Catherine from the Community Safety Team at the Vale of White Horse District Council came to speak to the Town Council on the situation with the Upper Reaches Hotel. The tenant (hotel owner) has put some measures in place in December and the Community Safety Team want more done since behaviour issues are still happening. With that in mind they are looking to put in place a Community Protection Notice ( CPN ) to get the tenant to properly secure the site against the people with problem behaviour.
Town Councillors asked for timescales. Some were angry that nobody had come along to talk on longer term strategic issues of the site. The Town Clerk had however spoken with the latest personnel at the Vale Property team. The Town Clerk was told this matter is to do with the relationship between the landlord and the tenant and can’t be shared in the public domain. They property team said when they can share these things, they will.
Charter Carpark
The Town Clerk had also asked about progress at the Charter Carpark. In the upper levels there are concerns regarding structural issues and fire safety. The district council will provide an update for the Town Council meeting on the 30th March.
Diamond Interchange at Lodge Hill
There followed a report from Councillor Neil Fawcett of Oxfordshire County Council.
He said in response to his report on the progress of the Diamond Interchange at Lodge Hill that the first plan had been unfriendly to pedestrians and cyclists. An updated plan was more friendly to pedestrians and cyclists. The new plan would be a compromise as the Highways Agency are not going to allow a plan that causes traffic backing up from the Diamond Interchange along the A34.
A question was asked about the design being constrained by the existing bridge and its life expectancy. This question was asked because the bridge at Kennington, nearby, has failed and is being rebuilt. Councillor Fawcett responded that he was sure the bridge was inspected regularly and as it was built in the 1970s it should have a very long life still. But he would check they had taken that in consideration in the plan.
Town Councillors had been given a presentation by Bellway Homes on developing the land between the Oxford Road and Peachcroft Farm. More information and details of a webinar are available at https://www.bellway-northabingdon.co.uk/. The proposals will deliver 371 new homes, 35% being affordable, a new sports pavilion and playing pitches – along with significant areas of open space, including the central St Helen’s Park.
Councillor Jim Halliday asked that since Bellway Homes are putting a planning application in for a housing development, it would be useful to have a clue when the Diamond Interchange would be completed.
Councillor Fawcett said ‘Every stage of the process has taken longer than they’ve said at the previous stage. All I can say on the positive side is we are working our way through the steps…’
To be Continued…
Re: The Developments around the perimeter road.
It would be nice were the council to place hoardings around the perimeter road to the effect that they could not guarantee the social infrastructure necessary to suppot those moving into the new housing, nor that anyone needing to commute to and from these houses would not be involved in a twice-daily gridlock.
I suppose a pressure group could do the same. The hoardings would only have to be up long enough for photographs and the media to get there … bad news travels.
Take the problem to the developers.
The Vale’s response (or lack of it) on the longer-term future of the site might be acceptable if it were not for the fact that this has been going on for 6 1/2 years. They own the site on behalf of the community and have a duty to make sure that it benefits that community, whether by providing an amenity, or by generating appropriate income to support other services or by encouraging footfall in to the town. Instead they have allowed it to become an eyesore which blights the entrance to the town and generates serious vandalism which endangers the well-being and property of local residents. It is clearly a difficult problem for them, but they owe us a bit more respect and accountability.
The major problem there is that the long lease that was signed with the tenant (several decades ago) does not allow the Vale to do very much about it.
The Vale is using the anti-social behaviour route because it is one of the only levers available to it.
I have to go to the Malthouse Surgery and I phoned the Vale to ask when the work on the multi story car part would be completed a it is better if I can park near to the surgery. No one seemed to know. I have not seen anyone working on the car park. I take it that if a contract was issued a completion date would be agreed.
At present it remains closed due to to very serious problems with the structure.
No firm decision has been made about what to do about it yet. This is because the cost of repairing it in its current form would be massive, and it would not be worth spending a large sum on it unless we are certain that the car park is going to continue in its current form long term. The Council would be criticised if we spent millions of pounds repairing a car park which was then knocked down a few years later.
@Janet – Gosh, you are a trusting soul – and I always took you for a realist. 😉
It is stated that 35% of the 371 homes will be affordable. Please can someone define ‘affordable’ in this context. Does it mean that 65% of the houses are unaffordable?!
‘Affordable’ generally means 20% under ‘local market prices’. The Affordable Housing Commission (2020) concluded that “many” supposedly affordable schemes “are clearly unaffordable to those on mid to lower incomes.”
Thanks for this reply, but it seems to me that in the end, the affordable term is meaningless.
Yes – it is a national definition and pretty meaningless.
The previous Vale administration went along with this form of ‘affordable housing’.
The new administartion is now starting to invest in actually affordable housing and there will be a shift towards housing for rent at affordable and social rent levels.