The long-awaited draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published for consultation this week (5 March).

In fact, there are two consultations, including a welcome consultation on reforming developer contributions.

NNGO has long campaigned for revision of the NPPF, to eliminate speculative development and encourage well-planned and affordable housing, but whether the revised draft will fit the bit remains to be seen.

See: NNGO response to consultation on Housing White Paper – April 2017 FINAL.

How should we judge the proposals?

• Will they limit the speculative development caused by the 5 Year Housing Supply rules?
• Will they increase the amount of genuinely affordable housing, available in perpetuity?
• Will they help direct development to areas of greatest need rather than greatest demand?
• Will they maintain or increase protection for designated areas such as Green Belt and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty?
• Will they encourage higher quality development, including higher density?

These are some of the criteria against which we will judge the revised planning framework. We will be posting further information on this website once we have had a chance to review the documents in detail.

It is vitally important that the NPPF meets the above criteria given the intense development pressures that Oxfordshire will be facing over the coming years including proposals for new towns and the planned Oxford-Cambridge Growth Corridor and Expressway.

This month, all our District Councillors and County Council Cabinet Members will be asked to vote on the Oxfordshire Housing & Growth Deal.

The Deal would commit our local authorities to providing 100,000 houses by 2031, a housebuilding level that is more than double the Government’s own projections of household growth for the County and still almost 50% above the Government’s own assessment of housing need after a large affordability allowance has been added, including several thousand houses over and above those already proposed in Local Plans. This is a significant commitment to make without a lot more careful thought and full public consultation.

Today, NNGO has written to all Councillors calling on them to oppose the Housing and Growth Deal.

We believe a better future is possible for Oxfordshire!

See a copy of our letter below.

Read more …→

At the West Oxfordshire Uplands Area Planning Sub-Committee on 6 December the planning application for the development of 68 houses on the Woodstock Road in the village of Stonesfield was withdrawn from the agenda. Consideration of the application has been delayed until January at the request of the applicants – it is understood that this is to allow for a revised landscaping plan.

The greenfield site lies within the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Over 200 local objections have been lodged against the application and NNGO member, Sustainable Stonesfield, have commissioned a Landscape Assessment.

The next WODC Uplands Area Planning Sub-Committee is scheduled for 8 January.

Find out more:

See Agenda for WODC Uplands Area Planning Sub-Committee, 6 December.

On 6 December, the Uplands Area Planning Sub-Committee for West Oxfordshire approved the planning application for 170 houses on greenfield land north of Witney Road in the village of Long Hanborough (17/1082/OUT).

Hanborough Parish Council objected to the proposal on the grounds that the development would have an adverse impact on the Conservation Area, and due to the traffic that would be generated by the scheme.

Neighbouring Freeland Parish Council also objected.

CPRE also objected because of the proximity of the site to the Conservation Area and the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), and due to the fact that the site is not within the draft West Oxon Local Plan, which is currently being consulted upon.

A total of 154 objections were received.

A key objection was that a large number of new homes are already allocated in the locality and that there is not an immediate need for the proposed development.

NNGO members, Hands off Hanborough, were disappointed by the decision.

See: Uplands Planning Committee in West Oxfordshire

Find out more:

Hands off Hanborough Website

Hands off Hanborough Facebook

Hands off Hanbourgh Twitter @handsoffhanboro

NNGO 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

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‘, 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.

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 …→