This is raw uncorrected scanned text from HTPS Newsletter 81
To see the original, go to http://www.taplowsociety.org.uk/twiki/bin/view/Newsletter/NewsLetter81

Hitcham & Taplow
Preservation Society
Newsletter - No.81 Spring 2004
£2 for non-members
A Society, formed in 1959, to protect Hitcharn, Taplow and the surrounding countryside from being spoilt by
bad development or neglect
As we were . . . This collection of pictures is
from the Bucks County Council website page ‘Bucks
Photos’. I’ve included the Women’s Institute banner
picture because there’s an article inside on the WI.
What is intriguing are the shield motifs, are these
specific to the W.l. or are they related to Taplow and
Hitcham in some way? What’s the story?

HITCHAM AND TAPLOW PRESERVATION SOCIETY
OFFICERS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
President Lincoln Lee
Vice Presidents
Chairman
Treasurer
Secretary
Fred Russell
Historian Leonard Miall
Advisory
Committee
John Kennedy, Leonard Miall, Tony Hickman, Derek Walker
Anne Hanford, 1 Saxon Gardens, Taplow, Bucks, SL6 ODD
Alan Senior, The Old Rectory, Hitcham Lane, Burnham, SL1 7DU
Jeremy Vanstone, 8 Stockwells, Taplow, Bucks. SL6 ODB
Malcolm Crick, Tony Meats, Andrew Findley
Jean Beaves, Euan Felton, Heather Fenn, Karl Lawrence,
Eva Lipman, Martin Maund, Andy McKenzie, Barrie Peroni, Helen Wogan, .
EDITORIAL
To misquote an old saw, the cost of freedom is often
an unhappy neighbour. People who knowingly sell
their homes to developers have bought their own
freedom at enormous cost to the neighbours they
leave behind. It seems that the biggest disaster to
befall Ellington Road and upper River Road was to
be publically labelled as a ‘Riverside settlement’ and
declared a Conservation Area. The attendant
publicity seemed to attract developers like ies to the
honeypot — helped along by having a poster about us
alongside the counter in the Planning Office which is
constantly frequented by developers.
Of the six houses for sale in the area recently, ve
have gone to developers. One house changed hands
three times, all to developers. There are at least
another two houses on the near horizon. It is we who
are left with the constant noise, dust, lorries, loss of
privacy and value of our homes who suffer the
consequences of such thoughtless or antisocial
behaviour.
Cliveden is very much on our minds at the moment
and we have to wait on the District Council for the
next move. Our indefatigable roving journalist and
historian Joy Marshall unearthed some things about
Cliveden you might find interesting. For instance,
did you know that when the Duke of Hamilton, who
fought in the Battle of Blenheim under the Duke of
Marlborough acquired the Cliveden Estate he “caused
the Estate to be planted with trees as to represent the
position of the contending armies engaged in that
battle”. One has to wonder whether the development
at the hospital site will change the order of battle!
Joy also discovered that Cliveden is a grade I Historic
Park and the whole area - including the hospital site
— is classified as a Biological Notification Site (BNS)
containing over 192 species of plants, trees, wildlife
including 9 very rare species of plants. In the
developer’s Ecological Survey Report of Dec. 2003
they explicitly state that the hospital site is
EXCLUDED from the BNS. The map Joy provided,
dated 2004, specifically INCLUDES the hospital site.
In section 4.2.1 of the report they say “With the
development being restricted to the hospital grounds,
which lie outside the BNS, there are unlikely to be
any direct impacts on the BNS” ls somebody bending
the truth a little here? The BNS notication requires
the Planning Office carefully to consider the impact
of development on a BNS site. Clearly, from the
evidence in the documentation provided to them, the
planners may not be aware that the hospital grounds
are a BNS site. This documentation also states that
about 300 trees will be felled and a further 2-300 will
have ‘major surgery’ carried out to make room for
these 191 houses. There is little doubt that the noise
and physical equipment movements involved in
felling and lopping 500 or 600 trees will seriously
disturb wildlife and ora for a large distance around
the site. Equally, there seems to be nothing in the
planning documentation about the traffic generated
by lorries moving hundreds of trees from the site.
Where is it all going?
At a special Parish meeting the idea of a Parish Plan
was oated. Although the turnout was disappointing
there were enough suitably qualified volunteers to
make up a Steering Committee, under the
chairmanship of John Kennedy, to get the ball rolling
and we can expect an update on progress at our next
AGM and a fuller report next Spring.

THE DAILY MIRROR, JULY 20, I942
Were you ‘there?
The scene at Bapsey pond on the 19th. June 1942 as the Bishop of Dorchester baptised one of the little
children. It was the rst time since the seventh century that water from from the pool had been used for
baptism. A Norman font, relic from the old Taplow church, no longer in existence was set up beside the pool
in the shade of an ivy—bound May tree. Five children were baptised; Anne Morrison and her baby brother
John together with John and Eileen Miller. The fth baby was not named in the article from the Daily Mirror.
Would the kind lady who passed me this interesting snippet please get in touch so that
I can return the clipping. I regret that my filing system broke down and I ’ve lost your name! Ed.
Exemplary Behaviour?
Heather Fenn
A community as much in the maelstrom of planning
storms can tend to forget its own bright spots in its
preoccupation with fighting developers. And yet,
credit where credit is due: we should not forget to
celebrate the beauty in our built and natural
environment, the sensitive restorations, the protected
natural spaces, the ancient trees kept in trim over the
centuries. There are ne contributions made by our
friends and neighbours we can and should be proud
of, and should celebrate.
There are stunning examples of good practice, with
people spending time and money to research and
restore their own properties, not just meddling in
other people’s planning matters. There are properties
in our community whose foundations date back
centuries, many of which have been kept at great
sacrice as they were all those centuries ago.
A walk along the top of the High Street is a walk
through a Tudor hamlet, and a drive past the sugarbowl topped delights of Ellington Gardens inspires
images of Edwardian tea parties on the lawn. Many
examples of ne guardianship and restoration deserve
to be celebrated.
The chimneys of Taplow Court are one good example
of people sparing no expense to retain the character
of a stunning building.
Orkney Court, whether or not we wanted it built, was
constructed in beautiful materials in a style which
cannot be said to be out of keeping with the local
area. The interior design of Taplow House Hotel is
an exquisite return to its Regency origins. These and
other examples of voluntary good practice take
considerable time and expense.
It would be nice to be able to say “well done.” Just
how to go about this will require some thought, but it
would be interesting to have comments back to this
Newsletter on this subject. Do you know of someone
who has done research in order to rediscover the
original feel of their property? Are you aware of an
example of a property brought back to its former
glory? Has an effort been made to rediscover the
traditional local colours for a barn, or to restore the
nish to old beams?
It might be possible to nd a way to celebrate the
good around us, possibly selecting a property each
year to name as “best example of keeping Taplow,
Taplow.” Our neighbours either contribute or
detract from our daily lives, so let’s say “bravo” to
those who bring joy and beauty to Taplow.

Notes from the 44th. AGM Oct. 2003
The meeting was attended by around 40 people,
including 30 member households.
Anne Hanford reported on a very busy year for the
Society, particularly in the area of Planning.
The Society had objected to the various stages in the
Sunnyside/Bridge Villa applications which were
eventually approved, despite strong local opposition;
similarly with the nearby development in River
Close. The Society had also objected to the two
applications for redeveloping the Nutshell site and to
a recent application for a car showroom on the
Bishop Centre site. A decisions is awaited on both
issues. The Society welcomed and supported the
refusal of the application to remove restrictions on
the Boundary Road stables site. The Society has also
played an active role in the Cliveden “No"Campaign
which is opposing the National Trust's proposal for a
development of nearly 200 dwellings on the
Canadian Red Cross Hospital site.
Anne Hanford also reported on the very successful
Village Green Party, held in June which was attended
by over 500 people, raising over £200 for the
Society's funds and over £1,000 in the rafe for the
Thames Valley Adventure Playground. She thanked
the many willing helpers and looked forward to an
equally successful event next year on 19 June.
Special thanks were made to Fred Russell for another
two excellent issues of the Newsletter, assisted by
Andrew Findlay. She emphasised the need for more
contributions and encouraged people to contact Fred.
She mentioned the intention to concentrate on the
development of a website for the Society in the
forthcoming year, also with the major participation of
Fred and Andrew.
She concluded with heartfelt thanks to all the Officers
and Committee Members and a plea for ideas for the
future development of the Society.
Summary of Treasurer's Report
Membership currently stands at 155 subscriptions
broken down into 148 individual households, 3 block
memberships and 4 corporations.Receipts over the
year totalled £2,841. Money held at the bank
amounted to £2,695 with an outstanding bill for the
Newsletter.The Accounts were audited by Jerry
Burley who was re— appointed as auditor for the next
year.
It was agreed that the subscription levels should
remain at £5 per household or £4.50 per block and
£50 per corporation
George Lawrence from South Bucks District Council
gave a brief talk on environmental noise and
mentioned the availability of an information pack on
the subject. The evening concluded with a
presentation by John Kennedy on Parish Plans and
how Taplow might be involved. (Anne Hanford)

A flexible Green Belt...
The Government seems to have decided that the
whole principle of the protection of the Green Belt is
a flexible concept, which may be rejected or
manipulated at will. The latest edict from the Deputy
Prime Minister's office, issued at the beginning of
February has demanded that the new Eastem Region
(now pretentiously entitled "The East of England")
build 465,000 new houses by the year 2021. This is
astounding! It means the construction of about 27,350
houses every year for 16 years! There are not enough
bricks or building workers in the UK to achieve this.
(The RIBA reported in September 2003 that housing
applications all across the North East of England
have been rejected, even on brown field sites,
presumably as an incentive to bring the workers
South.) This plan was forced through the East of
England Regional Assembly although most of the
councils in Hertfordshire and Essex voted against it.
There is NO proposal in this plan for a new water
supply for the relatively arid South East, nor any
proposal for an increased power supply or transport
system extension. The problems of transport to work,
despite the fact that existing commuter trains are
grossly overcrowded and the main motorways to
London are running slow due to pressure of trafc,
have been completely ignored. The plan for the
proposed ‘Corridor’ from London via Stansted and
Cambridge to Milton Keynes, includes a huge
addition to the housing area of Milton Keynes and a
huge new development of houses on the post war
"New Town" of Stevenage. This will be in the Green
Belt across the A1M road from the town, thus joining
up Stevenage to Luton and Hitchin. This plan shows
a proposed new bypass road around Luton, which
will run, not only through the Green Belt but also
through Areas Of Natural Beauty (AONB). The
remark that another area may be substituted for this
makes nonsense of the meaning of the AONB.
Beauty, which nature created through many centuries
on a very special terrain, cannot be moved! Our part
of the country, soon to be run by the largely
unelected South East Regional Assembly, may soon
feel the belt tightening.

. . .However
Tony McNulty, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of
State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister,
“It is important to put the matter in context, because
that leads me to what I want to say about speculative
developments. Despite our clear plan to build
sustainable communities for the future, there will
almost inevitably be some who wish to misinterpret
our intentions. I have to say strongly, however, let
them be warned. It is a mistake for developers and
property companies to think that the need for housing
in the South East can be used to undermine
longstanding policies for the protection of the
countryside and the green belt. To put it quite simply
and starkly, it cannot.”
“The fact that the land is located in the South East...
does not mean that it should be developed. We have
made it clear that, in deciding which sites to allocate
for housing, local planning authorities should assess
their potential and suitability for development against
a range of criteria which includes: the availability of
previously developed sites; the location and
accessibility of sites to jobs, shops and services by
modes other than the car; the capacity of existing
infrastructure, including public transport, water and
sewerage, to take the additional development; other
utilities and social infrastructure; the ability to build
communities; and the physical and environmental
constraints on the development of land.”
What about Cliveden, then?

Lincoln's Corner
Taplow - A strip Village ?
Calling Taplow a strip village may invite hilarity -it
suggests the Women's Institute or summat . But as I
mentioned in a much earlier edition of this newsletter
Taplow does seem to have been a strip village at one
time. When I was at school I was told that a strip
village had four basic needs : Water, Pasture, Arable
land and woodland. Many centuries ago, before the
Bath Road, railway, and motorway cut through this
area Water here was the River Thames. Water didn't
just mean drainage and drinking , and food like fish
and eels. It really meant transportation and trade
In the Pasture land, away from the water, cattle could
graze. Even further away from the water, there would
be arable land,. suitable not just for growing crops
but for the villagers to have their cottages , church,
and inn. Finally of course the woodland provided
timber and rewood, and a place where swine could
snout around.
Now look at the parishes of Taplow, Hitcham,
Burnham , Farnham etc on the map. Each of them,
long and narrow, seems to meet the requirement.
Taplow Graffiti
Lessons should be learned from those words painted
on the railway bridge over the Bath Road ....".Lizzie I
love you. Still, one year on."
The first lesson is to be careful -Lizzie, or for that
matter her sort-of-secret admirer, may be a member
of this Society. . You can't be too careful.
The second lesson to be learnt is that the inscription
reveals a degree of ‘steadfastness . Love for a whole
year? Maybe in time to come we will have
celebrations of ten, or even twenty-five years. Maybe.
Thirdly, to be honest it's not genuine graffiti.. To
achieve those strange lumpy gures which constitute
genuine grafti you have to attend a College which
specialises in such work. But don't think any the less
of our Taplow words because of that. Alongside the
railway tracks outside Paddington Station about 35
years ago somebody painted the words "Far away is
close at hand in images of elsewhere" I didn't know
at the time what this message meant, and for that
matter I still don't but the mere fact that the words
can be recalled after such a long time suggests that
the painted word can be just as effective as graffiti.
Especially when the spelling's correct.
But some awkward questions :Why didn't those
enthusiastic Line Whiteners touch up those wonderful
words ? And why, in the weeks since the above was
written, has somebody painted the letters NDT on the
bridge above ? Could NDT be the initials of our lovelorn swain, or even of Lizzie herself ? More likely
NDT has some cryptic meaning, like
Nerita Doesn't Talk.
Or maybe it has nothing to do with Lizzie, but is just
an abbreviation
No Damn Trains
No prizes

Village Green Party
The annual village green party
with its Ox spit roast and
barbecue will be held as usual on
the green on
Saturday June 19th.
6.00pm to 10.30pm
Picnic and dance
to the sound of music with
Mike Sanderson and his
musicians

5
The W.I Hall through the years
Muriel King
Early in 1926 Nancy, Lady Astor who was President
of Cliveden and Dropmore W.I. at the time wrote to
her friend Mrs. Audrey Skimming of Taplow House
recommending "that the women of Taplow would
benefit from a Women's Institute." Mrs. Skimming
duly accepted this advice and so, in March of that
year, an inaugural meeting was held in the Parish
Room and 85 members were enrolled. Two months
later a discussion took place as to whether or not
Hitcham should have its own Institute, but the ladies
of Hitcham decided to remain with Taplow, as did
Lent Rise Ladies’ Club members who later also
joined the W.I.
With this increased membership a larger hall had to
be found and monthly meetings were held at the
Dumb Bell Hotel on the Bath Road. By November
1927 the Drill Hall (now occupied by Thames Valley
Police Transport Division) became the venue, but
space there was limited so, with great energy and
determination it was decided to build a hall of our
own. Land was leased from the old Great Westem
Railway for a fee of £7. 10s per year, and this
arrangement continued until 1951 when the land was
nally purchased. Plans were drawn up by Mr. Salter,
an architect whose wife was a W.I. member, and
permission to build was granted by Eton Rural
District Council in 1929. The total cost of
construction was £1,340. 16s. 3d. and the money was
raised by the members in a variety of ways. These
included Subscriptions, Jumble Sales, Dances, Sale
of bricks at l/— each, plus donations from many local
people.
In 1930 the Hall was officially opened by Lady
Astor, accompanied by the Minister for Agriculture
and several other Members of Parliament. Three
Trustees were appointed —Mrs. Martineau, Mrs.
Madeley, and Mrs. Hyman. The President was Mrs.
Skimming and the Secretary the Hon. Mrs. Irby.
Registration of the Institute with the Charity
Commissioners also took place at this time. Records
show that William Wood of Taplow donated and
planted the shrubs along the boundaries of our land
and water came to the Hall from the Railway Station
via the Garage which was then a small concern. In
1932 the Committee Room was added and the
decision was made to limit membership to 200 !
During World War 11 the Hall was used as a
Reception Centre for evacuees with families sleeping
on the oor until homes could be found for them.
Ration Books were issued from there and members
ran a Mobile Canteen which served local Army
Camps and also the Prisoner of War Camp situated
on the adjacent Sports Ground. Prisoners were even
allowed to come to Dances at the hall. Both during
and after the war members staffed a Lending Library
and a Child Clinic.
The late Lord Desborough of Taplow Court was very
interested in the work of the W.I. and on his death his
daughter, Lady Gage, gave the Institute an additional
piece of land to the north of the hall. Built to seat
300 the W.I. Hall is the largest in the locality, and
over the years it has been used by many different
organisations and for many different purposes such
as: -Play Groups, Political Parties, Public Inquiries,
Dog Shows, Summer Camps for Scouts and
Brownies, not forgetting the Preservation Society
itself
The maintenance and safety of the hall has been a
continuing concern of the members over the years,
and so in 1953 , following several acts of vandalism,
an approach was made to Eton Rural District Council
for permission to site a mobile home at the rear of the
hall for a resident caretaker. Temporary permission
was granted which continued until recently when the
Trustees with support from local individuals and
organisations, including the Preservation Society,
were granted Permanent permission , which ensures
the continuation of this most successful arrangement.
Present members of Taplow and Hitcham W.I. have
much to thank those early members for when they
took the decision to build their own hall. It enables
both them and the local community to participate in
many different activities , including Art and Craft,
Badminton, Short—mat Bowls, Table Tennis and
Keep—F it. At the present time the members are raising
money to update the facilities in order that future
generations may benet from having the opportunity
to use a Hall with so much to offer.
In memorium
It is with great regret that we have to announce the death of Dr. Maurice Rogers, at the age of 92. Maurice had a strong
love for the countryside, and the preservation of the rural environment was of extreme importance to him. While living in
Hitcham, Bucks, he was the founder and for many years remained the Chairman of the Hitcham and Taplow Preservation
Society. This Society continues to be actively dedicated to preserving the rural environment in the Hitcham and Taplow
area against encroaching development from surrounding towns. In retirement Maurice was a tireless fundraiser for his local
branch of the CPRE.

Planning Applications
Remember, readers, whilst your Society is responding to these
applications on your behalf, it helps if you also write to the District
Council stating your views, for or against.

South Bucks District Council
Director of Planning Services
Council Offices
Windsor Road
Slough. SL1 2HN

03/00649/F UL. The Nutshell, River Road.
The demolition of existing house and replacement with terraces of four twoand a half storey dwellings with
integral garages. These are simply townhouses which in style and context are totally at odds with the line of
Edwardian cottages alongside them. An Antler’s homes intiative, not being content with the Sunnyside site.
Refused
03/00607/ADV. Altwood, Bath Road.
Externally illuminated Mini advertising box. What next? The appalling proliferation ofjazzy signs and
advertising gimmics on this section of the Bath Road continues apace. I’m expecting a giant Jurassic Park
Dinosaur to appear soon! That’ll stop the traffic...Permitted ‘
04/00353/IF UL. Old Court Hotel, Bath Road
Demolition of Old Court Hotel and building of block of 14 ats. We have been expecting this for some time but
most of the residents down by the Bath Road have been hoping that the developer would convert the hotel to an
apartment block similar to the wonderful conversion of Landsdown House next door. We really have to try for
this solution. Pending
04/00135/FUL, Silchester House School.
Resurfacing and layout of car park at front of school. Really there should be considerable replanting at the front
as well. Pending
04/000744/REM, Cliveden.
Application for reserved matters under conditions in 00/00282/OUT for demolition of redundant hospital and
erect 135 dwellings. Pending
04/00132/FUL, Marconi, Berry Hill Farm.
Erection of phone mast 21.65 metres high with 8 polar antennae plus equipment and 4 cabins. This will be an
abomination in our sight, a monstrous phone mast looming over the whole of Taplow and ruining the outlook in
a Green belt area. Pending
O4/00141/RC, Altwood, Bath Road.
Application for removal of flood plain conditions and restrictions. These people again. Its difficult to see what
the purpose of this strange application is, but we can be sure it bodes no good for us if approved. Pending
03/01115/F U1 and 04/00179/F UL, Bishops Centre, Bath Road.
Erection of car showroom, roundabout and traffic lights on the Bath Road with a new access to the Bishops
centre. I am speechless...Pending
03/01259/EUC, Leisuretrack, Bath Road.
Certification of lawfulness to display cars for sale. They should not be offering cars for sale on that site, there
was never permission to do so. No question of it, Taplow is set to become the car sales centre for the South
East. Talk about Silicon Valley, how about Thames Motown Valley? In Appeal
03.09095/TPO, Antler’s Homes, River Road.
This developer is determined to get rid of the remaining trees on the Sunnyside site. We had to stop them
cutting back yet another tree because it was getting in the way of their block of ats. District tree man told
them that the idea was that they should build the ats round the trees, not dock the trees to pathetic stumps to
accommodate their horrible flats. There used to be 38 trees on that site...they are supposed to plant a
replacement mature specimen somewhere, will they? and who defines ‘mature’? Permitted

7
Looking forward to 2020
-What do we want Taplow Parish to be like?
This article is based on a talk by John Kennedy,
former member for Taplow on South Bucks
District Council, to Hitcham and Taplow
Preservation Society’s 2003 AGM and a public
meeting called by Taplow Parish Council on
Friday 26 March 2004 to discuss a proposed Taplow
Parish Plan.
The Local Government Act of 2000 introduced a
modernised structure, resulting in SBDC now being
run by a Leader with a Cabinet of Portfolio Holders
in place of the old system of Chairmen and
Committees. The Act also required the production of
a Community Plan for the District to ensure its future
social, economic and environmental sustainability
and a Community Strategy to explain how the
Community Plan would be delivered.
The South Bucks Community Plan was produced in
2001 and focused on three themes: creating a better
environment, improving safety, health and well
being and developing and supporting a thriving
community. A Local Strategic Partnership (LSP)
consisting of the main local organisations operating
in South Bucks was then formed, including
representatives of Bucks County Council, SBDC, the
Parishes, the Primary Care Trust, the Voluntary
Sector, the Police, the Youth Council and the
Chamber of Commerce. Its objective was to improve
everyone’s quality of life.
The LSP Community Plan for South Bucks has now
been published. It confirmed that feeling safe,
improving health, a better community spirit and
protection of the environment are what matters to
most local people. There are six priorities: making
South Bucks a better place; reducing crime and
the fear of crime; improving health for all;
increasing community spirit and involvement;
making it a prosperous place to live and work and
a pleasant and healthy environment.
This overarching Community Plan for the District
includes the broad views of Taplow residents who
were consulted on the Taplow Parish Appraisal and
subsequent Taplow Community Plan which was
published by the Parish Council in 2002. Some
specific suggestions identified in the Taplow
Community Plan for the environment were: respect
the residential/rural diversity of Taplow and
maintain the primacy of the green belt; protect
the Parish from large scale encroachments and
plan accordingly. e.g. Cliveden and Dropmore;
create a master plan for the redevelopment of
Taplow Riverside between Maidenhead bridge
and Taplow paper mill, to include public open
spaces and sympathetic residential development,
including affordable housing; restrict further
commercial development along the A4; improve
sites of damaged land; encourage businesses and
public utilities, e.g. Railtrack, to improve the
appearance of their properties, e.g. verges, fences
and hedges and residents to keep their frontages
and gardens tidy. There were also many
recommendations on highways and traffic, public
transport, housing, public protection, employment,
spoits and leisure, youth strategy, the River Thames
and it’s flood plain, footpaths and verges.
Introducing Parish Plans. Local planning since the
Second World War changed radically with the
introduction of the green belt in 1948 and the
county map in 1954. The latter was really only a
broad zoning outline however in 1958 Town Maps
for Beaconseld and District, Slough and District
and Gerrards Cross and Chalfont were published.
These formed the basis for determining planning
applications until 1974, when Beaconsfield
(subsequently South Bucks) District Council was
formed. In 1982 work began on the first Local
Plan, which was finally adopted in 1989. The
second Local Plan was adopted in 1999 after much
public consultation and this forms the basis of all
SBDC planning decisions to this date.
The Government has now issued draft proposals to
replace the Local Plan with a Local Development
Document (LDD), which is expected to become law
shortly. This will form part of a Local Development
Framework (LDF), which should adopt the common
objectives of the Community Plan of economic,
social and environmental sustainability provided they
reect community aspirations concerning the use and
development of land. The LSP is required to develop
a consultation strategy and timetable for community
involvement, which will be monitored annually. The
LSP must have their LDF adopted within three years,
i.e. by 2007.
It is therefore vitally important that Taplow gets as
many as possible of it’s aspirations for the future of
the Parish included in this new LDD which will be
referred to in determining all future planning
applications once the LDF is adopted. To put this
another way, the government wants local
communities to take more control of their own lives,
to say what they want doing in their neighbourhoods

8
and to work with other people, agencies and
organisations in partnership to get it done. People
should feel that they can participate in a planning
system that is really interested in hearing their views
in order to change the culture of planning from one of
objecting to one of constructive participation.
This leads to the concept of Parish Plans, whose
purpose is “to set out a Vision of what is important,
how new developments can best be tted in, the
design and quality standards they should meet,
how to preserve valued local features and to map
out the facilities which the community needs to
safeguard the future”. A Parish Plan is not restricted
to those issues within the powers of a Parish Council
but can include everything that is relevant to the
‘people who live and work in the local community. It
can seek to inuence policy formation and service
delivery by other organisations, but it must be in line
with existing policies in community plans, structure
plans, etc. and the government’s wider planning
policies and proposals, for example, better use of land
to obtain more affordable housing.
Taplow Parish Council has now held a Public
Meeting to start the Parish Plan process and a
Steering Group has been formed initially consisting
of John Kennedy (Chairman), Pamela Bentley, John
Bidgood, Heaather Fenn, Phillip Langton, Tony
Meats, George Milne, Suzanne Thornley, Bernard
Trevallion and John Willmore, together with two
Parish Councillors and District Councillor George
Sandy who are ex officio. Many more of those
present also volunteered to assist with the distribution
and collecting of questionnaires, etc.
The Steering Group hopes to complete its work and
present the results ‘by next spring. If anyone else
either living or working in Taplow would like to offer
their help or make representations to the Steering
Group on their views for Taplow’s future would they
please contact John Kennedy on 01628 624248.
Will The Society Wither?
Alan Senior
Do you agree with the article in the last issue that
most of the actions of the Hitcham & Taplow
Preservation Society are essentially negative in its
aim to protect our immediate environment from
disfigurement and injury? Are we really against any
development or change in our area?
My own View is that our Society is extremely
positive in actively seeking to influence the nature
and scope of any proposed development or change
that appears capable of significantly impacting our
local environment. We object to those proposals that
we feel disgure or injure that which already exists!
But we are equally prepared to constructively
participate in supporting the best available alternative
when change is necessary.
The Cliveden site is a good example. We agree that
something positive must be done to improve the site
and accept that it is necessary for the National Trust
to generate some revenue from the site. We strongly
object to the most recent proposal for 192
unrestricted open—market ats and houses to be built
on the site, for a number of well-founded reasons. We
prefer a previous proposal for the site to be used for
retirement homes, sheltered accommodation and a
close-care facility, which would signicantly reduce
the impact of the development on our local
infrastructure.
Preservation and conservation mean much the same
thing to most of us. Neither is a purely negative
process and both can be an integral part of progress.
It is not necessary to totally destroy the existing to
make progress! A good blend of the best of the old
and the benefits of the new may well be the most
satisfying outcome to the majority of us. Compromise
is inevitable and so is change, but we should not shirk
from ghting to achieve the best compromise when
change is necessary.
The article said “why should the Society attempt to
preserve the current status quo in aspic?” Is this what
our Society is trying to do? If so, I don’t think it
really reflects our aims and certainly demeans our
efforts! It also asks whether we should be the
arbiters of taste for future generations? I suggest that
unless we make great efforts to preserve (or
conserve) the best of what we have now, future
generations can rightly blame us for allowing the
needless destruction of their heritage. I believe that
most of us are grateful for the efforts of past
generations to preserve in their time what they
considered worth preserving. We are also critical of
them where they have allowed our cultural heritage to
fall into disrepair, often to the extent that we now no
longer have the choice to preserve what is beyond
repair! Our future generations deserve the same
opportunity that we have now — to preserve what we
believed worth handing on to them.
Marks & Spencer learned a hard lesson when they
abandoned their traditional mature customers and
tried to broaden their appeal to the younger, trendier

9
market. Our Preservation Society must not make the
same mistake. The success of our Society depends on
a minority of mature residents who care enough about
the local environment to spend the time and effort to
do something about it. I am not saying that the
younger generation do not care, rather that they
already have enough to do in starting careers, making
homes and raising families. Doing something about
“preservation” is a luxury at their time of life that
many of them cannot afford. In due course, those
who feel strongly enough about preservation issues
will then become active members of our Society and
carry on our work. That is, of course, if our Society is
still seen to be an effective tool for the purpose! So,
to answer the questions that the article poses:
* We do not seek to represent all the inhabitants of
Taplow (and Hitcham, please remember). We do seek
to represent those inhabitants who either already
actively seek to achieve aims similar to those of our
Society or who will directly support the Society’s
activities by their efforts and nancial support.
* The average age of our members reects the stage
in life at which people can afford the luxury of
allocating time and effort outside the family. We
have a predominance of middle-aged and retired
members, which is to be expected and encouraged!
There are, however, a few younger people who
already feel strongly about the relevant issues and we
welcome them into our Society.
* Can we continue without an inux of new blood
and ideas? No — but we do not have that problem.
The young do not have a monopoly on “new blood
and ideas”. We gain new members each year from
those moving into the area and those realising that
they have an interest in our aims. However, we could
certainly do more to promote our Society and
increase our membership.
* Will our Society go the same way as the Bumham
Society (that, according to the article, is in signicant
decline and wondering about its future)? Unless our
Society maintains its focus and unless we continue to
be an active force in achieving our aims, then it could
well happen! We do not seek to be a ‘general’
Society that falls between all the stools. We want to
be recognised!
Contrary to what the article stated, I believe the aims
of the Society are properly restricted. This enables us
to concentrate our efforts in areas that reflect the
primary interests of our members. At the AGM last
October, the Rules of the Society were sensibly
modified to broaden the scope of what we seek to
preserve but the main thrust of our objectives remain
the same. Promoting‘ (and even organising) activities
to promote the aims of the Society seems a sensible
suggestion but, as the article agrees, it is difcult to
find enough members who will actively participate in
doing so. Organising the Village Green Party
stretches our resources but this event has, in its own
way, become something that we now feel is worth
preserving! Despite restricting our aims, however,
there is only so much we can do. Where we are made
aware of other preservation issues (like opportunities
to demolish or improve unattractive or nondescript
buildings), we will add them to our list of action
items. It is up to you, our members, to bring such
matters to our attention.
Last,'but not least, should we change the name of our
Society? Will a name change alone expand our
membership? I doubt it! Do you think that changing
the order of Taplow and Hitcham in the name is
important? I don’t! Should we be proud of the
existing name of our Society? Yes, definitely! So
why try to mend what isn’t broken?
Whither the Society? The Hitcham & Taplow
Preservation Society goes forward and will not
wither!
Below are some extracts from the SBDC documentation forming the Riverside Conservation Area. Since then the local
development we have seen is anything but an adherence to these fine statements. Who cares ? The Planning ofcers clearly
don’t
“The Ellington Road development was clearly designed with open spaces an integral part of the design. On the whole
these open spaces have remained and represent a ne contribution to the character and appearance of the area. Built at the
turn of the twentieth century, the strong late Victorian/Edwardian character and appearance of the buildings is an
overwhelmingly residential one. Spaces within the area dened are very important and contain ne trees and other
thoroughfare, increased modern traicflow is undoubtedly a negative inuence. Increased modern traffic flow along this
main road must not be allowed to further erode the character and appearance of the Area. On the riverbank the Area
includes the locally important Victorian villas, Bridge Villa and Sunnyside, at the time of writing sadly derelict, although
under close scrutiny to ensure an acceptable solution.
Along this riverbank there are many ne trees and some good open space with views across to Maidenhead. This area,
including the substantial new boathouse is surrounded by mature trees. ”

10
Rubbish !
Jeremy Vanstone
It is with increasing despair and anger that wherever
you travel in the country, particularly the south cast,
are the quantities of litter, rubbish and other debris
found on roads and accumulated on verges and in
hedgerows. It leads you to question the mindless
stupidity of those who casually discard litter but also
the effectiveness of the measures taken by the
authorities in removing it.
Litter clearance is most commonly the responsibility
of the District Council and outside of town centres,
the majority of Councils employ contractors to
undertake the work. The frequency of clearances is
rarely more than once a fortnight and sometimes as
long as six months. This means by the time the next
clearance is due the problem has grown and litter that
was previously on the highway has blown into
adjoining hedgerows and undergrowth and therefore
outside the Council’s responsibility. If litter is more
than an arm’s reach from the edge of the highway
then contractors are entitled to leave it. Apparently
this is a health and safety requirement so contractors
are not exposed to the risks of getting scratched by a
thorn or poked in the eye by a twig! The method used
to pick up litter is with a stick which has a pincer at
the end of it. If litter is too big or heavy that it cannot
be picked up using this stick and the operative does
not have a colleague who can assist in executing a
controlled lift in the approved health and safety way
then that litter has to be left for a specialist contractor
to deal with. Surprisingly, few contractors are
equipped with brooms so that litter that is too small to
be picked up with the stick (such as glass fragments)
gets left. Whilst on the subject of glass and other
sharp objects, unless the operative is accompanied by
a trained first aider who can slap a plaster on any
resultant wound then, glass has to be left for a
mechanical sweeper to deal with. Further because of
the fear of legal action contractors are instructed not
to collect litter in the vicinity of parked cars.
With regulations and practices as daft as these it is
little wonder that there is so much litter around the
place. Further although laws exist to combat the
problem — rarely are they exercised. But it is unfair to
blame the Councils. The real culprits are the
thoughtless, uncaring and stupid individuals who
drop litter in the first place. What can anyone
possibly gain by throwing litter out of a speeding car
or worse transporting rubbish from your home (where
no doubt it could be collected free of charge by the
Council) to dump at some remote beauty spot? Are
people blind to the ugly blight and disfigmrement to
the countryside and harm to wildlife that it causes?
Do not people today have any pride in the
environment and their surroundings? The answers
seem to be, No. The practice is indulged in by old
and young and at all levels of society. No one seems
to care anymore. Is it because people see so much
litter and rubbish around them that they think one
more bit cannot do any harm? More likely it is a
consequence of the selfish, throw away, get rich
quick lifestyles and the ever decreasing standards in
respect, behaviour and discipline that are now so
prevalent. It is difficult to comprehend the sense of
such people but this seems to be how increasing
numbers choose to live their lives, so that we all now
have to accept litter as a natural part of the landscape.
Uniquely it seems to be a problem only in this
country! Europe is pristine by comparison and in
countries such as Germany and Switzerland the
problem is non existent. Even in third world countries
the problem is nowhere as bad as here, as no matter
how poor you are, everything there has a use. No
wonder so many people are leaving this country for
abroad!
At the Village Green Party this year, the Society will be running a rafe to help fund the maintenance of the
mural that was painted by Sheila Horton in the Village Hall. This mural is a fascinating collection of scenes
from Taplow's past and is well worth an extended visit to view — every time you see it, you seem to spot details
that you didn't see before! Please contact Heather Fenn (0l628—6371 ll) if you can obtain any prizes for the
rafe or if you would like to help in some other way.
Next year, the Village Green Party will offer another chance to generate funds for a worthy cause. Do you
know of any local charitable organisations or worthy causes that would like to use our Party for that purpose?
Run a rafe? Stage an exhibition or art show? Have a sponsored challenge?
Please send your recommendations to:
The Secretary of HTPS, Jeremy Vanstone,
8 Stockwells, Taplow, SL6 0DB

Believe it or not the above montage is a composite of all the road signs the driver has to cope with between
Maidenhead Bridge and the railway bridge with the now famous ‘Lizzie’ graffiti on it. There are about 75 of
these direction signs, announcements and advertisements in a stretch of road only about half a mile long all
contending for the driver’s attention, in rural Taplow.
Ed. Fred Russell
White Heath, Ellington Road, Taplow, Bucks, SL6 OAX. Tel. 01628 672457.
email fredrusse11@onetel.com
Unless otherwise stated, the views expressed in the Newsletter are not necessarily those of the Society or its Committee. The Newsletter is published by the
Hitcham & Taplow Preservation Society. Printed by Maidenhead Printing & Stationery Co Ltd . It is edited and prepared for printing by Fred Russell who
welcomes contributions to the above address