CGR_B – Grove / East Challow

Any personal information supplied to us within the comments that could identify anyone has been redacted and will not be shared or published in the report. Further information on data protection is available in our general consultation’s privacy statement on our Vale website.

1. How far do you agree or disagree with this proposal?
Answer Choice		Response Percent	Response Total
1	Strongly agree	28.6%	4
2	Agree	28.6%	4
3	Neither agree nor disagree	7.1%	1
4	Disagree	7.1%	1
5	Strongly disagree	28.6%	4
6	Not sure	0.0%	0
7	I don't have a view	0.0%	0
answered			14
skipped			151

2. If you have any comments on this proposal please provide them below:

Answer Choices

Response Percent

Response Total

Open-Ended Question

100.00%

1		While I agree that the northern part of Grove Business part should be in Grove - the site occupied by Crown should be either Wantage or East Challow.
2		Why not consider Wantage town and Grove parish councils being joined as one?
3		This has always been accessed from Grove all the services come from Grove and is indeed named Grove Technology Park not Challow Tech Park
4		There is no information given on impact on East Challow parish council finances and the knock on impact this would have on residents. There is no information provided in response to the Grove PC request from East Challow PC. Grove PC give no information on the positive impact redrawing would have on businesses beyond a sense of association, which is vague at best.
5		I am writing to you about the claim by Grove parish council that Grove Business Park be transferred from East Challow parish to Grove parish. I am District Councillor for Ridgeway Ward which includes East and West Challow in addition to the Letcombes, Childrey, Sparsholt and Kingston Lisle. I am also an active member of East Challow parish council, where I live. I am objecting to the proposed change as being entirely unnecessary and I cannot see any particular reason for the proposal. I am not aware that Grove Parish Council has had a great deal of contact with the businesses on Grove Business Park. There would seem to be no major financial advantage for Grove Parish Council to this move and I can only think that it is a matter of kudos in having a fairly important local cluster of companies associated with the parish. Great play is made of the distance by road between the Park and East Challow. This was not always the case and, should the western relief road be built, which is likely to happen sometime in the future, it will again not be the case. I have been district councillor for nearly three years and during that time have made a point of contacting all the major businesses in the ward, including those sited in industrial estates/business and trading parks. This includes Grove Business Park which I have visited several times and have established a good working relationship with a number of the companies, identifying their requirements both from the business park itself on which they are situated but also from the district council. I was particularly involved with them during the Covid crisis in helping some of them with the business grant and that was appreciated. I send them regular reports on my and council activity which is also appreciated. Last Friday April 22nd I showed David Johnston MP around the Park and introduced him to some of the exciting companies active in precision engineering, metal extraction and recovery and business incubation in addition to a national business management company run by an East Challow resident which manages 900 staff. I am currently trying to encourage companies and the landlord to begin installing solar panels to reduce costs and contribute to the zero-neutral by 2030 target. Certainly not all, but many of the staff reside in East Challow and the other local villages to the west in addition to Wantage and Grove and further afield. Most of the companies have no idea in which parish they are situated and it means very little to them. The eastern boundary of the parish runs down the eastern side of the Business Park with the police station and CMS Industries already situated in Grove parish itself. I really cannot see the advantage of this proposed change and object to the proposal. Sincerely Cllr Dr. Paul Barrow Ridgeway Ward
6		Over more than thirty years there has been regular boundary reviews in which East Challow Parish has been forced to defend its boundaries against claims from the neighbouring parishes of Grove and Wantage. In every one the larger parish has gained land and housing at our expense. Grove Parish Council has been claiming that Grove Technology Park should be transferred into its parish with no valid reason since at least 1999. The site itself is closer to the village of East Challow and the current main entrance is on the very edge of the southern Grove boundary with Wantage. Downsview Road which runs west from the Mably Way roundabout to the business park makes the perfect boundary between the Parishes. Traffic from the north completely skirts Grove on the A338 and going south, east or west it has to pass through the centre of either Wantage or East Challow. Any future development can now only be to the west at the existing exit on Woodhill Lane (which was the historical main airfield access) as over the last ten years the site has become almost encircled by housing. A direct access west to the A417 and then on to the A420 towards the M4 or M40 is possible especially if the “west link” road is built. The local communities of East Challow, Wantage and Grove are equally affected by developments on Grove Technology Park and are invited to comment on any planning applications relating to it. Any planning issues relating to Grove Technology Park do not affect Grove to any greater extent than its neighbouring parishes. Grove Business Park was launched as a business park in the 1980’s under the name Wantage Technology Park showing that its link was not considered to be with Grove. Its name was only changed after the original owner BNF Metals Technology Centre went into receivership and the new owners re-launched it with a new name to make a break with its past history. East Challow Parish Council has considered the following assessment criteria relating to the review and can see no issues which are relevant to the Grove Parish Council request for a boundary change. • natural or man-made boundaries that help to define clearly one community from another • housing developments that straddle parish boundaries, thereby resulting in people being in different parishes from their neighbours • effective and convenient representation of local residents at parish level • the wards of Vale of White Horse District Council for the purposes of district council elections • the divisions of Oxfordshire County Council for the purposes of county council elections • views expressed in relation to any changes, particularly from those people directly affected • the extent to which proposals reflect the identities and interests of the affected community elections • the size and population of the local community Grove Parish Council’s comment that “some” businesses think they are already in Grove parish is noted although a recent business survey carried out for East Challow Neighbourhood Plan indicated that nearly all companies were satisfied with their situation. 25% of employees on the two industrial estates in East Challow parish (The W&G Estate and Grove Technology Park) live in East Challow parish. Over the last few years many productive contacts with Grove Technology Park have been made by East Challow councillors. East Challow Parish Council has been very supportive of the businesses when planning applications have been received. We do our best to support business development whilst ensuring plans are appropriate. East Challow Parish Council therefore asks that in the current boundary review the Vale of White Horse District Council supports the existing arrangements and does not allow larger parishes to continually “asset strip” small parishes. There is no reason why Grove Technology Park should not continue to be part of East Challow parish.
	Submitted at end of survey under ‘Any other comments’	It would make sense that Wantage and Grove be combined as one council. There is strength in numbers and given the amount of new homes being built in the OX12 area with no infrastructure there is little separation between Wantage and Grove. Look back at history in the 1930s when there was fierce debate as to whether Charlton Village should be joined with Wantage! Sooner or later history will repeat itself.
	Submitted at end of survey under ‘Any other comments’	I have often wondered how one could complain about the actions of our parish council, all my initial enquiries have led me to believe that they are beyond reproach and there is no body they are responsible to.
	Submitted at end of survey under ‘Any other comments’	Stop building houses Wantage and grove are ruined there’s no good shops in wantage anymore the roads are over crowded
	Submitted at end of survey under ‘Any other comments’	Is this best use of money, especially when poverty in the Vale is likely to increase? Should the money go into developing projects to support families.
	Submitted at end of survey under ‘Any other comments’	The quality of information provided does not support this consultation process. Only a small number of people have requisite background information to sensibly contribute, and with no attempt made to share the necessary information to a reasonable standard this cannot be deemed a democratic consultation. This is box ticking at best, and a stunning example of how local government alienates residents.
	Submitted at end of survey under ‘Any other comments’	East Challow Parish Council therefore asks that in the current boundary review the Vale of White Horse District Council supports the existing arrangements and does not allow larger parishes to continually ‘asset strip’ small parishes. There is no reason why Grove Technology Park should not continue to be part of East Challow parish.

answered

skipped

159

3. Are you responding to this request as: (tick all that apply)
Answer Choice		Response Percent	Response Total
1	a resident within the parish	64.3%	9
2	someone who works within the parish	0.0%	0
3	a business / organisation operating within the parish	0.0%	0
4	a visitor or interested party	21.4%	3
5	a councillor (parish, district, county)	0.0%	0
6	an officer (parish, district, county)	7.1%	1
7	Other (please specify):	7.1%	1
answered			14
skipped			151

Other (please specify): (1)

Councillor and East Challow resident (can only tick one)

4. If you are responding as a business / organisation, council or body please provide its name:

Answer Choices

Response Percent

Response Total

Open-Ended Question

100.00%

East Challow Parish Council

answered

skipped

164

5. To help us analyse responses, please provide the first part of your postcode (e.g. OX12 1)
Answer Choices		Response Percent	Response Total
1	Open-Ended Question	100.00%	13

		answered	13
		skipped	152

6. You can upload any supporting documents using the button below.
File Type	Average Size	Files Uploaded
.docx	22575Kb	1
To view the files uploaded, go into the individual results.	answered	1
To view the files uploaded, go into the individual results.	skipped	164

Supporting documents

EAST CHALLOW PARISH COUNCIL

Clerk to East Challow Parish Council

East Challow Village Hall

East Challow

Wantage

Oxfordshire

OX12 9SR

Tel. 07774 405472

eastchallowclerk@gmail.com

28 April 2022

Subject: Community Governance Review Consultation – Response from East Challow Parish council April 2022

Over more than thirty years there has been regular boundary reviews in which East Challow Parish has been forced to defend its boundaries against claims from the neighbouring parishes of Grove and Wantage. In every one the larger parish has gained land and housing at our expense.

Grove Parish Council has been claiming that Grove Technology Park should be transferred into its parish with no valid reason since at least 1999.

The site itself is closer to the village of East Challow and the current main entrance is on the very edge of the southern Grove boundary with Wantage. Downsview Road which runs west from the Mably Way roundabout to the business park makes the perfect boundary between the Parishes. Traffic from the north completely skirts Grove on the A338 and going south, east or west it has to pass through the centre of either Wantage or East Challow.

Any future development can now only be to the west at the existing exit on Woodhill Lane (which was the historical main airfield access) as over the last ten years the site has become almost encircled by housing. A direct access west to the A417 and then on to the A420 towards the M4 or M40 is possible especially if the “west link” road is built.

The local communities of East Challow, Wantage and Grove are equally affected by developments on Grove Technology Park and are invited to comment on any planning applications relating to it. Any planning issues relating to Grove Technology Park do not affect Grove to any greater extent than its neighbouring parishes.

Grove Business Park was launched as a business park in the 1980’s under the name Wantage Technology Park showing that its link was not considered to be with Grove. Its name was only changed after the original owner BNF Metals Technology Centre went into receivership and the new owners re-launched it with a new name to make a break with its past history.

East Challow Parish Council has considered the following assessment criteria relating to the review and can see no issues which are relevant to the Grove Parish Council request for a boundary change.

• natural or man-made boundaries that help to define clearly one community from another

• housing developments that straddle parish boundaries, thereby resulting in people being in different parishes from their neighbours

• effective and convenient representation of local residents at parish level

• the wards of Vale of White Horse District Council for the purposes of district council elections

• the divisions of Oxfordshire County Council for the purposes of county council elections

• views expressed in relation to any changes, particularly from those people directly affected

• the extent to which proposals reflect the identities and interests of the affected community elections

• the size and population of the local community

Grove Parish Council’s comment that “some” businesses think they are already in Grove parish is noted although a recent business survey carried out for East Challow Neighbourhood Plan indicated that nearly all companies were satisfied with their situation. 25% of employees on the two industrial estates in East Challow parish (The W&G Estate and Grove Technology Park) live in East Challow parish. Over the last few years many productive contacts with Grove Technology Park have been made by East Challow councillors. East Challow Parish Council has been very supportive of the businesses when planning applications have been received. We do our best to support business development whilst ensuring plans are appropriate.

East Challow Parish Council therefore asks that in the current boundary review the Vale of White Horse District Council supports the existing arrangements and does not allow larger parishes to continually “asset strip” small parishes. There is no reason why Grove Technology Park should not continue to be part of East Challow parish.

Yours sincerely

Linda Hooper

Clerk to East Challow Parish Council

On behalf of the Chair Vanessa Bosley