Deddington Development Watch

Update 20 December 2016

CDC Consultation on Oxford's Unmet Housing Needs

In July 2015 Cherwell District Council adopted a new 20-year strategic plan (Local Plan Part 1 2011-2031). Subsequently, CDC has been working on two further plans:

  • a Partial Review of Local Plan Part 1 dealing with Cherwell's contribution to Oxford's unmet housing needs; and
  • Local Plan Part 2, which will focus on non-strategic site allocations for new housing and development management policies.
Oxford says it has an unmet housing need of 14,300 homes up to 2031 which cannot be accommodated within the City's boundaries. The other district authorities in Oxfordshire are expected to accommodate this unmet housing need. Cherwell's allocation is 4,400 homes on top of the 21,734 homes it is already committed to build between 2014 and 2031 under Local Plan Part 1.

The allocations of Oxford's unmet housing needs are derived from a 'Spatial Options Assessment' by the Oxfordshire Growth Board. The figures were suddenly produced in September with no public consultation or adequate notice for the public to respond before being signed-off by the Growth Board. This is both undemocratic and severely undermines the Local Plan process since it presents district councils with a fait accompli as regards housing numbers.

Earlier this year CDC made a 'call for sites' in respect of both Oxford's unmet housing needs and Local Plan Part 2 across the whole of the district.

CDC is now consulting until 9 January 2017 on how best to meet Oxford's unmet housing needs. In this context only sites larger than 5 acres are being considered. The sites put forward around Deddington include six greenfield sites over 5 acres:

  • PR94 Land north of Clifton Road, opposite The Poplars (8.2 acres)
  • PR95 Land west of Banbury Road between School Ground and the Highways Depot (18.2 acres)
  • PR98 Land between Chapman's Lane and Oxford Road (8.2 acres)
  • PR111 Land east of Banbury Road, north of the Fire Station (5.1 acres)
  • PR112 Land north of eastern end of Earl’s Lane (7.7 acres)
  • PR113 Pond Field (aka the 'ridge and furrow' field), north of Earl’s Lane (5.2 acres)

Location maps for the Deddington sites are on pp. 5-8 of Part 5 of the 'Options' consultation paper, and for the Hempton site on p. 10.These six larger fields total 52.6 acres, enough for 640 houses at 30 dwellings per hectare. Prudential Group has also put forward a 5½ acre field at Hempton which could accommodate 67 houses at 30 d.p.h.

The current consultation on contributing to Oxford's unmet housing needs will be followed later in January by a consultation on Local Plan Part 2, when CDC will also publish its assessment of all the sites submitted in response to the 'call for sites'. This will take the form of a Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (HELAA).

The previous CDC assessment in August 2014 listed 22 sites around Deddington (excluding School Ground) which had been put forward by landowners and developers as being available for development.

If you wish to read the CDC 'Options' consultation paper on Oxford's unmet housing needs, please click here:

To make any comments to CDC, please send them by close of business on Monday 9 January 2017:
- by post to Planning Policy Consultation, Planning Policy Team, Strategic Planning and the Economy, Cherwell District Council, Bodicote House, White Post Road, Bodicote, Banbury, OX15 4AA
- by email

School Ground Update

At its meeting on 24 November the CDC Planning Committee refused the application by David Wilson Homes to build 99 dwellings on School Ground. The developer has six months in which to appeal the decision, although the original planning permission for 85 houses still stands. Many thanks to those who wrote to the District Council objecting the proposals.

You may have noticed increased activity on the site. Cherwell District Council say this is permissible if it relates to the existing permission for 85 houses.

School Ground update 27 September 2016

David Wilson Homes, part of Barratt Developments, has submitted another application to Cherwell District Council (CDC) to build 99 houses on School Ground, 14 more than the 85 previously approved, which would increase the population of the village by around 13%.

A large number of application documents have been posted on the CDC website, including numerous plans and drawings. The overview documents are the Planning Supporting Statement and the Design and Access Statement. If you would like to see these, please click here, and then click on "View associated documents" (in blue typeface).

The application documents seem to be little different from those submitted in connection with the previous application for 99 houses earlier this year, which was refused by CDC Planning Committee on 7 July. Committee members were particularly concerned at the prospect of the overdevelopment of the site and the consequences of unadopted estate roads.

We highlight below some of the more significant points raised by the new application:

1. Housing density

The developer claims that the density of the proposed development is compatible with neighbouring developments, when in reality Gaveston Gardens, The Daedings and The Leyes are much lower density developments of 2-storey detached houses.

2. Layout and design

The developer claims to be replicating the character of the listed buildings in High Street/New Street by making a feature of 2½ storey houses, especially along the Banbury Road frontage. The latter will be particularly conspicuous when approaching Deddington from the north.

None of the surrounding housing is higher than 2-storeys. Even though there will be a significant proportion of ironstone houses, the existence of a modern high density development cannot be disguised and the house designs still lack any chimneys.

3. A4260 Banbury Road

The new development will result in four points of access to/from the busy Banbury Road, plus a new pedestrian crossing, close to the already congested crossroads and school entrance. The majority of car commuters will wish to turn right during the morning peak. With a single lane exit on to the main road, it will be difficult to cross into the southbound lane, and cars wishing to turn left towards Banbury will be held-up by the right-turning vehicles.

4. Estate roads

As before, it appears that the estate roads will not be built to Oxfordshire County Council standards, and they will therefore be unadopted. CDC is not obliged to send refuse collection vehicles over private roads if there are access or liability issues.

A significant number of houses still have garages or car barns not wide enough to get out of a standard-sized car.

5. Residents' ongoing liabilities

It seems that almost the entire estate infrastructure is to become the responsibility of a residents' management company, including roadways, parking courts, public open spaces, children's play area (which will be a public amenity) and the balancing pond (or 'lagoon'). This raises a host of questions, including the future level of maintenance charges, defaulters and the burden on the occupiers of the 34 affordable homes, who will already be paying Council Tax.

6. Gaveston Gardens

The nature of the pedestrian access is still unclear. There are several references to a cycle link. The security implications of pedestrian access through Gaveston Gardens and the risk that new residents who commute towards Chipping Norton may park in Gaveston Gardens overnight remain unaddressed.

If you wish to make any comments to CDC, please send them (quoting reference 16/01548/F):

- by post to Head of Public Protection & Development Management, Development, Cherwell District Council, Bodicote House, White Post Road, Bodicote, Banbury, OX15 4AA; or by email   

The deadline for receipt of comments by CDC is the close of business on Wednesday 5 October.

School Ground update: Application for 99 houses refused

At its meeting on 7 July 2016 the Cherwell District Council Planning Committee refused the application by David Wilson Homes to build 99 dwellings on School Ground. The developer has six months in which to appeal the decision, although the original planning permission for 85 houses still stands. Many thanks to those who wrote to the district council criticising the proposals.


100,000 new houses for Oxfordshire – 'Have Your Say' on the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) 'refresh'

SEP refresh in context

The growth strategy for Oxfordshire is in the hands of the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP), a limited company which is not a democratically accountable body.

The high housing figures in the new Cherwell Local Plan are based on notional job creation targets contained in the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) produced by OxLEP without any public consultation or even debate in any full local authority meeting.

The ‘growth at all costs’ strategy for Oxfordshire in the SEP proposes 85,000 new jobs, 100,000 new houses (equivalent to two new cities the size of Oxford) and at least 200,000 more people (a 30% population increase) by 2031. This aggressive plan takes little or no account of environmental, infrastructure or social constraints.

OxLEP is undertaking a partial 'refresh' of the SEP, and has agreed to an online public consultation which ends on Friday 27 May.

OxLEP is not, however, looking to re-visit its employment growth targets. Many people feel that this is unacceptable. Spearheaded by the Campaign to Protect Rural England, Oxfordshire branch (CPRE), a coalition of over 20 local action groups (including DDW) and individuals has come together under the banner 'Need Not Greed Oxon' (NNGO) to campaign for a future for Oxfordshire that:

– respects the views of local people;

– meets the real needs of local people not speculator greed;

– protects the environment.

The draft refreshed Strategic Economic Plan may be viewed at:

http://www.oxfordshirelep.com/sites/default/files/Final-v3-website.pdf

Consultation questions

The OxLEP public consultation asks 7 questions:

1. How does the SEP capture the main characteristics of the Oxfordshire economy, its challenges and opportunities?

2. People – are the right priorities and commitments included? If not, what is missing?

3. Place – are the right priorities and commitments included? If not, what is missing?

4. Enterprise – are the right priorities and commitments included? If not, what is missing?

5. Connectivity – are the right priorities and commitments included? If not, what is missing?

6. Does the SEP articulate clearly the roles and responsibilities of OxLEP?

7. Please feel free to make any additional comments in the box below.

Briefing notes for responses

NNGO has produced some notes to outline specific areas of concern that you might find useful in drafting your own responses:

http://www.neednotgreedoxon.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/NNGO-Public-Consultation-on-the-SEP-Refresh-May-2016-FINAL.pdf

If the notes are too detailed, you may find the below short-form responses helpful. Please feel free to adapt them when making your own comments.

1. SEP

This plan leads to the imposition of a dreamt up 85,000 jobs by 2031 in a county that already has virtually full employment. The environmental and social impacts of this all-out growth strategy have not been considered.

2. People

The plan doesn’t address the real need: providing the right kind of houses, in the right place, for the right people (those in real need), and at the right price.

3. Place

Oxfordshire needs to remain an attractive place to live and work; this plan threatens the rural character of Oxfordshire. We want to see focused development, prioritising brownfield sites, respecting the views of local communities and recognising the value of our environment.

4. Enterprise

The plan should provide support for a range of sectors, including rural businesses, tied to local employment needs.

5. Connectivity

How can the SEP be properly assessed without knowing what infrastructure is required to support it and whether this is deliverable? We want to see a commitment to ongoing infrastructure improvement, delivered prior to further growth.

6. OxLEP

OxLEP (a limited company) is unelected and undemocratic, and exists solely to promote growth. We want to know why it is in charge of making decisions about the future of our county?

There was no public consultation on the first SEP; this review should therefore be a full scale re-examination of the overall growth figures for Oxfordshire, not just a token consultation on the bits around the edges.

7. Additional comments

(a) The SEP Refresh should be an opportunity to introduce lower growth targets for the county that are more realistic and appropriate.

(b) We want environmental and social considerations to lie at the heart of such decision-making, not be ignored or bolted on afterwards.

(c) The growth targets are being used to justify development on the Oxford Green Belt and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty – how can this be considered ‘sustainable’?

(d) We believe the SEP should be subject to a full Strategic Environmental Assessment.

(e) Notional job targets are leading to actual housing figures. There are no brakes, caveats or checkpoints. This means that valuable land is being released now, without really knowing whether or not it will be needed. The SEP needs to assess how likely it is to meet these growth targets.

(f) Growth should be phased, to ensure delivery of housing and jobs is in tandem. Measures need to be put in place to mitigate the risk of half-finished housing estates and projects that don’t join up and are not supported by the necessary infrastructure.

(g) We want sustainable development focused on meeting the needs of existing residents, with growth more in line with a 10% increase in population by 2031 (based on national population projections). This means the right houses, in the right place, at the right price and supported by the right infrastructure.

If you have limited time, we suggest you respond to Question 7, and simply call for:

1. A proper assessment of the impacts of the proposed Strategic Economic Plan,

2. The introduction of more realistic and sustainable targets,

3. Followed by a full consultation,

4. All led by a democratically elected and accountable body.

Online response form

The OxLEP online response form may be found at:

http://www.oxfordshirelep.org.uk/content/sep-refresh-consultation

Please note that the OxLEP web site will not accept a response to Question 7, unless you respond to all the other questions. You can however answer Questions 1 to 6 with a full stop (the system seems to be happy with this).

Don't forget – if you have any problems using the online response form, you can email your responses direct to: info@oxfordshirelep.com

You may also care to consider copying your response to the leaders of Cherwell District Council and Oxfordshire County Council, our MP, county councillor and district councillors. Email addresses are set out below.

To find out more about the campaign, please visit the 'Need Not Greed Oxon' web site:

http://www.neednotgreedoxon.org.uk/

The deadline for responses to the consultation is Friday 27 May. We urge you (and in turn ask you to urge others) to take part in the consultation and let OxLEP know your views about the growth strategy for the county.

cllr.barry.wood@cherwell-dc.gov.uk

ian.hudspeth@oxfordshire.gov.uk

victoria.prentis.mp@parliament.uk

arash.fatemian@oxfordshire.gov.uk

bryn.williams@cherwell-dc.gov.uk

Cllr.Mike.KerfordByrnes@cherwell-dc.gov.uk

 

 

 

School Ground update 13 May 2016

David Wilson Homes, part of Barratt Developments, has now submitted revised proposals to Cherwell District Council (CDC) to build 99 (rather than 95) houses, with 193 parking spaces. The developer estimates about 241 people would live on the development, which it is calling Deddington Grange. Details of house types may be found below.

A large number of revised application documents have been posted on the CDC website. To see these, please click here and then "View associated documents" (in blue typeface).

The application documents include numerous plans and drawings, and a number of documents and reports, including a detailed covering letter dated 26 April 2016 from the developer's agent, Turley, under 'Agent 26/4/16' opposite 'Officer/Agent/App't Correspond' on page 2 of the list, and the Design and Access Statement Addendum opposite 'Reports - Supporting Statement' on page 3 of the list.

There is a lot of detail at this stage which it is impractical to summarise. We highlight below some of the more significant points.

1. Layout and design: The developer claims to be replicating the character of the buildings in High Street by including some 2½ and 3 storey houses, some along the Banbury Road frontage. It also says that the layout and density of the new development are compatible with neighbouring developments, which in reality are much lower density with 2 storey detached houses. The proposed 'traditional' ironstone houses still do not have chimneys.

2. Foul drainage and water supply: Although Thames Water have long said that the existing sewer and water supply infrastructure have insufficient capacity, there is still no indication about how or when this is to be resolved.

3. Estate roads: It is proposed that the estate roads should not be built to Oxfordshire County Council standards, and they will therefore be unadopted. This raises road safety and maintenance issues. A significant number of houses still have garages not large enough for a standard-sized car.

4. Residents' management company: It seems that almost the entire estate infrastructure is to become the responsibility of a residents' management company, including roadways, parking courts, public open spaces, play area and the balancing pond. This raises a host of questions, including maintenance charges and defaulters.

5. Balancing pond: There are no plans to install safety equipment by the balancing pond for excess surface water, even though it seems to be expected that it will contain water at some stage of the year.

6. Gaveston Gardens: The nature of the pedestrian access is still unclear. The updated estate plan refers to a new "footpath/cycleway". The security implications of pedestrian access through Gaveston Gardens and the risk that new residents who commute towards Chipping Norton may park in Gaveston Gardens overnight remain unaddressed.

DDW is preparing a set of representations to CDC. If you wish to make any comments to CDC, please send them (quoting reference 16/00053/F):
- by post to
Head of Public Protection & Development Management, Development,
Cherwell District Council,
Bodicote House,
White Post Road,
Bodicote,
Banbury OX15 4AA; or

- by email to planning@cherwell-dc.gov.uk; or

- by completing the CDC Public Access service online comments form (registration required) accessible here:

It seems likely that the revised application will go before the CDC Planning Committee on 9 June 2016. Please therefore write to CDC sooner rather than later if you wish your views to be taken into account.

Housing Mix
Dwelling Type     Tenure         Number of Units
1 bed house         Affordable         8
2 bed house         Affordable         22
3 bed house         Affordable         4
2 bed flat             Open market     1
2 bed house         Open market     6
3 bed house         Open market     19
4 bed house         Open market     29
5 bed house         Open market     10
Total                                           99

This page is posted on behalf of Deddington Development Watch. Any views expressed are not necessarily shared by the DOL editorial team (DOL Disclaimer) or Deddington Parish Council.

'Need Not Greed Oxon' Campaign against Housing Growth

The growth strategy for Oxfordshire is in the hands of the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership (OxLEP), a limited company which is not a democratically accountable body.

The high housing figures in the new Cherwell Local Plan are based on notional job creation targets contained in the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) produced by OxLEP without any public consultation or even debate in any full local authority meeting.

The ‘growth at all costs’ strategy for Oxfordshire in the SEP proposes 85,000 new jobs, 100,000 new houses (equivalent to two new cities the size of Oxford) and at least 200,000 more people (a 30% population increase) by 2031. This aggressive plan takes little or no account of environmental, infrastructure or social constraints.

Plans have been announced for a 'refresh' of the SEP, and OxLEP has conceded a four-week online public consultation process from 21 April to 19 May. The precise scope of the 'refresh' is unclear, except it is understood that OxLEP is not looking to re-visit its employment growth targets.

Many people feel that this is unacceptable. Spearheaded by the Campaign to Protect Rural England, Oxfordshire branch (CPRE), a coalition of 23 local action groups (including DDW) and individuals has come together under the banner 'Need No Greed Oxon' to campaign for a future for Oxfordshire that:

- respects the views of local people;
- meets the real needs of local people not speculator greed;
- protects the environment.

The coalition is insistent that local people should have a real voice in the debate on the future of Oxfordshire. To find out more about the campaign, please visit the 'Need Not Greed Oxon' web site: http://www.neednotgreedoxon.org.uk/

The OxLEP online consultation on the SEP 'refresh' runs from 21 April to 19 May. We urge you (and in turn ask you to urge others) to take part in the consultation and let OxLEP know your views about the growth strategy for the county.

Planning Update March 2016

CDC Consultation 1: Oxford's Unmet Housing Need - issues

The Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 adopted last year provides for building 1,140 homes a year across the district (2011-2031 = 22,840), an increase of 70% compared with the target of 670 homes a year proposed by CDC in the pre-examination submission Local Plan.

The increased housing targets were derived from the Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2014 (SHMA). This has been criticised for basing housing need forecasts on ambitious economic growth projections rather than evidence based housing need, without proper consideration of the environmental, infrastructure and social impacts.

According to the Oxfordshire Growth Board, Oxford City has a housing need of 15,000 homes up to 2031 that cannot be accommodated with the city boundaries.

The new Local Plan was adopted on the basis that Cherwell District Council (CDC) would undertake an immediate partial review of the plan, including a joint review of the Oxford Green Belt, to help Oxford meet its housing need.

CDC has suggested that north Oxfordshire should accommodate up to 3,500 of Oxford City's unmet housing requirements (an extra 175 homes a year), a further 15% increase.

A summary leaflet on the consultation may be found here:

A detailed Issues Paper which invites comments on a range of questions is available here:

A number of fundamental questions are asked in the Issues Paper, including:

1. Is 3,500 homes a reasonable working assumption for Cherwell in seeking to meet Oxford's unmet housing need?
2. Should additional housing in Cherwell to meet Oxford's needs be supported by additional employment generating development?
6. Do you agree that the plan area or 'area of search' for the Partial Review document should be well related to Oxford City?

7. What factors should influence the plan area or 'area of search' for the Partial Review document?
8. Would a district-wide area be appropriate?

9. Should an area based on the Oxford Green Belt be considered?
11. How could Cherwell ensure that a five year supply for Oxford is managed without the existing Cherwell strategy and its housing requirements being adversely affected?

15. What locations should the Council be considering for the identification of strategic housing sites to meet Oxford's unmet needs?

The full list of 28 questions is available here (Part A).

CDC Consultation 2: Local Plan Part 2 - issues (deadline 11 March)

Last year Cherwell District Council (CDC) adopted a new strategic development plan for the period 2011-2031 (Local Plan Part 1). Work has now commenced on Part 2 of the Local Plan, which will contain more detailed planning policies to help determine planning applications and will allocate sites for development.

A summary leaflet on the consultation may be found here.

A detailed Issues Paper which invites comments on a range of questions is available here.

Various questions are asked in the Issues Paper, including:

26. Do you have any views on the main planning issues raised by the Starter Homes concept, the new duties on local planning authorities, and the implications for the Local Plan Part 2?
27. Do you have any views on the main planning issues raised by the proposed changes to the definition of affordable homes, and the implications for the Local Plan Part 2?
Do you have any comments on the adopted Local Plan affordable housing thresholds in the context of the Government's legal proceedings?

Are there any other issues relating to the provision of affordable housing that should be considered in the Local Plan Part 2?
29. What planning issues should be considered in any policy to guide the consideration of proposals for ‘windfall’ development?

Do you wish to comment on the implications of a national 'presumption in favour' of housing development on small sites, subject to certain criteria, for the Local Plan Part 2?

[The government is currently consulting on plans to create a 'presumption in favour' of development in the case of proposals for developing sites of 10 or fewer homes.]

30. Do you have any views on a potential increase to housing density around “commuter hubs” in the Cherwell District? How could these issues be approached in the Local Plan Part 2?
90. Do you consider the existing facilities for open space, sport and recreation to be adequate? (If not, please provide details.)         
Are you aware of any problems with infrastructure provision? If so, please provide details.

92. Are there local features or areas that you consider to be of particular value to the community? (If so, please provide details.)
           
          

Do you consider that there are valued landscapes and /or areas of environmental or historic significance that merit protection from development? If so, please give details.

The full list of 96 questions is available here (Part B).

Planning Update February 2016

Land North of Gaveston Gardens (School Ground)

David Wilson Homes, part of Barratt Developments, which recently purchased School Ground from the Prudential Group, has now submitted a detailed planning application to build 95 dwellings (rather than the 85 previously approved). This will increase the size of the village by c.13%.

The deadline for receipt of comments by Cherwell District Council is close of business on Wednesday 2 March.

The more important issues include the following:

● Cramped layout and repetitive design typical of any new estate anywhere in the country, even proposed 'traditional' stone houses do not have chimneys;
● No information about foul drainage and water supply, although Thames Water say existing sewer and water supply infrastructure has insufficient capacity;
● Housing mix does not meet local needs evidenced by Neighbourhood Plan questionnaire and will not help local people get on housing ladder or downsize;
● Only 3 of 19 2-bed homes are open market, and 43 houses are 4/5-bedroom;
● Affordable housing (33 homes) is heavily concentrated in the south-east corner, 23 are for social rent and only 10 for shared ownership;
● No landscape barrier between estate and Gaveston Gardens other than the back gardens of the houses in Gaveston Gardens;
● Hardly any provision for on-street parking, and 34 houses have garages not large enough for a standard-sized car;
● The estate exit onto the busy A4260 Banbury Road, where the majority of commuters will wish to turn right during the AM peak, is single lane whereas it could easily be made a two-lane exit;
● Security implications of pedestrian access through Gaveston Gardens and the risk that new residents who commute towards Chipping Norton may park in Gaveston Gardens overnight.

To see the application documents, check the link here and then click on 'View associated documents'.

To make any comments to CDC, please send them (quoting ref. 16/00053/F):
- by post to Head of Public Protection & Development Management, Development, Cherwell District Council, Bodicote House, White Post Road, Bodicote, Banbury, OX15 4AA; or
- by email to planning@cherwell-dc.gov.uk; or
- by completing the CDC Public Access service online comments form (registration required)

June 2015 Update

1. Cherwell Local Plan Approved

After last year's public examination, the Cherwell Local Plan has been found to be 'sound' and was formally adopted by Cherwell District Council on 20 July. The Plan provides for the delivery of 22,840 new homes up to 2031, largely in Bicester and Banbury. A total of 750 new homes are to be built in larger villages on sites of 10 or more, with a special allocation of 2,361 homes at Upper Heyford. There is also an allowance of 950 for 'windfall' developments (of fewer than 10 homes) across the rural areas.

No changes have been made by the Inspector to the policies for the rural areas:
Policy Villages 1 (Village Categorisation) provides that 'minor' development will be permitted within the built-up limits of Category A (Service Centre) villages and Category B (Satellite Villages) villages. Deddington is one of 23 Category A villages and Clifton and Hempton are Category B villages.

Policy Villages 2 (Distributing Growth across the Rural Areas) allocates a further 750 dwellings (on sites of 10 or more) at the 23 Category A villages (including Kidlington) from 2014 to 2031. This allocation excludes 'windfall' developments of fewer than 10 dwellings within built-up limits. To today’s date, permission for 341 houses has already been granted.

CDC has now begun work on Local Plan Part 2. This is expected to deal with the allocation of housing targets for villages and the identification of sites unless addressed by Neighbourhood Plans.

2. St Thomas Street

The appeal against CDC's refusal to grant planning permission for building seven houses behind St Thomas Street has been dismissed. The main reason for the Inspector's decision is that the proposal would fail to preserve either the setting of Deddington Castle or the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Threat to 'ridge and furrow' field

Ridge and Furrow

A planning application was submitted in April 2015 to erect a tractor and farm storage building on the western side of Pond Field (the 'ridge and furrow' field) to the north of Earl's Lane. The building, which would be open-fronted, is proposed to be constructed of steel sheeting and would be approx. 40ft wide x 30ft deep x 16.5ft high, with a front opening height of 13ft.

The application documents are available at: http://www.publicaccess.cherwell.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=NJX89EEM0K200 where you should click on the link 'View associated documents' (in blue)

Pond Field is the last surviving example of medieval 'ridge and furrow' visible to public view in Deddington. The field is also a valued community amenity, enhanced by its location near the school. It is a frequent sight to see parents and young children standing at the gate and watching the grazing sheep or cattle. The eastern end of Earls Lane is open landscape, currently unspoilt by visually obtrusive agricultural buildings.

Comments were invited, with the following issues suggested:

● Damage to rare surviving publicly visible example of medieval 'ridge and furrow'
● Field a local heritage asset which should be preserved
● Size and siting of building would be obtrusive
● Adverse impact on setting of surrounding open rural landscape
● Isolated position of building will attract undue attention
● Setting of field a much valued local amenity according to post-it notes at Neighbourhood Plan event
● Will detract from children's views of grazing sheep and cattle

Local planning update: February 2015

1. Land North of Gaveston Gardens
A detailed planning application has been submitted by Prudential Group's agents. It is similar to the scheme presented at the Windmill Centre on 13 November 2014 (see 'School Ground Masterplan' below).
The more important issues include the following:
● The 'attenuation basin' and pumping station for surface water disposal in the south-east corner of the site need to be properly landscaped.
● While it is proposed that foul drainage from the site should connect with the main Banbury Road sewer, the alternative of pumping sewerage into the Gaveston Gardens sewer is also mooted.
● 'Social' housing is heavily concentrated in the south-east corner of the site rather than being more evenly spread.
● Only nine houses (out of 85) in local stone are proposed, whereas 80% of respondents in the recent Neighbourhood Plan questionnaire preferred new developments to be built in stone.
● The estate exit onto the busy A4260 Banbury Road, where the majority of commuters will wish to turn right during the AM peak, is single lane whereas it could easily be made a two-lane exit.
● The security implications of pedestrian access through Gaveston Gardens and the risk that new residents who commute towards Chipping Norton may park in Gaveston Gardens overnight.
Application documents are available at: http://www.publicaccess.cherwell.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=NGQEIKEM0KR00 where you should click on 'View associated documents' (in blue).

2. St Thomas Street appeal (CDC ref. 13/01941/OUT)

Final submissions by the appellants and CDC were due by 31 January 2015. The Planning Inspector will consider the written submissions and his decision is expected by the spring.

3. Earls Lane: Tractor and farm storage building

A 'permitted' agricultural development application (ref. 14/02058/AGN) has been submitted in respect of the erection of a 39' x 29' x 15' tractor and farm storage building in Pond Field (the 'ridge and furrow' field). CDC normally determines this type of application without seeking public comments.

Land at rear of Orchard View and Valley View, St Thomas Street

An appeal was lodged against the refusal by Cherwell District Council to grant planning permission to build seven houses on the old orchard behind St Thomas Street and Hopcraft Lane.

The proposed entrance is on the blind bend in that section of St Thomas Street where traffic congestion is at its worst. Oxfordshire County Council made no highways objections to the original application, instead referring to the excellent road safety record.

The proposed new houses would be clearly visible from the raised banks of the Castle Grounds, which are a Scheduled Ancient Monument. This would have an adverse impact on the setting of, and views from, the tree-lined embankment.

The appeal would be decided by a Planning Inspector following a written representations procedure.

Comments were invited, possibly mentioning the following:
•    St Thomas Street/Hopcraft Lane already hazardous ‘rat-run’
•    Effectively single lane because of narrowness and on-street parking
•    Likelihood of traffic blockages at entrance caused by (e.g.) new residents’ cars, artisans’ vans, Council refuse lorries.
•    Sub-standard pavements a safety risk to (e.g.) school children, the elderly, buggies, etc.
•    Loss of 32½ feet of on-street parking on either side of entrance
•    On greenfield 'backland' site outside built-up limits and within the Conservation Area
•    Encroachment on green buffer space - damaging to the setting of the Castle Grounds
•    Impact on surrounding properties in the Conservation Area, including six listed buildings, which would be overlooked or lose views
•    Site classified as a traditional orchard BAP priority habitat
•    Impact on bat roost and swift colony – there is no ecological assessment
•    Village risks being overdeveloped as 85 houses approved on appeal north of Gaveston Gardens
•    Premature as a Neighbourhood Plan is being prepared

It is suggested that for maximum impact it is better to concentrate on making a limited number of points well and in your own words.

School Ground Masterplan


An exhibition was held at the Windmill Centre on 13 November 2014 by Prudential to present their plans for the development of School Ground north of Gaveston Gardens. A 'full' planning application is to be submitted shortly to Cherwell District Council.

The proposed housing mix is 7 'affordable' one-bedroom homes (one a bungalow), 20 two-bedroom homes (all 'affordable'), 29 three-bedroom houses (3 'affordable'), 23 four-bedroom houses and 6 five-bedroom houses. The housing types feature a high degree of terraced housing. The plans indicate that the houses will be mainly built of brick with only a limited number of ironstone dwellings. Some of the houses would be 2½ storey, with dormer windows in the roof, creating high roof lines. Roofs would be plain tile or slate, with some flat roofs.

Not all houses would have a garage. Even the larger houses would only have a single garage. While many houses would have narrow drives which could accommodate two parked cars, this would impede garage access.

The small triangular central green has been earmarked as a children's play area. The small green space in the south-east corner of the site is to be an 'attenuation basin' (or balancing pond) to collect surface water run-off.

The proposed estate entrance from Banbury Road would be north of the Fire Station access and the current 30mph sign, which Prudential propose should be moved further north. Banbury Road would be widened to accommodate a right-hand turn lane for traffic coming from the north. The plans also show a traffic light controlled pedestrian crossing just to the north of the School and pedestrian access to/from the development through Gaveston Gardens.

The proposed development therefore appears to be quite cramped. As regards accessibility, the entrances to the estate, the Fire Station, the Leyes and Earl's Lane, the pedestrian crossing and the crossroads would all be in close proximity.

More information will be posted on the DDW web site once a formal application has been submitted, including pointers on making comments to CDC.

School Ground: Master plan exhibition 13 November 2014

Outline planning permission was granted, on appeal, for building 85 houses on the 9½ acre field north of Gaveston Gardens on 18 December 2013. The land is owned by M&G UK Property LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Prudential Group. It was a condition of the outline permission that a detailed planning application should be submitted by 18 December 2014.
Normally it would fall to the builder to apply for detailed permission, but as Prudential had yet to sell the site to a builder, it planned to make the application itself. This full application will cover details of house designs, estate layout, scale, access arrangements and landscaping.
Prudential's agents held an exhibition presenting their proposed master plan for public consultation at the Windmill Centre on 13 November 2014.

Consultation begins on revised Cherwell Local Plan

Proposed modifications to the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 have now been published by Cherwell District Council.

It is now planned to build 5,392 dwellings in the villages and rural areas during 2011-2031. This figure includes Upper Heyford, windfalls and completions 2011-2014.

Substitute Policy Villages 1 (Village Categorisation) provides that 'minor' development will be permitted within the built-up limits of Category A (Service Centre) villages and Category B (Satellite Villages) villages. Deddington is a Category A village and Clifton and Hempton are Category B villages.

Substitute Policy Villages 2 (Distributing Growth across the Rural Areas) allocates a further 750 dwellings (on sites of 10 or more) at the 24 Category A villages 2014-2031.
Under the revised housing trajectory, the supply of housing in rural areas is now spread (on a reducing per year basis) over the full plan period: 130 p.a. in 2014/15-2020/21, 100 p.a. in 2021/22-2024/25 and 50 p.a. in 2026/27-2030/31. These annual figures include the 888 extant permissions as at 31.3.2014 (including 85 at Deddington) as well as the new allocation of 750 homes.

To view the revisions, please visit:
http://www.cherwell.gov.uk/localplanexamination

The public is invited to make comments on the suggested changes up to 3rd October. If you wish to make any representations, you may:
    - send an email to planning.policy@cherwell-dc.gov.uk;
    - complete the Representation Form to be found on the above web page;
    - send a letter to Local Plan Modifications, Strategic Planning and the Economy, Cherwell District Council, Bodicote House, Bodicote, OX15 4AA.

July 2014 News Update: Cherwell Local Plan examination 'suspended'


Cherwell District Council (CDC) currently lacks an up-to-date strategic plan for the future development of north Oxfordshire during the period up to 2031. Without an up-to-date plan, the district is vulnerable to opportunistic planning applications by developers.

A draft new plan, contemplating the building of 670 homes a year across the district, was submitted to the Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles MP, earlier this year.

Subsequently, a Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) commissioned by all the local authorities in Oxfordshire recommended that the allocation for Cherwell district should be increased to 1,140 homes a year.

The public examination of the draft Cherwell Local Plan opened on 3 June and was suspended by the Inspector on 4 June on the grounds that the plan submitted was based on out-of-date information and was 'unsound'.

Oxford City Council argued that the plan was fundamentally flawed since it made no provision for meeting unmet housing needs in Oxford that could not be physically accommodated within the city boundaries. The City Council maintains that it needs 1,000 homes a year to be built up to 2031 in the four local authority areas around Oxford.

To avoid abandoning the process and going back to square one, the Inspector said he was willing to suspend the hearings and reconvene in December if CDC addressed the deficiencies and produced a modified plan in the meantime. CDC accepted to do this, including the increased allocation of 1,140 homes a year (although this includes no allocation for Oxford's unmet needs).

Over the next few weeks CDC will urgently review the capacity of all potential housing sites, including the scope for a much larger allocation of houses at Upper Heyford.

While the focus for new housing in the district is Bicester, Banbury and, if Oxford City Council gets its way, Kidlington, the Inspector indicated that CDC should also look at allocating more housing to the rural areas.

It is by no means certain that the foregoing, which does not address Oxford's unmet requirements, is 'doable'. There are various potential obstacles, not least the position of Oxford City Council, which could derail the process. A review of the Oxford green belt also seems inevitable.

Deddington Development News Update May 2014

An application for 26 houses and a 40 space car park at the Poplars site, Clifton Road, Deddington was submitted to Cherwell District Council in mid March 2014. Although initially incomplete it was finally registered in late March and the consultation period began in April.

Deddington Development Watch (DDW) thought it important, after the Prudential land approval, to establish the views of the village to further large scale development and to bring the views of the village to the attention of the decision makers. Their petition stated:

'We, the residents of Deddington, call on our Parish Council, following the approval of 85 houses on the Prudential land, to resist all further applications for large scale residential developments on green field sites in, or adjoining, the village which involve building more than 15-20 houses.'

686 (52%) residents of our village signed the petition in the limited time available before the Parish Council meeting on 16 April. The response clearly demonstrates the views of the village and as very few people we approached declined to sign the petition this is clearly the view of the great majority of Deddington residents.

In addition, residents in Castle Street, Chapel Square and Clifton Road were given the opportunity to sign a second petition focussing on road safety issues. This petition had the virtually unanimous support of these residents and was submitted to the County Council as the Highway Authority.

DDW would like to thank everyone who signed these petitions.

Your overwhelming support for our objective – protecting our historic and attractive village from excessive and inappropriate development reinforces our commitment, and helped by our Parish Council, to do what we can to achieve that. We only get one chance - once built on, green field land and historic landscape is lost, probably for ever!

May we also apologise to those residents who would have wished to sign the petitions whom we were unable to contact in the limited time available.

Both petitions were submitted to the Parish Council at its meeting on 16 April and the Parish Council resolved that Cherwell District Council be recommended to refuse the application.

DDW also distributed a flyer to every home in the Parish setting out numerous planning reasons why this application should be refused and many residents submitted comments to Cherwell DC objecting to the application.
 
We believe that as a consequence of all these actions and the overwhelming opposition of the village Banner Homes withdrew its application even before the end of the public consultation period.

Your views have clearly counted on this occasion, after all, it is our village, but if developers, volume builders and CDC do not know what we think then others' viewpoints (Pickles/Boles) will be heard!

DDW do not, however, believe that this is the end of the matter. We understand Banner Homes are consulting Cherwell DC about a possible revised application involving a reduced number of houses and a car park! Watch this space as this site is crucial to the rural setting of Deddington Castle and will need to be resisted.  

Meanwhile, the sale process of the Prudential land, opposite the Fire Station, is nearing its conclusion and we know that the name of the purchaser, which is likely to be a volume house builder, is likely to become known in June/July 2014. The appeal decision on that site requires construction to start, in effect, no later than December 2015 and in all probability, earlier. The sale process is clearly the most significant indication that the timescale for building the 85 homes required by the planning permission will be achieved.

The Poplars: planning application withdrawn


Banner Homes have asked Cherwell District Council to withdraw the current planning application - probably as a result of a strong objection registered by English Heritage.

We should like to say a big thank you to everyone who has already written to CDC objecting to Banner's proposals. This must also have been a contributory factor.

Banner have intimated that they plan to submit an application for an alternative scheme in the near future. We shall keep you posted about developments.

KEEP DEDDINGTON RURAL, NOT URBAN SPRAWL
ACT AGAIN!  BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE - THE POPLARS, CLIFTON ROAD

 populars

Another planning application has been submitted for housing development in Deddington. The proposals, which have been submitted by Banner Homes Limited, envisage building 26 houses plus a 40 space car park on a 4-acre field in Clifton Road, adjacent to the Castle Grounds.

The proposed housing mix is 9 x 4 bedroom, 8 x 3 bedroom, 7 x 2/3 bedroom terraced houses and 2 x 2 bedroom maisonettes. The latter 9 dwellings would be 'affordable' homes (or 'social' housing).

To see the application documents on the Cherwell District Council (CDC) website, please click here and, after the page has loaded, click on 'View associated documents'. The deadline for public comments is 24th April 2014.
According to the CDC Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (October 2013), there are 15 further green field sites around Deddington identified as potential development sites, with the capacity (including the Pegasus/Prudential site) to build some 1,000 houses. To see the CDC plan, please click here and scroll down to the last page (page14).

As predicted, the Pegasus/Prudential application was the tip of the iceberg.  The Banner application is simply the next to try to obtain planning permission for housing around our village.  Although the Pegasus/Prudential application was refused by CDC, it was allowed on appeal. This further inappropriate proposal demonstrates what little regard developers have for policies to protect rural villages and the wishes of residents.

Deddington is vulnerable to opportunistic planning applications as CDC is one of many district councils which lacks a five-year housing land supply and has not completed its new Local Plan. This is becoming a very vexed issue all over the country, and stories of 'warfare' with developers are attracting a lot of media coverage.

For the time being we have a situation where developers are dictating to councils where, and how many, houses are to be built. This is driving a coach and horses through the concept of 'localism' and the immense effort of district councils to produce coherent plans for sustainable development. Our MP, Sir Tony Baldry, has described this as 'planning anarchy' akin to the 'wild west'. Deddington remains under threat. The heritage of 1,000 years could be ruined for ever in less than two years by urban sprawl.  We, not developers, should all actively decide our future.

If you feel that this development is unacceptable, especially after 85 houses (including 29 'affordable' homes) have already been permitted (10% of the existing number of houses in the village), and instead that our village should grow in a more sustainable way, responsive to local needs, with 3–5 new houses a year over the next 17 years, then this is your chance to make your views known by writing to Cherwell District Council.

Comments are invited on one or more of the following issues:

● Site in a prominent position adjacent to Deddington Castle/Castle Grounds, which is a Scheduled Ancient Monument
● Dangerous precedent of seeking to build on green open space within the Conservation Area
● Northward view from the Castle Grounds, which directly overlook the Poplars, would be replaced by the sight of regimented modern housing and rear garden clutter
● The fine view from the Clifton Road of the tree-lined embankment (see above) would be blocked by housing
● Deddington's housing quota up to 2031 more than satisfied by Pegasus/Prudential development of 85 houses (including 29 'affordable' homes)
● Contrary to Cherwell Local Plan, which envisages incremental 'minor' development, infilling and conversions within the built-up area of the village
● Yet more executive houses would create another 'dormitory' development catering for car dependent long distance commuters
● More pressure on village road system, parking and road safety
● Impact on the primary school and health centre
● Premature as parish council producing a Neighbourhood Plan to reflect residents' views on future development in the parish

It is suggested that for maximum impact it is better to concentrate on making a limited number of points well and in your own words.

PLEASE ACT NOW - A few moments of your time will help keep our village rural, and urge your neighbours (and other members of your household) to do the same to maximise our impact.

You may also wish to copy your comments to one or more of the following:

Local District Councillor - Paul O’Sullivan - cllr.paul.o’sullivan@cherwell-dc.gov.uk
Local County Councillor - Arash Fatemian -   arash.fatemian@oxfordshire.gov.uk
Local Member of Parliament - Rt. Hon. Sir Tony Baldry - tony.baldry.mp@parliament.uk
CDC Executive Lead Member for Planning - Michael Gibbard - cllr.michael.gibbard@cherwell-dc.gov.uk
Deddington Parish Council - deddingtonparishcouncil@googlemail.com

View of The Poplars standing on the mound (inner bailey) in the Castle Grounds 

View of the Poplars standing on the mound (inner bailey) in the Castle Grounds

Housing threat to The Poplars

A planning application by Banner Homes Limited to build 26 houses on the field called 'The Poplars' between Clifton Road and the Castle Grounds was submitted to Cherwell District Council.

We are currently digesting the application documents with a view to providing guidance on the issues on the Deddington Development Watch web site early next week. We shall let you know when this is available.

ST THOMAS STREET/HOPCRAFT LANE - PLANNING APPLICATION

A planning application was submitted for permission to build seven houses at the rear of eleven houses in St Thomas Street and Hopcraft Lane. To see the application documents on the CDC website, please click here.

The site is presently open green space within the Conservation Area. The proposed access is currently a driveway between two houses on a blind bend in St Thomas Street. Please see the photographs below.
Apart from the adverse landscape impact on the setting of the unspoilt village 'backland' and the Castle Grounds, the proposals raise the prospect of even more traffic congestion in what is already one of the most congested parts of the village road network. Regulations would necessitate the loss of 32½ feet of parking on either side of the entrance to the development.

Comments are invited, possibly on one or more of the following issues:
● Dangerous precedent of residential development on greenfield site outside built-up limits and within the Conservation Area
● Encroachment on open space forming part of the setting of the Castle Grounds
● Impact on surrounding properties, some listed, which would either be overlooked or lose views
● St Thomas Street/Hopcraft Lane already hazardous 'rat-run'
● Effectively single lane because of narrowness and on-street parking
● Likelihood of traffic blockages at entrance caused by (e.g.) new residents' cars, artisans' vans, Council refuse vehicles
● Narrow pavements a safety risk to (e.g.) school children; insufficient space for pushchairs opposite entrance
● Premature as parish council producing a Neighbourhood Plan to reflect residents' views on future development in the parish

Please feel free to include photographs to illustrate your points.

Pegasus/Prudential appeal result


You have probably heard the bad news that the Planning Inspector has allowed the appeal by Pegasus (on behalf of Prudential Group) for outline planning permission to build 85 houses in the field on the edge of the village between Gaveston Gardens and Banbury Road.

In allowing the appeal, the Inspector did acknowledge the considerable body of local opposition, so it is disappointing that this did not carry the day.

A copy of the decision is available on The Planning Inspectorate website:

http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/fscdav/READONLY?OBJ=COO.2036.300.12.6100408&NAME=/DECISION.pdf

It is anticipated that Prudential will now on-sell the site to a builder, who will have to submit a detailed planning application before the end of 2014.

The matters which the detailed application will cover include building layout, design, housing mix, phasing, access and pedestrian links, building materials, location of play area and detailed infrastructure systems (e.g. on site storage of surface water and sewage).

There should be some scope at this stage to make representations to Cherwell District Council, including suggesting conditions.


Pegasus appeal: 29 October - 1 November 2013

The hearings were held at the Cherwell District Council offices at Bodicote House, White Post Road, Bodicote OX15 4AA, starting on 29 October.

Keep Deddington Rural - Oppose the Pegasus Appeal!

 

Keep Deddington Rural - Oppose the Pegasus Appeal! 

Prudential Group, represented by Pegasus, has appealed against the refusal by Cherwell District Council (CDC) to grant planning permission to build 85 houses on the 9½ acre field between Gaveston Gardens and the A4260 Banbury Road.

Unless we vigorously resist this appeal, there is a real risk that Pegasus will get their way, thereby ruining for ever the rural character of the village we all cherish. If the appeal succeeds, it will almost certainly encourage other developers to try their luck. There are now at least 16 'greenfield' sites encircling Deddington, including the Pegasus site, aggregating some 85 acres with the capacity to build over 1,000 houses.

To see a list of potential development sites, please click here.
If you would like to see a plan of the sites, please click here.

For the time being we have a situation where developers are dictating to district councils where, and how many, houses are to be built. This is driving a coach and horses through the concept of 'localism' and the immense effort of district councils to produce coherent plans for sustainable development. Our MP, Sir Tony Baldry, has described this in the House of Commons as "planning anarchy".

If you feel this huge development is unacceptable, and instead that our village should grow in a more sustainable way, responsive to local needs, with 3-5 new houses a year over the next 18 years as contemplated by the new Local Plan, this is your last chance to 'Have your Say'.

Comments may focus on one or more of the following issues:
● Contrary to Local Plans, which envisage incremental minor development year-on-year within built-up area, not an 11% jump in village population from a single development
● Regimented high density townscape up to 3 storeys out of keeping with rural edge of village
● Would pre-empt other housing opportunities in village until end of Local Plan period (2031)
● Insufficient 2-bedroom homes (15%) - too many executive houses (55% 4/5 bed) - not meeting local need (e.g.) smaller homes for the young and elderly
● Limited bus services - few local job opportunities - increased carbon emissions from additional car journeys to main employment areas and shopping centres
● Will cater for 'dormitory' needs of car dependent long distance commuters
● Impact on over-stretched sewers, storm drains and water pressure - please give examples of overwhelmed drains and low water pressure
● Impact on roads in village, road safety and parking
● Harm to visual amenity across Swere valley - loss of timeless view of parish church from Deddington Circular Walk at Coombe Hill (see above)

It is suggested that for maximum impact it is better to concentrate on making a limited number of points well and in your own words.

PLEASE ACT NOW for the sake of the future of our village. A few moments of your time will help shape the future of our Parish. Please also urge your neighbours (and other members of your household) to write as well to maximise our impact.

A really big thank you to the approximately 70 residents who found the time to attend the afternoon CDC Planning Committee meeting on 16 May 2013 at Bodicote House when the application by Pegasus (on behalf of Prudential Pensions) to build 85 houses was refused.
Although the planning officers had recommended that the application be approved, and explained their reasons to the committee, a good number of committee members spoke firmly against the proposals and in favour of the principle of 'localism'. The newly re-elected chairman of the parish council, Alan Collins, also addressed the meeting.
Pegasus will almost certainly appeal against the refusal, perhaps in a matter of weeks. If so, the appeal could be heard before a planning inspector as early as September.
Apart from the mooted developments on The Poplars and the 'ridge and furrow' field in Earl's Lane, it should not be forgotten that there are 14 other sites encircling the village which have been put forward by landowners and developers as potential development sites.

Deddington Development Watch
deddingtondevelopmentwatch@hotmail.com

Potential housing developments in Deddington - Update


Earl's Lane 'ridge and furrow' field

Proposals have emerged for the development of the 5-acre field north of Earl's Lane. This has the capacity for 60 homes at 30dph. More information will be posted on the website when available.

Consultation on final changes to Local Plan

Proposed changes
As regards the new Local Plan, CDC is now consulting on the final changes before the plan is submitted to the Secretary of State for the remaining stages (an examination-in-public by a planning inspector followed by formal adoption).
The proposed changes most relevant to Deddington are summarised below:
1. Deddington and five other villages are expected to take 252 homes (on sites of 10 or more) between now and 31/3/2018. We are grouped with Adderbury, Hook Norton, Ambrosden, Chesterton and Launton for this purpose.
2. The revised housing allocation of 252 houses (on sites of 10 or more) is said to be in 'the interests of meeting local housing need in rural areas.
It is unclear whether 'local' housing need means the housing requirements of people who live, and if in employment work, in the locality, or whether it also includes workers who choose to sleep in a particular village but who commute to a place of work some distance away.
3. The number of houses to be allocated to each village will be decided by CDC. There is no longer provision that the number of houses to be allocated to each village will be divided 'broadly equally - this has been deleted.
4. Although the revised housing allocation is said to be for the period 2012-2031, it is 'front-loaded' so that all 252 houses are expected to be built, or permissions granted, by 2017/18. Under the previous housing trajectory, completions were relatively evenly spread over the entire plan period.
5. There is a minimum site size (10 dwellings), but no maximum. These sites may be within or outside settlement limits, raising the prospect of permitting building on 'greenfield' sites.
6. 'Windfall' developments do not count against the revised housing allocation. These are defined as unplanned developments of less than 10 dwellings (minor development, infilling and conversions) within built-up limits.

Issues

The proposed changes are likely to leave rural villages like Deddington more exposed to inappropriate development:
● there is no limit on the size of developments in rural villages
● there is nothing to ensure that developments are responsive to 'local' housing need rather than the 'dormitory' needs of commuters
● rural completions are 'front-loaded' with no housing allocation after 2018 (which is not credible).
Cherwell District Council needs to be persuaded to resolve these vulnerabilities by:
● limiting the size of individual rural developments to not more than (say) 20 dwellings
● requiring planning applications to be accompanied by an up-to-date local housing needs assessment for the village concerned
● adopting an incremental approach to rural growth by providing for relatively even completions over the full plan period up to 2031

Have your Say

If you would like to make any comments, please begin by saying that the proposed changes 'are unsound because they are not justified for the following reasons' ...

Please note that only those who make representations to CDC in response to the consultation will be eligible to participate, if they so wish, at the Examination-in-Public.

Your comments will carry more weight if you are able to quote relevant policy or paragraph numbers. These are cited in the attached summary.

To see the current draft of the Submission Local Plan (August 2012), please click here.

To see the schedule of proposed changes, please click here.

 

 

VALUED RURAL VILLAGE OR URBAN SPRAWL .....

ACT NOW! BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

A statement from Deddington Development Watch 

 


A planning application has been submitted by Pegasus Group, on behalf of Prudential Pensions Ltd, to build 85 houses on a 9½ acre site comprising Grade 2 agricultural land between Gaveston Gardens and the A4260 Banbury Road.

The indicative housing mix is 15% 2-bed, 30% 3-bed, 45% 4-bed and 10% 5-bed. Houses fronting the Banbury Road would be up to 3-storeys high. The developers are non-committal as to the proportion of affordable homes.

To see the application documents on the CDC website, please click here.

The village is threatened on all sides. There are at least 13 'greenfield' sites on the fringes of Deddington, including the Pegasus site, aggregating some 59 acres, with the capacity for building at least 675 houses, and 2 more sites at Hempton (70 houses), which are owned or controlled by developers. Clifton may be vulnerable too. The potential sites include 20 acres behind The Paddocks (200+ houses) and even the Allotments.

To see a list of potential development sites, please click here.

If you would like to see a plan of the sites, please click here.

The Pegasus application is simply the tip of the iceberg. If this large-scale high density development is allowed to happen, it would give a green light to other developers to bring forward their plans to build elsewhere in Deddington. The village would change beyond all recognition.

Deddington is vulnerable to opportunistic planning applications as Cherwell District Council (CDC) is one of many councils which lacks a five-year housing land supply and has not completed its new Local Plan. This is becoming a very vexed issue nationally, and stories of 'warfare' with developers are attracting a lot of media coverage.

For the time being we have a situation where developers are dictating to district councils where, and how many, houses are to be built. This is driving a coach and horses through the concept of 'localism' and the immense effort of district councils to produce coherent plans for sustainable development. Our MP, Sir Tony Baldry, recently described this in the House of Commons as 'planning anarchy'.

This is a defining moment in the Parish's 1000+ year history and we should all actively decide its future.

If you feel that this huge development is unacceptable, and instead that our village should grow in a more sustainable way, responsive to local needs, with 3-5 new houses a year over the next 18 years as contemplated by the new Local Plan, this is your chance to make your views known by writing to Cherwell District Council.

You may also leave letters in a special collection box at the Post Office.

You may wish to focus on one or more of the following issues:

● Site in prominent position on ridge in countryside
● Incongruous sight of 3-storey houses fronting the Banbury Road
● Contrary to Local Plans, which envisage incremental 'minor' development, infilling and conversions within built-up area, not an 11% jump in population from a single development
● Deddington's Local Plan housing allocation is c.85 houses up to 2031 - would pre-empt other housing opportunities in village for next 18 years
● Insufficient 2-bedroom homes (15%) - too many executive houses - not responsive to local needs
● Increased carbon emissions from additional car journeys as few local job opportunities and limited bus services
● Impact on sewers, storm drains and water supply - give examples
● Impact on village road network, parking and road safety
● Harm to visual amenity across Swere valley - loss of timeless view (please click here) of parish church from Deddington Circular Walk at Coombe Hill
● Harm to the fabric, character and appearance of the conservation area

It is suggested that for maximum impact it is better to concentrate on making a limited number of points well and in your own words.

PLEASE ACT NOW for the sake of the future of our village.

A few moments of your time will help shape the destiny of our Parish. Please also urge your neighbours (and other members of your household) to write as well to maximise our impact.
You may also wish to copy your comments to one or more of the following:

Local District Councillor - Paul O’Sullivan - cllr.paul.osullivan@cherwell-dc.gov.uk
Local County Councillor - Ray Jelf - ray.jelf@oxfordshire.gov.uk
Local Member of Parliament - Sir Tony Baldry - tony.baldry.mp@parliament.uk
CDC Executive Lead Member for Planning - Michael Gibbard - cllr.michael.gibbard@cherwell-dc.gov.uk
Deddington Parish Council - parishcouncil@deddington.net

Deddington Development Watch
deddingtondevelopmentwatch@hotmail.com

This is a statement from Deddington Development Watch.