Planning application for 300 house development approved in Woodstock

woodstockNNGO member, Woodstock Action Group, and local residents are shocked and dismayed that an outline planning application for 300 homes in the historic village of Woodstock has been approved.

On 6 December, the Uplands Area Planning Sub-Committee for West Oxfordshire approved the planning application for 300 houses on greenfield land at Woodstock East (16/01364/OUT).

In February of this year, the Council approved the proposal by developer Blenheim Estates and Pye Homes.

Woodstock Parish Council objected to the application on the grounds that a decision would be premature in the context of the Local Plan process, and that it would be inappropriate for the resolved approval to go forward without re-assessment of a reduced Objectively Assessed Need.

Irrespective of the merits or otherwise of the proposal, it is of course a complete travesty that the Council should have had to spend so much time and money engaging in the Local Plan process when the application can get waved through whilst a consultation on the site is still live.

See: Uplands Area Planning Sub-Committee for West Oxfordshire, 6 December

Planning application for 70 homes in village of Burford rejected

Responsible Planning in Burford

On 6 December, the Uplands Area Planning Sub-Committee for West Oxfordshire rejected the planning application for 70 houses on land east of Barns Lane, known locally as ‘Cole’s Field’ in the village of Burford (17/00642/OUT), despite the development being recommended for approval.

695 objections to the scheme were raised, largely based on the grounds that Cole’s Field is entrely within the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), in a Conservation Area and in the Upper Windrush Valley Target Conservation Area.

Burford Parish Council, the Cotswold Conservation Board, and CPRE were amongst those that objected to the proposal.

NNGO member, Responsible Planning in Burford (RPiB) were delighted with the outcome, but are mindful it is not the end of the road and now wait for news of the almost inevitable appeal.

Disappointingly, at the same Committee meeting, the decision was made to approve a 300 home development on land at Woodstock East and 170 dwellings in the village of Long Hanborough.

See: Uplands Planning Committee in West Oxfordshire, 6 December.

Find out more:

See: Responsible Planning in Burford Facebook

Beauty Betrayed


Beauty betrayed‘, published by CPRE National Office this month, is a major new report into development in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs).

It shows there has been an 82% increase in new housing units given planning permission in England’s 34 AONBs in the past five years, despite repeated commitments by the Government to ‘maintain national protections for AONBs for the benefit of future generations’.

This represents almost 15,500 housing units since 2012, while the number of housing planning applications has more than doubled in that time

Of the eight AONBs under most pressure, three are in Oxfordshire – the North Wessex Downs, the Chilterns and the Cotswolds.  The latter tops the list with 62 housing schemes coming forward over the last five years.

Find out more.


Oxfordshire Growth Deal


In Phillip Hammond’s Budget Report last week, he said that the Government has agreed an outline Housing and Growth Agreement with the Oxfordshire Growth Board.

This deal would provide councils with £215m over 5 years, with £60m for affordable housing and £150m (£30m pa for 5 yrs) for infrastructure.   It also includes £5m for capacity funding, including progressing the Joint Spatial Plan for the county.

Rather a drop in the ocean compared to the £8.5billion funding gap outlined in their own recent Infrastructure Strategy!

In return, our local authorities have committed to providing the 100,000 houses by 2031, as outlined in the Oxfordshire SHMA 2014.   This is despite the new proposed OAN methodology showing that the current figures grossly over-exaggerate local need.

We haven’t seen anything of this deal until now – we certainly didn’t vote for it – and yet it seems, in true Growth Board fashion, to have been already agreed (subject to the councils individually signing it off).

Read more …