The Quarry

Sun 14 Dec 2008, 13:01

saj quarries are the oxfordshire mafia be warned.

Sun 14 Dec 2008, 01:30

Light industry or housing in the old quarry? Of course, living nearby, my ears have pricked up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't a government recommendation made only two or so years ago that neither should take place on this land?

Sat 13 Dec 2008, 11:32

Back to the Quarry Issue:

Glena, if you would like to form a petition of local resident neighbours who would like to have some kind of access to the quarry for their dogs (or for whatever reason), I'd be happy to sign it.

I'm sure that the owner, given the opportunity, would want to be a good neighbour.

Sat 13 Dec 2008, 11:28

My number is 0779 214 5704, you creep.

Sat 13 Dec 2008, 11:17

WHAT!!!???!!!
Harriet, I thought that some of the motoring evangelicals on this forum were somewhat round the bend, but I had no idea that someone was either reading or posting or both, was downright deranged! I invite the whacko to call me directly and try your threats on me. email me directly and I'll pass you my mobile number. I'd LOVE to have an 'exchange of views'.

Sat 13 Dec 2008, 01:06

I completely sympathise Harriet. Luckily mine was nowhere near that aggressive.
It had been pointed out to me that I made a mistake in my first posting---it is possible to have a decision to create a footpath which goes against the original wishes of the landowner. However, this usually takes a long time and the most satisfactory outcome is that which is achieved by compromise and mutual consent.

Sat 13 Dec 2008, 00:17

Harriet: that is, of course, horrendous and I'm completely appalled.

I'd ask you and anyone else who gets a call like that to let me know the details by private e-mail or using the messaging function here. If someone is making these calls, chances are that you're not the only one getting them; I'd like to collect the details so we have a better chance of nailing them down.

And for anyone anonymous out there with an itchy phone finger, my number is 810117.

Fri 12 Dec 2008, 22:34

Ken Jones, think about what you say, for your own sake.

I for one am backing Glena 110%.

Nothing can ever be achieved with a negative attitude. The quarry is something worth fighting for.

And, yes the common people do have a say?

Fri 12 Dec 2008, 19:39

i am applying for a foot path across your garden. will you object to it. i think you might.glena leave it alone the out come has already been decided.

Fri 12 Dec 2008, 11:54

Glenna, I've had anonymous phonecalls as a result of my postings on here about speeding - hoping that I get killed, it seems to be a sad fact of life in Charlbury, as it may affect my daughter should she answer the phone I'm not going to be posting on here in future, but if it happens again we will be going to the police.

Fri 12 Dec 2008, 09:36

The quarry situation I do not think will ever really 'go away' until it has been resolved. To my mind though at present we - the general public can do nothing until one party makes a clear move, i.e either the Town Council pushes it's wish for the area to…

Long post - click to read full text

Wed 10 Dec 2008, 17:38

So many helpful suggestions about what I should do or not---I am quite overwhelmed !! Firstly, thank you for those of you who showed support and sympathy. Actually the phone call could have been much worse and I'm a lot tougher than I was when I became a district councillor 9 years ago though no one wants calls like that. However, it did encourage me to try to explain further what we were aiming at. I think the 'as it happens'article was very well written (not by me !!) but just in case anyone was slightly mislead by the title I wanted to say that we were revisiting the subject, not just because of the footpath but also the development(s) and because people had asked us to.
In other words I was 'representing the interests of the people of Charlbury' as Roger is urging me to do---not, in this case, as it appears his interests but those of others who want a footpath or, at least, want a discussion about the matter.
Actually they are not really my interests either---I feel very impartial---I have lived in Charlbury since 1979 and have only walked in the Quarry once. Also I do agree with Roger that there are other lovely walks---Mill Field, Centenary Wood etc. but (as people have implied) in this case it's not what I want that's relevant.
I thank Jon for his support but I think the landowner does, in the end have the last word i.e. if Lord Rotherwick had really stuck out could the OCC have made the footpath go through the wood ?? I wouldn't have thought so. However, where a landowner doesn't have the last word, of course, is to have any development he likes on his land---this can be opposed and can be turned down as we have just seen.
Finally---oh dear I suppose this will a 'long posting' sorry Richard---re dogs fouling---of course that is HORRIBLE---bins have been provided (too often full but we do let WODC know when that is the case) and fixed penalties can be given but when does one actually see it happen ??? I don't.

Wed 10 Dec 2008, 16:17

"For a Covetous Man to inveigh against Prodigality... is for the Pot to call the Kettle black." Roger

Wed 10 Dec 2008, 14:02

John and Igor ,lets hope nobody ever tells you how to run your lives ,like seems to be happening on here .If Glena wants something to take to the council maybe she should TRY getting the dog owners that let their animals fowl the town centre to stop as that WOULD be worthwhile or is that too easy a task .

Wed 10 Dec 2008, 12:24

I completely agree with Jon. Ownership doesn't entitle one to live in a vacuum, unaffected by the wishes and concerns of ones neighbors .

Why shouldn't Glena try and change the owner's mind? Surely lobbying is one of those precious democratic freedoms I've heard some posters repeatedly refer to when it refers to their own interests.

The anonymous phone call is another example of the kind of cowardice that prompts sniping from those who want to hurl abuse but avoid engagement with the issue. If you're bothered again, ask for the caller to identify themselves. If they refuse, hang up and call BT who will take the matter to the police.

Wed 10 Dec 2008, 08:15

Of course the quarry is private land, but that doesn't mean the owners can do what they like with it. I think Glena is right to air the topic again: she's a district councillor, and the district council has to decide in the long run whether (part of) the site should be designated for (a) housing or (b) employment, the only two options proposed at present. And those options ARE on the table, so should be discussed in the public domain.

I would like to think there is a legal redress against a property owner, or indeed anyone, who makes anonymous (and by implication threatening) phone calls trying to influence the democratic process. Let's hope in this instance it was not the owner who phoned Glena.

But surely Glena is wrong to suggest that "the landowner will always have the last word". The example she cites -- of the footpath through the forest (which takes nearly an hour's walk to reach from Charlbury, so not exactly a local amenity) -- was won very much against the landowner's wishes.

The quarry owner wants to turn the Charlbury end of the site into a housing development. The Town Council wants it used for small businesses (the option I would favour, personally). The quarry owner doesn't get his way just because he owns it, but his proposal will be judged on its merits and the local community will be consulted. The phone caller "should get his facts straight", to use his own words. Not that I'd be so rude, myself.

Wed 10 Dec 2008, 06:13

Glena
May i ask why this topic is being raised again ,as surely this was put into simple terms by the owners of the quarry not so long ago.
The mere fact that they have said NO should mean exactly that and the fact that they keep being approached in the hope that they will change their mind is i feel incomprehensible at best and futile at worst.
Surely you have enough work to do representing the interests of the residents of Charlbury without the need to follow up a hollow dream.
I am sorry if this sounds harsh but this is real life and responsible owners we are talking about here.
The mere fact that we can enjoy walks through wychwood forest with all its beauty is a bonus which we can all enjoy and people with dogs are allowed through ,so why not enjoy that and leave the quarry as it is ,a place of beauty that can still be admired but from a safe distance.

Tue 9 Dec 2008, 16:09

Oh dear !! It was a bad day anyway and I've just received my first anonymous phone call re Charlbury/WODC business. The caller simply said that the quarry is private land and an SSFI and told me to 'get my facts straight'.
I suppose this was in response to 'as it happens' which is just being delivered. To get everyone's facts straight---we do know that the quarry is private property and therefore, if the owner does not want a footpath there will not be one. We also know it is an SSFI (or at least a small part of it). The word 'campaign' is not meant to be aggressive or conflict with either of those two facts.
However, we have been asked by various people if there couldn't be a footpath across one part of the land and so we are seeking to explore that issue. We are also asking for people's views on any kind of development of the quarry (as has often been discussed). We had a questionnaire in 'as it happens' a few years ago but it seemed a good idea to do it again.
The landowner will always have the last word but a very long 'campaign' eventually resulted in part of one of the circular paths going through Wychwood and I think most people would say that was a good thing.