Page 38 - Phonebox Magazine April 2011

Mercury Report – Olney
Town Council Meeting on Monday 7th March 2011
Public participation
Chris Talbot, Treasurer of Olney Rugby Club, opened this month’s meeting. He explained that Olney has enjoyed splendid sports facilities due to Olney Town Council (OTC) and the Sports Clubs. Olney Rugby Club now owns ten acres of land freehold and the Club’s Management Committee has decided to proceed down a limited liability company route, splitting the Club into two parts: one to hold the assets and the other to run the activities and provide the facilities while maintaining the status required for gift aid, etc.
He asked if OTC would let the Club acquire the freehold of the land on which the clubhouse stands in exchange for a suitable sum, thus giving it the freehold of both the clubhouse and the adjacent field. If this was approved, he noted that the Club would be happy for there to be a covenant restricting the land’s use to being for a clubhouse.
Census for England and Wales
Richard Izzard, responsible for coordinating the Census for Olney, Newport Pagnell, Astwood and Stoke Goldington, gave a detailed talk about it. The main point is that,
if you’ve not submitted yours by the time you read this – get a move on!
Olney Rugby Club
The first item to be considered in the meeting proper was Chris Talbot’s request for the Club to acquire the freehold of the land on which the clubhouse stands. Two Councillors, Tony Evans and John Smail, had declared a personal interest in this item, meaning they could discuss but not vote on it.
Mike Hughes introduced the topic, explaining that the Bowls Club owns its own clubhouse while the Tennis, Cricket, Rugby and Football Clubs do not. He invited Councillors’ views. Tony spoke in favour of granting the request, seeing nothing wrong with it. John Sharp spoke against it, feeling that the Council should try to benefit the whole town and not just the Rugby Club. Dave Price spoke in favour, noting that the Club does benefit the whole town – through sport and other community activities such as quiz and charity nights. Finally, Ron Bull asked how the Council would come to a decision as to what the freehold was worth, Gill Edmonson noting that, as achieving best value is a Council requirement, this would indeed have to be done properly. Ron believed it would
have a high value, while Mike Hughes disagreed, due to the covenant which would be associated with the land.
Councillors voted by majority of seven to one, with two absentions, in favour of obtaining legal advice and furthering the discussion with the Rugby Club.
Environmental Services
Rob Ward, Milton Keynes Council Neighbourhood Manager for Environmental Services, gave a presentation. Note that Rob’s title is as stated here and not, as stated previously, the assistant to that post.
In the first part of his presentation, Rob explained that he manages the delivery of Environmental Services in the rural parts of Milton Keynes
(MK) Borough, covering waste collection, landscape, highway maintenance, play area maintenance and neighbourhood enforcement. Savings of around 30% would have to be made in the next four years, which would require choices of what could and could not be achieved, alongside ensuring the best use of resources. Readers who wish to report a problem with any of the services Rob manages should call 01908 252570.
Driftway
The second part of Rob’s presentation concerned the Driftway banks. As background, note that in the previous meeting, John Price and Rob Ward had presented three options to resolve the problem...
1. Do nothing and continue with efforts to establish wild flowers on the existing banks. Cost to be met by the developer.
2. Keep the existing profile, remove the wild flowers, and establish topsoil and amenity grass. Cost approx £10,000 to be met by MKC.
3. Reshape the mound and establish amenity grass. Full cost in region of £120,000 to be met by MKC.
... and the Council had voted unanimously in favour of option 2. At the time, the Driftway banks were believed not to have been adopted by MKC.
Since then, Rob had discovered that MKC’s Highways department had in fact adopted the Driftway banks, although the Section 106 element relating to completion of the landscaping had not been signed off. The results of this were that MKC may not have as much negotiating power with the developer, Taylor Wimpey, as previously thought. However, independent of that, Rob stressed that MKC remained committed to completing the works on Driftway.
Rob proposed two new options:
A. Plant grass and shrubs in six inches of topsoil then cut approximately six times per year. Costs: £8,500 to implement, £900 per year to cut. Summary: high potential for success, attractive, higher ongoing cost.
B. Plant further mixed species and wild flowers in a thin layer of topsoil, providing new growth and encouraging what’s there to develop, then cut twice a year. Costs: £3,200 to implement, £300 per year to cut. Summary: Higher biodiversity, fairly attractive, lower maintenance cost.
Mike Hughes stated that option A was basically that agreed by OTC in its previous meeting, that this was what should be done
38 Phonebox Magazine