|
Our last newsletter
explained that in the new year we would need to lobby our county
councillors who are the key targets of this phase of our campaign.
They are the ones who will decide whether Penbridge will be debated
at the Structure Plan “Examination In Public” and ultimately
whether it finds its way into the plan.
Your action
in completing structure plan response forms in November provided
a dramatic illustration of the strength of feeling of local people
against this outrageous proposal. Now your continued action in lobbying
our elected representatives will be crucial in ensuring that this
development does not find its way into the structure plan. If you
were unable to complete a response form, don’t worry. You
can now make your opin-ion known by joining the lobbying campaign.
Even if you wrote to your councillor previously, we would urge you
to write again now.
ACT NOW – WRITE TODAY
In March, council officers will present the analysis of the structure
plan responses to our county councillors. We need to make sure that
the people we have elected to represent our views are informed about
this is-sue, understand our concerns, and are convinced that our
position is the one they should adopt. No doubt the promoters of
Penbridge will be lobbying hard too.
We need to influence
the voting pattern of a wide group of council members - those who
voted FOR building in the Green Belt, and those
who did not vote. If just 6 people who voted for this proposal were
to change their minds, the vote will swing. Councillors who voted
for building in the Green Belt are unlikely to change their minds
unless the wider implications of this change of policy are made
clear to them.
Individual letters
count more than standard ones or petitions, so we are not this time,
providing a proforma but asking you to write your own. In your letter,
you might like to…
ASK
THEM
• To reject proposals for development in the Green belt
• Why the Council has produced no justification for allowing
building within the Green Belt, contrary to government planning
guidance in PPG2 which says that once the general extent of the
Green Belt has been approved it should be altered only in exceptional
circumstances
• Why the issue of exceptional circumstances was not addressed
prior to any decision being made to in-clude development at Grenoble
Road in the Structure Plan
EXPLAIN
that…
• The County Council’s working group did not recommended
any growth within the Green Belt but put forward the development
of unconstrained land in other locations. It is clear that satisfactory
alternatives to building within green belt do exist
• Voting for any development in the Green Belt will place
rural communities at risk of opportunistic inap-propriate developments
such as the Penbridge proposal in Sunningwell Parish
• The Penbridge proposal would overwhelm a number of small
rural communities, coalescing them into a ribbon development linking
Abingdon to Oxford via Whitecross, Wootton, Sunningwell, Bayworth
and Kennington, in direct contravention of the Council’s existing
policy on the Green Belt
• Penbridge would severly impact the already saturated A34
and would draw additional traffic into the area by its park and
ride scheme
SAY
THAT …
• The Green Belt was set up 50 years ago to preserve the special
landscape character of Oxfordshire, and to prevent ribbon development
and urban sprawl around Oxford. It should be maintained
• You are concerned about urban development encroaching into
the countryside
• The Vale’s housing allocation is already met by the
existing local plan without affecting the Green Belt and the Penbridge
development is unnecessary
• You are concerned about the impact of the Penbridge proposal
on an area of high landscape value, including the consequent harm
to the wildlife and environment
• You support paragraph 2.23 of the draft Structure Plan which
categorically states that the County Council does not see a need
to release further land in the Green Belt around Oxford
• Although they may have voted for the Grenoble Road proposal
previously, you would encourage them to change their minds now that
the full implications of that decision have become apparent
Who
to contact?
Please write to as many councillors as you are able. The size of
the response is what counts! You can of course send the same letter
to more than one councillor (and enclose them all in one envelope
addressed to Oxfordshire County Council, County Hall, New Road,
Oxford OX1 1ND) or by email – addresses available on members
lists at www.oxfordshire.gov.uk.
You may also want to write to Bob Johnson (our
county councillor) to applaud his stance in voting against building
in the Green Belt and encourage him to lobby his colleagues to do
likewise.
PRIME
TARGETS
• Mrs.
J Heathcoat (Faringdon)
• Mrs M Hastings (Yarton/Otmoor)
• Anda Fitzgerald-O’Connor (Shrivenham)
• Rodney Rose (Wychwood)
Secondary Targets
• Ray Jelf (Deddington)
• Diana Ludlow (Thame0
• George Sanders (Henley N)
• David Wilmshurst (Chinnor)
• Tony Crabbe (Benson)
• Don Seale (Burford)
• David Robertson (Witney N)
• John Farrow (Goring)
• Carol Viney (Sonning Common)
• Dee Bulley (Carterton)
• Steve Hayward (Bampton)
• G A Reynolds (Wroxton)
OTHER COUNCILLORS THAT
COULD BE WRITTEN TO
• Liz Brighouse (Wood Farm)
• Andrew Brown (Oxford East)
• Robert Evans (Chipping Norton)
• Margaret Ferriman (Banbury Neithrop)
• Mrs Fulljames (Ploughley)
• Roy Mold (Banbury Grimsbury)
• John Power (Oxford W)
• Sylvia Tompkins (Headington)
• Brian Hodgson (Charlbury)
• Margaret MacKenzie (Drayton)
• Mick McAndrews (Old Marston)
• Craig Simmons (St Clement’s)
• Ted Cooper (Witney S)
• John Dennis (Wolvercote)
• Barbara Gatehouse
(Blackbird Leys)
• Ken Harper (Banbury Ruscote)
• Neville Harris (Didcot Mereland)
• Biddy Hudson (Temple Cowley)
• Terry Joslin (Didcot Manor)
• Shereen Karmali (Oxford S)
• Sandra Mold (Banbury Grimsbury)
• Kieron Mallon (Banbury Easington)
• Chris Robins (Kidlington S)
• Sam Segaran (Iffley)
• C H Shouler (Bicester S)
• Leslie Sibley (Bicester N)
• Betty Standingford (New Marston)
• Christine Witcher (Kidlington N)
• Keith Mitchell (Bloxham)
|
