Page 30 - Phonebox Magazine March 2016

Mercury Report
Public participation
Sue Warren spoke again on the subject of parking in Oakdown Crescent. She’d been speaking with Milton Keynes Council (MKC) about the possibility of introducing a permit parking scheme there. In order to be considered by MKC this would, amongst other criteria, require the support of over 70% of the properties in the Crescent. Sue felt this level of support would be achievable and said she would canvas opinions.
Susan Hughes spoke to report that, after nine years, the Olney Neighbourhood Action Group had ceased in its current form due to the withdrawal of support from MKC and, because of restructuring, Thames Valley Police. She explained that she was sad to see it go, but felt it had helped the town a great deal. She also thanked John Boardman for chairing its meetings, Liam Costello and Sandra Grummit (the Town and Deputy Town Clerks), and said she could not have wished for a better representative from Olney Town Council (OTC) than Rosemary Osborne. Steve Clark, on behalf of the Council, thanked Sue for the Group’s work.
Oakdown Crescent
Liam reported that he’d attended a site meeting in the Crescent, along with a new person at MKC who’d be in the job for only the next six months. While that doesn’t sound like a great start – the Mercury report from July 2015 noting stalled progress due to the person looking at the issue being reassigned without MKC telling OTC who, if anyone, was continuing with it – it is a step in the right direction and at least the length of his ‘stay’ is known. Peter Geary explained that a plan had been proposed: To make interim repairs addressing the worst of the uneven surface, to produce an options paper on which OTC would consult with residents, then to show the results to MKC who would decide what action to take.
Circular Walk
As reported before, a Circular Walk is being planned, and MKC has proposed that the section which runs parallel to and south of Weston Road alongside one of the streams be diverted to instead run in the same direction along the northern bank of the River Great Ouse. Tony Evans preferred this route as, with it being fenced, there was a degree of separation between walkers (and their dogs) and the nearby sheep. Peter Geary felt OTC 30 Phonebox Magazine | March 2016
should ask for it to be a permissive right of way, this being different from a public right of way in that, although anyone could use it, the Council could ban particular people from doing so if the need arose. As noted by Jeremy Rawlings, permissive rights of way are not shown on Ordnance Survey maps although, as Liam explained, good signage could partially negate this concern.
Citizens Advice Bureau
For the past few years, the Council has made a yearly payment to Citizens Advice Milton Keynes in order to provide an outreach service in Olney, amounting to four 45 minute appointments every fortnight. Citizens Advice has proposed leaving the amount unchanged this year, at £5,198. Councillors discussed this, the key points being that the sessions were, on the whole, fully booked but that less statistical information, for example the number of people helped, was available than in previous years. Councillors voted all in favour, bar two abstentions including one due to this lack of information, of making the payment to retain the service for another year.
Budget 2016-2017
Based on a recommendation from the Finance Committee, Councillors voted unanimously to accept the proposed budget. Looking at the income side, the Council Tax Base – the equivalent number of Band D properties in the Parish paying Council Tax – has increased by 0.8%. But, the Council Tax Base Reduction Grant for Olney – a government grant given to Parish Councils to compensate them for the reduction in Council Tax Base due to various welfare changes – has been reducing every year and will eventually disappear. Looking at those issues, plus the predicted spend, OTC has increased its precept to £177,000, a 4.1% increase, resulting in it taking £68.54 per year from the illustrative Band D Council Tax, a 3.28% increase.
Lavendon Road Section 106 requirements consultation
Having previously declared an interest, Peter Geary and Ben Brock left the meeting for the duration of this item.
This refers to a Planning Application to build 50 houses on the triangular parcel of land South of Lavendon Road and immediately South East of the Whirly Pit roundabout,
stretching around half way to the river. Section 106 refers to a legal agreement between a Local Authority and a Developer, linked to planning permission and also known as a planning obligation. A new development can place extra pressure on local infrastructure, for example healthcare, and the agreement aims to balance that pressure with improvements to the surrounding area such that, where possible, the development will make a positive contribution to the local area and community.
Liam started the discussion, noting that this was prior to planning permission being decided and that the estimated amount payable under Section 106 would be £985,220, equating to £19,704 per house. MKC had calculated this estimate in accordance with its Supplementary Planning Guidance, and were asking for comments on it, along with whether any additional projects or requirements were needed in order to make the development agreeable in planning terms.
While this sounded a large gure, Deidre Bethune and Joe Stacey each noted that the money would go to MKC and that Olney wouldn’t get to see a lot of it, perhaps 25%, OTC effectively having to bid for local projects. A lengthy discussion followed, much of which centred on what OTC could, in principle and reality – which, the feeling appeared to be, may differ significantly – actually affect. Councillors agreed to respond noting the amount, showing a few illustrations of local projects and offering further information in due course.
While not discussed during this meeting, on the same night, the Sainsbury’s Planning Application was rejected by MKC. This was for a number of reasons, but it’s worth noting that they included the supermarket site being outside the existing settlement boundary and in open countryside. This 50 house Application is outside but almost adjacent to that boundary and just over the road from the proposed Sainsbury’s site. If this Application is agreed, would the ‘open countryside’ reason for rejecting the Sainsbury’s one carry less weight?
Plan:MK
As reported before, Olney and other Parish Councils had won various concessions from MKC in terms of the content of the Plan, for example that the map showing satellite settlement ‘bubbles’ surrounding Olney and certain other nearby villages would be removed. MKC had released draft one of