Woodcarvers Exhibition

Woodcarvers Exhibition
On Saturday, Brian Eastoe, the tutor of the local woodcarvers associations, was doing a good job of guiding people into the Community Free Space to see the carvings. He joked that we would be allowed to leave once we had voted for our favourite three wood carvings, and signed the visitors book.
Woodcarvers Exhibition
Wood carving was happening on the premises, and Brian, was looking to get as many opinions as possible on the recent works.
Woodcarvers Exhibition
Some works took a huge amount of work and looked very cleverly executed. Others were simple with a few simple curves.

All was going well. We filled in our 1,2,3 on the slip provided, and wrote something in the visitors book, and were about to leave, but then out of the blue Brian said that Van Gogh was not a skilled painter, or something similar. My wife looked astonished and said she could not believe he had said that. A very robust discussion followed.

26 thoughts on “Woodcarvers Exhibition

  1. Janet

    It is nice to see skills being practised. On another note. The Vale is turfing out the canoe club which provided recreation for young people. Along that road it looks as if part of the land has been sold to a private fishing club. Perhaps they are going to sell off this land too. Sad day for Kingfisher Canoe Club- having to disband and distribute kit due to being asked to leave Wilsham Road. The Vale should support the young people of the area.

    Reply
  2. Daniel

    I think the point is that The Veil has carved a niche for itself; to sell-off or destroy what it can – only if the consultants say so though.

    Reply
  3. Su

    Janet, can you explain what you mean by the Vale are turfing out the canoe club? As far as I can recall, the canoe club didn’t have a lease with the Vale DC.

    Reply
  4. sue.

    The land Kingfisher were on is held by the Army and they were told a few years ago that they needed to move. It has nothing to do with the Vale or Town council as far as I know.

    Reply
  5. Janet

    I am putting the comments by David Surman so that you can see what he has to say about the situation. – As Youth Development Officer for the canoe club I am heartened by the comments on this thread in complete contrast to the behaviour of the authorities involved. This land is Vale land that is supposed to be used for recreation by local people. This need not and should not ever have happened,I geuss everyone should be asking their councillors why? Secondly we had a new site and at the eleventh hour that was blocked. I geuss people should be expressing their thoughts to their councillors and MP too We are volunteers running a community facility in our own time. I`ve been working for 25 years in canoeing and kayaking work with young people. We now have no home no way of operating and if they are not prepared to help us no future. We have been working night and day over the last two years to solve this problem. I`m gutted by what they`ve done to us.

    Reply
  6. ppjs

    It would be helpful to hear from the Army and/or the Councils.

    If there was no formal lease, then what were the arrangements for local use? Did an initial use on the basis of informal “of course you can” turn over the years into an assumption that the use was a right?

    This is a question and not a comment.

    Reply
  7. Deedee

    Janet & Sue, this is what I’ve gleaned about that site so far.
    Originally it was RAF Abingdon rowing club, when they left Abingdon the army took their place, however when the last Olympics were held here the National Army Rowing club we’re evicted from their HQ at Dorney Lake to make way for the competition, they then ( that’s the national army rowing club) took up residency at the Wilsham Rd site, so it has nothing at all to do with our friends at Dalton Barracks.
    There is a lease in place between VWHDC and the army for which they pay a peppercorn rent of just £500 per year.
    In short a National organisation that has no need to be here has evicted a local club who will now have to close, that’s appalling!
    Might I suggest council evict the National Army Rowing club and instal Kingfisher instead? They are far more entitled to use local amenities .

    Reply
  8. ppjs

    I don’t understand the conclusion that Deedee draws in her penultimate paragraph.

    A legitimate rowing club has a lease with VWHDC for which it pays rent. It obviously has a need to be somewhere and presumably it exists for the benefit of serving and former soldiers. The previous tenant was also a rowing club for armed forces personnel.

    The statement the rowing club “has no need to be here” is an opinion, not a fact. If it pays its rent (however measly that is), it is perfectly entitled to secured its patch. I pay rent for my house, and I do not expect anybody just to park their car on my drive.

    The canoe club also has a need to be somewhere; the questions to be answered are “Where?” and “On what terms and with what protection?”

    Most soldiers are young people. I would have thought that at least some Abingdonians would be pleased to offer a site to men and women who are called to put life and limb in harm’s way in a dangerous world.

    I would also have thought that the Army and VWHDC could have found space for an activity that operates on a voluntary basis to help young people.

    Anyone for joined-up thinking?

    I assume, of course, that Dave Surman has briefed our MP.

    Reply
  9. Deedee

    I totally disagree with your analysis of the situation PPJS,
    1, a legitimate rowing club it may be, but why should it fall on the council tax payers of the Vale to provide, at an unbelievable discount, a public asset to a national organisation?
    2, why should a national organisation, service personal to boot, have precedent over a local club to a local public asset ?
    3, you say my statement they don’t need to be there is an opinion, not a fact, is rubbish, they existed before they came to Abingdon and evicted the canoe club!
    4, the National Army Rowing club actively use their premise less than 4 weeks of the year, the rest of the time it’s moth balled, meanwhile the canoe club has no where to go, that’s wrong !
    6, I believe it a legal obligation of council to obtain the most from any public asset? If that’s the case and that the army pay just £500 a year rent then I’ll pay £600a year in rent for the canoe club to take over the lease!
    Time for the public to stand up !

    Reply
  10. Deedee

    Indeed PPJS, but that’s not up to me to do that, however if Janet & co want to approach the council with a proposition to take over the lease by paying £600 a year for the lease I will cover that cost!

    Reply
  11. Su

    Maybe someone who reads this blog can shed some light on the legal issues involved in breaking leases, and maybe also the problem of covenants on Council owned land which prevent for example the construction of buildings?

    Reply
  12. Deedee

    Su, just because a property or parcel of land has a covenant on it doesn’t necessarily mean the be all and end of things, covenants can be altered or removed and often ignored altogether.
    Have a look at the Land Registry site and visit “practice guide 48” that’s a good starting point, then contact your local district councillor and the councillors responsible for that area.
    Don’t run away from this, local public opinion will be on your side! Get the press involved and don’t be afraid to knock on doors and shout very loud, I think most of Abingdon would be behind you? Good luck.

    Reply
  13. John

    Perhaps if the non local use of the facilities at Abingdon rowing club by Baliol college, St Johns college, St Edmunds Hall and a few other Oxford University Colleges were stopped some space could be made for the local clubs. They also moor their coach boats along Wilsham road 4 or 5 boats at times at last count and across from private homes. It also would reduce the nuisance of the colleges arriving at 06:30 every day and waking everyone up with their loud hailers and cox boxes. So to support Daniels point if you have enough money you can do as you want as the colleges pay to use the clubs facilities and the club only pays the peppercorn.

    The Abingdon Rowing Club and the Army Rowing club are adjacent to each other and share facilities and consider the canoe and kayak clubs as a nuisance.

    Reply
  14. Deedee

    Sorry Su, forgot about the lease issue.
    In reality all a lease is an agreement between two parties, usually one party agrees to lease out a property or facility for a specific period and with laid down terms and conditions to another, however there will be (or should be if the person compiled the lease correctly) break clauses and opt out terms, it all depends on the will of the person or organisation granting the lease! In other words if the vale wanted to evict the National Army Rowing club then I’m sure they could, that said wouldn’t it be good all round if the lease for that property was given to Kingfisher but with a caveat allowing the army to use it to?

    Reply
  15. Daniel

    Count yourselves lucky….my brother lives opposite a parcel of land far narrower than between Wilsham Rd and the river, in SW London, between a residential road and a mainline railway embankment. 10 m max….that’s 10m between curb and mainline railway . There’s a planning application for flats on that parcel of land.

    Be careful what you wish for. The houses on Wilsham Rd have a lovely view of the river, but not so good that a few flat’s couldn’t fit down by the rowing club….

    DeeDee…you faith in the weight of public opinion is commendable.

    Reply
  16. Deedee

    Daniel as with all things public there exists a very fine balance between the needs, the wants and the money, the parcel of land that houses the rowing clubs and sailing club is a classic example of a cunundrum that’s easier to ignore than address.
    For sure it could be left to bimble along as it is? 60 year old facilities on a prime, £2 million building site that recoups just £1500 a year in rent, it’s delapedated and as far as Kingfisher is concerned, not fit for purpose.
    So what’s the option? Easy, sell the plot for building for an easy £2 million, create a new organisation that includes the sailing club, Abingdon rowing club and Kingfisher all working together in a new purpose built facility further down stream along the Otneys acces from the road to the marina and rivet Park, the council could pocket a cool one million while giving the million toward building the new facility, the shortfall (if any) could be obtained from Lottery funding, it’s alll achievable, if someone grasps the nettle !

    Reply
  17. Daniel

    Wonderful! If only we had such resourceful thinking in the people who are paid to come up with such resourceful thinking!

    Let us hope our nettle graspers grasp.

    Reply
  18. hester

    Just to seta cat – or a flying pig – among the pigeons, I havent checked the map, but isn’t the land Deedee proposes pretty close to the land set aside for the South Abingdon river crossing ……..

    Reply
  19. Deedee

    Not quite Hester, drive along Lambrickway passing rugby club, at the small cross roads go straight on toward the public slip and keep going until you reach the car park and small grass area, that’s where I mean?
    The southern bridge you refer to, is that the one supposed to have been a pre cursor to Abits? Is so it’s a decade late already and I think it was further down stream, but in any case that theory has been scuppered because Morland Garden has now been built in its path.
    But are you referring to the proposed river crossing the other side of Culham which is part of the ever expanding Didcot plan? In which case it will be of little benefit to Abingdon

    Reply
  20. Helen

    I’ve come to this a bit late, but for John @18, I’m a member of Abingdon Rowing Club and I don’t recognise his claim that we regard the kayakers as a nuisance. I’ve never heard anyone say anything negative about them, and all the interactions with them that I’ve had and witnessed have been cheerful hellos and offers of help to carry kit etc. on both sides. We all love the river, after all. I feel sorry that they have to leave and that the alternative piece of land became unavailable. I have no idea whether there were any discussions about sharing, but I’ve read that their problem is storage and I’m sure we would have been happy to help if we had room; for the record, our boathouse is full of our boats, not college boats (and nor are we sitting on pots of money).
    Also for the record, you’ll often see Army boats out on the river, so it’s not true that the site is mothballed.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.