Tag Archives: parish council

Oxford to Cambridge Expressway – response from our MP John Howell

Posted on by

OUR LOBBYING CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE Please continue to write to the MP’s and other Government officials on the Expressway lobbying list.

Dear Mr Hill
Thank you for your email concerning the proposed Oxford to Cambridge Expressway. I appreciate the concerns that the proposals are raising and indeed share some of them. However there is also much speculation at present.

I have had discussion with the Secretary of State for Transport to ensure that he is aware of the local issues and have also put these concerns in writing to him. I have also discussed the matter with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government due to the potential issues of housing to be built along the route.

I am of the firm opinion that the route should utilise existing roads wherever possible rather than carve a new path through Green Belt land to the south of Oxford. Given that there are alternatives I believe that it is inappropriate and unnecessary to use Green Belt land for this. Further with the requirement for housing to help fund the new road there is even greater reason to avoid a route through the Green Belt.

I have also raised concerns about the transparency of the work on this project. A project of this magnitude should have ready access to as much information as possible in the public domain. I accept that some competitive data needs to remain private but feel that the lack of information is adding to speculation. I have asked the Secretary of State to intervene so that as much information as possible can be immediately put into the public domain with explanation as to what is being held back and why. I have also asked him to ensure that there is full public consultation before a route is decided and not just on the preferred option.

With thanks again for raising your concerns on this project with me.
John

EXPRESSWAY – URGENT LETTER NEEDED ASAP

Posted on by

Good morning Dorchester Residents

We have heard that things are moving fast in Government re the Expressway.It seems a decision could be made very soon on the route and a “sham” period of consultation would
follow. In effect, the decision will be made and local views will count for nothing.

I attach a letter which has been sent on behalf of the Expressway Action Group (EAG) which has been set up to fight our cause.The letter makes the key points on the disadvantages of the Southern route, which we need to communicate to major players in Government, particularly the National Infrastructure Commission, BY MONDAY MORNING if we are to influence discussions in time. I have sent letters on behalf of the Parish, but letters from as many residents as possible ARE VITAL!

There is a target list as well, giving both email and postal addresses of people in government to whom you should write. In view of the short time available , we suggest you send your letter by both email and post. Not all letters may get read, but I have been assured that “volume”of letters is as important as “content” in this case – a sort of online petition via email.

The text of the EAG letter can be used as a template and need not be changed, although if you want to vary it or add something in your letter please do. But time is of the
essence here so please get your emails off ASAP.

To: The Lord Adonis
Chair, National Infrastructure Commission
5th Floor, 11 Philpot Lane
London EC3M 8UD

25th October 2017-10-25
Dear Lord Adonis

I am writing to you on behalf of the Expressway Action Group in regard to the proposed Oxford to Cambridge Expressway (OCE) and its routing around Oxford.

The Group represents 19 villages and parishes across Oxfordshire, with approximately 20,000 residents, who are gravely concerned regarding the risks that this project poses to our communities and the environment.

We are especially concerned that at a Highways England seminar on the 18th October, they announced that once their studies are complete there will be no Public Enquiry to provide an open assessment of the merits of each Expressway route around Oxford, and only one route will be subject to any consultation process.

There has been no public or democratic consultation whatsoever on the Oxford routes for the Expressway, in spite of the efforts of individual Councillors and others to extract information: FoI requests have been rejected, no documents released, and there have been no public meetings or press statement by Councils.

We are concerned that some senior Council officers and councillors have been actively promoting a new Southern expressway route leaving the A34 near Abingdon and passing Oxford to the south and on to Thame and Aylesbury, rather than supporting the original Northern route shown in earlier studies. (*see Note 1 below) (** Map: see note 2)

It is difficult to understand the logic of this when there is a better, cheaper and quicker option to the North along the existing dual-carriageway A34.

The Southern route for the Oxford section of the Expressway has the following key disadvantages:

1. The ‘Southern Route’ costs £400 millions more than the Northern option (see NIC / Highways England Stage 3 Report p 47 *** see note 3)

2. It would have major drawbacks for the Oxford to Cambridge Growth Corridor’s development, as well as causing huge damage to communities, wildlife habitat, amenity and local transport links.

3. It would run along the southern edge of the Growth Corridor rather than down its centre, separating Corridor cities & towns like Coventry, Northampton, Banbury and Bicester from the growth uplift which fast access would provide.

4. The Southern route separates the Expressway from the East-West Rail Link:
a. It would prevent easy transfer from road to rail, keeping commuters in their cars:
b. It would impact first/last-mile access into Oxford city centre and into other Corridor towns, and increase in-town road congestion.

5. The Southern route via Aylesbury runs through the edge of the London commuter belt:
a. New housing developments there would attract London-facing residents and further increase pressure on road traffic into and out of London:
b. The growth, revenue and employment uplift intended from the OxCam Growth Corridor and Expressway investment would be reduced if new residents were commuting to London instead of seeking new local or in-Corridor employment .

6. A Southern route for the Expressway away from existing Oxfordshire growth towns with developed infrastructure (industry, shops, surgeries, schools etc.) would have the following effects:
a. It would instead route towards proposed new greenfield development sites and smaller towns without the infrastructure and growth plans needed, and so
b. Growth and employment in the Corridor would be seriously delayed until all that new infrastructure can be built.
c. This would in turn delay Treasury revenue growth for years compared to the original plans.

7. It would ruin 10 miles of Oxford Green Belt, causing massive & permanent damage to rural lands and wildlife: it would change the character of the area for ever. We cannot envisage any circumstances in which forecast economic growth could outweigh the certain environmental harm an Expressway and associated development through the Green Belt would cause, especially when there is a clear and better alternative.

The Northern route runs close alongside the OxCam East-West Rail link past new rail stations at Oxford Parkway and Bicester: it runs through the centre of the western OxCam Corridor close to expanding growth towns: it would not draw extra London traffic along its length: and it would do far less environmental and habitat damage. It would also generate more growth and Treasury revenue, more quickly, than the alternatives.

We ask that you take action to ensure that these key issues are properly debated within Government, with the NIC, Highways England and Oxfordshire Councils, and that debate takes place with effective Public involvement and consultation before any decision is made on this motorway-standard road and its associated housing developments.

Yours sincerely

 

Peter Rutt / Co-ordinator, Expressway Action Group

————————————————-
NOTES
*Note 1: Growth Board minutes (Growth Board Executive Officers’ Group 11th July et al) show that the Growth Board and its Councils have been collaborating with the NIC and Highways for months on detailed ‘workstreams’ to facilitate these plans. However at no time have our County or District Councils consulted with our member Parish Councils, press or the wider public. All Freedom of Information requests to the NIC and Highways England have been refused.

**Note 2: NIC Corridor Ideas Competition Invitation / Map showing possible routes and also route of the East-West Rail Link.

 

*** Note 3: NIC / HE Stage 3 Report table of costings for Expressway options p47 :
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/571353/oxford-to-cambridge-expressway-strategic-study-stage-3-report.pdf

Background / Expressway Action Group

The Expressway Action Group includes members from 19 villages and parishes including Baldons, Cuddesdon & Denton, Dorchester on Thames, Garsington, Great Haseley, Horspath, Little Milton, Newington, Radley, Sandford on Thames, Stadhampton, Tiddington, Warborough, Waterperry, Waterstock, and Wheatley. It was set up in summer 2017 to raise awareness of the Expressway issues.

 

Statements of Support:

Liberal Democrat County Councillor for Wheatley Division, Dr. Kirsten Johnson:
“This is the most important infrastructure project for our region in a generation, and it is happening behind closed doors without any input from the residents it will affect most. People are just not aware of the huge and adverse impact the Expressway would cause to our environment if a Southern route is selected. We need to have an open debate on the merits of each route.”

South Oxfordshire District Councillor Elizabeth Gillespie:
“Upgrading the A34 and the current roads to Cambridge seems the only rational route for a new Expressway, if one is justified at all. It is hard to see what case could be made to go through the Green Belt and countryside South of Oxford instead, with all the environmental damage that would inevitably cause. I fully support the aims of the Expressway Action Group in opposing any such route”.

Steve Harrod, Cabinet Member of Oxfordshire County Council and Councillor for Chalgrove & Watlington “Please could you add my name to the EAG as an active objector to the lack of transparency being shown in the development of these plans. It is essential that local residents have a say in the formation such wide-ranging and drastic changes as are being discussed behind closed doors. The impact on the character of the countryside of the proposed southern route would be devastating to the villages and their residents in the path of this draconian suggestion. Whilst I am in principle supportive of the concept of the O2C Expressway, to consider a route with such extraordinary repercussions, without consultation, undermines the very core of democratic local government. I am in agreement with those who suggest the existing A34 as the preferred route as it would be far less damaging to virgin countryside and would no doubt cost significantly less to the public purse.”

See more info on our expressway information page

Oxford to Cambridge Expressway update

Posted on by
At a meeting with the Expressway Action Group (EAG) on Tuesday 10th October it was revealed that some headway had been made to find out what has been happening so far in planning a new “Growth Corridor” to link Oxford and Cambridge and, more important from our point of view, one of three published possible routes referred to as the “Southern route”. The map was shown on Page 14 of the October issue of the Dorchester News. This was the second public meeting for some of the Parishes close to Cuddesdon and Denton but the first for Dorchester as we only discovered the extent of the plan in the middle of September from our County councillor. More information is being sought from some of the reluctant organisations involved but they are remaining somewhat tight lipped.
The EAG are treating this possible route very seriously and are mounting a campaign to fight it as robustly as possible now, as by the time a consultation takes place they fear that a decision in principle will already have been made. Time is short and some decisions may be made before the Chancellors Autumn Statement.

How could it affect Dorchester?

The southern route would intercept the A34 near Blewbury, pass South Moreton, Brightwell cum Sotwell, cross the hillside somewhere near Wittenham Clumps, cross the River Thames somewhere between Dorchester and Warborough, heading north using the Thame valley near Stadhampton, Denton, Cuddesdon Little Milton crossing the M40 and on towards Thame. This road is likely to be two or possibly three lanes with the occasional junction and the scale of the only map we have is such that the accuracy of the route is limited to about a mile. Perhaps of greater concern is the fact that the whole route which is 100 miles long is expected to deliver a possible 1m new houses . Given that the part of the route closest to us is about 10 miles long this could mean another 100,000 houses in South Oxfordshire.
Therefore we are urging every resident to start lobbying now before any decisions are made that would be difficult to address later. The key points are listed below but we recommend you read the more detailed explanations and recommended recipients to lobby on the web site.
1. Any proposed Southern Route will cut through the heart of Oxford’s Green belt, in contradiction of national and local planning policies
2. The Southern Route will cost over £400 millions more than the Northern / A34 option (NIC and Highways England’s own figures)
3. A Southern route would separate the Ox-Cam Expressway from the East-West Rail Link, preventing transfer from road to rail, and would deny easy access to Oxford Parkway, Bicester & other stations, generate MORE road traffic and city congestion and pressure on ‘park & ride’ services.
4. A Southern Route will leave the A34 through West Oxford unimproved and miss the opportunity for regeneration in that area
5. A Southern route will cut through a pristine Flood Plain environment and wildlife corridor: it would cause huge environmental damage
6. A Southern Route to M40 Junction 6,7 or 8 will prevent designated Growth Towns of Bicester, Witney, Banbury, Northampton etc. receiving the growth boost and advantages of the new Expressway. Any Southern Route would run on the ‘wrong’ side of Oxford for linking them to the Expressway.
7. A Southern route would deliver much-needed housing growth later than a Northern option, which would link existing growth towns which already have town centres, infrastructure, schools, surgeries, employment zones etc.
8. The Northern option via A34 and Bicester is closely aligned with the new Oxford – Cambridge Rail link: access from Expressway to Rail stations would allow faster ‘last-mile’ access to Oxford / Didcot and other Knowledge SpineTowns, and reduce road traffic pressure and congestion on Oxford City.
9. The Northern route along A34 would see junction improvements and improved flows all along the A34 to M40 at Junction 9, and especially at J9 itself, and would eliminate the daily traffic jams on the M40 there.
The Parish Council

Oxford to Cambridge Expressway

Posted on by

One of the proposed routes (S4) linking the A34 to the proposed Expressway passes very close to Dorchester (please see map below).

An Action Group has been formed to campaign urgently against this proposal.

Updates:

Report from Dorchester-on-Thames Parish Council: Fences on Bishops Court Farm

Posted on by

The below report was originally distributed with the December 2016 edition of the Dorchester News

Report from Dorchester-on-Thames Parish Council: Fences on Bishops Court Farm

1. On 6th October 2016 the Parish Council was contacted by Mr Scott Ruck on behalf of Mr Andrew Reid, the prospective purchaser of Bishops Court Farm. Contact was made by telephone calls to both the Clerk and the Chairman.

2. Mr Ruck explained that Mr Reid, who already has a farm at Mill Hill in north London, intends to keep a significant quantity of sheep on the land and has no interest in any property development other than to the Farm and the existing farm buildings which will be mostly redundant. Mr Reid’s immediate priority was to erect fencing to separate the footpaths and bridleways that cross the Farm from the fields in which the sheep will graze.

3. Although the purchase had not yet completed, due to the presence of a river cruiser moored on land which is part of the Farm, Mr Reid and his team had been on site that day (6th October) and met with Arthur McEwan-James, the Field Footpaths Officer from Oxfordshire County Council (OCC), to discuss all issues concerning the several Rights of Way across the property including the Thames Path which is a ‘National Trail’. Apparently there have already been conversations with the Environment Agency concerning the boundary along the River Thames.;

4 The footpaths and bridleways that have now been fenced are those that are published on the Definitive Rights of Way Map, most recently updated in February 2006, which can be viewed, along with many other pieces of relevant information, at https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/definitive-map-and-statement-online

5. On 6th October Mr Ruck told the Clerk that Mr Reid is keen to establish a good relationship with the Parish Council and to have a face-to-face meeting soon (possibly in private rather than at a regular PC meeting but the options are open at this stage). At the time of writing this report (23/11) the Parish Council’s meeting with Mr Reid has not taken place but direct email contact has been established between Chris Hill, Parish Council Chairman, and Mr Reid; and Chris Hill, together with some Councillors and the Clerk, has met Mr Luke Winham MRICS, Mr Reid’s estate surveyor. Another meeting with Mr Winham is expected w/c 28 th November.

6 On 20 th October the Parish Council was told by Historic England that the Inspector of Monuments Chris Welch would be making contact with Mr Reid to discuss the future of the Dyke Hills which are a Scheduled Ancient Monument, in fact ‘SAM1’.

7. On Thursday 3rd November several residents contacted the Parish Council to express dismay at the fencing work which had commenced upon the farmland between the end of Wittenham Lane and the River Thame/River Thames confluence and then along the Thames Path towards Day’s Lock. In the knowledge that managing Rights of Way is the responsibility of the County Council, some of these residents also contacted County Cllr Lorraine Lindsay-Gale.

8. The Parish Council arranged two site meetings to be held on 8th November. The first was with Luke Winham and the second was with Arthur McEwan-James (OCC) with his line manager James Blockley, Countryside Access Team Leader and County Cllr Lorraine Lindsay-Gale. At the meeting with Mr Winham, the Parish Council was represented by the Chairman, Cllr Keith Russell and the Clerk while at the second meeting they were joined by Cllr Mike Rimmer.

9. What we learned from Mr Luke Winham:

a. Mr Reid and his team have been told (by persons unknown) that there has been a long history of issues concerning the footpaths between members of the public and the previous owner of the land which they understand to be more akin to ‘a war’.

b. They have inspected the land and have been dismayed by the amount of dog excrement in the open fields. They are worried about the dangers that this poses to their sheep and wish to have fencing that will prevent dogs from entering the fields. They believe that several dog owners at present using the paths and fields do not have their dogs under control. They have also been surprised at the amount of litter that visitors have left behind them, some of which could harm the animals

c. Although sheepwill be the main residents, there may also be cattle and horses and even deer. Barbed wire fencing is necessary to control such animals.

d. There were some places where Mr Winham said it is possible that alterations to the line of the new fencing could be made and he took some photographs to discuss with colleagues. These included the area where the line of the path passes very close to the River Thame and the triangular shape that has been caused by a strict adherence to the Definite Map near ‘Blue Bridge’ across the Thame. Mr Winham also promised that hedges / trees which overhang the footpaths would be cut back but he emphasised that maintaining the surface of the bridleway/footpath itself is the responsibility of the County Council.

e. The intention is that sheep will graze on the Dyke Hills and that this area will in the near future be fenced off from public access. In fact, although residents and visitors have been walking on the Dyke Hills for as long as anyone can remember and beyond, there is no access to the Dyke Hills shown on the Definitive Map. Mr Winham indicated that Historic England would be pleased if the traditional public access to the Dyke Hills is brought to an end because this traffic is considered to be damaging the fabric of the Ancient Monument. The grazing of sheep, however, is expected to be beneficial.

f. Mr Winham said that in the field by Day’s Lock Mr Reid has agreed to provide a short-cut which links the Thames Path to the bridleway that comes across the bridge from Little Wittenham and runs towards the kissing gate.

10. What we learned from Mr Arthur McEwan-James and Oxfordshire County Council.

a. The County Council is responsible for managing only those paths which are shown on the Definitive Map. There are statutory minimum widths for rights of way which are 3 metres for a bridleway, 1.5 metres for a field edge footpath and 1 metre for a cross–field footpath.

b. In the case of the middle field between Blue Bridge and Day’s Lock Miss Bowditch received a payment from OCC to allow the land along the river bank across which there was the Right of Way an additional width of 2 metres. This agreement is binding in perpetuity and will be observed by Mr Reid. The agreement was made following the riverbank collapsing in several places.

c. Arthur McEwan-James confirmed that the lines of fencing so far installed follow guidelines about minimum widths that have been indicated to Mr Reid.

d. In some areas this takes the footpath along ground that is uneven and away from the established walking route because this is now behind a fence. Both the officers from OCC said that once this ground is walked the traffic will create a better surface. One of the Parish Councillors present raised the question of who would be liable should a member of the public have an accident which was caused by the path surface being unsafe

e.Members of the public who wish to report a footpath issue to the County Council can do so by telephone or, better still, by email attaching photographs https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/report-issue-public-right-way.

f. Barbed wire should only be used on the inside of fence posts (the animal side) and where it is wrapped around a post the barbs on the outside should be removed or covered over. Strands of barbed wire should be protected either by a strand of plain wire running next to them or by a wooden rail. It is understood that the contractors are aware of this and that measures to protect the public will be taken before the work is completed.

g. It is possible to achieve a Modification to the Definitive Map but, due to the small number of OCC staff working on this task, it can take several years to be approved. For a full explanation see https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/content/modifications-and-
diversions

h. Some residents who attended the Parish Council meeting on 9 th November were keen to start this Modification process and believe that there is ample evidence to support a claim that the Dyke Hills should be open for public access. They were not dissuaded by warnings about the length of this process.

11. At the regular monthly meeting of the Parish Council, held on Wednesday 9 th November, 29 residents attended to voice their concerns about the new fencing on the Farm and the Standing Order that ‘Public Participation’ should be limited to 15 minutes was suspended. Cllr Keith Russell explained to the meeting what role the Parish Council could play in representing their concerns and County Cllr Lorraine Lindsay-Gale was also present both to answer questions and to collect information to pass on to Arthur McEwan-James.

12. It was agreed that the Parish Council would communicate the concerns of the meeting to Mr Reid and keep residents informed about how the matter progressed. A report would be inserted with the December/January edition of Dorchester News. Those present at the meeting were invited to let the Clerk have their email addresses so that those with a special interest in this topic could receive regular communication. The Clerk will issue a similar invitation through Dorchester News.

13. Since the Parish Council meeting both the Chairman and County Cllr Lindsay-Gale have exchanged emails with Mr Reid and Mr Winham and by 17 th November it appeared that some concessions had been achieved regarding the route of the fence near the River Thame, some lengths of fencing not being barbed and the re-opening of the Dyke Hills for public access on a limited number of days. Mr Reid has, however, informed the Chris Hill that he has consulted and worked with the footpath officers both of the local authority and the Thames Path and they have both advised on and approved the fencing work. As to the barbed wire, Mr Reid says that when he first inspected the; farm he noted that there was already barbed wire in numerous locations.

14. On 19 th November Chris Hill was contacted by email from BBC Radio Oxford who had learned about the new fencing controversy from a listener and on the following day (Saturday 20 th ) Chris himself saw the fencing work that has recently occurred near Day’s Lock. Photographs of this work were taken later the same day and copied to all members of the Parish Council and County Cllr Lindsay-Gale, who forwarded them to Arthur McEwan-James. The photographs show that the new fencing along the river gives the Thames Path walker very little room to pass along, that in places the path is made even narrower by the overhang of vegetation growing from within the curtilage of Day’s Lock, and that in other places the path has a very narrow flat strip along the top of a steep slope towards the River Thames. Should this be the area about which BBC Radio Oxford’s listener has complained it is easy to see why. Those who visited Day’s Lock with Chris agreed there are several places that are dangerous and noted that the path, which seems narrower here than at any point so far inspected, is probably the most visited area of the whole stretch.

15. These photographs have now been sent to Mr McEwan-James for his comments and, pending the final resolution of this matter, Chris has told BBC Radio Oxford that a statement at this time would be neither appropriate nor helpful. Arthur McEwan – James is coming the village on the morning of Friday, 25 th November specifically to view the new fencing work in the area of Day’s Lock. He will also be meeting the Clerk and other representatives of the Council

16. Since 21 st November, the Clerk has been made aware that some residents have taken advantage of the procedure mentioned in paragraph 10(e) above to register complaints about the new fencing, especially where it crosses a route which the ground condition indicates has clearly been a much used pathway. These complaints are being dealt with by Arthur McEwan-James.

17. On 22nd November, following a site meeting with a freelance Rights of Way consultant (a former Countryside Officer with another County Council) Becky Waller had a meeting with Kate Ashbrook, General Secretary of the Open Spaces Society which is based in Henley-on-Thames www.oss.org.uk Becky and others have now set up an independent group of residents which is interested in achieving modifications to the Definitive Map and, possibly, applying for the registration of some areas, including the Dyke Hills, as open space to which the public should be allowed access. The Open Space Society, of which the Parish Council is a member, will be supporting Becky Waller’s group and has offered support to the Parish Council should it wish to pursue similar action. Becky can be contacted via rightsofwayDOT@gmail.com

18. Because this matter is clearly a topic in which many residents have an interest, the Clerk has set up a new Parish Council emailing list – ‘Footpaths & Rights of Way’ – so that news of the latest developments can be communicated relatively quickly and easily. The email addresses of subscribers will not be displayed and therefore remain confidential. Emails will include updates about path closures due to flooding, for example, and subscribers will also be supplied with a list of useful websites where maps and guides can be obtained. To join the list please contact the Clerk – parishclerk@dorchesteronthames.co.uk

This notice is dated 23rd November 2016 and has been prepared by Geoff Russell, Clerk to The Council, with assistance from colleagues.