs” policy has led to a county plan that envisages building at virtually double any previous rate, and threatens to overwhelm our infrastructure, services, landscape and communities. The growth strategy for Oxfordshire proposes 100,000 new houses by 2031, equivalent to two new cities the size of Oxford; plus 85,000 new jobs, and at least 200,000 more people, roughly a 30% increase in our population. In order to meet these top-down targets rural Oxfordshire is being sacrificed. Yet the public have not been properly consulted. Put simply, the growth strategy is the biggest threat to rural Oxfordshire in our history and its impact would be irreversible. “We roar in shock and despair at the breakdown of Britain’s century-old planning system, which has now lost its democratic and local legitimacy, surrendered to a cynical free-for-all for developers and land-owners and exposed our communities and environment to wholesale commercial vandalism, while making no contribution to the need for affordable homes. We are being picked off village by village, street by street and need to unite through NNGO in a county-wide and eventually nation-wide reassertion of popular control.” Peter Jay, Chairman of Rural Oxfordshire Action Group (ROAR)
6
Our Vision
However, OxLEP do not want to hear what we have to say about the overall growth targets for Oxfordshire; as far as OxLEP is concerned, the growth plan is done and dusted and the revised SEP will not be revisiting the housing and job targets.
We are campaigning for a future that respects the views of local people, plans for “need not greed” and protects the rural character of Oxfordshire.
We do not agree!
We believe there is an alternative vision for the future of Oxfordshire – one that is not based on forced economic growth, but which focuses on meeting local people’s real needs.
“The Woodstock Action Group (WAG) has joined like-minded local action groups in Oxfordshire because we believe that in unity there is strength. We have adopted the Latin phrase, E pluribus unum – ‘Out of many, one.’ With mutual aims and support from the many we take heart in knowing that we are not alone in our struggles.” Bob McGurrin, Chairman, Woodstock Action Group (WAG)
What are we doing?
In order to encourage a re-think on the aggressive growth strategy being foisted on our county, we are calling on decision-makers to give consideration to environmental and social concerns as part of high level strategic plans within Oxfordshire.
What does this look like in practice? One of the ways we are trying to change the ‘business as usual’ approach enshrined in county plans is by putting pressure on the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP) – which is driving economic growth in the county. This month, OxLEP launched a public consultation on its ‘Refresh’ of the SEP – the Strategic Economic Plan, the economic strategy for Oxfordshire. When the original Plan was drafted in 2014 there was no public consultation – apparently there was no time! So this is the first time the public have had the opportunity to comment on the county’s ambitions.
We believe now is the time for the public to make their voices heard. We are calling on the public to respond to the OxLEP consultation (see below). Need not Greed is also in touch with parish, town and district councillors, MPs, and the local media to share your concerns about the forced economic growth planned for this county and the lack of public consultation on these plans. We are holding a series of public meetings and events around the county to raise awareness of your concerns and of the SEP Refresh. This may be your last opportunity to stop the juggernaut of forced economic growth in Oxfordshire; your final chance to protect our rural county from irreversible damage.
What you can do?
Respond to the OxLEP publication consultation, which runs from 21 April to 20 May. Below are the questions posed by the OxLEP public consultation and our suggested responses (you should include your own comments where possible): 1. Does the SEP capture the main characteristics of the Oxfordshire economy, its challenges and opportunities? If not, what else could be included? This plan leads to the imposition of a dreamt up 85,000 jobs by 2031 in a
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Spring 2016
John Broad
county that already has virtually full employment. The environmental and social impacts of this all-out growth strategy have not been considered.
5. Connectivity – do we have the right priorities and commitments in place? If not, what is missing?
2. People – do we have the right priorities and commitments in place? If not, what is missing?
How can the SEP be properly assessed without knowing what infrastructure is required to support it and whether this is deliverable? We want to see a commitment to ongoing infrastructure improvement, delivered prior to further growth.
The plan doesn’t address the real need: providing the right kind of houses, in the right place, for the right people (those in real need), and at the right price.
6. Does the SEP articulate clearly the roles and responsibilities of OxLEP – both in itself and in relation to other processes?
3. Place – do we have the right priorities and commitments in place? If not, what is missing?
OxLEP (a limited company) is unelected and undemocratic, and exists solely to promote growth. We want to know why it is in charge of making decisions about the future of our county.
Oxfordshire needs to remain an attractive place to live and work; this plan threatens the rural character of Oxfordshire. We want to see focused development, prioritising brownfield sites, respecting the views of local communities and recognising the value of our environment.
There was no public consultation on the first SEP; this review should therefore be a full scale re-examination of the overall growth figures for Oxfordshire, not just a token consultation on the bits around the edges.
4. Enterprise – do we have the right priorities and commitments in place? If not, what is missing?
7. Please feel free to make any additional comments in the box below.
The plan should provide support for a range of sectors, including rural businesses, tied to local employment needs.
The SEP Refresh should be an opportunity to introduce lower growth targets for the county that are more realistic and appropriate.
‘Can the Law help your campaign?’ CPRE Seminar, Exeter Hall, Kidlington: 10am-12noon, Wednesday 22 June How can you use public law, including Judicial Reviews, to deal with inappropriate development and adverse planning decisions? This seminar will look at a number of real life examples and is aimed at providing participants with practical advice as well as an
understanding of the law. It will be led by Alastair Wallace, Associate Solicitor, Irwin Mitchell LLP. (See ‘Events’ on the CPRE Oxfordshire website for further information). CPRE members – £10, non-members £20 Limited spaces: please contact E: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk T: 01491 612079 to book your place.
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
CPRE and Need not Greed coalition members at a ROAR Rally in Woodstock, May 2016.
We want environmental and social considerations to lie at the heart of such decision-making, not be ignored or bolted on afterwards. The growth targets are being used to justify development on the Oxford Green Belt and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty – how can this be considered ‘sustainable’? We believe the SEP should be subject to a full Strategic Environmental Assessment. Notional job targets are leading to actual housing figures. There are no brakes, caveats or checkpoints – this means that valuable land is being released now, without really knowing whether or not it will be needed. The SEP needs to assess how likely it is to meet these growth targets. Growth should be phased, to ensure delivery of housing and jobs is in tandem. Measures need to be put in place to mitigate the risk of half-finished housing estates and projects that don’t join up and are not supported by the necessary infrastructure. We want sustainable development focused on meeting the needs of existing residents, with growth more in line with a 10% increase in population by 2031 (based on national population projections). This means the right houses, in the right place, at the right price and supported by the right infrastructure. The draft SEP Refresh (and the online response form) can be found at: http://www.oxfordshirelep.org.uk/ content/sep-refresh-consultation
Take Action
Support the campaign www.neednotgreedoxon.org.uk 7
The Oxford Flood Alleviation Channel – the CPRE view It is clear something needs to be done about flooding in Oxford. There are 4,500 properties in Oxford at a 1% or higher annual risk of flooding. This figure could rise to nearly 6,000 by the year 2080 with the predicted effects of climate change. There have been a large number of floods in Oxford in the last decade, whether this is a trend or just natural variability is difficult to say, but we can say this is entirely consistent with the sort of changes we expect to see with increasing CO2 levels and may well be a harbinger of what will be the norm in the future. The Oxford Flood Alleviation is a £120m enterprise designed by the Environment Agency. It has funding from central government, the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership, Thames Regional Flood and Coastal Committee and local councils, but needs further contributions to enable construction. Provided the scheme is fully approved and funded, the earliest work can be expected to start is spring 2018. Construction is expected to take two to three years. The scheme will provide enhanced channels around west Oxford, providing additional capacity and help to manage the movement of water through Oxford. It is expected to reduce the risk of flood water entering homes, businesses and disrupting transport links. Although a channel would reduce flood risk, it cannot remove it entirely. The flood plain would still play an important role in managing flood risk in Oxford – with some selective bunds or defences to protect built-up areas. It is also likely to move water quicker from Oxford downstream – good for Oxford, but maybe not so good for communities downstream! This large civil engineering project would inevitably cause massive disruption to the local ecology and surrounding landscape in the West Oxford flood plain. While CPRE acknowledges and
8
welcomes the commitment in the plan to restore the natural environment with the flood plain, we believe the plan underestimates the massive disruption this project will cause and believe it will be many, many, years, if ever, before this beautiful and tranquil part of Oxford will be restored. We would therefore like to see much more effort and planning going into the minimisation of the disruption and positive restoration of the natural and historic environment of the west Oxford flood plain. The project (including the removal of large amounts of spoil to create the channel) will inevitably require new infrastructure for access and storage. CPRE is concerned that these access facilities will become permanent, leading to further urbanisation of this rural corridor. We would strongly urge that access and storage facilities are removed after the completion of the project and the area restored to a pristine state. CPRE fully appreciates that the Thames and its tributaries must be positively managed to ameliorate the serious flooding that has occurred in Oxford, but we feel a very limited approach has been taken in the planning for the current alleviation scheme. We believe a whole catchment approach should be taken. We further urge that complex assessments of the operation of the proposed channel and its downstream impact must be subject to a rigorous and independent review. CPRE believes the Thames corridor is a valuable resource for Oxfordshire and indeed is emblematic of Oxfordshire and Oxford. Flood plains are an essential component of our rural landscape and ‘natural capital’ and should be protected and, wherever possible, enhanced. See more about the scheme, visit: http://bit.ly/1MvPSuu
A devolving Oxfordshire? The Government’s devolution agenda offers the transfer of power and money to local councils in return for promises of delivering growth and creating efficiencies through combining authorities. Oxfordshire County Council has proposed a devolution deal in which the Districts and County would merge into a single unitary authority. However the District Councils have proposed an alternative structure which would see the abolition of Oxfordshire County Council and the creation of four unitary authorities: Oxford City Council and then the merger of South Oxfordshire District Council with the Vale of White Horse, West Oxfordshire with Cotswolds District Council (currently in Gloucestershire) and Cherwell with South Northamptonshire. These four Councils would work together as a ‘combined authority’ on issues such as health and social care, housing and transport. Both sides have now commissioned studies to assess the best way ahead. CPRE’s interest is ensuring that there is a proper structure for strategic planning and that we, as local residents, will have a strong voice in the decision-making. The existing Oxfordshire Growth Board, where the authorities supposedly work together, appears to lack transparency and we would be concerned with any solution that increased its remit. A public consultation is promised in the summer, so we’ll be keeping a watchful eye.
Richard Harding CPRE Water Advisor
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Spring 2016
Helena Whall
WANTED: Planning Advisor If you live in Oxfordshire, have a strong interest in the countryside, an understanding of the planning system, and some spare time then please get in touch! The CPRE branch routinely responds to planning applications and other consultations, but we urgently need the support and advice of an experienced planning advisor. The work may involve investigating plans, planning applications, and other consultations, visiting sites, liaising with relevant local bodies and sharing information with the branch. This is a volunteer role, likely to involve a commitment of a few hours per week. Want to find out more? E: campaign@cpreoxon.org.uk T: 01491 612079
Alun Jones (centre) with Lord Mayor of Oxford (right) and John Harwood, CPRE branch President (left). A selection of Alun Jones’ hand drawn maps of towns and villages around Oxfordshire can be seen in an exhibition at County Hall, Oxford. The exhibition was opened by the Lord Mayor of Oxford, Councillor Rae Humberstone, and the Chairman of County Council, Councillor John Sanders last November, who both remarked on Alun’s cartography skills and the social significance of his drawings to Oxfordshire. CPRE is indebted to Christopher Hagwood, a long-time friend of Alun’s, who organised the exhibition. We are still on the search for a permanent home for this precious archive.
‘You will get the countryside you pay for at the supermarket’* We have had a busy few weeks carrying out this year’s tree and shrub planting, selected hedge trimming and willow pollarding. The latter has been transformed this year by hiring in a 360 degree excavator with an operator using a revolving saw blade fixed to the end of its jib. The term “a knife through butter” would best describe the effectiveness and cleanness of cut produced. In previous years we have used a rough terrain forklift with a man cage for a trained chainsaw operator to stand in, but however one uses this format it is slow, with uncertain outcomes for the man using the saw as willow branches are very prone to twist and snap during cutting. The new system was especially welcome this year; after taking on some new ground in the autumn we have had plenty of extra work to do in reducing the considerable width of some long term split willows, whose big branches
had collapsed to the ground many yards from the original trunk and had begun forming new trees away from the hedge line out in the fields’ grazing grass. This activity will allow us to now fence off the hedgerow from dairy youngstock who will be grazing the summer grass. We have taken the opportunity to plant some new trees into the hedge, with the aim of coppicing and gapping up the hedge over subsequent winters. We all know that farmers like the weather as a subject for discussion, but what pleases one may not bring a smile to another! This year there has been a subtle change – it’s suddenly whether or not we should stay in or get out in June. I would not like to guess the percentages of each, other than to say there seems to be plenty of each view. Despite the opinions and claims expressed by each group, no one has an accurate crystal ball to predict our
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
national future financial well-being in either scenario. The only certainty is uncertainty. History shows that what is assured today may not be so tomorrow. I am sure that gut instinct and personality traits will carry most weight when the pencil is finally in hand. Whatever the outcome, the day after, farmers will still be farming and consumers will still require food – the only issues will be price and provenance. Listening to Cumbrian farmer James Rebanks (author of The Shepherd’s Life) being interviewed about his best seller on the radio recently, one of his comments particularly struck home – “You will get the countryside you pay for at the supermarket.” Angus Dart, CPRE Farming Advisor * Quoted from The Shepherd’s Life by James Rebanks
9
The story of a donor and a well-known hedgehog Andrew Hopkins
A few years later, when Lucie was 12, her family moved from Newlands to Oxfordshire, when her father, the Reverend Benjamin Carr, become vicar of the tiny village of Waterstock. He died in post in 1923, and Mrs Carr, Lucie, and her sister Kathleen moved to Staverton Grange, 129 Banbury Road, Summertown, Oxford. Lucie never married. She is known to have worked as a governess in South Africa for several years. In 1930, Mrs Carr had bought 127 Banbury Road, and a plot of land to the rear for its garden. It was in this that Lucie built a house for herself in 1960. She called it Newlands, after the place where she had met Mrs. Tiggy-winkle. After her death it was demolished and a block of flats was built on the site, known as Newlands Court.
Newlands Valley
Thanks to The World of Beatrix Potter, Cumbria
In 2000 Miss Lucie Carr, of Newlands, in Staverton Road, Oxford, died, at the grand age of 101. She left £1.8 million, mostly equally split between seven animal and environmental charities, one of which was the Council for the Protection of Rural England, as CPRE was then.
It was there that the family became friends with Beatrix Potter, whose family spent summers on the shores of nearby Derwent Water. One day in 1901, Lucie, then two, left her gloves behind on a visit to the Potters’ summer house at Lingholm. This incident inspired the The Tale of Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle which is dedicated to “the real little Lucie from Newlands” and in which Lucie is the heroine. She is a good little girl who lives at a farm in “Little-town” but is prone to losing handkerchiefs and pinafores. Looking for them everywhere, she spies some white cloths lying on the grass on the fell called Cat Bells. Hoping to find her missing handkerchiefs, under a big rock she comes across a little door in the hillside. 10
Mrs Tiggywinkle’s kitchen
‘Lucie opens the door and finds a short, stout person wearing a tuckedup print gown, an apron, and a striped petticoat. She is ironing, her eyes are twinkling and her nose is sniffling, and Lucie can see prickles under her white mob cap.’ She is Mrs. Tiggy-winkle the hedgehog, and the local animals’ laundress. She has found Lucie’s lost things, and is laundering them for her, along with Squirrel Nutkin’s jacket, and worn stockings belonging to Sally HennyPenny. Lucie and Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle then go off down the fell delivering all the washing, first to Peter Rabbit and Benjamin Bunny.
It is nice to think that Lucie’s will, leaving so much to environmental and animal charities, was inspired by love of the open countryside of the Newlands Valley, and of her childhood friends Mrs. Tiggy-winkle, Squirrel Nutkin, Sally Henny-Penny, Peter Rabbit and Benjamin Bunny, whom she had met there a century earlier. Michael Tyce Chairman, Thame district CPRE Oxfordshire voice Spring 2016
Lucie, from the Story of Mrs Tiggywinkle: © Frederick Warne & Co, 1905, 2002. Reproduced by kind permission of Frederick Warne & Co.
Her house in Oxford was named after the Newlands Valley in Cumberland, where she had lived a hundred years earlier when her father had been vicar.
Oxford Green Belt Way Ten years on... This year is the tenth anniversary of the creation of the Oxford Green Belt Way, the fifty mile circular walk created by the branch, and as a result of my plea in the last Oxfordshire Voice for volunteers to help with the monitoring of the Way, I am pleased to say that for the first time the Branch now has a complete team of helpers on the basis of one monitor for each of the nine stages of the Green Belt Way.
Gordon Garraway CPRE Footpaths Advisor
Brian Robert Marshall
How often has one narrowly missed being hit by a cyclist while walking on a pavement? Sadly, cycling on pavements seems to be an increasing occurrence in towns but worryingly, cycling on public footpaths
It seems that the growth in the popularity of cycling in the countryside has not gone unnoticed by the National Trust since it is proposing to create a mountain bike trail on Badbury Hill near Faringdon, as it has done elsewhere in the country. While it is right to encourage people to get out and enjoy the benefits of the countryside, is it right to create such an activity where there is an Iron Age fort and where walkers go for a quiet walk to appreciate the remarkable flora and stunning views over the Thames Valley? Both the CPRE Vale District Committee and the Ramblers have expressed concern over this development and we are urging the National Trust to reconsider the proposal.
Programme: 2016
The full details of the members’ events programme for this year are included on the flyer sent out with the mailing of the Voice to all members. Details will also be added to the CPRE Oxfordshire website under ‘Events’. Non-members are welcome to these events, but priority for places will be given to CPRE members. Thursday 16 June – 7.00 pm “Oxford’s Laboratory with Leaves” – a guided visit to the Oxford University Research Station in Wytham Woods. Maximum 35 people. No cost. BOOKING BY 6th JUNE 2016 ESSENTIAL Thursday 11 August – 10.00 am Visit to Bicester Eco-town – a guided tour of the first, complete phase of the development. No cost. Maximum 20 people. No cost. BOOKING BY 1st AUG 2016 ESSENTIAL Brian Stives
This means that each stage will be monitored at least once, if not twice, a year, to ensure it continues to be properly waymarked and is as easily walkable as we set out to make it ten years ago. Any problems found will be reported to the County Council’s Countryside Access Team (CAT). It was heartening to hear at a recent meeting with members of CAT that the Green Belt Way is recognised as a long distance recreational walk in the county. This puts the Green Belt Way on a par with the Oxfordshire Way and the d’Arcy Dalton Way, two other long distance walks created many years ago by members of the branch and Oxford Fieldpaths Society (OFS) working together. And it is a particular pleasure that a member of OFS who helped with the original way-marking of the Green Belt Way is still a monitor for one of the stages.
in the countryside, which also is illegal, is on the increase and has become a problem in particular in the Chilterns. Unfortunately, some of the lycraclad cycling fraternity seem to think that whatever the law says, it is OK to cycle on public footpaths. An instance of this has been happening recently in the parish of Sunningwell near Abingdon, and has caused so much altercation with local residents that the County Council has agreed to put up gates to deter such activity.
CPRE Members’ Events
Sulgrave Manor
Wednesday 14 September – 10.30 am Visit to Sulgrave Manor – a guided tour of Sulgrave Manor, built by Lawrence Washington, ancestor of George Washington, in the mid-1500s. Refreshments and lunch are included. Minimum 15 people. Cost – £16.50 payable in advance. BOOKING BY 26th August 2016 ESSENTIAL You can find out more and register your interest in the first instance by contacting:
Badbury Hill near Faringdon
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
Becky Crockett, Administrator Tel: 01491 612079 Email: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk 11
Oxfordshire Voice
Branch Office
CPRE Online
Published biannually by the Oxfordshire Branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.
CPRE Oxfordshire, First Floor, 20 High Street, Watlington, Oxon OX49 5PY (Registered office)
Oxfordshire: www.cpreoxon.org.uk
Design: Rob Bowker T: 01491 825609 Print: Severnprint Ltd with vegetable inks on recycled paper using renewable energy.
T: 01491 612079 E: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk
Twitter: @CPREOxfordshire www.facebook.com/CPREOxfordshire National: www.cpre.org.uk