Cornbury Park licence - request to Mr H to withdraw appeal
| Cally Robson |
👍
Tue 5 Apr 2011, 23:13 I'm pasting below a copy of the letter I sent today by registered post to Mr Hofman requesting him to withdraw his appeal against the granting of the premises licence for Cornbury Park before the hearing on 5th May Cally Robson Mr Mark Hofman Cc: Bill Oddy, Head of Community Services, West Oxfordshire District Council, Council Offices, Woodgreen, Witney, OX28 1NB Bill.Oddy@westoxon.gov.uk 4 April 2011 Dear Mr Hofman, Re: Appeal dated 18 February by Mark Hofman in respect of the Premises Licence granted by West Oxfordshire District Council on 10 January 2011 to The Lord Rotherwick in respect of Cornbury Park, Charlbury, Oxon As a resident of Charlbury and taxpayer in West Oxfordshire, I request that you withdraw your appeal against the granting of the premises licence to Cornbury Park before the scheduled hearing on 5th May at Banbury Magistrates Court or that you commit to pay the costs incurred by the Magistrate?s Court, wodc and Cornbury Park should your appeal be turned down or found to be without basis. I am making this request to you on the following grounds: 1) That you have not demonstrated there is local public support for your appeal, and no Charlbury residents have stepped forward publicly to express their support. 2) That on the contrary, many objectors to the licence in its original form have since publicly stated their satisfaction at the panel?s granting of the licence with the added conditions imposed. 3) That a groundswell of local public opinion, exemplified in more than 500 signatures from local residents on the petition at www.petitiononline.com/cbyevent/ , a well-liked Facebook group in support of events www.facebook.com/SupportCharlburyEvents, and many postings on the Charlbury public forum forum.charlbury.info/cgi-bin/dview.cgi, indicates that the majority of locals feel the noise levels and numbers of events in Charlbury to-date are entirely appropriate. 4) That having mooted a Charlbury Noise Limitation Group and raised public concern in the Charlbury web forum forum.charlbury.info/cgi-bin/dview.cgi?thread=1271, you have refused to enter into discussion with the community, thus demonstrating not only a disregard for local opinion but also that you are out of step with local feeling in the community. 5) That in any case, the licensing panel gave ample hearing to objectors to the original application and spent an unusual amount of time in deliberation to reach an equitable solution and specify restrictions and conditions, to be regulated by the well respected Safety Advisory Group, that would limit noise levels and numbers of events, whilst allowing community events to continue. 6) That the additional conditions placed on the granting of the licence by the panel, with advice from their expert advisers, are entirely sufficient and appropriate in limiting the number and nature of events and permitted noise levels. 7) That despite requests you would not engage in discussion with representatives of Cornbury Park to try to seek some accord before you submitted your appeal, knowing that in so doing you were likely to cause the organisers of the new Wilderness Festival at Cornbury Park to pull out because of the commercial risks involved in backing a festival that might lose its licence. 8) That Charlbury Town Council, an objector to the original premises licence application, has recently attended meetings with the Safety Advisory Group and event organisers at Cornbury Park and has since noted that the conditions placed on the licence are being satisfactorily fulfilled and that they have no dissatisfaction with the granting of the licence or the process carried out by the wodc licensing panel. 9) That despite having made representation to Charlbury Town Council you still do not have its support in making this appeal. 10) That while in the forum you have expressed support for Charlbury events and the significant fundraising they enable, your appeal against the Cornbury Park licence effectively works against the viability of those events . It challenges the conditions and level of regulation that the WODC has set, which could create a precedent to limit other local events in a way the community does not welcome. 11) That despite requests, you have not clarified your real objectives in challenging the licensing panel's decision. 12) That leaked emails show that you are making the appeal because you feel there is no exposure to you on paying costs, should it be found that there are no grounds for appeal. Your email of 14th Jan 2011 to a handful of local residents: 13) That there is good reason to believe you are using the appeal process in this case, not out of genuine concern for the community, but, as a legal professional with a personal interest in the process of judicial review in the UK, to exercise your own interests. These are all reasons why I believe you should not to be forcing the Cornbury Park Estate to incur burdensome legal costs, or the Court and the wodc to spend tax payers? money in defence of your appeal, when in current times in particular it should be spent on services that are of value to the community. I look forward to your prompt and considered reply. Yours sincerely, Cally Robson |