Lower Heyford and Caulcott Parish Council Minute Books 1894 - 2019

LOWER HEYFORD & CAULCOTT PARISH COUNCIL THE MINUTE BOOKS 1894 – 2019

Photo copyright: Robin Barker

Abridged to celebrate 125 years of the Lower Heyford & Caulcott Parish Council

An abridgement of the minutes of Lower Heyford and Caulcott Parish Council meetings held between 1894-2019

Text copyright ©2020 Lower Heyford and Caulcott Parish Council

Abridgement by Elaine Cox and Peter Deeley

1

CONTENTS

FOREWORD BY MR JAMES MACNAMARA

3

MINUTE BOOK 1: 1894-1906

5

MINUTE BOOK 2: 1907 - 1924

10

MINUTE BOOK 3: 1925 – 1950

15

MINUTE BOOK 4: 1951-1971

21

MINUTE BOOK 5: 1972-1983

27

MINUTE BOOK 6: 1984-1990

32

MINUTE BOOK 7: 1990-1996

40

MINUTE BOOK 8: 1997 - 2005

45

MINUTE BOOK 9: 2006 – 2011

51

MINUTE BOOK 10: 2012 - 2019

57

APPENDIX 1: CHAIRS AND PARISH CLERKS (1894 – 2019)

66

APPENDIX 2: DATES OF NATIONAL AND LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE

69

2

Foreword by Mr James Macnamara The Parish Council is pleased to present to the current residents of Lower Heyford and Caulcott this modest volume that charts the history of the parish council from its inception to date.

The villages are most fortunate to have in their possession a collection of virtually every single minute of every meeting of the council since it started in 18941. We have conducted a careful review of all of the minutes which are held in 10 volumes and believe that we have all but a couple of sets. This is a rare situation for a parish council to find itself in and for this we are indebted to all the parish clerks and chairs who, over the past 125 years, have been so diligent in maintaining such good records and for ensuring that they were kept safe.

The minutes come in a variety of shapes and sizes. During the early years they were beautifully handwritten by various parish clerks - none more so than the minutes of the inaugural meeting of the parish council, held in the schoolroom on New Year’s Eve 1894. The first chairman was the Rev. Joseph Arthur Dodd and the minutes were taken by the new clerk to the council, George James Dew who was in fact appointed on 12th January 1895 and was to remain in post as parish clerk for the next thirty three years.

The first four minute books, covering the period from 1894 to 1972 were kept in beautiful leather bound volumes. These books are, today, still in very good condition despite some of them being over 125 years of age. Later volumes changed gradually in format through the use of the typewriter right up to more recent use of computers, with the printed page being bound into folders according to the year and decade. Each and every set of minutes therein bears the signature of the person who chaired the subsequent meeting.

I have one sad reflection here in that there was only ever one lady chair in the history of the parish council - Mrs Robin Hepworth who was chair from 2007 to 2011. Given that there were no less than 20 chairmen in the entire existence of the parish council I can only hope that in the ensuing years the gender balance may shift.

Civil parish councils were formed in England under the reforming Local Government Act of 1894 to take over local oversight of all secular and civic duties. They are the first tier of local government and concern themselves with representing the local community, delivering services to meet local needs or liaising with the bodies that do so, and helping to maintain and improve quality of life and community well-being. Lower Heyford Parish Council embraces the villages of Lower Heyford and Caulcott and is one of about 9,000 such councils across England.

The minutes of the parish council paint an evolving picture of life in a north Oxfordshire village as it progressed through the twentieth century and then into the next one. The minutes reflect the gradual changes in the local economy from one deriving the vast percentage of its income 1

Civil parish councils were formed in England under the reforming Local Government Act 1894 to take over local oversight of civic duties in rural towns and villages. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/56-57/73/contents

3

from agriculture, evolving through a process of ever increasing mechanisation of agricultural processes, and resulting in farms using ever larger items of equipment on ever larger fields that required fewer and fewer labourers to tend.

As this process has continued we have seen the social make-up of the parish change from one comprised largely of farm owners and labourers to a very broad variety of backgrounds and jobs. The farms that once stood at the heart of the parish have largely been converted from redundant buildings and into additional houses.

The presence of the US armed forces at nearby Upper Heyford from 1951 until 1993 presented many challenges and opportunities to the parish. There were occasional problems of parking enormous American left hand drive cars in the village but there was a tight bond between the communities and the parish council worked hard to maintain good relations between all involved.

The arrival of the internal combustion engine heralded two new issues of speed and an ever increasing volume of motor vehicles. Neither sat happily on roads designed for the horse and cart, moving agricultural equipment and produce about the parish. This phenomenon has tested the mettle of many councillors and councils and does so until today.

The parish council minutes, in short, represent a walk through the history of a north Oxfordshire parish as no doubt they will do for the next 125 years.

In order to avoid spoiling the enjoyment to be found on the ensuing pages I shall resist the temptation to further disclose the contents and merely note that this abridgment brings to life all of these issues and many more.

Before ending I would like to thank the hundreds of councillors who have foregone many evenings endeavouring to serve the community in which they lived to try and improve the lot of the residents of the parishes over the past 125 years. They do this without remuneration and with great goodwill.

Finally it would be remiss of me to fail to thank all those who have been involved in the creation of this memento of the first 125 years of the parish council.

I would especially like to mention the chroniclers, Peter Deeley and Elaine Cox who, between them, have spent hundreds of hours combing through every word that has been recorded by way of minutes of well over 1,000 meetings of the council and of the parish. This task has taken almost a year for which time we are most grateful to them both as we are to those who have later helped with the checking and final editing.

So my thanks to all those who have so carefully and diligently selected appropriate passages and events of the last 125 years and brought them and the parish tenor to life in this book. The work of all involved has been a labour of love for the minutes make truly fascinating reading as is demonstrated in this work.

I commend this wonderful record celebrating the 125th anniversary of the council that I am very proud to have chaired for the last few years.

JJ Macnamara Chairman, Lower Heyford Parish Council 4

MINUTE BOOK 1: 1894-1906 The first full meeting of the Lower Heyford Parish Council was held on New Year’s Eve 1894.

The schoolroom, replete with world maps and counting aids stuck to the walls, must have been pretty crowded that first night with the potential councillors settling themselves uncomfortably into the children’s desks and curious villagers hovering respectfully behind them. The school received half-a-crown for each hire of the room.

Voting forms for nominees to the council had already been distributed and it was left to Mr William Padbury King, a farmer from Caulcott, to read the formal notice convening the meeting. Mr King held an important public post as ‘Overseer of the Poor’, looking after those who needed financial aid and who might otherwise end up in the Bicester workhouse. There were 13 candidates for the six places. Those chosen were Mr King himself, one of the biggest landholders in the area, Mr James Stroud Cheesman, another farmer from Caulcott, Mr Andrew Castle, wheelwright, Mr George Auger again a Caulcott farmer, Mr James Justice, farm labourer and Mr William Waddup, farm labourer. Other trades included two coal merchants, a shoemaker and a foreman carpenter.

Mr King got most votes with 13. Mr John Eli Faggetter, a general labourer who received none, demanded a recount as was his right, but still remained without support. The vicar, Rev. Joseph Arthur Dodd was asked to take the chair, possibly because he was the most literate. He remained chairman for three years before leaving to take up office in South Hackney, London.

The role of secretary, or clerk, was undertaken by Mr George Dew, the Registrar of births and deaths for the district. As a boy he helped in his father’s workshop, making coffins, even nailing them down. He also kept diaries for nearly half a century recording the village’s daily events.

His wife was the schoolmistress. Mr Dew acted as the council clerk for 25 years - without pay.

At that first meeting he was deputed to buy a suitable oil lamp for future meetings. It cost £1.

7s. 7d. The chairman would have the power to decide when to use the lamp, due to the cost of oil. Mr Henry Tubb, a banker from Bicester, agreed to act as treasurer provided he did not have to attend meetings: the account was never overdrawn.

Poor’s Coal By the anniversary of the first council meeting, 16 villagers had put in nominations to be on the body that handled the hand-outs of coal to the poor. Money from the rent of 32 acres of land (a field off the Portway, south of Caulcott) went to pay for this coal. It was known as ‘Poor’s Land’ and was earmarked by charities for many years for this purpose. At first the council tried to rent out the Poor’s Land as a whole but nobody was interested. Then Mr William Kinch, a farmer from Steeple Aston, offered to rent the land for an annual payment of £24. 15s. per acre. However, he would not sign up until shooting rights were included.

No less than 71 parishioners, 50 from Lower Heyford and 21 from Caulcott, applied for the poor’s coal when the first list was opened on Christmas Eve 1895. Tenders were invited from local coal merchants for the supply of 1st and 2nd class coal from the Moira mine in Leicestershire. Mr Richard Gold’s tender for 18/6 per ton second class was accepted, but how much each household got was left up to Rev. Dodd. He decided on eight hundredweights (cwt) per person.

5

A close watch was always kept on the applicants for the Poor’s Coal in case someone was holding something back. In January 1895 Mr Albert Fortnum was asked about his earnings. He was able to convince the interrogators of his need and by four votes to two he went on the list.

A year later there were 46 applicants from Lower Heyford and 25 from Caulcott. Mr. Gold, the coalman, wanted to know what qualified a person to receive a share of the coal and a Mr Charter asked what was meant by ‘poor.’ The minutes record that ‘a long discussion ensued’. It was finally agreed that no one earning more than 15 shillings a week should be entitled.

Every year the right to free coal was hotly debated. By December 1901 the council had to go into committee (behind closed doors) asking three villagers who were listening to leave. This time ‘a long and exhaustive discussion’ added one name, Mrs Sarah Baggett, but ‘struck off’ 16. Once again Mr Fortnum was quizzed about his earnings. A year later the amount of coal issued to 75 homes was 24/6 per ton. Some people got 8 hundredweights, some 5½.

Footpaths, Gates, Stiles and Ditches The condition of footpaths, gates and stiles was a constant source of concern. The path running beside the manor house down to the coal wharf by the canal was always needing attention. The council decided to install a ‘clap gate’. The ditch at Caulcott also needed attention and some wanted a clap gate, others a stile.

There were always arguments between Lower and Upper Heyford councils about the canal path and the stile there. Each accused the other of leaving the stile, which was the boundary line, in a dangerous state. But at least there was agreement on a new stile in Broadhead Meadow on the footpath to Steeple Aston. It got a clap gate with oak posts and deal panelling costing £1.

9s. 6d.

Dolly’s Ditch was a drain and was always getting blocked. In May 1895, the council argued that as it was blocked with ‘drift sand’ from Freehold Street and that the Highway Board should repair it. The Thames Conservancy Board replied that several houses had individual drains emptying into the canal. Ploughley rural district council suggested siting a settling tank costing £60 which would receive all sewage from the village before it entered any tributary, such as the Cherwell, leading to the Thames. The council in effect said to Ploughley that it should properly clean Dolly four times a year and save this expense.

Allotments At the April meeting in 1895 the council decided to find extra land for the allotments.

Nine villagers, three from Caulcott, had asked for them. But when the landowner, Corpus Christi College, Oxford, was asked, the bursar, Mr Henry Leblanc Lightfoot, said ‘no land in the parish was unoccupied’. Then the College changed its mind and offered the arable field known as Walker’s Ground for £30 a year rental. The College laid down nine conditions, one of which was that no more than two white straw crops be sown, each to be of a different grain.

Five councillors voted to accept, but Mr Cheesman voted against. It was the first time unanimity had been broken. There were eight plots each of more than two acres being rented out at 34/- per acre plus rates and taxes. A plan of the field is given in Figure 1.

6

Plan of the allotment field April 1895

In 1902 the council had a long debate about tenants’ rights of shooting on the allotment grounds at Caulcott. Lord Jersey, owner of the land, was asked to rent allotment holders the right to shoot there.

Box for Council Papers In March 1897, the clerk was authorised to buy a japanned box to hold council papers and documents. It has been in continuous use ever since.

Roads There was always a fuss about the condition of the market square and surrounding roads and a tug-of-war between the parish and various other bodies about who was responsible for it. It was proposed eventually that if Lower Heyford looked after the market square itself the rural 7

district council would look after the surrounding roads. Lord Jersey agreed to have twenty loads of stone dug from his allotments in Caulcott for the repairs.

Queen Victoria’s Jubilee For Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee Celebrations in 1897 it was agreed villagers should be entertained with a free meal. Five years later for the coronation of her son Edward VII there was no appetite for such indulgence. The idea of a ‘meat tea’ got no support, instead the money was to be spent ‘for some permanent purpose.’ However, the Jubilee Oak in the market square, commemorating Queen Victoria, continued to raise concerns. In July 1904 it was decided to have the surrounding iron guard painted and to put up a four foot high galvanized fence to prevent children climbing inside.

Market Square showing the new iron guard for the Jubilee Oak Street Lighting Public lighting for the village was also an issue that raged over many decades. As early as 1899 Mr John Eli Faggetter (who had failed to get elected in the vote for the first council) called attention to the ‘dark and dangerous state’ of the village streets in winter and the need for adopting the Lighting and Watching Act concerning the general public good. Mr Cheesman, always vigilant, opposed the motion. The chairman now was the new incumbent at St Mary’s Church, the Rev. Vivian Lennard. He supported Mr Cheesman and the idea was quashed. But later the same year, when Mr Faggetter again proposed the idea votes were again tied. This time Rev. Lennard voted for the motion and the idea of proper lighting was carried.

Councillors had heard a report from Steeple Aston council about the cost of lighting in that parish and another detailing the probable cost of lighting in Lower Heyford and of the extra rate needed to pay for it. In May 1900 a special meeting was called to support the proposition.

Details were presented of how much Steeple Aston paid and how supplying 13 lamps to the railway station alone had cost £47. With 44 villagers present, the idea was rejected by 22-12.

It not uncommon to have large audiences at these meetings: the previous year 31 people had turned up for the elections.

8

Boer War At the turn of the century the Boer War was being fought between the British Empire and two Boer states in South Africa. A fund to raise money for this ‘Transvaal War’ raised £11. 1s. 6d. by door-to-door collections.

Public Finances Just how carefully the council monitored its handling of public monies can be judged by the fact that by 1895-96 there was a balance of all of eight pence carried over to next year. £25.

10s. 7d. was spent on the poor’s coal. Of that, £24 had come from the rent on Poor’s Land, 15/11 from the Susannah Bruce charity and 15/4 from the Abigail Malpas charity. In the same year, the council agreed that names of recipients of the parish charities be published on church and chapel doors. It was still common practice that public announcements were pinned there but to those receiving poor monies this was humiliating.

Mr James Stroud Cheesman, the farmer from Caulcott, was always of an independent mind, watching every farthing spent. In 1896, he reported that parish council annual costs were running at £15. 0s 7d. and he unsuccessfully opposed the raising of extra money. Later he would lose his seat.

Telegraph Office Villagers were also complaining by 1903 of the ‘great inconvenience’ of having no telegraph office. The council asked the Postmaster General but he refused. So they asked the local MP George H Morrell to use his influence and he reported that work would be carried out the following March.

Fire Engines The village had always depended on outside fire engines to meet its needs. In November 1906 Bicester urban district council asked for contributions towards the upkeep of its fire engine.

But the council decided that because there was a fire engine at Steeple Aston, the one in Bicester was too far away to be of much use in an emergency.

Council Nominees Mr Faggetter may only have been, by his own description a ‘general labourer’, but he was regularly a thorn in the council flesh. Having been involved in the lighting debate he stood again for the council in 1899. He came last, seventh, missing out by three votes – a count which was done on the spot by a show of hands among the 31 present in the schoolroom in March of that year. They had listened to a testy clash between Mr John Eli Faggetter and Mr Christopher James Cheesman. According to the minutes ‘Mr John Eli Faggetter also asked Mr C.J. Cheesman how many parish council meetings he had attended during the year, and it was stated that Military Drill which Mr Cheesman had attended several times clashed with the meetings of the Parish Council’. To remain on the council, you had to have a good record of attendance.

Mr Faggetter who was eventually voted onto the council emigrated to California in May 1907 on account of his poor health. The council wished him ‘good speed’ and every success in the new world and he was released from paying for his allotment ‘from Michaelmas next’.

9

MINUTE BOOK 2: 1907 - 1924 On 4th March 1907 a Parish Meeting for the purpose of electing six parish councillors was held.

Thirty-nine electors were present, and ten nominations were received. Votes were counted and six people were duly elected: Andrew Castle, Charles William Gardner, Richard Gold, John Horwood, Frederick Manger and William Richard Thomas. Rev. Lennard remained as chair.

Allotments In 1908 it was proposed that in the allotment field a straight line should be staked out from the left hand post of the entrance gate to a point at a distance of 12 feet from the hedge ‘at the bend in the hedge to define the road’, and also that at the top of Mr Gold’s five acre piece a sufficient space for turning round of a waggon should be staked off and allowed to the road. It was also agreed that the rent of the allotments be reduced to £3 per annum proportionally from Michaelmas 1908.

In the summer of 1909, Mr Gold asked if the council would provide a lock and chain with a key for each tenant, for the allotment ground, as the gates were sometimes left open to the detriment of Mr Gold’s crops.

In May 1917 the Chairman gave an account of the advantages of potato spraying to allotment holders. It was agreed that a spraying machine should be purchased for £3 together with three crates of chemicals at 24/- each crate. Allotment holders would pay 8d. a chain for use of the machine and 1/10 for the spraying liquid. At the July 1919 meeting, the committee reported that they had enquired as to the spraying of potatoes and found that no one was desirous of having them sprayed.

In January 1918 a parish meeting was held to discuss a proposal made ‘on behalf of the Food Production Department of the Board of Agriculture, with regard to the growing of more food – especially potatoes’. It was suggested that more land was required for the cultivation of potatoes and the Chairman asked for names of applicants willing to take more land. Only Mr Waddup applied.

Roads and Drains There were regular complaints to Corpus Christi College that the water tap in Freehold Street was allowing water to spill over down the road. The college was responsible for the water supply. In 1909 there was a complaint of the drain near the Post Office having burst up and the ‘sewage running down the street and smelling badly’. It was explained that the Rural District Council had inspected the drain and the public sewer into which the drain ran would be immediately put in order.

Fire Brigade In March 1909, it was agreed that a contribution of £2 per annum be made to the Bicester Urban District Council for the use of their engine in case of fire.

Bicester fire brigade sent the council a letter in December 1916 saying that ‘anyone having a fire in the parish should do his best to send horses with the messengers.’

In 1921, Bicester Urban Council asked for a contribution of £17. 10s. towards the purchase of a ‘motor lorry’ (costing £500) to attend fires outside the town.

10

Freehold Street – showing open drain Poor’s Coal In 1909 a complaint was made regarding the delivery of the Poor’s Coal, and it was proposed that in future the Parish Clerk should review the colliery invoice and hand it to a member of the committee with the list of recipients before the delivery of the coal.

Following a variety of queries from councillors and parishioners, in May of the same year a parish meeting was held to consider the mode of distribution of the Poor’s Coal. The unequal shares were explained by the chairman, and a wish was expressed that the coal in future be of better quality. In December 1912, there was an increase in the Poor’s Coal allowance to 8cwt and 12 cwt.

The council sought legal advice on the Poor Law rule that a person needed a three-year residency in the area to be entitled to coal. In 1918, on the end of the Great War, coal was difficult to get, and the council decided that the Poor’s Land revenue should be paid in cash.

Larger shares were ten shillings and smaller ones 7/6 - as long as the rent had been paid. That year a total of £27. 7s. 6d. was handed out. In 1922 there was coal available, but once again in 1924 cash became the option (8/- and 11/-) since there was major industrial strife at the coalheads. From that year money was allocated instead of coal.

Railway The council asked the Great Western Railway Company (GWR) in 1910 to provide a footbridge over the line to save passengers having to use the footpath on the road bridge.

Rev. Lennard, council chairman, raised a matter in 1914 relevant to all ministers. The Sunday train service, he said, was very inadequate for clergymen taking services in local churches.

GWR were asked either to provide a Sunday motor or train to arrive at Heyford at 8 am or that one of the existing trains to be run an hour earlier. The railway company said such alterations could not be justified.

11

Later, in 1919, it was proposed that the Clerk be directed to write to Upper Heyford, Steeple Aston and Steeple Barton Parish Council asking them also to apply to the GWR to provide a ‘down train (or stop the express)’ at Heyford Station on Sundays about mid-day.

Post Office and Telegraph Office In 1911 and then in January 1914 the council asked for a public telephone call office to be opened at the Heyford Post Office, in Freehold Street. The postmaster first said no, then changed his mind later that year.

The Post Office was a very big part of village life. When the Banbury postmaster wanted it to open at 8 am instead of 7 am the council did not protest. Then it was suggested it should close on alternate Bank Holidays - again no argument. But the idea of closure on a Thursday afternoon incurred the wrath and opposition of councillors.

In September 1916 the question of the abolition by the Postmaster General of ‘all-day deliveries and despatches’ from the Heyford Post Office was considered. It was proposed that the chairman should write to the Postmaster General appealing against the proposed curtailment and asking that the 11am and 6.30pm despatches be retained. The council also asked for a third delivery at 7.30pm - not only that but Sunday deliveries. The postmaster however, felt these ‘not to be warranted.’

Coronation of King George V For the coronation of George V on 22nd June 1911 a dinner was provided for the ‘men and lads’ and a meat tea for the ‘women and children.’

At annual parish meetings, the public were allowed to speak and ask questions. Mr F Harris was particularly vociferous and, in April 1912, wanted to know why, despite his proposals at the previous ‘Annual Assembly’, there had been no discussion about the erection of the flag staff on the church tower, and why no public seats had been erected for the coronation celebrations.

Mr Harris also asked why the council went into committee (excluding non-committee members) when he attended meetings. Finally, he proposed the council provide a recreation ground in the village for the use of the parish (this presaged later events). The idea was supported by everyone - except the chairman and one resident. The first suggestion of a suitable place was Tredwell’s Close.

The Great War The sacrifice of local men apart, the Great War impacted on the parish only in small ways. The parish was told of the existence of a War Agricultural Committee and in 1916 supported, ‘in view of the national crisis’, the idea that women should be encouraged to work on the land.

There was support too for Sunday work in the fields ‘provided labour should receive a higher rate than on weekdays.’

Compulsory military service was not introduced until 1916. In March 1917 the council received a circular from the County of Oxford National Service Committee asking the Parish Council to distribute ‘enrolment papers to all male persons in the parish between the ages of 18 and 61 not employed on the land.’

12

Reading Room The idea of a Reading Room being provided for the parish was discussed as early as May 1913.

By 1919 the issue was dividing the parish. In March 1919, Rev. Lennard resigned his chairmanship of the Council and Mr William Thomas was duly elected to replace him. At the July meeting a letter was read from Mr Reginald Lennard, (the son of the former chairman, Rev. Lennard). It was accompanied by a petition from 123 residents and another from 28 exsoldiers and sailors.

The letter was ostensibly written on behalf of an anonymous donor offering £50 towards the building of a ‘Village Institute and Reading Room’ to serve as a permanent memorial of the men from the parish who had fallen in the war and as a home for the existing War Memorial Library. A number of conditions were attached to the offer relating to construction (stone and thatch or Stonesfield slates), the provision of a bath house, a room to be used as a library and club room, and a tablet or plate with the ‘names of the fallen inscribed’.

After discussion, Mr Moore proposed that the thanks of the Parish Council be accorded to the anonymous donor stating that the time was not ripe for such an expenditure and that the scheme as proposed was not a practical one.

In August, Reginald Lennard wrote again saying the donor was prepared to renew his offer and made some small amendments to his original conditions. Lennard offered to underwrite the memorial himself and gift £5 a year for five years to go towards the upkeep. He named two distinguished local servicemen who had offered substantial donations.

So, it came to a special meeting on 2nd October 1919 where villagers by 34-2 approved the idea - though it was pointed out that raising the rest of the funds might need an extra nine pence on the rates for ten years.

At the meeting on 7th February 1920, the cost of the proposed Village Institute was presented.

It was roughly estimated to be about £1,350. It was agreed that the Clerk be instructed to approach the Ministry of Health for a donation of £1,000. At the following March meeting, Mr Lennard requested information on progress and the Council confirmed that it was doing its best to get the sanction of the Ministry of Health to the scheme.

On April 15th the Chairman read a letter from the Ministry of Health and after discussion it was proposed that another public meeting be called ‘to explain to the parish the situation’. There, on 26th April, Mr Lennard proposed the council go ahead and raise a loan secured on the rates and got almost unanimous support (34 to 1).

At the May meeting, the council decided it must have control of the Village Institute scheme and, as this might clash with the anonymous donor’s wishes, it was obliged to reject the £50 offer. There was an attempt to get special funding under the Public Libraries Act and a poll of the parish showed a narrow majority 71 to 68 in favour but the council was adamant even in the face of this demand and by 4 to 2 it decided to postpone the whole scheme indefinitely.

13

Extract from minutes of meeting held 2nd October 1919.

At the annual meeting in March 1921, presided over by the new Chairman, Mr S Moore, Mr Lennard accused the Council of failing to carry out the wishes of the village as a whole, as expressed in the poll. The cost of the scheme upon the parish would have been ‘lighter than the upkeep of a horse,’ he said. In time, as the minutes record, the Reading Room came to be built as a result of the money and support of Reginald Lennard himself - though without some of the original aims.

14

MINUTE BOOK 3: 1925 – 1950 In March 1925, following ten nominations, six new Parish Councillors were elected: Albert Butler, George Cuss, John Grimmett, Charles Leonard Lapper, Harry D’Oyley Preston and William Richard Thomas, who remained as chairman.

Later, in April 1928 the council gave ‘a hearty vote of thanks’ to George Dew and invited him to accept the honorary office of Clerk to the Council in recognition of his voluntary service over the years. At the meeting in July that year they were recording his passing after 34 years in office. Mr W. Cheesman was appointed Clerk at a remuneration of £3 a year.

From October 1939 council meetings moved from the schoolroom to the rectory. There was no explanation in the minutes, but this must have been connected with the outbreak of war the previous month. They returned to the school in January 1942.

Miss Dorothy Dew, the local teacher, was co-opted onto the council, in December 1944, the first woman member in the fifty years of its existence. Four years later she became the clerk, a post her father had held for over thirty years. But 18 months later she and another woman candidate both failed to gain council seats, filled as usual by six men. Miss Dew, on behalf of the Women’s Institute, asked for a new village hall in January 1945. All involved were invited to a lecture on the subject, with a promise for action ‘sometime in the future.’

Footpaths The footpath to Upper Heyford and the Paine’s Close footpath were frequently under discussion. It was proposed that the chairman be deputed to find out if there was any waste material from the making of the new railway bridge at Heyford station that could be purchased and used for the repair of the Upper Heyford footpath. This enquiry was unsuccessful. In July, it was estimated that 24 loads of road material would be needed, and Mr Thomas was asked to get a price from Mr Smith of Enslow and to contract for the delivery ‘while the dry weather lasts’.

However, by February 1926 the road material had still not been sourced and Mr Thomas suggested that material from the railway station could be had free of charge. In April, the question of the repairs to the footpath were discussed again and Mr Thomas drew attention to the difficulty of getting road materials to the spot, but that the footpath ‘would be repaired as soon as it became practical’. In December 1926 it was reported that the repairs on the Upper Heyford footpath were completed and the bill for £14.10.0 was presented for payment.

The bridle road to Kirtlington was also in a bad state and the Council was asked if it would metal the road and make it into a proper bridleway. A new finger post inscribed ‘Bridle Way to Kirtlington’ was also proposed. In March 1927, a bill for new oak handpost and new oak stile in The Moors, to the north-east of the village, was allowed and ordered to be paid.

15

The Railway Bridge at Heyford Station The Clerk was also directed to have the stile in Broadhead meadow, on the Steeple Aston side of the river, repaired as well as a stile on the Upper Heyford footpath. The latter had been a problem for some time and the Clerk was directed in June 1926 to ‘get the repair done at once’.

By July 1950 the Ploughley Rural District Council had received an application for the diversion of the Bridle Road from the centre of Hand Post Ground to a road well known as the Grass Seeds Road towards Cold Harbour. No objection was raised.

Roads and Motor Traffic The extremely dusty state of the road between the railway bridge and the crown of the hill above the cottages was of concern in June 1925 and the Clerk was directed to write to the County Surveyor of Roads. The first hint of ‘Motor Traffic’ as a problem, however, was in March 1928 when a letter was sent to the district surveyor complaining about ‘banks of refuse in Freehold Street’ and asking him to remove it ‘as owing to the increased motor traffic the danger is great.’

In August 1934 the council considered ‘the increasing accidents which have occurred in the village’ and asked the county council to put up warning signs at junctions.

Speeding in Freehold Street was always a source of concern and in March 1950 with many children in the new council houses on Cherwell Bank the council ‘informed the policeman’ of the complaints, ‘especially about the Co-operative Society milkman.’ There was also a demand for ‘danger signals’ for drivers.

16

Broadhead Meadow Bridge Who owned the Broadhead Meadow bridge was a conundrum that was never really solved.

When the foundations started to give way in July 1938 the question was - who would pay for repairs? Thames Conservancy and Oxford Canal Company quickly denied any ownership. A search though the records revealed nothing and so Oxfordshire County Council was asked to repair it. It ‘repudiated any responsibility.’ So Ploughley rural district council was asked ‘for a ruling.’ And finally, without further explanation in the minutes, the County Council put its hand up and did the work.

Housing No more important task faced the Council than the provision of homes. In February 1929 they wrote to Oxfordshire Rural Community Council asking for four new ‘parlour houses’, i.e. with two living rooms downstairs. A year later the need was deemed to be eight houses ‘at the earliest possible moment’ - six ‘parlour’ and two four-bedroomed homes. By December 1930, with nothing done, Bicester rural district council was told that there were two distinct cases of overcrowding in the village.

The council was told in 1938 that one resident had been waiting two years for a house. In the middle of the second world war Ploughley Rural District Council (which had replaced Bicester RDC) was debating ‘post-war housing for the working classes.’ Lower Heyford said it would need 12 to be on ‘Grass Seeds’ (the local name for a field on the south side of the B4030). It said demolition of dilapidated properties could not start until houses were available for people to move into.

Shortly after the war a special meeting was held to consider housing needs. Finding a suitable site was a stumbling-block. ‘Grass Seeds’ field, the villagers first choice at the top of Freehold Street, was held by the authorities to be dangerous for children to cross the road on the way to school: and there was no water supply.

Instead a development at Paine’s Close was proposed. This aroused much anger with regard to children’s safety as Paine’s Close was on a narrow road and on a sharp bend. It was also the wettest land in the village. ‘Men in the Forces have been fighting for better conditions and it’s up to us to see that their houses are put on higher and healthier ground,’ said one councillor.

‘Sanitary hardware’ was clearly an issue in the inter-war years. In 1929 a new member, Corbett Scarrott, headed a sub-committee dedicated to removing the sanitary refuse, on a voluntary basis. In addition, two contracts had been arranged for carting rubbish away and there were twenty collections, the householder paying two pennies per item.

Silver Jubilee of King George V The village was always keen to celebrate royal occasions. Apart from the idea of a children’s playground, the council had a special meeting for the King’s Silver Jubilee on May 6th, 1936.

There was to be a children’s tea party followed by games, paid for by the council. For adults a cricket match was proposed and then a social. The vicar donated one hundredweight of coal for each old age person (‘announcement greeted with applause.’). Seven pounds would be spent on ‘provisions’ and three guineas (£3 3s) on beer and minerals.

A year later in March 1937 the council was having to talk instead about a Coronation (of Edward VIII) following King George’s death. The Silver Jubilee celebrations were to be

17

replicated but one councillor objected to ‘the supply of beer being more than one glass per person.’ This time there would also be mugs for the children.

Cinema Ploughley RDC told the council in January 1939 of a move to bring ‘cinematograph entertainments’ to the district on Sundays. The council proposed Lower Heyford should object and there is no record that films ever came.

Telephone Kiosk An ‘electric lighted’ telephone kiosk was promised to the village in July 1938 and the council was able to report its arrival - five years later.

Recreation Ground As long ago as 1912 there had been voices calling for some kind of recreation ground or playing field. In March 1935, as the council considered plans to celebrate the forthcoming Silver Jubilee of King George V, someone suggested a children’s playground to mark the occasion.

A committee was set up and sites looked at. The one chosen was Harris’s Close, rented by farmer Bill Knapton. Since Corpus Christi owned all of the land it had been consulted and showed some willingness - the price of its land going for between £20 and £25 an acre. One councillor had the idea of asking the church to do the deal with Corpus Christi since the college was empowered to gift land to the church. The rector met the college and reported back that Corpus Christi did not seem keen on giving the land but might sell quite cheaply - at £30 an acre (already well above the original calculation). A petition was signed by villagers and presented to the college and in March 1937 the rector, Rev. Ward-Jackson, said the college had been given the go-ahead by the Ministry of Health to sell 1.092 acres of land in Harris’s Close.

By now George V had died and the goal for completion was the coronation of Edward VIII. That target was not met as Edward VIII was never crowned. Instead the council had now decided to buy the whole of the land in Harris’s Close and put forward a price of £150 for it.

The King George’s Fields Foundation (set up to honour the late King George V) offered £50 and its support on condition that the children’s playground now became the King George V Playing Fields.)

Another interested group, the Committee for National Fitness, offered a grant if part of the land was levelled to ‘one in forty’ (for sports to have a ‘level playing-field’, or near enough).

In October 1939 Corpus Christi said it was now prepared to rent all the land at £4 annually with the option to buy it for £90 but it wasn’t until three years later that the lease of three acres was finally agreed. Then in March 1944 it was agreed to start clearing the land - felling trees and selling off the wood - so that levelling could begin. Perhaps because of the war, no actual playing field or children’s corner emerged though the rector appealed for the children to be allowed to play there because nowhere else was suitable.

In 1948, a member of the Oxford Playing Fields Association came to talk about the National Playing Fields Association which had government money and could offer up to 60% for setting up. But the village had to show its plans first and guarantee the ground would be kept in good condition. There needed to be facilities for children, adolescents and adults and a building for dressing and showering. Eventually in 1950 the council secured the rest of the land from the college for another £25 plus costs and so work could at last begin.

18

Poor’s Land By 1928, the tenancy of the Poor’s Land changed as a result of the previous tenant being in arrears of rent. From the end of November 1931, the Poor’s Money began to be paid equally to all beneficiaries (the distribution of coal had been stopped since 1924). Then, they were each getting 7/6. But in 1944, the payment was limited to old age pensioners who should each receive 15 shillings.

Water Supply There were always problems of water shortage in the village. In June 1934, the shortage of water to various householders was discussed. But on seeing the cost for the laying of pipes in trenches (8/- a yard) with extra costs to connect up between houses, it was decided ‘the water question remain for the time being.’ Caulcott residents were no doubt glad to hear that in October 1949 ‘the well had been made safe for the general public.’

A piped water scheme for the village was in a government plan ‘for when the war finishes’ councillors heard in March 1945. Corpus Christi College was responsible for the water system and often faced criticism for failing to improve the supply. It was also galling for villagers to see a water pipe running along the top road to the RAF base in Upper Heyford only to be told they could not have a share. Then the council was told in 1949 that a rural district council engineer was coming to test for quantity and purity with a view to supplying the community.

Second World War In March 1938 the council asked for a public lecture on Air Raid Precautions. A year later (after Chamberlain had returned from Munich) the council was told such lectures had been ‘discontinued,’ but by March 1940, it was agreed that a demonstration be given ‘at an early date’. At the same time the council received a baby’s respirator (for use in the event of a gas attack) and a demonstration of its use took place the following week.

In January 1942 there was a lengthy discussion about civil defence. It was proposed that the Parish Councillors form themselves into a Local Defence Committee. They attended a demonstration of a ‘blitzed area.’ Then in December 1943 the minutes record the decision to form an ‘Invasion Committee’. The council agreed to form this committee with the Rev G.A. Ward-Jackson as chairman and power was granted to him to ‘co-opt others.’

Another aspect to wartime locally, was the protest to the Commanding Officer of RAF Heyford ‘complaining of the disturbance caused by personnel returning to camp late at night. The CO said he had ‘issued orders restraining RAF personnel from being a nuisance.’ A year on things were getting worse. Now iron bars, barbed wire and farm machinery had been put across the village road. A demand also came for RAF police to patrol the area. The council also sought compensation for damage to hedges, gates and the like caused by the military while on manoeuvres.

Food Rationing After the war food rationing was still common and in March 1950 the council was advised that 12 tons of food ‘from overseas’ had already been distributed through Ploughley Rural District Council. A house to house collection in support of the Lord Mayor’s Appeal for Thanksgiving was proposed in recognition of this overseas aid.

19

That same meeting heard about the need for a licence to store more than three gallons of petrol (still on the ration.). The committee was reminded that the licence could be obtained from a member of the village, Mr Garrod.

Street Lighting The issue of lighting the village resurfaced in January 1945 with a suggestion that six lights would be sufficient. More than a year later the idea was again ‘stood over,’ and no action was taken.

The Bell The proposal by the landlord of the Bell to extend the front garden area of the pub in May 1950 triggered a special meeting of the council. After much discussion and an inspection of the site the landlord was told to ‘put it back as it was before’ and was reprimanded for being rude to a councillor.

20

MINUTE BOOK 4: 1951-1971 It is interesting to note that although women were standing for election to the parish council they were failing to be elected. In May 1952 Violet May Adam received 61 votes and Izabel Alice Wells 41 votes, but these were not enough. It was three years before Mrs Davis name appeared on minutes as the first female council member.

Civil Defence Lectures on civil defence continued to be held weekly in Bicester well into 1951. A further series of advanced lectures were also to be arranged for Lower Heyford. In November 1951 it was proposed the members of the Civil Defence Corp be asked if they could attend.

Water Finally, in March 1951, the village was notified that a scheme for a piped supply of water had was being considered for government approval.

Footpaths and Bridleways A survey had been carried out into the condition of ten local footpaths and bridleways in the parishes including: Lime Kiln Corner Caulcott to Goldwell Spinney; Grass Seeds Field, The Church Way, Treadwell’s Close, Poor Man’s Path and Frog’s Lodge.

The details of the diversion of the bridle way across Hand Post Ground to Grass Seeds Road, including width and metalling, were agreed and it was noted that the old bridle way across the field had been ploughed up, although the right to use it was retained. The County Council would be liable for the upkeep of the new bridle way.

Football Club A letter from newly formed Heyford Athletic Football Club was received in November 1951.

Money had at last been raised to fund children’s swings for the playing field. The question now raised was how to level the field to allow use of the field for football.

The first quarter of an acre of the field had cost £57 in 1935; the major part, three acres, came in 1943 for £90 and the last quarter of an acre followed. The football and cricket clubs were told there would be no objection to them using the field and a tender was let for £10 to allow cattle to graze there to keep down the growth. In May 1956 an appeal went out to the village for voluntary help and some paid labour to get the field into shape. That year the newly formed cricket club purchased sand to help with levelling the surface for a pitch. But the footballers complained about a sewage lorry driving over their pitch.

Permission to build a dressing-room came in March 1957 and a management committee was formed. There was ambitious talk about a children’s skating rink and a tennis court, but by 1969 the changing room was reported to be ‘of much lower standard than that of clubs visiting’.

It was agreed that detailed plans and specification should be available before the committee could make a decision.

A special meeting of the Parish Council was held in April 1970 to discuss new changing rooms for the playing field. A number of options were put forward. It was noted that the National Playing Fields Association might be willing to fund some money if a larger building was

21

envisaged: twice the size of the original proposal and with pebble dash facia boards instead of prefabrication. In honour of Sidney Humphries, who had done so much to get the project going, it was agreed to set up a memorial fund, the proceeds to go towards the new pavilion.

Permission was given in July 1972 for work to begin and the football club contributed £200.

Bus Shelter The need for a bus shelter became urgent in 1955 when the village hall, where people had been sheltering, decided to lock its gate. Fifteen years later when the debate on spending on projects was heard, the bus shelter came top of the list. At that meeting in 1970 it was indicated that the provision of a bus shelter at the top of the village was very necessary and the council were requested to precept for the cost if necessary.

Village Hall In 1948 a fund had been started to pay for a new village hall. Ten years later that amounted to £110 and with a £175 gift from ‘the Americans’ (probably the USAF at Upper Heyford) and a remit to make a fresh start and raise money, a Village Hall Committee was set up. There was talk of building a new hall behind the old one which would then be demolished.

In September 1963 plans for the new village hall were examined. Two years later the Ministry of Housing and Local Government loaned £500 to be repaid within 30 years. The old village hall was becoming an eyesore and in 1967 a letter was sent to the parochial church council asking for it to be demolished. In 1969 though, people were asking what was holding up progress, to be told that committee charged with the task had not met for two years. In March 1970 it was also reported that the Village Hall Committee had been reinstated and had had four meetings. A scheme to site the proposed hall at the top of the village was now approved and a grant would be sought of about £4,750 for the £9,500 required. £4,000 was already available.

The old village hall finally closed on 31st March 1966 and a request was made to the Parish Council early in 1967 to demolish the old hut.

The Bell Normally snug and peaceful, trouble spilled out of the Bell pub in March 1952 after a coach had arrived unexpectedly in the square. The council told the police of ‘a very drunken scene […] when glass bottles were smashed.’ The police explained that the disturbance was caused by a ‘coach which arrived unexpectedly’ At an annual meeting Mr Reggie Lennard, now a councillor, said the recently painted Double Diamond sign ‘spoiled the effect of the beautiful old stone’ of the pub building. Halls Brewery, the owners, were told it ‘greatly disfigures this fine old building and the adjoining street and homes.’ By the month’s end Halls had removed the sign.

Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II Another coronation this time for Queen Elizabeth the Second - and a good moment to put street lighting in as a memorial, it was agreed. A bus shelter was also proposed and as always tea and sports for the children.

For Queen Elizabeth’s coronation in June 1953 a clump of trees costing £12 14s 6d was planted in the playing field. Villagers who had voted for the idea were asked to make a contribution.

In July of that year a letter was received from Corpus Christi College enclosing a donation of £5 towards the Coronation Clump of Trees. At the same time the King George’s Field

22

Foundation Fund had approved £140 towards the provision of memorial gates and levelling of the field.

Sewage Disposal Getting major improvements in the village needed infinite patience. In November 1952 there was a report that the sewage disposal site for new council houses in Bromeswell Close would be in a corner of the field where there was a footpath to Upper Heyford. Nine years on the council was told that sewage works for the whole village could not be completed yet as there were other works in hand. In January 1967 Caulcott wanted to know if it would be getting mains sewage. No, was the short answer, no sewage in the immediate future. In March the council was talking of another two years wait, but in the June Ploughley RDC advised of the forthcoming erection of two pumping stations and a sewage purification works; Village Lighting It seemed a majority of the village still did not want street lighting. In December 1953 a woman told the council she found difficulty getting home from the station after dark, only to be told nothing could be done because of the cost. Subsequently, at the annual meeting in March 1958 (five years later) it was demanded of the council to find out the cost of six (electric) lamps.

Forty villagers gathered to hear two schemes from Southern Electric. It was argued that Caulcott residents should be exempted from any charges since the schemes would not benefit them. Only five voted for the ideas (£121 annual charge for six or £400 with 25-year loan for 14 lamps) so the idea was abandoned. In May 1963 SEB came up with new costings, the council chose the scheme with 14 lamps costing £400 and a vote of 12-8 in the wider community supported this. But the costs spiralled when the council decided to ask for a government loan, added lighting for new streets of Bromeswell Close and Cherwell Bank - and five lamps in Caulcott. At another special meeting in December 1965, 35 people present heard the 23 lamps in the two villages would need a loan raised of £800 repayable over 25 years equal to a four pence rate levy. By show of hands 12 voted in favour and 23 against and that idea too was ‘abandoned.’ By September 1970 the latest costing from SEB was now £1,057. But at a special meeting in January 1971, ‘street lighting’ came bottom of the list of priorities discussed.

Poor’s Fund In the early 1950s a notice from the Poor’s Fund trustees still went up on a notice board (church doors no longer used!) saying that ‘a grant will be made to each household containing a pensioner who has been resident in the parish for at least 3 years.’ It was agreed not to state how much each received and also agreed that the recipients names would no longer be registered in the minutes book. In 1958 the council tried, without success, to sell off the land but it was another decade before changes came about. With the permission of the Charity Commissioners several charities were amalgamated including Poor’s Land, Malpas and Bruce.

By January 1972 old age pensioners were getting £3 each for Christmas.

Traffic Traffic continued to be a headache for planners, councillors and other villagers alike. In December 1955 a demand for speed limit signs in the village ‘as traffic often moves too rapidly’ was turned down by the county council. It said a speed limit of 30 mph could not be agreed to.

Although it was told that a house at the top of the village had twice had its fence broken by lorries failing to negotiate the corner. By September 1969, another request, this time for a 40mph speed limit on the main road, had been turned down, on the basis of the 1969 Transport Speed Limit Policy. Another request was made to the County Council in July 1972. Then in 1957 complaints were received from residents that cars were parking all night and revving up

23

in early morning. In May 1959 it appeared that many cars were mistaking Mill Lane for Freehold Street. There was a call for a ‘no through road’ sign there. Two accidents were reported on Long Bridge when vehicles failed to negotiate the bend. In 1967 there was a demand for cars to park only one side of Freehold Street, but the county surveyor said any obstruction was not sufficient to need regulation.

Housing There was talk in March 1954 of new houses ‘along Upper Heyford road’ with piped water supply installed. In 1956 Ploughley Rural District Council told the annual meeting that 32 council homes had been built in the district since the war. There were then four applicants on the waiting list here. Two homes in the parish were due for demolition: normally nothing would happen until the present occupants - usually old people - had been catered for. Ploughley described them as ‘hutted families’ (possibly a term for council properties.) People at the meeting wanted to know when bathrooms would be installed in pre-war homes: ‘as soon as possible’ was the answer. When someone asked about garages being provided the council reply was that they were too expensive to install.

By July 1959 the waiting list was now six. In September 1964 Ploughley said it was looking for a site for 12 homes in the Lower/Upper Heyford/Somerton/Middleton Stoney area Three years later Lower Heyford was appealing to Ploughley to approach owners of land ‘with a view to releasing suitable sites for controlled housing development, ‘drawing their attention to the fact that the population of the village was diminishing owing to the housing shortage.’ It wasn’t until 1964 that councils - including ours - were asked to number houses.

In April 1968 Ploughley welcomed the news the council was willing to negotiate part of the playing field for housing development; But a month later Oxfordshire county council refused Ploughley’s application ‘to develop approximately six acres between the Main Road and Freehold Street’. In February 1969 a special meeting of the council agreed to set aside 0.215 acres of the playing field for development by Ploughley as old people’s bungalows. The value of the land was put at £815 and in January 1970 the deal was completed.

In Abigail Malpas’ will of 1657 she bequeathed some homes in London to the benefit of the poor of Lower Heyford. For three hundred years they had given the village a return of a few pence annually. Then in 1956 the City of London notified the council that these tenements in Three Leg Court, Whitecorn Street, Cripplegate were to be subject of compulsory purchase.

They had been bombed in the war and on redemption of the rent charge of £1 per annum, the village would be getting £18 10s. With an eye to business the council wrote asking if it would it be possible to increase the amount, since the bank rate had fallen since the offer was made.

There was no answer.

The Square The square was forever a source of dispute. In March 1957 the surface was in a bad condition and the council asked Oxfordshire if they would take over responsibility for the ground except for the jubilee oak and rails around it. In 1958 the county said it had never been their responsibility. Then in October 1960 they did they work!

Best Kept Village The council several times entered the best kept village competition but never won anything. In October 1957 the judges reported the ‘standard of this village was high and only beaten by

24

exceptional merit of certain others.’ But by March 1965 Lower Heyford decided not to try again ‘as there were so many untidy aspects of the village.’

Telephone Kiosks Caulcott was told in May 1958 that a telephone kiosk would be provided. But when the council asked for an additional one in Lower Heyford the post office said it was not justified: not enough people used it (judged on the money it generated.) The council argued that the present kiosk was not well situated given the housing density in the village and, if two kiosks were not viable, how about moving the existing one ‘about halfway up the village’ - about 80 yards up Freehold Street was calculated as ‘dead centre.’ In July 1964 the council told the post office telephone people of an imbalance: ‘in the eastern end of the village which consists of the main population, there is only one private telephone, whereas in the western end there are 16.’

Reading Room After the reading room had been built, Mr Reggie Lennard wanted to gift ownership of it to the council, which was delighted with the ‘generous offer’. The Ministry of Education objected to it becoming a charity but backed off after the council had pointed out that ‘the facilities provided in the trust deed are provided with the object of improving the conditions of life for the persons for whom the facilities are primarily intended; and considers no one really familiar with that village (most of whose inhabitants live in small cottages) could feel any doubt on the matter.’ Radical changes soon happened, however. The bath was taken out and in early 1966 it was proposed using the reading room as a doctor’s surgery, and in the next year the rector was given approval to use it for youth activities; But those ‘activities’ did not include tampering with the electricity meter and after that incident the youth of the village could no longer use the facilities unless shepherded.

The council held some meetings there but realised it would become superfluous when the new village hall was opened. In 1971 it asked the Department of the Environment to wind up the trust - only to be told it would have to prove that ‘the trust is about to fail.’

Beeching Report The Beeching Reports of 1963 and 1965 proposing the closure of many railway stations, inevitably had repercussions for Lower Heyford. On being told the station was to be closed, the council argued the case for retention with the British Railways Board: ’besides serving a number of other villages and the American Air Base it is used by several residents in Lower Heyford as the means of reaching their daily work and particularly elderly people use it and would feel the closure a real hardship.’ Astonishingly it won the day so convincingly that in 1966 there were protests at the long delay in erecting a platform shelter on the ‘up’ line, American Air Base at Upper Heyford The American air base had come to Upper Heyford in 1950 but it wasn’t until 1964 that Ploughley Rural District Council called a meeting of local councils to discuss ways of ‘furthering relations with our American guests in Oxfordshire.’ Thought was given to the need ‘to get in touch with young fellows (American servicemen), mainly single, that could not get away from the camp and needed other interests than going to the public house’. Noise and road accidents were the two principal irritants for locals. Ardley Parish Council sent a round-robin letter asking for support about complaints of aircraft noise. Lower Heyford hearing that that other villages in Oxfordshire received reductions in rateable value because of the row, decided to apply. Then in 1972 it wrote to the base commander about the number of car accidents involving American servicemen and to complain about the traffic chaos caused by their open days.

25

Doctors’ Surgery Doctors began using the reading room as a surgery in May 1966, paying five shillings a week for its hire. When the Deddington surgery opened five years later the reading room was no longer needed for the doctors, and the council discussed the idea of financially helping needy parishioners getting to the new surgery. When a villager asked the council for £2 for the cost of taxi, they were paid out of the Poor’s Charity. It was decided that any motorist taking old people to the surgery could charge up to five New Pence per mile and paid £10 annually towards the County Council minibus taking villagers there.

26

MINUTE BOOK 5: 1972-1983 After 79 years of handwritten minutes, in November 1972 the first typewritten minutes were recorded. Mr. K. Allen was Chairman at that date. Earlier that year, the council had stood in silence following the death of chairman of Sidney Humphries in January 1972. It was decided a memorial fund be started with proceeds going towards the new playing fields pavilion: £172-12p was raised.

School In January 1969, it was reported that the Oxfordshire County Council proposed to build one school for the two parishes, to be positioned very close to the end of the Upper Heyford base runway. Lower Heyford Parish Council instead suggested that building the new school in Lower Heyford would be safer and less noisy and they offered the use of the playing field.

By April 1978, Oxfordshire County Council ‘wished the parish council to know there was no question of closing the school.’ The council’s clerk said the current issue was only the possible withdrawal of one teacher because of low pupil numbers. Parents were concerned about the effectiveness of having only one teacher remaining. With the pupil number at 31 this was the very minimum for two teachers. By May 1978 there was talk of a ‘good possibility’ of some pupils attending from outside the parish which would prevent the loss.

A meeting in the school in February 1980 was told the fate of the school had still not been decided but that it was a good omen that the school was being redecorated. Next came a strong hint that the two Heyford schools would be ‘federated’. It was felt that Lower Heyford had the better buildings and land available if new building was to take place.

In June 1980 however, Upper Heyford objected to the county education sub-committee proposal of amalgamation and the matter was now before the Secretary of State for Education in Whitehall. In September, Oxfordshire accepted the recommendation for an amalgamated school with the juniors for both villages going to Lower Heyford school. A new infants teacher had started at the school.

M40 Motorway In January 1970, the council received a feasibility report from the Ministry of Transport for a motorway, to be called the M40.

In June 1973, an Action Group was set up to monitor future use of the B4030 and to prevent the use of the road as a lorry route from the A40 to the proposed new M40. At the July meeting of the group, concern was expressed at the proposal for two M40 junctions, one at Middleton Stoney and one at Weston-on-the-Green; by July 1974 there was concern at the possible effect of an M40 extension, via the Upper Heyford Route, on the Poor’s Land and footpaths.

The Bell When Oxfordshire suggested replacing the thatch on the barn opposite The Bell with asbestos in March 1971 the council had no objection, only saying that ‘coloured asbestos may be less harsh’.

27

Children in the School Playground at Lower Heyford (copyright Diccon Harris) USAF Base In November 1972, as Cold War intensity grew, increasing activity at the USAF base led to more complaints. The USAF warned there would be changes in flying times. In April 1978, there was a call for a united village councils’ approach to ‘settling grievances’. First there was a demand for more noise readings to be taken ‘particularly for stationary aircraft prior to starting their take-off run’. Cherwell District Council (which had replaced Ploughley in 1974) complained about the unsightly hangars and talked of an acceptable ‘toning colour’ which would be tried. In October 1980 Upper Heyford base liaison committee report (on which councils sat) discussed the base roads, landscaping the new hangers, air pollution, civil defence and deviation from flight paths.

The following year the Americans advised that another squadron of aircraft was to be stationed at the base bringing 600-700 additional staff. Lower Heyford asked for road improvements and a footpath to Upper Heyford ‘so folk would not have to cross the road’: fears were expressed about the large number of accidents involving servicemen from the base on the road to Upper Heyford.

Concern was also expressed about money paid by the base to Cherwell District Council and what use it was put to. Councils demanded further rate rebates because of the noise. Five parishes were getting rebates but the amount, for some reason, was not disclosed.

Reading Room During the fuel crisis of November 1973, it was agreed the village hall and reading room could be used as ‘warming rooms’ for people suffering from lack of heating supplies. In April 1974 it ceased to be used as a doctor’s surgery.

28

During 1973 there had also been discussions with Oxfordshire County Council planning department regarding change of use for the reading room, from a public room to a private residence. With the advent of a new village hall, the parish council wondered if it could be converted to a house, a museum, a chapel, a youth centre or rented to newly marrieds or old people - only to be told it would cost £5,600 for conversion to a home. In April 1976 charity trustees took it over and as the minutes observed ‘this concluded a long and complicated business stretching over some seven years’.

Bus Shelter A new site for the bus shelter and bus pull-in was agreed in March 1973, at the entrance to the new village hall car park.

Speeding

By March 1973, the 40-mph speed limit was agreed for the B4030 from the bridge to the junction with Upper Heyford Road. This followed the death of a Lower Heyford woman in 1972 on the Upper Heyford road. There was also talk of a footpath there. At the same meeting, it was noted that the Upper Heyford Base Commander advised the Council that every effort was being made to draw servicemen’s attention to the road hazards throughout the village.

By the end of July that year, there were complaints that the 40-mph limit was not being complied with and the Council was asked for a copy of the original plan to improve the junction of Freehold Street with the B4030 and for the police to carry out speed checks.

Parking Americans were using the chapel in Lower Heyford and their big cars were causing a hazard.

The pastor was requested to ask if visitors would park on only one side of Freehold Street.

It was agreed there would be a ‘parking helper’ to make sure that drives were not blocked.

The worshippers were then told they could park in the village hall car park - for a fee, but that was not taken up. The council thought about buying land off Mill Lane for a casual car park but that would have cost £1,000.

In 1982, there were also complaints that fishermen coming to the canal for competitions were causing obstruction especially in Mill Lane.

Housing In July 1973 ratepayers were circulated with a document indicating around ten new council homes were required. Two years later a special meeting was told that about 25 families from Lower and Upper Heyford were on the council house waiting list. That meeting welcomed plans by the district council to erect six old people’s bungalows on land adjacent to the reading room. There was a less enthusiastic response for building a block of four houses on land between the Bell and 17 Freehold Street.

Post Office The post office informed the village in October 1973 that mail vans would be taking over from cyclists.

Deddington Surgery A bus paid for by local charities was now taking villagers to the Deddington surgery. But in June 1974 it was suggested it could no longer visit Caulcott ‘due to the cost’ or Lower Heyford ‘because of the narrow roads’. Charity trustees said they would fund nothing more

29

unless the bus stopped at Caulcott. In 1975 the bus service had resumed and picked up from both Caulcott and Lower Heyford.

In January 1975, Bicester doctors agreed they would take patients from Caulcott but not Lower Heyford after three cases had been cited of people having difficulty getting appointments or transport.

Later a minibus was introduced only for patients with appointments, going around half the area twice a week and serving the infant welfare clinic on alternate Tuesdays. The costs were shared between the health authority, doctors and parishes. In July 1983 it was said 135 patients used the bus in the past year; the cost for the coming year of the bus would be £73.

A concessionary bus fare system for the elderly was also considered in 1983. It was agreed that the tokens for each individual would be to the value of £12.

Football Club and Playing Field The football club asked for floodlights near the football pitch in 1975 so it could have evening practice in winter. Two years later it requested a club room and bar. A special meeting was called to consider these changes and objections came on grounds of noise and traffic damage to nearby properties. It was reported there would be no late-night dancing or music licence.

In July 1983 the licence stipulated drinking should finish by 9.45 pm and the building be vacated by 10 pm. Six months later the council agreed to allow the bar to be opened on a weekday other than Wednesday, to remain open till 10.30 and for the building to be empty by 10.45 pm. After Saturday games, the bar was to be open for an hour.

Notices went up in November 1976 calling for a tennis court on the playing field but without enough interest it was felt the cost could not be justified. The plan to buy the land was withdrawn.

Caulcott Playground Caulcott residents presented a petition asking for a playground in November 1976. The council reported that it had been found impossible to find any landowner of a suitable site who would agree to leasing land, so it was agreed to defer this indefinitely.

Tree Planting There was much support for tree planting in the villages, and a donation had been received from Mrs Busby, the schoolteacher, for trees and shrubs. Cherwell DC wanted trees planted ‘relative to the area of high landscape value in the Cherwell Valley’. Most would have to go on land tenanted by local farmers who asked for financial help. In January 1976, it was agreed to plant seven trees on the B4030 and ten along Greenway, Caulcott, at a cost of between £4 and £10 per tree including stakes, guard posts and wire. Individuals and organisations in the parish would be invited to plant and look after a tree.

Parish Magazine – Valley News The Parochial Church Council for Lower and Upper Heyford, Somerton and Rousham decided, in 1979, to publish a magazine, but not only on church matters. It would be managed by a committee with representatives in each parish and financed by donations and advertising and was named ‘Valley News’. Lower Heyford council agreed to donate £15 towards first year’s costs.

30

Extract from Valley News, February 1979 Royal Commemorations In September 1979, the council learned that the plaque on the Jubilee Oak was wrong. It read Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee, 1897 but should have read Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee,1887. It was agreed that the plaque be replaced. A couple of years later a juvenile who damaged the seat around the tree had £5 deducted from his pocket money.

For another royal celebration, the Queen Mother’s 80th birthday in April 1980, the council decided celebrations should be ‘an occasion for fun and not fund raising;’ Arrangements were made for an Arts and Crafts exhibition in the school and a flower exhibition in church.

For the wedding of Prince Charles and Lady Diana in September 1981, a village fete achieved a very successful profit of £503.15s.

Planning Applications After a spectacular blaze destroyed part of the very old Paine’s Cottage the council received a planning application in September 1983 for its reconstruction.

31

MINUTE BOOK 6: 1984-1990 Mr W. Knapton was elected chairman and Mr M. Inkpen agreed to serve as Vice-Chairman. It was recorded that meetings were held in ‘the Heyfords School’.

Knapton’s Croft In early 1984 Corpus Christi College announced its intention to replace Knapton’s farm buildings in the heart of the village with a private housing development. The council told the College of ‘the need to thoroughly investigate, with the aid of the local people, the beneficial community aspects of the ideas of low-cost housing and small-scale work units.’ That summer because of ‘the sensitive nature of the business at hand and the particular interest of those parishioners in attendance’ the council meeting was opened up to general discussion. Mr. Knapton, hoped discussion would be both ‘well-ordered and constructive.’

At that meeting on Monday 9th July 1984, the College representative present said the continued agricultural use of the buildings was ‘inhibited within the context of the modern farm practices’ given its central village location. He argued for residential use and against small work units.

One villager said work units would be good for the village and another councillor argued that there should be a mixture of residential use and workshops.

From the audience came the question that ‘putting aside all the cosmetic aspects, is this not a misused opportunity for the college to demonstrate its interest in the village? Given the historical and paternal role of the College in the affairs of the parish is this not the soft option, a quick sale with the window dressing of the planning permission?’

Another asked: ‘Is this not simply a question of the financial advantage of residential units over work units?’ ‘Yes, this is a factor,’ the College representative admitted. Someone else asked: ‘What about the social responsibility of the College after many long years of direct benefits as the major local landowner?’

At the annual meeting in late 1984, the view was that cost factors would mean the development (as private homes) being too expensive for many local people. That meeting was followed by a special meeting which decided to object on the grounds it did not ‘recognise the need to take this final opportunity to preserve the essential working life of the village.’

In May 1985, the council felt a ‘sense of foreboding’ as to the sincerity of the College in pursuing the principle of workshops and two months later that fear was confirmed. The College had decided against workshops, having found the costing figures ‘unconvincing’. In the November the village learned that the long hoped-for workshops development would not proceed. The old barns and the open area of the Market Square would be developed for residential use by two separate builders.

By September 1986, work on the redevelopment was progressing. At first it was referred to as ‘College Court’ but it was pointed out in the meeting that the College’s connection with the site was so short it did not warrant ‘its inclusion in any chosen name’. Eventually it came to be known as Knapton’s Croft.

32

Knapton’s Farm around 1982 (copyright Ewan Makepeace) River Pollution Dead fish were seen in the Cherwell in summer 1984. This was caused by major pollution incident after a very large fire in Banbury.

Canal There was worry too about the future of the canal drawbridge. The British Waterways Board said in March 1986 that it would be replaced by a wooden bridge, but the village saw no reason to take away the present structure. The new wooden bridge was installed that summer despite local opposition, and it was suspected that the waterways had cut up the old one on site to preempt any action that could lead to its reinstatement.

The increasing popularity of life on the water was reflected in more residential long-term moorings. The council recorded how many permanently moored boats were causing a nuisance with casual dumping of rubbish, obstruction of the towing path and dogs running loose. It felt this was discouraging holiday-makers and was also concerned about the possibility of unauthorised workshops being set up on boats.

Telephone Boxes The future of rural telephone boxes caused some anxiety nationally in 1984. In view of the threat of privatisation, the council wrote to British Telecom to establish the financial position of its two kiosks. BT advised that those earning less than £185 a year might be in danger of closure: the Lower Heyford one was safe (£540 revenue) but Caulcott (£134) might be vulnerable, although not in the immediate future. With BT planning only to save about one percent of boxes countrywide, by 1987 it was felt only the one opposite the Lower Heyford post office should be protected on grounds of its traditional rural setting - and a year later the

33

kiosk was given ‘listed’ status. The council felt the successful outcome owed as much to prompt action as to good fortune.

Railway Station The fine railway station waiting room building was earmarked in November 1984 for removal to Didcot for preservation. Many years later however, it still lay in a heap at the GWR railway museum there. But British Rail stressed this did not mean Heyford station was going. Soon afterwards, the council reported plans to build a new purpose-built station building had been rushed through with indecent haste and ‘showing scant regard for villagers opinion.’ BR offered a new improved timetable and made a reduced fares offer in March 1986 but said the facility had to be used or these would be withdrawn again. In November 1987 came complaints about overcrowding on trains: BR promised to increase rolling stock to two coaches. At that time, the council asked for the 7.07 am Banbury-London fast train to stop at Heyford. In January 1990 there was another complaint this time about intermittent reliability of the service and characterised by ‘uncaring indifference’ on the part of some of BR staff.

USAF Base The USAF base liaison committee allowed local people to vent their feelings about the management of the base. It considered matters like base security, local noise readings and road traffic accidents. The commander said he was making efforts ‘to ensure base personnel behaved to the highest standards’ on local roads. In September 1985 he expressed ‘genuine concern’ at the number of vehicle incidents and offered base phone numbers in cases of difficulty.

The base was always announcing ‘increased flying activity periods.’ In 1988 new flight lines were imposed without warning and with new take-off patterns. Noise readings were assessed by the RAF and Cherwell District Council and a straw poll revealed a consensus that in Lower Heyford there was now more noise. This was at the height of the peace movement anti-nuclear demonstrations outside the Upper Heyford air base. Some councils supported the protests: Lower Heyford, when it received a copy of a resolution from Somerton asking for support in condemning the use of the base in the raid on Libya, took a less positive stance: ‘briefly discussed and noted’ the minutes reported.

In March 1986 the MoD announced it was awarding double glazing grants to those villages most affected by noise. About 700 homes were to be awarded, but those in Lower Heyford were not among them. However, it was said that one home in the village had successfully claimed compensation for noise.

In July 1987 the base meeting considered a request to support an application for double glazing for Dr Radcliffe’s school at Steeple Aston. The idea of a reduction in the forthcoming community charge on properties suffering from noise was discussed but quickly dealt with by local MP Mr Tony Baldry. He explained, ‘because there are valid and continuing reasons for the change, the only way round would be the realignment of runways costing about £50 million’.

Over fifty parishioners attended a meeting in March 1990 to hear a property company explain the noise compensation scheme. In July 1989, jets had spent ninety minutes navigating a variety of flying circles which were then measured for noise levels in an effort to identify the least intrusive - but take-offs, when most noise was generated, were not tested. Soon there was concern over the incidence and impact of mass take-offs and some overflying of Lower Heyford itself was reported.

34

There were also concerns about pollution - complaints were about the burning off waste oil and rubber materials and fire drills that were emitting too much smoke.

Bus Shelter In November 1985 serious damage to the bus shelter caused by vandals cost in the region of £1,500 to repair. At the next meeting the view was expressed that there was a ‘growing trend among some youth to be noticeably less respectful to elderly’ and additional abuse of both private and public property was evident. Greater effort on the part of parents was called for.

Mains Gas Mains gas was a prospect for Lower Heyford in May 1985, with the report of the installation of a new pipeline from Hopcroft’s Holt to Upper Heyford. The supply was running directly to, and being financed by, USAF. Southern Gas were asked if they could make a connection to Lower Heyford. Every household was canvassed and a 35 per cent take up was necessary costing £480 per household. Insufficient interest was shown.

St Mary’s Church The church asked for help in raising £47,000 for restoration of St Mary’s in January 1986. The parish council offered support for the venture but said any help would be limited and deferred the idea. In March it donated £190.

The following year, the rector wrote to the council expressing the church’s increasing difficulties in the upkeep of the churchyard particularly with grass cutting. He drew the council’s attention to its responsibility for the maintenance of a ‘closed churchyard’ (no more burial room). The council’s clerk said there was doubt whether the churchyard, although full in parts, could be accepted as a closed one.

St Mary’s Church, Lower Heyford

35

In January 1989 the Parochial Church Council asked for continued support for maintenance of the churchyard. The council noted that St Mary’s had been reported to have received a substantial bequest from the estate of Miss Dew and felt it might now be in better position to bear the costs itself. It agreed not to give further financial assistance.

The PCC asked the parish council to reconsider but they refused. The clerk was asked to write to the rector refuting the contention that assistance given in the past was a ‘compromise payment’ in recognition of the alleged ‘partly closed’ status of the churchyard. In January 1990 another appeal for assistance was made. Council members responded with the hope that a similar approach to the Charity trustees might be favourably received.

Footpaths After a parishioner had expressed concern about the state of footpaths in January 1986 it was decided to arrange a forum of interested to parties to consider proposals to divert, extinguish and create footpaths. Then came reports of dangerous stretches of canal towpath.

Pig Farm at Caulcott The annual meeting in May 1986 was presented with a small jar filled with large dead flies. It was evidence brought by Caulcott residents complaining of problems on a pig farm there. The minutes record ‘members appalled at the sight before them.’ It was confirmed that Mrs Ball was in touch with the Environmental Health officer in Banbury.

‘Litter Blitz’ weekend – 4th/5th April 1987 At the February 1987 meeting it was agreed that the parish would participate in County and District Councils’ sponsored ‘Litter Blitz’ weekend. A number of measures were agreed, including provision of a rubbish skip in the village, free plastic refuse bags, and publicity via community bodies for support and assistance.

Buses Deregulation of the bus system brought timetable changes, so much so that in July 1989 concern was being expressed that the Number 25 minibus service was arriving full and leaving the elderly to stand.

School In September 1986, Oxfordshire County Council presented the case for closure of the Heyfords’ school. The parish council recognised there were only limited prospects of raising pupil numbers within the foreseeable future. The county offered to defer closure moves to hear a more detailed case by school governors, but in March 1987, it was reported that members of the Oxfordshire County Council had voted to close the school completely. Formal notices of closure were published and, unless an appeal was upheld, the closure and transfer of pupils would take effect in September. Lower Heyford council had expressed ‘deep regret and considerable concern’ at the decline of the school and then lodged an appeal with a 350signature petition in support. The minutes of the meeting in January 1988 reported that ‘the school is to remain open’ and there were suggestions that closure was to be deferred as an amalgamation idea was still being considered by the County Council. Members welcomed this news but agreed to defer further reaction until more detailed information was available.

By May 1988, the parish council were concerned that ‘the continuing uncertainty, coupled with unwelcome and aggressive publicity emanating from Upper Heyford, was having harmful effects on the numbers of children likely to attend (Lower Heyford) school in the coming year.’

36

It accused the county authority of ‘delaying tactics,’ saying governors were kept in dark about the proposals. Some doubt was voiced about the integrity of the authority in the apparent use of the unsettled atmosphere as a means to manipulate falling rolls, thereby achieving by stealth the original intention of complete closure.

The final shock for the council was to discover in July 1988 that the school governors had apparently resolved to support a recommendation to the county that the Upper Heyford site be chosen as the preferred location for the Heyfords’ school. It said this was a fundamental change to ‘the position previously held by governors and council’ that Oxfordshire should choose the site. One councillor, who was also school governor, felt unable to disclose to the council the business transacted and decisions taken about the school’s future. At a special meeting, where the governors were called to account, Canon Wilson, rector appearing on behalf of the governors, said they were influenced by the evidence that the greater number of children were from Upper Heyford rather than Lower Heyford. The rector answered a series of questions but did not agree the governors had been ‘blackmailed’ by Upper Heyford with their threats to withdraw their children completely. It was agreed that the governors look again at the figures and contact the local press to redress the balance which had swung in favour of Upper Heyford.

In January 1989, Oxfordshire County Council proposed the idea of closing both schools and building a new one on a site at Upper Heyford - which would be much nearer the USAF Base runway. The council noted regretfully that some parents had started taking their children away to other schools. In July 1989 Oxfordshire ruled that there was no further need for Lower Heyford school buildings. So control returned to the original trust under which it was established in the 1860s. In its place came a kindergarten which was soon triggering its own concerns because the traffic being generated by the delivery and collection of children attending the school Roads Three road accident blackspots occupied much council time. Oxfordshire County Council refused a major upgrade of the Kirtlington turn on the B4030 and its junction with Freehold Street. The council cited a parishioners’ plan for improvements and said it would not let the issue lapse ‘until the requisite number of deaths or increased funding occurred’. In November 1987 a fatal accident occurred at the third problem spot - Long Bridge. A young American serviceman was killed in an accident involving a heavy lorry. Temporary traffic lights were installed, and the council successfully called for them to be made permanent. It also pressed for a footway to be built.

After a fatal accident at the Caulcott junction the council made a further call for early action to ‘overcome this now desperate situation.’ It was the fifth death in just over three years on the B4030. In March 1990 the council again wrote to Oxfordshire County Council about weight restriction on local roads to combat the increasing numbers of lorries.

Food Mountains The EEC ‘food mountains’ in this period were sometimes a source of benefit locally. In March 1987, Age Concern Oxford wrote regarding distribution of surpluses. The Forget-me-not Club in the village undertook to ensure all eligible people received their allocation.

Jubilee Seat The Jubilee Seat needed repairing again in 1987 at a cost of £480. Two wooden bench seats were agreed, each costing about £200. Council members held an on-site meeting and decided

37

to place one under the oak and the other on common land at the junction of Freehold Street and Mill Lane with a plaque commemorating Miss Dew. One resident was concerned that siting it there might encourage noise and bad behaviour by youngsters, but the council declared that the ‘misbehaviour of a small number’ should not prevent installation for the good of all.

Tree Planting In March 1987, council members were provided with copies of the 1979 planting scheme and discussed a number of fresh sites for tree planting: the top of Paines Close, at Caulcott Hill, Greenway and the Village Hall. It was agreed to invite Mr Nicholson of Steeple Aston to provide suggestions. An attempt would also be made to consolidate the old scheme sites onto one single map. In September 1987 the Clerk was asked to write to Mr Nicholson to place a provisional order for the trees and initiate a grant application.

Also in 1987, the ancient Wellingtonia tree at Manor Farmhouse was deemed to be in a ‘dangerous and senile condition’ and recommended for felling (by the College) It was asked to replant with a similar tree and also agreed to highlight its importance to make people aware ‘of this outstanding local landmark.’ But when the old tree was removed, replanting was ‘not a feasible project’ due to the insufficient soil depth available.

Dog Fouling Dog mess was the source of government literature to the council in 1988 detailing byelaws to compel dog owners to clean up after their animals in public places. There was support for action, but reservations were expressed about the difficulty of enforcement. There was mention of special waste bins, but it was decided not to place warning notices on the playing field: it was felt enforcement difficulties could lead to ‘undesirable conflict.’

Planning Plans to convert a Caulcott farm building into a private home were considered at a special meeting in February 1988. The council decided to object and made plain the strong feeling existing against allowing applications which intruded into open countryside. The planning inspector upheld the council’s decision.

Another planning issue quickly followed. At Cold Harbour, Corpus Christi wanted to convert barns into a single dwelling, part of Fir Tree Farm. This aroused considerable interest: over the ‘remote and sensitive setting of the site.’ Reservations were expressed about access, the impact on landscape and inadequacy of services.

Children’s Play Area The equipment for the playing field was to cost £3,136 of play equipment. The council said it was open to donations to help pay this bill.

Shops The village was stunned in July 1988, when the local shop and post office in Freehold Street went up for sale as a private dwelling. Concern was expressed at the sad and serious prospect of losing particularly the post office. The following March the council considered relocation to new position in Freehold Street. The matter had been put on the council agenda to give the public a voice but no public were present, so the meeting agreed to support the application.

Street Lighting

38

Once again lighting was on the agenda in November 1988 with the presentation of four options for public street lighting: i) pole mounted lights; ii) pay householders to leave on their outside lights on; iii) do nothing; iv) opt for combination of everything. To assist ‘unlit parishes to get speed limits imposed’ Cherwell District Council advised that it was willing to provide grant aid of up to 75 per cent. There was a quote of £2,250 to provide Caulcott with five street lights but a meeting decided the Lower Heyford need was the greater. Six lights in Freehold Street would cost £2,200 and in May 1989 the council decided on this option.

Drainage A highways drainage scheme was to start early in 1989 with much disruption to car parking.

The council expressed the hope that the main benefit of the scheme would be to reduce or eradicate the sewage smells in many parts of the village. Clearance of considerable amounts of debris from the drain in Market Square seemed to have improved the smell problem but no improvement was reported at the top of Freehold Street.

May Day parade at the Post Office in Freehold Street (1970s) (copyright Ewan Makepeace) Miss Dew’s Bungalow Proposals came along in early 1989 for an extension to Miss Dew’s bungalow at the bottom of Mill Lane. Very soon the application was enlarged - now it was a matter of its demolition to allow erection of a cottage. Cherwell district council granted permission but said the work would be ‘carefully monitored.’ There were fears that trees were being destroyed and the council wrote to Cherwell about the house being erected in contradiction to the planning approval.

There was criticism of the project and the whole Cherwell District Council planning process.

Words like ‘delay’ and ‘obstruction’ were used. A gable-end lychgate was shortly put up near the site entrance which attracted much local opprobrium and Press interest.

39

MINUTE BOOK 7: 1990-1996 The chairman elected at the Annual Meeting of the Parish Council in May 1990 was Mr Max Scraggs, with Mrs Robin Hepworth being elected as Vice-Chair. Mrs Christine Wordsworth offered to take over the post of Clerk from Mr Peter John.

At this meeting the level of public participation was said to be causing disquiet. The council did not wish to discourage attendance by the public but needed to strike an effective balance that would enable proceedings to run smoothly. The clerk was asked to ‘issue a caution’ in writing saying that the public were only permitted to speak at the discretion of the council.

The Parish Council’s 100th birthday was discussed in November 1993. It considered holding a ‘parish party’ the next year. An exhibition of village life was staged with tea and a dance and barbeque in the evening. A loss was made on the barbeque of £59.80: ‘disappointment expressed.’

Streetlighting The Council noted ‘with pleasure’ the installation of six new lights by Southern Electric in March 1990 and it was hoped 30 mph speed limit signs would follow soon.

USAF Upper Heyford The July 1990 report from the USAF base meeting, told of discussions about its future ‘in the prevailing climate of thawing east-west relations.’ That meant that until ‘things settled down’ there could be no case to be made for spending on runway realigning or other noise-reducing measures. In November 1990, the council agreed that it would support the idea of ‘a low key’ RAF base.

In May 1991 there was still need for signs to be put up at the base ‘reminding drivers to keep to the LEFT’ and regard speed limits and to ask police to be aware of the excessive speed of USAF personnel during their ‘rush hour’.

Then by the middle of 1993 it was almost over: meetings were taking place with regard to the base closure and its subsequent use. The base was handed back to our Ministry of Defence on October 1st, 1994 and the sale of USAF goods and property was advertised in Valley News.

There was ongoing discussion about what to do with the area once the USAF left the base, including runways, which it seemed were to be used for storing up to 10,000 new cars. This news triggered concerns about car transporters using unauthorised routes. Oxfordshire County Council said it would take out injunctions against offenders.

During this time a public meeting held at Upper Heyford and attended by four Lower Heyford councillors was unanimous in ‘opposing the proposal to establish a new town or settlement on the base.’ A gathering of local councils discussed long term development. The only common ground among delegates was opposition to the new town proposal and a wish for the base to retain its predominantly rural atmosphere. An action committee was set up to promote the interests of local people.

40

Dog Owners In May 1990 the council was told that the dog warden had removed two dogs from a village home and that ‘a further one or two’ may soon be attended to.’ It was necessary because the animals were ‘not properly supervised and caused considerable nuisance throughout the village.’

In 1991 the playing field management committee asked that dogs be banned from the field or kept on leads. However, it was pointed out that this had been considered before and that the parish council had no authority to ban dogs from the King George Memorial Field.

In 1993 it was decided dog litter bins were ‘not worth having in Lower Heyford’. However, two ‘poop-scoop’ bins were installed in January 1995 at an annual cost for emptying of £100 per bin. Free poop scoops were available and plastic bags. In 1997 the estimated cost of emptying both was £234.

Post Office In July 1990 the council noted the resumption of Sunday postal collections ‘with interest.’ The post office was asked to remove the wall-mounted box from site of the old post office at Freehold Street and proposed relocating it on the grass verge opposite - next to the listed telephone kiosk.

In 1994 it was reported that the post was now arriving so late that ‘the village PO/Stores was shut by the time the van arrived with money etc.’ The Clerk was asked to contact the Post Office about this.

The following year the council realised the very strong possibility that all these facilities may be lost. The present owners of the shop and Post Office were selling up and it was doubtful whether any purchaser would want to operate the shop. By March 1995 closure was confirmed, with the post office finally closing on 25th June 1996. The council decided to support continuance of the business and community service post office operated in Freehold Street on three days a week. But there would be no general store.

Railway Station British Rail told the council in 1990, that it was installing a 20m steel mast with aerial in the station yard. This information was ‘received with horror’ but an attempt to prevent erection failed.

In September 1991, the Clerk was asked to request British Rail to improve the covered waiting area as it was not large enough when the weather was bad. It was also noted in March 1992 that there was a call box at the station but there was no telephone in it yet.

Bus Services The bus company, Heyfordian, notified in 1990 that, now the new bus timetable was in operation, they were not able to divert buses through the centre of the village.

In autumn 1991, a complaint was made to Midland Red that buses were persistently running early and to point out ‘it was hardly surprising they were empty.’ In March 1994 Thames Transit no longer operated a bus through the village.

41

There was a suggestion in July 1996 , that a dial-a-ride service be started in the area to help those with mobility problems. The Forget-me-not Club asked if some bus services could come through village because their members had difficulty with the hill and with carrying shopping back from the bus stop at the top. In September it was said that community services would be available on Tuesday mornings.

Bus shelter In November 1995, it was reported that damage caused by school children waiting for the morning bus to Bicester included graffiti, broken bottles, strewn paper, serious damage with one of the front walls being forced outwards.

Best Kept Village Competition In July 1991, the council made the decision to take part in the Best Kept Village Competition.

However, the village failed to reach the second round. It was agreed to try again next year and noted that a heap of rubble in the village had not yet been removed.

Beacon Europe 1992 In 1992 the parish took part in the Beacon Europe project to celebrate the opening of the single European Market, and to have large beacon fire on the Lower Heyford allotments.

School English Heritage was asked in 1991 to protect the building’s future by listing it - but it felt this was only a ‘borderline case’ and refused. Three years later use of the schoolhouse was changed to wholly residential. The council felt it could not object even though this would mean the privately-run kindergarten school would close.

Nationally, 1991 was designated as ‘the year of the homeless’. This did not prevent the schoolhouse from sitting empty for a long period. The church diocese was urged to do something about it. Two years later the council was having to write to the diocese expressing its ‘disgust’ at the state the building was in.

Tree Planting The council agreed to a letter to be sent asking for a fourth tree be planted to commemorate the headship of Miss Hughes, alongside three trees already planted to commemorate the headships of Mrs Dew, Miss Dew and Mrs Busby. The County Council arboriculture officer subsequently found two not in prime condition but the council decided to go ahead with a tree preservation order given their history.

Housing Ten interested people replied to a questionnaire in March 1992. The next step was to interview prospective recipients. The Ministry of Defence was to be asked if it planned to offer houses no longer needed on the air base to a housing trust.

In the summer of 1992 the council asked Cherwell what its policy was in allotting council houses to ‘problem’ families who had no connection to the area. Later the same year a number of Lower Heyford residents sent an unsigned letter of complaint to the council. The new village policeman was made aware of the problems and invited to attend a council meeting.

42

Speeding In September 1991, it was noted that there had been an increase in heavy goods vehicles and the general speed of traffic since the M40 had been open. The Clerk was asked to write to the Highways Department about this, again suggesting a weight limit on the Long Bridge. By March 1992, a response had been received stating that ‘there must be proof of need on the grounds of safety and accident prevention before this is considered by Oxfordshire County Council.’

Speed cameras were first mooted for the B4030 in January 1994. The council was told by Oxfordshire County Council to self-finance the camera - a response it regarded as ‘less than helpful.’ Oxfordshire CC noted that a number of villages had erected speed camera warning signs - which ‘could be better than nothing.’

By January 1996, the speed camera warning signs had been agreed, but still not erected. A letter from the Cherwell District Council confirmed they were in the course of being contracted out and by March they had been put in place. The Clerk had in the meantime ascertained that a 30 mph limit could be imposed even if there were no streetlights. It was resolved to ask the police to carry out some speed checks while the signs were still there.

Jubilee Oak Advice was received from Oxfordshire County Council that their ‘tree man’ would come and look at the tree in view of concerns about dead wood. The Clerk was asked to write to the County Council. In January 1995, a reply confirmed they would not accept responsibility but that their Forestry Officer had inspected the tree and felt it was not dangerous at the time. The parish council accepted it would have to meet maintenance costs for the broken branches.

Subsequently, Southern Electric instructed their contractors to cut back excessively hard in order to clear power lines.

VE Day 50th Anniversary Celebrations Oxfordshire County Council offered a £500 grant for the VE Day 50th anniversary celebrations in 1995. This would go towards a street party, music and dancing and, on VJ day (Victory over Japan), a church service. WW2 veterans were to be invited to lunch at The Bell.

A letter from the United Nations asked councils to mark this with a ‘model resolution’ and a letter of greetings to the Secretary General, but the parish council felt this was ‘irrelevant to its business.’ The celebrations were judged a success but cold May weather in 1995 somewhat curtailed the event. In September a drinks and buffet event at The Bell after church service was very successful: total expenditure to date was £410.50.

Countryside Matters In November 1990, the council agreed that the contractors who had been cutting verges had left ‘a terrible mess’. The Highways Agency had been contacted and suggested that the Parish Council make a complaint to Cherwell District Council.

In November 1992 the Clerk informed the meeting that a report on conservation in Lower Heyford had been completed and was available for circulation.

In 1993, as one of the funded ‘parish environment initiatives’, a group called Pond Action had been contacted about Caulcott pond. Oxfordshire County Council agreed to research ownership of the pond in Caulcott. It agreed to a slightly raised kerb of granite setts to keep water back

43

from the edge of the highway. Other funded projects included a potential footway on the B4030 in Lower Heyford and a village noticeboard.

In May 1995 the parish council was told that the restoration of a pond in Paines Close had not been pursued: it ‘seems to have disappeared’ and had no public access anyway. Also in 1995 an idea for a linear ‘country park’ was mooted, comprising ecology and agriculture with leisure interests. The council’s only response was the thought that increased tourism might enable a shop to be re-established Refuse Collection In January 1996 the council wrote to Cherwell District Council objecting to the introduction of ‘wheeled (wheelie) bins’ on the grounds of: ‘environmental unsuitability in rural and especially conservation areas, pollution, unnecessary expense and regression of recycling principles.’

In March Cherwell sent a ‘rather indignant reply’ to the effect that matters had progressed too far to have any chance of stopping or halting the project. A Valley News article asked people not to leave their bins out all the time. The council clerk conducted a survey of ‘wheeled bin visibility from the highway:’ it seemed apparent there was some evidence to justify the council’s fears on unsightliness, but it decided to take no action at this time.

Village Hall At the annual meeting in May 1996, planning implications were discussed about disposing of the present village hall and re-establishing it elsewhere, possibly sharing with the Sports and Social club.

44

MINUTE BOOK 8: 1997 - 2005 At the annual meeting of the Lower Heyford Parish Council in May 1997 Mr Scraggs was unanimously elected to continue as Chairman. Mr Humberstone was duly elected as ViceChair.

At a meeting in January 2004, a recap was made of the proposal made in September 1999 to undertake a village appraisal with a view to creating Village Design Statements. The Chair emphasised that the project should be community led to represent views of residents and that it should not be dominated by the Parish Council. A modus operandi was set out and a draft report was available for the subsequent meeting in April 2004.

In 2004, the council considered a draft layout and items of content for a parish council website - https://heyford.info/ Two years later a website demonstration was projected onto the wall for the council to view.

During this period the council also failed to attain Quality Parish Council status as measured

by Whitehall but decided it would try again.

Millennium Celebrations and Golden Jubilee In May 1997, even though there were three years until the Millennium, ideas were being considered to mark the event. There was discussion about building a combined Village Hall/Sports Centre. In September that year, there was some support for this and there was also an offer to stage an exhibition of Lower Heyford in the 20th Century as a focal point. It was noted that a small majority of those favouring an event would like to see a lasting feature as well. A decision was taken not to decide anything until autumn 1999.

A ‘Millennium Oak’ was planted in the Market Square in November 1999 in time for the centennial celebrations. However, it was reported that a planting cane was immediately stolen and a plastic guard twice ripped off.

A grey squirrel was also spotted in the oak and was seen as detrimental to the tree’s future but the council was advised that significant damage was unlikely and that the squirrel was probably only there for the acorns.

In May 2000 the Millennium Oak seat was ready for installation. The inaugural event in July was to coincide with an event planned by the Millennium group who suggested it could include a jazz band and a blessing of the seat by the rector.

There had been fears that the tree’s future growth might encroach upon the seat. Then in January 2001 it was reported that the seat had been struck by a vehicle and the tree had been damaged. An arboricultural officer said, ‘nothing could be done for the tree and only time would tell whether disease had been admitted.’

At the Annual Parish Meeting in April 2002, it was noted that a committee had been formed to arrange a street party in Market Square on 3rd June 2002 for the Golden Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II.

45

Bus Service In May 1997 there were more threats to the village bus services. Oxfordshire County Council said that in view of very limited usage there was no justification for opposing the cuts.

In September 1997 Oxfordshire County Council agreed to finance one service (Heyfordian).

A year later it was reported that the Friday bus would go through the villages picking up anywhere including Caulcott. A year later the council was told the bus would not go through Lower Heyford anymore because of obstructions caused by parking on Freehold Street, particularly at the top. The Council felt the problem was unsolvable and the decision would have to be accepted.

Schools In May 1997, the Council received letters from the School Governors regarding closure of the school. From 1st September 1997, the school would be incorporated into the catchment for the village area of Fritwell C of E School. The council did not oppose and did not respond to the consultation.

Post Office Following the closure of the village post office in 1996, pensions were no longer being delivered from Steeple Aston post office because of pressure from Post Office Counters and advice from the police not to do so on security grounds.

USAF Upper Heyford The future of the old air base was discussed in July 1997. The council was told that the new ‘master plan’ was based on the ‘dubious premise’ that permission would be given for 5,000 houses. In 2001 plans were mooted for the development of a settlement of about 1,000 plus attendant business, social and leisure premises. All the Cherwell valley parishes agreed to oppose this development on grounds of disparity with the Comprehensive Planning Brief.

Allotments There were rumours in 1997 that allotment land was to be given over entirely to agriculture.

Corpus Christi College denials were accepted but a ‘close watch’ would be kept and the situation would be reviewed in a year.

Flooding In summer 1998, the Environment Agency questionnaire was sent to village flood victims.

Three houses were flooded in Lower Heyford and some in Caulcott, from Gallos Brook. The agency planned to appoint a flood warden for the villages and isolated and outlying properties were assessed for possible flood defence improvements.

Speeding The police had confirmed that regular speed checks were being carried out in 1997. The village policeman suggested that the council ‘borrow’ a set of anti-speeding signs after Deddington had used them. The council had also received a letter ‘referring to significant number of recent cat fatalities’ on Freehold Street caused by reckless and inconsiderate driving. The letter called for traffic calming measures. A copy was sent to the police. The council sympathised but told the resident ‘it regrets that it is unable to be of assistance.’

46

The next summer, parents of children at the nursery school (formerly the Mrs Dew school) were accused of ‘speed and inconsiderate parking.’ The nursery advised that it is ‘constantly issuing its customers with reminders.’

In November 1998, there were complaints of obstructed vision coming out of South Street in Caulcott by cars parked on the corner at the Horse and Groom. A resident claimed that Oxfordshire would not renew ‘slow markings’ on the main road unless £100 payment was made.

In September 1999 came a proposal to install ‘traffic gateways’ with ‘Kill Your Speed’ signs.

The council was told that the £1,500 held for the project could be increased to approximately £3,300 using budgeted funds. In November the police issued two fixed penalty tickets and three cautions – two of the drivers were locals.

In 1999 the village also participated in a police speed enforcement exercise. The council noted that ‘the situation had become somewhat confused by police activity’ following the appearance of a dummy speed camera in a garden on Station Road.

RAGE (a road action group) contacted the council with ideas that included ‘mannequins dressed as police’, vehicle chicanes, a sponsored youngsters toddle (a ‘toddler-thon’). Police statistics showed an 18 per cent increase in traffic on Station Road in the last two years.

In April 2004, the focus was again on the traffic in Caulcott. The council had been attempting to get Oxfordshire County Council to put double white lines through the ‘dip’ past the Horse and Groom. A radar traffic survey had been carried out but had not established sufficient grounds for police enforcement of the 60 mph limit, although ‘some exceptionally high speeds had been recorded’. In Lower Heyford there had been a seven month wait for OCC to put down the agreed 30 mph roundels at each 30mph zone entry point.

The council was told in November 2005 that the Long Bridge had been inspected and found to be adequate for 40 tonne vehicles with no possibility of a weight limit.

Facilities for the Elderly The Forget-me-not club in 1998 notified the council that it was disbanding due to dwindling members: regret was expressed.

In 2000 a report on the forthcoming withdrawal of the Meals on Wheels service by Oxfordshire County Council was received but a request for a donation was not approved.

Similarly, Oxfordshire Carers Centre complained that the council had refused a donation to their appeal, yet two Lower Heyford residents had been helped in the past and fifteen per cent of its adult population was estimated to be carers. The council decided to uphold the refusal in accordance with policy.

Mobile library The council, hearing of Oxfordshire’s proposed economy measures in 2003, expressed concern that there should be no reduction in the mobile library service. However, a warning from Oxfordshire suggested that poor patronage for the service might mean it would have to be terminated.

47

Sports and Social Club In January 1999, the Sports and Social Club management suggested a suitable site by the Bromeswell Field gate for a basketball site. However, there were doubts expressed over its long term popularity. The estimated cost was £1,500 inclusive of sleeve (the net) and hard standing. By late 1999 an estimate of £3,000 was given for the work. In the November the earlier quote of £1,500 was accepted. Three basketballs were to be given to parishioners ‘to raise the profile of new facility.’

King George’s Field, on which the Sports and Social Club building stands, holds charitable status. Because of this, in January 1999, the council heard that procedures to regularise the sale of alcohol were now in hands of a solicitor.

There were also other issues with regard to King George’s Field because legal wrangling about its charitable status had caused the failure to have a new constitution in place by the time of the expiry of the lease to Trustees in March 2003. In the meantime the lease was being ‘held over’.

Village Hall On May 2003, an expression of interest from the Jehovah’s Witnesses had been received in respect of their purchase of the Village Hall. There was some discussion of a merger with the Sports and Social Club and no objections were received from the floor. A year later the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ offer of £136,250 was accepted.

In September 2004, Cherwell District Council agreed to an extension of, or separate building for, the Sports and Social Club and Village Hall. A Village Hall Relocation Committee was set up. Demolition of the existing building was considered with a clubroom and sports changing facilities to be provided in a new building.

At the same time, the council had to find a new place for its meetings. It was advised that the council could not meet on licensed premises (such as the Sports and Social Club) except in exceptional circumstances. It was agreed that the next meeting would be held in the church.

Bus Shelter In March 2000, police spoke to ‘sizeable number of youngsters’ and warned them. One panel of the bus shelter had been kicked out and another was getting ‘ the same treatment.’ Later that year both boards at the back were ‘systematically being kicked out.’ Anti-graffiti paint was being considered.

Street Lighting In May 2003, a recommendation was made to go ahead with the Bromeswell Close footway light as well as on the Station Road bridge to light the station footway.

Railway A meeting in May 2004 reversed the previous view that parking spaces at the station should be marked out. Someone remarked that this would be ‘urbanisation’ – a ‘dirty’ word often heard when it came to change. For example, later that year, the Council discussed rights of way and agreed that paths should be well maintained but ‘not too well maintained for evidence of urbanisation.’

In 2005 it was noted that First Great Western had made timetable changes without proper notice. There was also pressure from the Council to reintroduce Sunday services.

48

Work started on the station footbridge replacement in March 2005. Discussions began about preserving the old Great Western Railway footbridge. Network Rail offered to donate the bridge to a preservation society but the council decided against this since some costs might fall upon the parish.

The council also raised with Network Rail the lack of disabled provision on the new bridge.

Network Rail said only ‘like for like’ replacement had been funded and it was up to any ‘rail industry partner’ to install ramps or lifts in the future.

Housing The council had told Cherwell District Council that it objected to housing young people in what had always been considered old people’s bungalows. It said it had no knowledge of the background of these young tenants. Cherwell told the parish council there was no possibility of a tenant being rehoused again unless there was an infringement of the conditions of tenancy.

Cherwell did acknowledge that the situation was ‘a disaster’ but it was not their fault: the land had been sold to Ploughley District Council (which preceded Cherwell) specifically for housing old people but it could not help because that was not shown in the legal documents.

In March 2003, a meeting was held to discuss the prospect of 11 new houses being built at Caulcott Farm. Concern was expressed about the potential increase in private car traffic on Greenway. A housing needs survey had produced 19 registrations of interest for affordable housing and it was noted that Cherwell District Council were appraising the situation with a view to proceeding with a scheme once an appropriate site for development was found.

In May 2004 the annual meeting noted that consent had been given for four dwellings - contrary to the Council’s wishes. A complaint was lodged with the Cherwell chief executive. Cherwell had concluded that the ‘mock farmyard approach’ was suitable for this location. However, the parish council felt Cherwell’s decision was of ‘dubious legality’ and was in ‘indecent haste’ just to get application approved.

In Lower Heyford, an assessment of need in 2004 identified six properties required (two onebed flats, two two-bedroomed houses and two three-bedroomed houses) with a mix of shared ownership for one one-bed and one two-bed house. The council thought the development, possibly an extension of Valley View, would be sufficient for the ‘foreseeable future.’

However, it was told in April 2006 its application for a Housing Corporation grant had failed.

Boat Yard In July 2004, as part of the Oxford Open Water Festival, a heritage boat had stopped overnight at Lower Heyford with evening entertainment: attendance was ‘disappointing’ however, possibly due to a clash with an England football fixture.

Local Hospitals Considering the plans for Bicester Primary Centre Project, the council asked: ‘how can the provision of two ambulance bays (with white lines on the roadway) in replacement of Bicester ambulance station, be considered a service improvement?’ The council supported the ‘Keepthe-Horton General’ campaign and wrote expressing its concern to the then Minister of Health.

Dog Owners The council was told that dog fouling signs placed at either end of the footway between Manor Farm House and Church Lane had soon been torn down.

49

Church In 2005, the council were told that the churchyard was approaching exhaustion of available grave space. A very approximate estimate was suggested of three years before the apparent grave space at the eastern end became exhausted. It was proposed that a geophysical survey be carried out to discover any other available plots. Re-use of graves was suggested – the ‘lift and deepen’ system was an option though ecclesiastical permission probably had to be sought.

Alternative sites were considered: 1) meadow on east side between church and old school playground; 2) land to north sloping down to canal (less attractive); 3) acquisition of land elsewhere for new cemetery. The council wondered whether the Church of England might make funds available.

In January 2005, the parochial church council asked for financial assistance with the maintenance contract for the church clock costing of £391 per annum and agreed a donation of £250 from the council.

Policing In November 1998 the council expressed ‘general disquiet’ about the organisation of the Neighbourhood Watch and its operation.

Community policing was considered with the possibility of parish wardens issuing on-the-spot fines for anti.-social behaviour. The idea was broadly welcomed - though for the sake of community relations those appointed should not be parishioners.

The council was told that a number of youngsters had recently conducted mock rites on one church tomb and taken out and burnt porch notices.

Another illegal rave in November 2004 at Cold Harbour. Ravers had ridden over an extensive area of the surrounding fields and there had been interference with badger setts and fireworks were let off after 11 pm in contravention of the law Best Kept Village In March 2005 the council decided not to enter the Best Kept Village competition and for the matter not to be a routine agenda item in future.

Parish Map A map of the whole parish was completed by Don Finch and printed and marketed in 2005. An initial run of 300 copies at a cost of £482.

50

MINUTE BOOK 9: 2006 – 2011 By 2007, the council’s website was up and running and, in 2011, three new domain names were purchased. In summer 2011 parts of the council website had to be disabled to prevent hacking.

For clarity, a flowchart was presented in May 2008 that had been drawn up to show interrelationships between committees and trusts in the village.

In 2010, the council, when questioned about the rise in precept, explained that it had worked on very tight minimum resources in the last two years. The £2,000 increase was due to legal costs.

Mrs Hepworth, who had been Chairman since 2006, stood down in 2011 after 32 years of service to the council. She was succeeded by Mr Macnamara.

Village Hall In May 2006, it was noted that the Jehovah’s Witnesses had offered to buy the village hall site adjoining the crossroads and a village hall relocation committee was formed. The parish council also noted the covenant restricting the use of the land to that of a village hall and this was included in the legal transfer deed from Corpus Christi. In July 2007, in response to the offer from the Jehovah’s Witnesses it was proposed to change the covenant to include nonresidential institutions.

In 2007 the Trust for Oxfordshire’s Environment advised that up to £25,000 might be available for village hall relocation. A questionnaire had shown a small parish majority in favour of the incorporation of the Sports and Social Club into a single facility.

The Village Hall Management Committee suggested a merger with the King George’s Field charity as the best way forward to minimise issues of building a new hall on the playing field. In May 2007, it was noted that the Clerk had written to the Charity Commission for advice on this proposal.

There was also a suggestion that the new hall and Cherwell District Council’s proposed affordable housing could be developed on same site (Mill Lane corner of King George’s Field or Bromeswell Field near the side of King George’s Field hedge).

In November 2008, it was reported that the sale of the old village hall was completed and £130,000 was to be held in the Charities Aid Foundation Bank ready for the building of a new village hall in the future.

Litter and Refuse Collection Also in May 2006, the spring litter pick was reported as a success, but people were ‘dismayed by vast amount of detritus deposited on road verges entirely by way of car windows.’

Fly tipping in the village hall car park was reported in July 2006, and also along Station Road by the Cold Harbour track. A bed base dumped at the village hall had been reported to Cherwell District Council and duly cleared away by them. In Caulcott, the Parish Clerk had cleared up some mixed domestic rubbish and reported it to Cherwell District Council for action since an individual name and address had been found on a number of discarded documents.

51

In 2007, the recycling area was also suffering from vandalism and fly tipping. The November meeting reported sacks of debris in the Caulcott layby and a mattress dumped at the recycling site.

In January 2009 the council opposed the planned incinerator building at Ardley on the main B430. It was pointed out this would bring extra traffic problems with the B430 being already a ‘rat run’ between the A34 and M40.

Oxford Airport Tackley parish council held a public meeting during 2006 to discuss instrument landing systems for Oxford Aviation Services. A new business plan aimed at increasing small business jets from two to four a day. It was argued that such aircraft were less noisy than most turboprops. Night flying had been prohibited by an earlier agreement/planning application.

There was concern because 60 percent of flights have ‘line of approach from north’ over Lower Heyford.

Housing In November 2006, it was noted that Cherwell District Council had declined to consider either of the alternative sites proposed for affordable housing. It re-asserted its decision to abandon the Valley View option.

A Housing Needs Survey in 2008 showed support for affordable housing and it was identified that seven households wanted to come back to the village. It was brought to the council’s attention that affordable housing was to be built at Heyford Park, although this may not be parochially dedicated.

Valley News It was reported in November 2006 that the future of Valley News was to be secured through a combination of advertising and other financial support from parish councils A management committee was to be formed to include one representative from each council.

Environment The meeting in November 2006 also noted the new duty to conserve biodiversity and had received guidance which specified that every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard to conservation of biodiversity as part of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act of 2006. The definition of biodiversity included habitats, species (plants and animals) and the way in which living things interact with one another.

In November 2007 the council was told that the Cherwell valley had been designated as biodiversity ‘hotspot’ with the aim that the ‘diversity’ should be allowed to spread out.

Jubilee Oak In November 2006, Corpus Christi College confirmed they agreed to have recommended work carried out to the oak tree in Market Square to clean out deadwood and raise the canopy. They would meet the cost ‘irrespective of the question of ownership, which they were investigating.

Dead wood within the tree was worrying on safety grounds. The cost of clearing and raising the canopy was £475. Yet another debate about ownership. Oxfordshire County Council agreed to carry out works at their cost ‘irrespective of ownership.’

52

After more damage by a vehicle, the millennium seat around the oak become unstable. A witness said it was a road sweeping vehicle but the firm concerned denied all knowledge. The council paid for repairs.

It was noted in July 2007, that a Whitebeam, planted at the millennium, had died and the Council authorised its replacement in the autumn along with any others, as necessary.

Railway In July 2006, Sunday services were agreed by First Great Western with three trains running each way. There was also a pledge to cover the rail company’s losses up to £3,000 - from individuals, local businesses and parish councils. Lower Heyford Parish Council pledged £200.

First Great Western were to have an observer on trains to count passengers in order to establish potential income. In November 2006, 650 passenger journeys had been recorded -‘a good start but insufficient to rebate the amount of the guarantee.’

The Cherwell Rail Users Group (CRUG) for Heyford and Tackley had met with First Great Western’s regional manager. In November 2006, issues reported included: the timetable; permission-to-travel machine; line rebranding to Oxford Canal Line; loudspeaker announcements -‘too quiet since turned down and asked to be turned up a bit again’; enhancement of station, disabled access. It was noted that a proposal for a ‘parish rail forum’ had been shelved in view of insufficient interest.

In spring 2007, a programme of works was approved for the Station Road rail bridge. The work would commence in November 2007 and be completed by March 2008. There would be a temporary footbridge and related diversions. The railway would also be closed on Sunday 6th and Sunday 13th January 2008. The new bridge would be 4 inches higher than the old one and accommodate all current rail traffic, unless the line was electrified, in which case the design incorporated the facility to be jacked up.

In September 2007, the inaugural meeting of the Friends of Heyford Station was held with the aim of ‘adopting’ our station as part of a national scheme under the patronage of the Great Western Railway. The aim was to foster a better relationship - from the point of view of ‘users’ - with the company and making the station a friendlier place to visit in terms of its looks and facilities.

Church The Council was informed of the refusal by Corpus Christi College to release land between the churchyard and old schoolhouse to expand the graveyard. Land between the northside wall and canal was possible, subject to the church’s approval. Re-use of graves was also seen as a definitive long-term solution.

The Council noted the church’s e-petition to the Prime Minister for cost of repairs to its buildings ‘to be reimbursed to preserve archaeological and historic heritage.’

The Parochial Church Council also reported that the choir was in abeyance due to the lack of a choirmaster, and the bell ringers were also appealing for new members.

The annual carol singing in the Market Square on December 14th 2007, brought receipts of £110 (sale of mulled wine and mince pies donated by The Bell) against expenses of £100 (Bletchingdon Silver Band).

53

The Bell With the introduction of the smoking ban, in 2007 the Bell sought retrospective permission for a covered smoking area. The application was refused as the plan was ‘unsympathetic to a listed building.’

Policing An illegal rave at Caulcott Hill barn over a September weekend in 2006 had necessitated the police being called in by the landowner, but they declared themselves unable to act because of the ‘sheer scale of the invasion.’

In 2007 an exercise was arranged west of the access track to Caulcott Farm. Cherwell was asked to assess noise impact with possibility of holding events each weekend. during the winter. Cherwell, after taking noise readings, informed the landowner that the site was not suitable for this activity.

The police reported 18 crimes in 2008. In March 2007, two reports had been received: Petrol stolen from a motor vehicle on Freehold Street and a cash robbery, also in Freehold Street.

Later, it was noted that a man had been charged with 107 thefts from canal boats in the area.

Street Lighting The Council was told, during 2007, that Oxfordshire wanted to switch off rural streetlights between midnight and 5.30am: Council said it had no objections.

Play Area In July 2007, the council received a report that although some of the equipment in the play area was noisy and rusty there was no significant safety risk. Later, volunteers were recruited to try to find funding for new equipment and the Council agreed to support a clean-up of the playground and to contribute to its refurbishment - estimated to cost £5,000.

Allotments In 2008, the council was advised that the allotments were being tested for contamination. If they were then closed the council might have to find new places. In November 2008, it was reported that the soil testing results were OK, but that the results of vegetable testing were awaited.

Speeding A report from a police-neighbourhood group meeting suggested antisocial behaviour was not a problem in Lower Heyford, but that parking and speeding were the main problems.

In January 2007 councillors, members of the public and trading standards enforcement officers in Station Road by the rail bridge logged 28 registration numbers in suspected speed breaches.

In March 2007, it was noted that the Clerk had attended a traffic calming event hosted by Cherwell District Council. Details were given of the portable Speed Indicator Device (SID) and a proposal for parishes to pay the cost of installing a ground screw to hold each device. In July, the Clerk reported the cancellation of the long awaited traffic survey due to a lack of a suitable fixing post for the data box.

In September 2007, there was consideration of a speed handgun-at a cost of £129: this was not chosen ‘largely because of risk to personal security from angry motorists.’ The meeting had

54

also received a letter from a resident urging the council act on the ‘total disregard of the 30 mph speed limit’. By January 2008, it was agreed to purchase a £400 portable speed gun (not hand-held.)

In March 2007 there had been two cases of speeding prosecuted, one received a warning and another a £30 penalty ticket: both drivers pleaded guilty and fined £135 and £180.

In 2009, with the loss of the kerb on the green, residents in Market Square were asked if they would like wooden posts to prevent parking: two were for, two were against, and two had other proposals.

A suggestion was also made that a speed sign be painted on the road from Rousham before the Long Bridge. But the Council would have to pay as there were insufficient funds for county funding. It was reported that the footpath on Station Road by the Long Bridge was dangerous: it was frequently used by mothers with buggies and children going to school.

Roads In January 2010 the 40 mph signs for Caulcott were still awaited. These were finally installed in 2011. The requested double white lines to prevent overtaking were, however, not forthcoming due to ‘poor sight lines’ (on road).

In March 2010 it was reported that the road was crumbling by Gallos Brook, opposite the Horse and Groom pub. Caulcott residents had also been worried that flooding would occur in that area.

By 2010, the council was warned that the government was likely to scrap or delay most capital projects: including pothole repair.

At the start of 2011 the council was told that Station Road was deteriorating badly due to many lorries going to the Enstone recycling plant: manholes subsiding, side of road collapsing. It was reported that the size and volume of lorries on Station Road was damaging ironwork in the road. Cracks were beginning to appear in buildings. The council asked the highways authority why they were so slow in taking action to remedy this.

In November 2011, in case of heavy snow the council were arranging to keep clear the roads not cleared by Oxfordshire County Council. A price was to be obtained for the snow plough which cleared the village a year ago.

Bus Shelter In May 2007, it was noted that the bus shelter roof and the timetable display case had been vandalised. Graffiti had also been carved in the paintwork. Two sets of initials together with a message ‘seemingly claiming responsibility’ had been passed on to police. A youth confessed and wrote letter of apology to the Council and cleaned off the graffiti to the best of his ability.

Parish Plan In September 2007, the parish council expressed interest in following Defra guidelines for a Parish Plan. On 12th January 2008, 27 parishioners attended a parish council meeting where their interest was gauged in relation to such a plan and it was agreed to go ahead with production of a ten year scheme.

55

In May 2008, a committee comprising 11 parishioners was formed to work on a village questionnaire to inform the parish plan and in September 2010 a draft copy of the Parish Plan was submitted to the council for approval.

The parish plan was then distributed to every household. In it there was a recommendation for a Welcome Pack to be made available to all newcomers to the village. It was also suggested that ‘no new village hall was needed but enhancements should be made to the church and playing field’.

An updated copy of the Parish Plan was prepared and submitted for approval by Cherwell District Council in April 2011.

Charities In 2010 it was decided that the Lennard Trust and Relief-in-Need charities should merge and the necessary legal actions were put in motion.

56

MINUTE BOOK 10: 2012 - 2019 During this period the parish council website www.heyford.info was under construction.

Photos and brief biographies of councillors were included, together with an electronic version of the welcome pack for new arrivals to the villages. The minutes were also now being recorded on the council website.

In 2017, it was reported that a longstanding member of the council and past chairman, Mr Alan Humberstone had sadly died.

Allotments For many years the allotments had been run by Mr Ernie Bishop. In October 2017, and following Mr Bishop’s death, it was noted that Mr Chris Cox had volunteered to take over the running of the allotments which are on land owned by Corpus Christi and managed by Bidwells. Bidwells had recently taken over from Savilles and now required the formation of a Lower Heyford Allotment Association.

Village Hall and Sports and Social Club In 2007 the sale of the old village hall had been completed and £130,000 was being held for the building of a new village hall in the near future. In 2015 it was confirmed that the money in the bank from the sale of the old village hall could not be used for anything other than the community.

The Village Hall Management Committee had suggested a merger with the King George Field charity as the best way forward to minimise issues of building a new hall on the playing field.

Following this, it was reported in July 2016 that the Sports and Social Club required a form for ‘Fields in Trust’ to be completed supporting their intention to submit a planning application for an extension to the sports and social club building. This was approved and the clerk was instructed to return the form.

By April 2017 a request had been received from the Social Club that the lease, which had eight years remaining, should be extended to enable them to apply for grant funding for an extension to the building. It was agreed in principle that the lease be extended for a further 25 years. The clerk was instructed to contact Cantelli solicitors for a price for extending the lease and inform the Social Club. In October the agreement to the terms of the lease had been signed by all.

Brethertons Solicitors were to be instructed to proceed to extend the lease for a new term of 50 years and by spring 2018 the signed lease was lodged with the solicitor. The only outstanding issue was whether the responsibility for maintenance and repair of the new facility would revert to the parish council and this was to be clarified. The contractor for building the new Village Hall and Sports Club, Mr John Varney, had revised his estimate, made in 2016, and the work was scheduled to commence in April 2018.

At the January 2019 meeting it was noted that the newly refurbished ‘King George’s Field Community and Sports Centre’ (named as such following a village survey) was almost finished with the work scheduled to be completed on budget. The meeting thanked the KGF Committee of Management, as well as John and Barry Varney for the excellent work in achieving this fundamental change so quickly and cost effectively.

57

In March 2019 the new building was almost complete and a Barn Dance and opening ceremony was planned for 4th May. Long Bridge damage In October 2016 it was noted that no action had been taken by Cherwell District Council with regard to the damage to the Long Bridge caused by large vehicles. The clerk was instructed to write to English Heritage for advice over the damage caused by heavy lorries to this Grade 2 Listed structure. A year later the bridge had been cordoned off by Oxfordshire County Council in order to investigate the damage to it, caused by the large lorries which use it.

The Grade 2 Listed Long Bridge Roads and Speeding In September 2012, increased traffic on Station Road was discussed. Damage had been caused to the road and some adjacent houses by the traffic, particularly heavy lorries. There was also concern expressed about excessive noise and vibration. It was declared that the carriageway was ‘not fit for purpose.’ One house owner reported that the house shook and cracks were appearing. Blocked drains also were causing problems, particularly in the boatyard. One house reported being damaged by flood water. The council decided to write to Oxfordshire County Council and the local MP requesting road surfacing, drain clearance and rebuilding where necessary and for a 7.5 ton weight limit.

In 2012, the annual meeting was told that a speed indicator device (SID) had been purchased.

The two objectives were: 1) to slow traffic, and 2) to gather reliable ‘speeding’ data. Initial data suggested 75 percent of vehicles were speeding above 40 mph in Station Road. It was reported that 20 mph limits were envisaged for Freehold Street and Caulcott village as it was noted that seven local councils in our area already have 20 mph speed limits. In July 2015 it was decided to buy eight ‘Twenty’s Plenty’ signs for £320.

58

In November 2012, the council was told that speed checks on Station Road had resulted in ten cautions and six tickets (one a motorist from Upper Heyford.) It was said by the police that there were no resources to carry out speed checks in Caulcott.

The SID was moved to Caulcott early in 2013 and was reported to be ‘a good deterrent to speeding motorists.’ The plan was to rotate it around the parish and make use of the sunshine since the power did not last for much more than a week.

In April 2013, it was reported that a serious accident had occurred in which a car lost control at the Freehold Street crossroads and crashed into 134 Freehold Street ‘causing considerable damage and rendering the house uninhabitable’. Members of the public insisted that the parish council write to highways authorities in the strongest possible terms requesting a number of important safety measures be installed or implemented. A letter was sent to the Oxfordshire County Council Highways Department demanding many safety improvements to the junction.

In January 2016, speeding in Caulcott was discussed after a dog was killed. By April that year data had been received from a speed survey carried out in Caulcott and together with Lower Heyford data the data could be passed on to a consultant to prepare a technical note for submission to Oxfordshire County Council.

In November 2017, following a recent incident with a removal lorry driver, the clerk was instructed to write to Dorchester Living (the firm developing the former USAF base at Upper Heyford) to obtain a list of their tenants at Heyford Park who are required to sign the Routing Agreement. A letter was also sent reminding them that their vehicles should not use the B4030 route. Some 200 lorries a day were travelling up and down Station Road from the quarry at Great Tew – some villagers were keeping a count. Large lorries from several named companies continued to use Station Road contrary to agreed routing plans. Their names had been passed to the police. It was separately considered that lorries had caused a burst pipe in the road which covered the boatyard in silt.

It was also reported that Dorchester Living were employing a traffic consultant to design traffic calming measures at Lower Heyford, Ardley, Middleton Stoney and Upper Heyford, the areas identified as most impacted by the development at Heyford Park. No date had yet been set for a meeting between Dorchester Living and the Mid-Cherwell Neighbourhood Plan group.

At the January 2019 meeting, a paper was circulated proposing consultation on a number of changes to positions of speed signs, some revised speed limits and other measures to mitigate the speeding problems identified by recent traffic surveys. The meeting also noted and approved that the cost of consultation would be £2,600 and approved the commitment to approximately £150 per positioning base for each SID of which there were likely to be about eight. The meeting noted that Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) would provide installation of the SID bases free of charge. Mr Eggeling and Mr Cox were asked to liaise with OCC as appropriate to expedite the implementation of these measures.

Policing In November 2012, WPC Brown presented a 12 month review of police matters in Lower Heyford. There had been a range of theft and assault incidents and the police had also been informed of an alleged drugs incident in the village. WPC Brown reminded the meeting that for any non-emergency incident a call to 101 should be made and a crime reference number

59

taken. A recent instruction also directed that the evening/night-time rural patrols were being redirected to the towns and that only emergency calls outside would be responded to. The council expressed its dismay and would write to the chief superintendent if the situation had not changed within a month.

Jubilee Seat In May 2016 it was reported the damaged stone seat around the Jubilee Tree had been removed and was now lying in the church yard. Villagers views were sought where to re-site the seat.

The matter was discussed again in July 2016 and the Parochial Church Council were happy to have the old stone seat in the churchyard. By October details of a metal seat which could be suitable for around the tree were presented and in November the council had a quote from a local blacksmith for a bespoke hexagonal seat to be placed around the Jubilee tree in Market Square. The seat would be of galvanized metal and cost £1,725 maximum. The method of funding this was discussed and it was agreed to write to the Trustees of the Village Hall to see if they could assist.

Diamond Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II In March 2012, Mr. Thompson reported that there would be a Fun Day on 2nd June to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee and every child in the village would be given a commemorative coin, the total cost of which was £300. It was resolved that the Parish Council would make a donation of £150 towards this cost. It was also suggested that the villages plant a commemorative tree and approach the Jehovah’s Witnesses with a view to planting the tree on land outside the old village hall which, as it is between Lower Heyford and Caulcott, would make a lasting memorial and link the two villages.

Church The annual meeting in 2014 was told of the plans to turn part of the church interior into a more useable meeting space and laying on mains water. The Village Hall trust was supporting this work and as requested by the Parish Plan survey, this work will provide a meeting area with kitchen and toilets and so that village organisations can make use of the new facilities. The church’s capacity has also been raised to over 160.

Reading Room At the April 2013 meeting one councillor resigned, feeling that local people were being priced out of the chance of renting the Reading Room because of its charging policy. It was explained that the property was being managed according to the wishes of the Charities Commission.

Play Area A group of volunteers were to meet in September 2014 to prepare the site for the provision of new play equipment. The Friends of Lower Heyford playground committee had presented a scheme for the improvements. A village questionnaire had shown 98 percent of respondents were in favour of a new playground and at the 2014 annual parish meeting it was reported the Play Area Group had obtained a £44,000 grant to modernise the area.

In February 2018, a member of the Playground Committee attended the parish council meeting to update councillors on the maintenance etc of the playground and had agreed to carry out regular checks on the playground equipment. The clerk was instructed to create a checklist to be completed and returned to the clerk fortnightly. The Playground Committee representative pointed out that she would be carrying out visual checks to the best of her ability but had no training and could not be held liable for any errors.

60

It was reported that the Playground Committee has funds of some £3,700 which it is prepared to hand over to the parish council for future maintenance of the playground. There was some discussion as to whether the money should be handed to the KGF Committee of Management for use on the building project but it was agreed that the money should be retained by the parish council specifically for playground requirements. The parish council was responsible for insurance of playground equipment . ROSPA reports had been paid for in 2015 and 2016 by the parish council and responsibility was then handed over to the playground committee but it is not known if a report was carried out in 2017. The parish council would in future take over this responsibility.

Railway In January 2012, there were complaints about the excessive noise particularly at night from the works on the railway and the state of the fence alongside the railway. The meeting was informed that the original deadline for electrification of the track had now been extended and there would be work on Saturday nights.

Romany traveller site at Caulcott In January 2014, a lengthy debate involving members of the public as well as councillors discussed the proposal for a Romany and travellers site in Caulcott. It was decided to write opposing the idea. Later, at the annual meeting in May 2016 villagers were told that, although permission had been granted by the District Council (against the parish council’s wishes), nothing further had happened.

Sewage Much concern was expressed about sewage drains in Caulcott at the meeting in January 2014.

Tankers had been pumping day and night for four months to remove overflow. It was noted that sewage had been pumped into Gallos brook and onto farms, threatening the health of livestock. Letters were to be sent to the County Council, Thames Water, the Environment Agency and the local MP. Trees In May 2015 it was noted that Corpus Christi had been asked to fell the pine trees beside Station Road after one collapsed across the highway in a storm causing traffic problems.

Residents were again asked if they favoured lighting in Station Road following this tree collapse which had made it necessary to stop traffic in the dark.

Street Lighting There had been discussion regarding a new streetlight in Freehold Street after the parish council voted 4-3 in favour. However, in May 2015 the council reversed its decision to have another streetlight in Freehold Street. It also decided not to consider extra lighting in Station Road after a survey had shown that ‘due to cost and light pollution’ most people were against the idea.

USAF Former Air Base – Heyford Park Dorchester Living, the company developing the old air base at Upper Heyford, told the meeting they wanted to form a Neighbourhood Plan which would include most villages. They explained that the extent of the development at the site (1,057 new houses plus ancillary facilities) would mean the prevention of new homes elsewhere. It was said that joining this plan would ensure a fair share of improvements to roads, schools and the like for villages.

61

Caulcott had been deemed a ‘Category C village’ and during discussion about reuse of land opposite Horse and Groom it was revealed that Caulcott’s new status meant only barn conversions or agricultural buildings were permitted.

Mid Cherwell Neighbourhood Plan.

At the Annual Parish Meeting in May 2015, it was explained how the Mid Cherwell Neighbourhood Plan (MCNP) was designed to protect us and nine other parishes from speculative development. The Chair had attended a MCNP forum meeting at which a constitution was signed on behalf of Lower Heyford PC to protect us from the proposed overspill from Oxford City of 3500 additional homes to be considered by Cherwell District Council (CDC). He had agreed to draft thoughts on the overspill given that Banbury, Bicester and Kidlington are presently building large numbers of houses.

In March 2016 the council was represented at a forum comprising 11 villages and Dorchester Living and Upper Heyford Residents Association. The details and purpose of the Neighbourhood Plan were outlined and addressed the new threat of further local housing as a result of Oxford City Council being unable to meet its housing need. The MCNP aims to protect villages from unwanted development, and also provide requirements for the Dorchester Heyford Park housing. Following submission of the plan there would be a referendum for residents to vote for or against its adoption as part of the Cherwell Local Plan.

At the parish council meeting that month, it was confirmed that the MCNP would be submitted to Cherwell District Council (CDC) by February 2017 and there would be referenda in all parishes with residents being asked to vote for or against the plan. Prior to the referenda the Inspector will need to see that there has been community engagement and therefore it would be important for parish councils to engage with as many members of the community as possible to ensure that everyone is fully informed. The top issues for the plan were development, loss of character of the area, increase in traffic, affordable housing, public transport and health and leisure facilities.

In March 2018, Mr Martin Lipson, Chairman of the MCNP Forum, and Mr Peter Stoddart confirmed that the MCNP had been submitted to CDC for public consultation commencing the following week for six weeks, after which it would be examined prior to a referendum. They also clarified the issue regarding Policy PD3, the Caulcott buffer zone. The following phrase has been added to the policy: ‘Any development which is proposed adjacent to the designated strategic area of Heyford Park (as defined by Local Plan policy Villages 5) should not give rise to coalescence with surrounding settlements, to ensure that their separate identity and character are maintained.

In support of this policy, preference should be given to development within the strategic site allocations at Heyford Park, subject to heritage and ecological constraints, in accordance with Local Plan policy Villages 5.’

The council’s representatives on the MCNP forum also identified a series of designated green places - which would receive protection from development. The following areas were proposed: The meadow abutting the canal which is traversed by a public footpath and incorporates the bowling club

62

The meadow opposite Ham House, Station Road The paddock adjacent to Ivy Close, The Lane The field behind College Farmhouse Payne’s Field traversed by a public footpath to the south of the phone box in Freehold Street King George Playing Field Other suggestions made were : the land around Kingdom Hall the allotments the Village Green the paddock in South Street, Caulcott the Dairy Ground, Greenway, Caulcott The council representatives also wanted to discuss the Traffic Mitigation Plan which will be part of the Neighbourhood Plan and suggested measures for reducing speeding on Station Road and at Caulcott including chicanes, green planting, SIDs, reduction in speed limits and changing lines in the road, all of which could potentially be funded under a Section 106 Agreement .

In January 2019, it was noted that the Neighbourhood Plan had been ‘examined’ and passed substantially unaltered. It was noted that, regrettably, three of the designated green spaces proposed within the parish had been disallowed by the examiner, being the allotments, Dairy Ground in Caulcott and the area known as Payne’s Field. The possibility of appealing was discussed but as this would mean a delay in progressing with the overall approval of the MCNP it was decided not to proceed with this route. It was noted that the MCNP would be subject to a referendum which required a simple majority to be passed into effective planning law. In view of the beneficial effects on planning control all councillors were asked to encourage any seeking guidance to vote for the MCNP. Kingdom Hall The Jehovah’s Witnesses wanted to close the amenity for bottle banks on their land, although there was a right of way for the public to access. It was suggested that the bins be moved to the layby at Caulcott. In May 2015, it was reported that the recycling bins had been moved from Kingdom Hall to the Caulcott layby, and that the appearance had been much improved as a result. There was also provision of a recycling site at the boatyard so that the whole parish was now well served.

Phone Kiosks In October 2016 information was received regarding the removal of the phone kiosk at the station. Discussion followed regarding how little the phone kiosk is used, but in view of the very poor mobile phone signal in the area it was decided to write objecting to its removal, particularly in view of the lack of formal notification. The clerk reported that Steeple Aston Parish Council would wish to support this action.

Similarly mobile phone signal was reported as poor in Caulcott and it was decided the phone kiosk should be retained as the Defibrillator is located at the Horse and Groom and phone contact would be required in the event of an emergency.

63

In May 2019, the results of a village Facebook poll were shared on the future use of the phone box in Freehold Street. No decision was made and the phone box remained in a state of disrepair despite British Telecom having responsibility for it as a listed structure.

In August 2019 there was discussion regarding whether the parish council should adopt the phone box and take on responsibility for it. The door to the box had since been mended and the phone appeared to be in working order. It was noted that it is a listed structure. It was suggested that a log of calls made from the box be obtained from BT to ascertain usage and to contact the conservation officer at Cherwell District Council regarding its upkeep as it is currently in a dilapidated condition.

Defibrillator A decision to purchase a defibrillator was made in February 2015. After the idea of locating it at the phone box was ruled out it was thought it could be put on the outside wall of The Bell.

Consideration given to purchase another, to be sited at The Horse and Groom. The cost of the devices was £1,400 plus vat but funding was likely from outside bodies.

Dog Owners It was decided to place a newly bought dog waste bin at the entrance to the King George’s playing field, thus providing provision for disposing of waste at every entrance.

Grass Cutting After Oxfordshire’s decision to reduce grass cutting, it was decided to look for contractors who would do the work between 6-10 times yearly.

Housing Development Ironically, early in the decade, affordable housing was taken off the regular council agenda since it seemed there was little prospect of further development. However, in February 2016 it was reported that surveyors had been seen around Station Road and the Long Bridge acting on behalf of the Bonnar Allan Company who were undertaking a speculative survey of the area with a view to proposing housing development.

In April 2016, the Bursar of Corpus Christi told a parish meeting that the college had been approached by Bonnar Allan, which he described as ‘a new and different kind of benign developer.’ The proposal, he said, would benefit both the college and Oxfordshire’s need for affordable housing. Also the college was aware the ideas would be ‘controversial.’

In April 2016 there was an open meeting in the church to hear a presentation by Bonnar Allan and John Harrison, the Corpus Christi Bursar, on proposals for the creation of a new town at Lower Heyford. The meeting attracted a record number of over 100 residents to hear plans for proposed housing. John Harrison explained the College financial situation as well as affordable housing needs but stated that if the proposals were not accepted by CDC and Oxford District Council Inspectors then Corpus Christi would not pursue this development. Nigel Rankine of Bonnar Allan outlined plans for 5,000 houses within a countryside park on farmland around Lower Heyford, but which would protect the existing village and views from Rousham. The development would include car parks and a research and development centre as well as doctor, dentist, new parish hall, schools, commercial buildings and a canal side park. Mr Barry Wood (CDC Leader) during questions expressed concern over the proposals and Mr Martin Lipson of MCNP indicated likely opposition from all 11 parishes. There were numerous public

64

expressions of heated disapproval from residents whose addresses and email details were recorded. The parish council also decided to form an action group.

The developer said that Lower Heyford had been chosen as being ‘ideal’ after rejecting Tackley and Kings Sutton. The intention was to build 5,000 houses as part of a countryside park. A lynch-pin of the scheme would be to improve the rail service into Oxford without increasing the volume of traffic (‘loud laughter’ was registered in the minutes at this point). There would be a large new car park near the Jehovah’s Witnesses building from which a shuttle bus would operate to the station. The minutes observed that ‘the meeting became quite heated’ with many questions one of which was directed at Corpus Christi: ‘have you considered building on your playing fields in Oxford?’

Corpus Christi informed the council at the next meeting that it was no longer working with Bonnar Allan. It was noted the bursar of Corpus Christi had not actually confirmed that another developer would not be engaged. So the threat remained.

Following the rejection of the idea of 5,000 houses, a later meeting was told this only emphasised the importance of the Mid Cherwell Neighbourhood Plan (MNCP) in controlling developments in all parishes around Heyford Park.

Parking

By September 2016, parking in Mill Lane and Freehold Street had increased to the extent that some residents were unable to get out of their driveways and should an emergency vehicle require access it would be impossible for it to get through. The Clerk was instructed to put a notice on noticeboards and in Valley News requesting that residents park with consideration and use their driveways where possible.

Bus stop at Caulcott At the January 2019 meeting it was noted that a new bus stop had been approved. A request stop would be provided on the Portway at its junction with Greenway.

Publication of the Minute Books At the January 2019 meeting, it was noted that it was the 125th anniversary of the formation of the Parish Council. Mr Eggeling considered that this should be acknowledged and proposed that a book be compiled to record the principal events and reflect the changes in the Parish during that time. The meeting considered the costs of producing such a book and noted that these would be dependent on how it was decided to distribute the book and whether or not a charge would be made to parishioners.

65

Appendix 1: Chairs and Parish Clerks (1894 – 2019) Councillors, chairs and parish clerks The positions of councillors, chairs and parish clerks are fundamental to the proper functioning of parish councils.

The role of the parish councillor is to serve the community in which they live. Hence parish councillors are required to meet a number of tests of age and eligibility and be resident in the parish or else be closely connected with the parish by way of employment. The majority of councillors serve for a modest number of years. However there are inevitably a number of councillors whose tenure was notable either for its very duration or for the impact they made upon the parish in some manner.

It is the parish clerks, who in the early days were not remunerated and in more recent times have been modestly so, who do a vast amount of the behind the scenes work of agenda drafting, minute preparation, letter writing, investigating, communicating, ordering items and so on.

Without their tireless efforts the work of the parish council would simply grind to a halt.

A full list of chairs and parish clerks is set out below along with the dates during which they served. It would be an almost impossible task to list all of the good folk of Lower Heyford and Caulcott who have served as councillors during the period but a few further details of some of the luminaries are set out below.

Councillors Mr Sidney Humphries ~ Mr Humphries served as a councillor from 11th March 1946 and had two spells as chair totalling some 9 years. At the first meeting after his death, which was held on 27th January 1972, his fellow councillors stood in silence in admiration of a man who had served his community for 26 years and had ‘never missed a meeting’.

Mrs Denise Ball ~ Mrs Ball served for almost 36 years having attended her first meeting, as a newly elected councillor, on 23rd May 1983 with her last meeting on 21st March 2019. For the first few years Mrs Ball attended council meetings in the very school which she herself had attended as a child, the Mary Dew School, so named after its headmistress, Mary Dew née Banfield, who had married the first parish clerk, Mr George James Dew, on 9th March 1872.

Chairs Rev. Vivian Rodwell Lennard ~ the second and longest serving chair having been in post from 1897 until 1919. He was the local vicar as were many of the early chairs.

Mr Reginald Lennard ~ was the son of Vivian Lennard and became chair in 1961, having been a councillor since 6th May 1958. It was Reginald Lennard who set up the Lennard Trust and gifted the Reading Room to the village. The Reading Room now forms one of the assets of the Lower Heyford and Caulcott Community Fund whose charitable aims are to relieve need within the village and provide general benefit to the village.

Mr William (Bill) Knapton ~ was chair for some 11 years from 1974 to 1985 and had been a councillor since 9th May 1949, making his tenure as a councillor just over 36 years. Bill 66

Knapton was a farmer in the village and his name lives on in the street behind the Market Place, Knapton’s Croft.

Parish Clerks Mr George James Dew ~ was the first, and by a margin, the longest serving parish clerk. At the meeting held on 4th December 1894 George failed to be elected as a councillor. After two elected councillors decided not to take their seats, on 2nd January 1895, he allowed his name to go forward again and being the sole candidate was appointed unopposed. At the following meeting on 12th January 1895 he was appointed parish clerk.

In 1899 he withdrew his name from the election to be a councillor, but remained as clerk, a post which he held until 1928. As he prepared the minutes his rationale for withdrawing was not minuted. One can only speculate as to his reasons for doing so at the time.

Mr Dew was a truly remarkable man having written very detailed diaries noting life in the village and the surrounding countryside in astonishing detail since 1862 when he was just 15 years of age. He continued to write his diaries (albeit with less detail after the turn of the century) until the night before he died. They are all now in the Bodleian library.

The minutes Mr Dew prepared were in beautiful, and highly legible, handwritten script. In his period as a parish clerk there were remarkably few instances of errata requiring amendment.

Bearing in mind these were hand written scripts, prepared long before the advent of correction fluids or computers, this was a truly remarkable record.

Miss Dorothy B Dew ~ was the daughter of George and Mary Dew and held the post of parish clerk for 15 years from 1948 until 1964. She had previously been the headmistress at the village school from 1913.

Mr Peter John ~ Mr John served as clerk for some six years from 1984 to 1990. He set the bar very high for his most detailed and complete minutes. Although his minutes were not the first to be prepared using a typewriter clearly his skills were exemplary. His minutes stand out in terms of neatness, completeness and accuracy.

Mr Roger Bowen ~ Mr Bowen was not only one of the longest serving clerks he had previously been a councillor from 13th May 1987 until he became clerk on 7th July 1994. His tenure lasted until 17th April 2008 making a total of some 21 years. During these 21 years, as both councillor and clerk, Mr Bowen never missed a meeting. The minutes maintained by Mr Bowen, like those of Mr John before him, were amongst the most complete and detailed. From 1995 they were impeccably maintained on a ‘word processor’ purchased for the princely sum of £352.

67

Lower Heyford Parish Council Chairs and Parish Clerks Date

Chair

31-Dec-1894 12-Jan-1895 7-Dec-1897 11-Mar-1919 24-Jan-1921 16-Jan-1925 20-Jul-1928 09-Jul-1937 30-Apr-1941 12-Dec-1945 05-Apr-1948 25-Apr-1952 25-May-1954 24-May-1955 30-May-1958 20-May-1961 21-May-1964 04-Apr-1968 27-Jan-1972 19-Mar-1974 07-May-1974 13-Sep-1979 09-May-1984 08-May-1985 13-May-1987 13-Sep-1990 07-Jul-1994 13-May-1999 17-May-2007 17-Apr-2008 21-May-2009 18-Mar-2010 19-May-2011

Rev. Joseph Arthur Dodd

Years Service 3

Rev. Vivian Rodwell Lennard Mr Wm. Richard Thomas Mr Samuel Edmund Moore Mr Wm. Richard Thomas

22 2 4 12

Rev. G A Ward-Jackson

8

Mr Harry D'Oyley Preston

7

Capt. Thomas Leonard Wilson Mr Sidney Humphries Mr Harold Smith Rev. K G Packard Mr Reginald Lennard Mr Sidney Humphries

2 1 3 3 3 8

Mr Kenneth Albert Allen

2

Mr William Knapton

Mr Michael Inkpen Mr Max Scraggs

Mr Alan Humberstone Mrs Robin Hepworth

Clerk none Mr George James Dew

33

Mr William Cheesman

13

Mr John William Grimmett

7

Miss Dorothy B Dew

16

Mrs Probert Mr K T Jolley

4 6

Mr David Lowe

5

Mr Richard J Makepeace Mr Peter John

5 6

Mrs Christine Wordsworth Mr Roger Bowen

4 14

11

2 12

8 4 Mrs Sue Lee Mrs Lisa Davies Cathy Fleet

Mr James Macnamara

Years Service

1 1 10 to date

9 to date

68

Appendix 2: Dates of National and Local Significance 1802

Parliamentary Inclosure Act An open field system of farming had continued in the parish until 1802 when a piece of land (32 acres 6 perches) was awarded to the poor in lieu of common rights lost by enclosure of fields. The poor of the parish had previously been able to access common and waste ground in order to cut plant material for use as kindling. Subsequently, the ‘Poor’s Land’ was administered by a village charity and leased out to a local farmer as permanent pasture for sheep grazing and silage.

1850

The Great Western Railway opened Heyford Station.

Construction of the railway line had begun five years earlier in 1845.

1867

A National School was built in Market Square.

An extra classroom was added in 1894 and in a reorganisation of schools in 1932, the school became a junior school and senior pupils from Lower Heyford went to Steeple Aston. Lower Heyford school became a Church of England school in 1952 but closed in 1974 and is now a private house.

1897

Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee

1899-1902

Second Boer War

1914-1918

The Great War

1935

King George V Silver Jubilee

1939-1945

World War II

1937

King George VI Coronation

1953

Queen Elizabeth II Coronation

1963-1965

Beeching Axe The reduction of the route network of railways in Great Britain

1971

15th February 1971 - Decimal Day in the in UK and Ireland Currency changed from £sd to £p in readiness for joining the European Economic Community in 1973.

1972

Local Government Act Ploughley was a rural district council in Oxfordshire from 1932 to 1974. It was abolished under the Local Government Act 1972 and now forms part of the Cherwell district.

1951-1993

American Air Force stationed at RAF Upper Heyford during the Cold War period

69

1992

Beacon Europe On 31st December 1992 a chain of beacons was lit across the then 12 countries of the European Union in celebration of the official opening of the single European Market.

1995

VE (Victory in Europe) Day 50th Anniversary (8th May)

2000

Millennium Celebration

2002

Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee (3rd June)

2012

Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee (3rd June)

70