ABBEYFIELD ICKENHAM SOCIETY
The AIS has been a part of Ickenham for 37 years and is a sheltered house for 7 retired people at Court House, 26-28 Court Road.æ Our resident housekeeper provides two communal meals each day. It is managed by a committee made up of local volunteers, including church members, to whom the society owes a great debt.æ Ron Watkins, chairman for many years, was longest serving, but currently Ruth Gear, Peter Cotmore, John Foxford and John Davies are trustees as well as Mary Holloway and Brian Hague.
Our 3 ladies and 2 gentlemen agedæ 78 to 99 includeæ Miss Winnie Bugden, a long time churchgoer. Our two other ladies, Connie and Gwen, are keen church and village club goers and our gentlemen John and Ivan, also make use of the community facilities. Presently we are restricting admissions to enable us to develop en-suite facilities. Abbeyfield, nationally, is changing too and in future will play a bigger role as monitoring systems become more complex.
My wife and I are going on a Voluntary Services Overseas placement from September.æ If you‰re interested in taking on the challenge of our new development while retaining our local, domestic style approach please ring me on 01895 624414.
Derek Hughes (Chairman)
In a letter from the Planning Inspector, Elizabeth Fieldhouse, dated 28th March she concludes that the appeal is dismissed and that planning permission is refused for a new building with ground floor offices and first and second floor flats. An L.B.H. application for costs against the appellant, Mr. C. Lane, is the subject of a separate decision.
There is a possibility that the validity of this decision could be challenged on application to the High Court and the appellant has been sent a special leaflet outlining the circumstances where such an action may apply.
Ickenham Ward Councillor John Hensley said how pleased he was that everyone‰s efforts had been rewarded and that the Inspector had taken on board his comments.
á..THEN THE OUTBUILDINGS ARE DEMOLISHED
Early Saturday morning 5th April, and hard on the heels of press stories of the Appeal result, local people witnessed men, with unmarked white vans, pulling down the side extension of the garden centre. They attempted to obscure the shop name, but these boards had fallen down by Sunday. They fenced off the front area of the shop and barred the entrance to Pete Cottage whilst littering its lawn with wood. The doors to the outhouses were smashed in as if to invite the attention of more vandals and the old lawn mower that had been perched on the flat roof was junked unceremoniously on its side.
|
|
|
Local residents called the Police, and through the good offices of our Beat Officer, a regular watch will be maintained on the premises. Our shocked Ward Councillor immediately contacted Uxbridge Planning Committee Officers as well as the Constabulary.
In an email response, on 7th April, Jon Finney from Uxbridge Planning Department said, ‹It appears that the works have not involved any demolition of the buildings and Enforcement may not therefore be possible. I shall however try and visit the site today and will write to the Appellant's Agent to try and find out what his Client's proposals are. We may then need to consider action to clear up the site. If in the meantime there is any further work on site, I would be grateful if you could let me knowŠ. Doubtless villagers will do this to ensure that the eyesore is dealt with quickly. There has been further suggestion that the time is now ripe to seek local listing for the site.
The emphatic ëmessage‰ of the destruction implies that the site will never be offered back to its former leaseholder. If this turns out to be the case and it becomes apparent that a new, acceptable and sympathetic development is unlikely to materialise, then many villagers have contacted the editor saying that they would like to see Pete Cottage restored to its original condition with one side opened as an Ickenham museum and the other as a teashop. The gardens could be made to look very attractive and there would be room for small, local craft outlets around the site.
Note: In the April edition there was a misprint. The only
witness for the appellant should have read Mark Baldwin, not Mark Lane and the
witnesses shown as ëcalled‰ for L.B.H. should have specified ënamed‰. Apologies
for these minor errors.
Editor
