Thank you James Young for your sensible thoughts. As it seems many of the Institute and Lucy Plackett users want to continue to use those buildings in their present locations, I think we are at risk of acquiring a proliferation of community buildings across the village, all of which will require upkeep and maintenance. In addition the church and Methodist room are used also for secular village purposes as well as Church House and, sometimes our pubs.
It is the case, as James notes, that a developer securing planning permission for 30 houses plus community centre at Milton Road will then, probably, submit a further application for more housing on that site. I suspect that 30 houses, realistically, represents the thin end of the wedge. The village, I think, is probably facing a very high price (more than 30 houses and erosion of the rural envelope protecting our village and helping to identify it) to get a community centre not all villagers really want, in a location which is not desirable or convenient for all.
In the 2004 AVA survey one of villagers' principle concerns was the amount of traffic travelling through the village (especially between Milton / Berry Hill Roads and The Green / Oxford Road. It is obvious that a large amount of housing at Milton Road is likely to increase traffic through the village on a road which is unsuitable for heavy traffic flows, not least because the carriage way at several points is reduced to one lane because of (necessary) on street parking. Furthermore the Milton Road site is in the least accessible location for all villagers, particularly those in Twyford. I am not convinced that there is truly a need or desire for a further community building. Improvement of the existing facilities should suffice. However, if it is truly felt that the village must have an all-new community centre, then I would have thought a more appropriate and central location of greater convenience for all villagers would be on the land off Aynho Road between the telephone exchange and The Plough. I gather there has been a planning application to build houses on that site which may have recently been refused (somebody will correct me if I am wrong!)
Ian Asbury
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to Mr Atkinson for clarifying the situation with the Institute.
In order for the village to be able to compare like with like it would need to know the cost of fitting out the new centre (as the developer is just providing the shell) The £500,000 estimate for the institute appears to include for fitting out (new stages etc) which would have to be provided at the new facility as well.
The new facility would quite rightly need lots of car parking as its too far too walk!
James Young
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To add to what Rick Atkinson has said below with regards to the Institute:
The current £25,000 will of course make the Institute a much more pleasant environment (with heating!) and should encourage greater use of the building. From there the potential for future upgrades is much easier.
Rick has outlined one potential upgrade path which as yet has not been considered widely. I know other people have other ideas as well and the good news is that all of these (including the one Rick mentions) come in far less than the cost of a new build – and in the heart of the village.
Many thanks to everyone that has so far shown an interest in the Institute Appeal.
Andy Green
Walton Avenue
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whilst Mr Burrows consistently shows that he is more than capable of defending himself, I think it worth pointing out a few technical errors in the Parish council’s response to his post which may assist people in making up their mind.
The Milton road site is quite rightly not part of the village conservation area. It is a Greenfield and agricultural piece of land and as such it would be highly unusual for it to be protected by a conservation area inclusion. Conservation areas were introduced to protect areas of architectural or historic interest not the open countryside.
Sites such as Milton Road are instead protected by different measures; such as the current planning policy that states that development outside existing village envelopes should not be approved.
The Parish council quite rightly points out that all sites are sensitive, especially in a village such as Adderbury, which due to its close proximity to Banbury is ripe for extension. I believe Mr Burrows was using the word “sensitive” not in an ecological sense but as the Milton Road site (with its long history of development refusal) is viewed as key to setting a development precedent to the other potential sites all around the village.
The developer of the Milton Road site ,(now KB Benfield of Coventry) knows that its best chance of finally securing planning for this site is to provide a community benefit, so that it may get consent to develop its houses as an exception to normal policy. There is nothing wrong with this and if I was in the developers shoes I would do the same.
Louise and I now live next door to this site and we were fully aware of these proposals before buying. If the village decides it wants a new community facility then we will gladly live with any decision, accept it with good grace and support it where we can. We have been hugely touched by the warm welcome we have received from all the villagers we have met and love the village.
I do however object to the proposals on a matter of principle which I explain below:
In a village the size of Adderbury land is a precious and scarce resource. The village has existing facilities which could be improved to be made “fit for purpose”. What the Parish council are advocating sets a dangerous precedent that effectively means that when community facilities need upkeep or improvement it will take the easier route of “slash and burn”, abandoning what exists in favour of shiny new facilities that appear to cost nothing. But of course there is a cost and that is to the character of the village.
If you follow this approach through it means that when the proposed new facilities on Milton road are no longer “new” and need maintenance (which all buildings do in time), the accepted solution will simply be to do another deal with a developer and use the same justification for supporting a further extension to the village. This may be in 20 odd year’s time, but I for one hope to still be living in the village then (unless I get shot for this post!!) as will future generation of villagers.
If the members of The Lucy Plackett centre wanted to make the move to a new facility I could better understand the logic, as it would allow everyone under one roof in an efficient new building. However they don’t want to move as the site is considered too remote from village. They are staying put and making plans for improvement of the existing facility.This leaves the Institute, which is in obvious need of repair. I am reliably informed that the money exists to meet and indeed exceed the current fundraising target. However this money is conditional on the Institute not then being sold (understandable as donors would not want to see their money go to waste).
The Parish Council are undoubtedly acting in what it perceives to be the best interest in the village but I am surprised at its post.
When the Milton Road site was last put up for inclusion in the old local plan councillors Mitchell and Harper made submissions to Cherwell DC objecting to the sites development on numerous grounds including remoteness, increased traffic congestion through the village, extension of the village into the countryside , detrimental urbanising impact on the rural landscape and setting a precedent for further development along Milton road spoiling the character of the area.
These same arguments are still valid today but seem now to be outweighed by the lure of a new centre.
Personal Conclusion (if anyone is still reading!!!)
If Lucy Plackett users are staying put and the money exists to substantially improve the Institute then events have moved on and the need for a new centre has surely diminished.
If the village decides to go for a new site it should be aware that legally there can be no guarantees or reassurances in advance limiting the number of houses to 30. There is nothing stopping the developer getting consent for 30 houses and then re-applying for more. Cherwell may refuse consent for a larger scheme but the developer could then appeal and win on grounds that its higher density scheme accords with current national planning policy. The Parish Council are right in its aim to try and limit the scheme but it may be powerless to stop it.
My e-mail address is below, should anyone wish to contact me regarding this post for further information/debate (ideally not abuse though as I’m just putting my personnel opinion forward which I think is the purpose of this section of the brilliant new website)
James Young
jy@why50.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institute Appeal Fund.
There seems to be a growing misconception in the village that the £25,000, asked for to repair the Institute, will modernise it and make it into a “new” community centre. To put the record straight; the £25,000 is for ESSENTIAL REPAIRS ONLY. We as a management committee are responsible to the trustees to maintain the building in good order for the village. Whatever happens regarding a new community centre, we will need to look after the building for at least another 3 or 4 years, which is the reason for the maintenance fund appeal.
Previous estimates to extend and upgrade the building have been in the order of £500,000. Briefly, this would provide a small single story rear extension (so limited by planning regulations), a stage (created by removing the internal south wall and upper room) and a modernised auditorium. We would still be left with the car parking problem for major events. I hope this clarifies the situation.
Rick Atkinson, Chairman of the Parish Institute Management Committee
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clarification of the Parish Council view
Some Adderbury residents are concerned about the position of the Lucy Placket Activity Centre if they vote for the Milton Road proposals. I would like to clarify the situation. The Milton Road plans will not endanger the Lucy Placket Centre, nor will they stop the Lucy Placket building being improved or replaced with a building of a similar size.
About 6 years ago a committee of residents and parish councillors worked with architects to produce a plan for a building at the Lucy Placket which would provide for many users. In order to meet the aspirations of all potential users, including sporting activities, this building needed to be significantly larger than even the two present buildings on the Lucy Placket combined. Despite what some people have suggested, this met with considerable opposition and was clearly rejected at a public meeting. The Parish Council sees no point in trying to resurrect that or a similar idea.
The Parish Council have clearly stated that the Lucy Placket centre will remain.
At present the Management Committee of the LPAC are conducting an investigation into possible ideas for the future of the centre. The Parish Council are committed to working with the LPAC committee to achieve improvements, and we will support all viable suggestions. They have stated they wish to keep the centre at largely its present size and for mainly the current users.
It has been suggested that the Parish Council has said ‘vote for Milton Rd or do nothing’. We have stated in Option 3 that if there is no support for anything at the Milton Road we will need to ‘consider what alternatives exist for ensuring fit for purpose facilities in the village’. We will continue to do this.
The Parish Council is committed to achieving the best possible facilities for the community of Adderbury. We have spent a long time investigating every possibility, not just the Milton Road site. We have reached the conclusion that this is the best site and also the best opportunity for meeting the aspirations of Adderbury residents for improved community facilities.
Diane Bratt, Chairman of Adderbury Parish Council
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the current “view taking” in Adderbury is a SURVEY and not a POLL.
With a survey the results can be considered by the survey organisers before they make their decision (which can go with or against the majority); with a poll the majority of the voters decide the way forward.
I had always believed we were to have a POLL on issue of a new Community Centre. Perhaps the Parish Council could clarify how the results will be used?
Andy Green
Walton Avenue
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By now all villagers on the electoral roll should have received the survey the Parish Council is undertaking of the views of residents on a proposed community centre at Milton Road. The return date is 31 October and the Parish Council urges everyone to express their view. The Parish Council wishes to find out the village’s opinion of the proposal in question on the Milton Road and have drafted the questions accordingly.
As stated in last month’s Contact, the questions for the survey were changed from those drafted at the meeting in July attended by various interested people. The Parish council apologises to those who came to the meeting for not using that version, which was due to be agreed by the Council. Upon reflection Councillors felt those questions would not lead to meaningful answers. They also widened the issue to include the Lucy Plackett Activity Centre (LPAC) and the Institute. The Parish Council has no control over the latter and has made its commitment clear to maintaining the LPAC, even if a new community centre is built. The Parish Council are listening to the LPAC committee about revamping that building, but it would not provide for use by many other groups. There was considerable opposition to a larger building on LP when this was suggested, only about 6 years ago. The parish Council refutes the notion that Milton Road is the most sensitive site in the village, it recognises that all sites are sensitive to those who live near them. The Milton Road site is not in Conservation area and will not impact as much as some sites might.
If you are under 18 your views on this would be especially welcome. Please email them to the Adderbury Parish Council on adderburypc@hotmail.
A large print version of the parish council letter regarding the consultation is available in the library at Church House.
Helena Scott, Clerk to the Adderbury Parish Council
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further to our article in the October issue of CONTACT we see that commonsense has prevailed in that the voting choices proposed in the original “A Message from the Chairman” have now been altered so that you can vote for “A New Community Centre and a Football Facility” or “A Football Facility”, or “No Development”, all on the Milton Road.
Why is there is no point in re-visiting any scheme on the Lucy Plackett Playing Field? Yes, the last scheme was rejected some years ago. This was because the scheme appeared to grow to a point where it was considered unviable. However ideas were floated at the public meeting in July for a more modest scheme that would accommodate the needs of many organizations in the Village. The decision by the Parish Council to “keep the Centre running and to provide for meeting the landlord’s cost year on year” is to be welcomed. The building does belong to the Parish.Council anyway!
The Institute needs rejuvenating. It seems, however, that it is being written off as not “fit-for-purpose” without obtaining a wide spectrum of experienced advice and a full investigation of the alternatives. How many quotes have been obtained and for what? Whilst we do not suggest anything untoward it is unfortunate that the main proponents of the “development” are also those who have the future of the Institute in their hands. It is difficult to understand how, at this stage, the Management Committee is asking for donations for repairs when it appears that the intention of the Trustees is to sell off the building – perhaps a system of pledges might be more appropriate?
The current plan can only come to fruition by the development of the most sensitive piece of land in the village. Every development that has been proposed over the past thirty years has been opposed and turned down.
Once this land has been built upon it can never be retrieved.
It is your choice!
Peter Burrows
Chairman, Adderbury Conservation Action Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having just received the 'Parish Poll' through our letter box we felt that we had to comment:
The options listed seem to be a bit one sided. It's either vote for some sort of development on the Milton Road or do nothing. What is wrong with the option of developing a facility in the middle of the village where it can serve the whole community, be easy to get to and not add to the volume of traffic along Horn Hill Road.
At the weekend we received an e-mail requesting support for the Institute, there is no option for choosing to develop this on the poll.
Why is the parish council so bent on seeing a development at the Milton Road site?
Stephen and Stephanie Betts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's stop bickering and start acting (if you will excuse the pun). There is only one question - Do you want a modern facility in the village or not? Yes or no. Simple. Once we know the answer to that question, we can move on. If it is no, the village, especially those whose say no, should support The Institute 100%. If it is yes, the Parish Council should take a lead and get things moving.
Vic Western
Chairman
Adderbury Theatre Workshop
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The draft document was handed out at the Parish Council Meeting not collected from any rubbish bin! It was referred to in CONTACT as a 'draft questionnaire"
It then took over a month for the questions to be sorted out - after it had been pointed out how self defeating they were. So come on then give us just one example of an innuendo or an innaccuracy (except the date of the July meeting which was of course on 25th not 29th July!)
Peter Burrows
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The “PARISH POLL”. (Contact - October issue)
It looks like some one has been rummaging through the Parish Council’s refuse bin, piecing together fragments of discarded draft documents, combining them with a good deal of innuendo and publishing the results in the October edition of “Contact”! (See page 15). Are you confused? There are so many inaccurate and misleading statements in the article that there is not enough space here to correct them all. Suffice to say, the “survey” (it is not a Parish Poll) documents will be dropping through letter boxes later this month with the correct information and a questionnaire. See paragraph 3 on page 20 of “Contact” for the explanation as to why the questions have had to be rationalised to focus on the proposed Milton Road development.
Rick Atkinson
|
