Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

11. Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre (IRC), Evenlode Crescent, Kidlington, OX5 1GN.

Councillor Fiona Mawson, Other Registerable Interest, as a member of Kidlington Town Council.

15. Part Of Os Parcels 1864 And 3655 South West Of Milestone Farm, Broughton Road, Banbury.

Councillor Chris Aramini-Brant, Other Registerable Interest, as a member of Banbury Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

Councillor Ian Harwood, Other Registerable Interest, as a member of Banbury Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

Councillor Dr Kerrie Thornhill, Other Registerable Interest, as a member of Banbury Town Council which had been consulted on the application.

The Chair to report on any requests to address the meeting.

Requests to address the meeting (including the application, whether you will speak in support of or objection to the application, your contact details) should be submitted to democracy@cherwell-dc.gov.uk  

The deadline for requests to address this meeting is noon on Wednesday 22 July 2026.

Addresses can be made virtually or in person. Full details of public participation at Planning Committee meeting is available in the Constitution, Planning Committee Procedure Rules.

There will be no public speaking on agenda item 11 as this is not a planning application for determination by Cherwell District Council.

The Chair advised that requests to address the meeting would be dealt with at each item.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 2 July 2026.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 2 July 2026 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive communications from the Chair.

1.          The Chair reminded Members that should they need to leave the room for any reason, that they should be mindful of timing and endeavour to be present for officers’ presentation, public addresses and participate in the debate. Members were advised that voting was ultimately a matter for their own judgment.

The Chair to advise whether they have agreed to any item of urgent business being admitted to the agenda.

There were no items of urgent business.

The Committee to consider requests for and proposed pre-committee site visits.

Any requests or recommendations for site visits will be published with the written update.

There were no proposed pre-committee site visits.

Report of Assistant Director – Planning

Purpose of report

This report details the Council’s performance in determining planning applications for the Government’s targets on Speed and Quality, as well as general performance figures.

Recommendations

The Planning Committee resolves:

1.1           To note the report.

Resolved

(1)        That the report be noted

The Assistant Director Planning submitted a report which detailed the Council’s performance in determining planning applications for the Government’s targets on Speed and Quality, as well as general performance figures.

The Head of Development Management advised the Committee the Council went over the 10% threshold of major decisions overturned at appeal in 2024 and 2025 in the measure of quality of decisions. On 15 June 2026, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government advised that it had chosen to designate the Council as poor performing on the quality of major decisions, due to being over the 10% threshold.

The Head of Development Management explained that a comprehensive Action Plan was being prepared to support the earliest possible removal of designation. That work was being undertaken in partnership with the MHCLG and PAS, both of whom had committed to supporting the Council through the improvement process.

Resolved

(1)      That the report be noted

Report of Assistant Director - Planning

Purpose of report

To keep Members informed about planning appeal progress including decisions received and the scheduling of public inquiries and hearings for new and current appeals.

Recommendations

The Planning Committee resolves:

1.1           To note the position on planning appeals contained within the report.

Resolved

(1)        That the report be noted

The Head of Development Management submitted a report which informed Members about planning appeal progress including decisions received and the scheduling of public inquiries and hearings for new and current appeals.

Resolved

(1)          That the report me noted.

Report of Assistant Director – Planning.

Purpose of report

To update Members on current planning enforcement activity within the second quarter of 2026.

Recommendations

The Planning Committee resolves:

1.1 To note the content of the report and current planning enforcement position.

Resolved

(1)        That the report be noted

The Assistant Director Planning submitted a report that updated Members on current planning enforcement activity within the second quarter of 2026.

Resolved

(1)      That the report be noted

**No public speaking permitted on this item as it is not a planning application for determination by Cherwell District Council. Individuals can make their own representations on the application to the Planning Inspectorate during the consultation period**

The Planning Committee is asked to authorise officers to advise the Secretary of State, the Planning Inspectorate and the Home Office that Cherwell District Council raises no objection to Crown application CROWN/2026/0000004 / Cherwell reference 26/01402/CROWN, subject to: 

1. The Secretary of State being satisfied that the submitted national need, operational need and security evidence justifies the proposed expansion of Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre; 

2. The Secretary of State being satisfied that the proposal constitutes Grey Belt development which is not inappropriate development for the purposes of the National Planning Policy Framework, or, in the alternative, that very special circumstances exist which clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and any other harm; 

3. The development being controlled by planning conditions covering the matters set out in this report; and 

4. Any necessary planning obligations, Crown undertaking or other binding mechanism being secured to address travel plan monitoring, public transport and active travel mitigation, off-site biodiversity net gain, highway works, monitoring and any other mitigation required to make the development acceptable in planning terms. 

Recommendations

The Planning Committee resolves:

1.1 To authorise officers to advise the Secretary of State, the Planning Inspectorate and the Home Office that Cherwell District Council raises no objection to Crown application CROWN/2026/0000004 / Cherwell reference 26/01402/CROWN, subject to: 

1.  The Secretary of State being satisfied that the submitted national need, operational need and security evidence justifies the proposed expansion of Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre; 

2.  The Secretary of State being satisfied that the proposal constitutes Grey Belt development which is not inappropriate development for the purposes of the National Planning Policy Framework, or, in the alternative, that very special circumstances exist which clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and any other harm; 

3.  The development being controlled by planning conditions covering the matters set out in this report; and 

4.  Any necessary planning obligations, Crown undertaking or other binding mechanism being secured to address travel plan monitoring, public transport and active travel mitigation, off-site biodiversity net gain, highway works, monitoring and any other mitigation required to make the development acceptable in planning terms. 

Resolved

(1)        That the committee authorise officers in consultation with the Portfolio Holder and Chair of the Planning Committee to write to the Secretary of State, the Planning Inspectorate and the Home Office that Cherwell District Council objects to Crown application CROWN/2026/000004/ Cherwell reference 26/01402/CROWN, unless the items listed in the recommendation in the officer’s response have been addressed.

The Committee considered a report of the Head of Development Management which recommend the Committee authorise officers to advise the Secretary of State, the Planning Inspectorate and the Home Office that Cherwell District Council, as local planning authority, raised no objection in principle to the proposed crown development subject to:

1. The Secretary of State being satisfied that the submitted national need, operational need and security evidence justifies the proposed expansion of Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre.
2. The Secretary of State being satisfied that the proposal constitutes Grey Belt development which is not inappropriate development for the purposes of the National Planning Policy Framework, or, in the alternative, that very special circumstances exist which clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and any other harm.
3. The imposition of planning conditions
4. The imposition of a legal agreement to mitigate the impact of the development 

In introducing the report, the Principal Planning Officer explained that the application was made by the Home Office under the Crown development procedure. It would be determined by the Planning Inspectorate. Cherwell District Council was a consultee on the application.

The application was an outline planning application with all matters reserved (except for access) for the expansion of Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre comprising the development of new accommodation blocks and ancillary supporting accommodation, the conversion of existing site infrastructure, demolition of existing structures, creation of additional car parking, landscaping and associated site infrastructure.

It was proposed by Councillor Smith and seconded by Councillor Mawson that the Committee authorise officers, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder and Chair of the Planning Committee, to write to the Secretary of State, the Planning Inspectorate and the Home Office to advise that Cherwell District Council objects to the application subject to:

a)    The imposition of planning conditions

b)    The imposition of a legal agreement to mitigate the impact of the development 

c)    Matters requiring resolution before permission could be sorted listed below:

1. The Secretary of State must be satisfied, on complete and robust evidence, that the additional capacity is necessary; that an expanded capacity of up to 400 detained persons is justified; that the proposed scale and form of development are proportionate; and that reasonable alternative sites, configurations and less harmful means of meeting the stated need have been properly assessed.
2. A transparent and complete Green Belt balance is required before determination as the development would cause harm to openness and to the Green Belt function of maintaining separation between settlements.
3. A detailed operational parking justification is required due to the proposed increase from 97 parking spaces to approximately 324/325 spaces.
4. Provision of a sufficient operations detail to demonstrate how the expanded facility would safely manage a materially larger population with differing individual risk and vulnerability profiles.
5. The Council requires clear confirmation and enforceable measures to ensure that the Technology Park’s present and future operation is not adversely affected.
6. Consideration of local community impact of the development and local opposition.
7. The Council requires binding and transparent arrangements to protect vulnerable people accommodated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

Refused in line with officer recommendation, Reasons to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 25/03234/OUT, an outline planning application (with All Matters Reserved except for access) comprising a residential development of up to 74 dwellings (Use Class C3) with associated access, landscaping, amenity space, drainage and associated works at Land to the East of Claydon Road Cropredy for Obsidian Strategic Asset Management Ltd.

Geoff Scammans, on behalf of Keep Cropredy Rural and Jacqui Smith, Vice Chair of Cropredy Parish Councill addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Paul Galgey, agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the committee in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Aramini-Brant and seconded by Councillor Webb that application 25/03234/OUT be refused in line with the officer recommendation for the reasons set out in their report.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officer’s report and presentation, the addresses of the public speaker and the written updates.

Resolved

That, in line with officer recommendation, application 25/02895/OUT be refused for the following reasons (and any amendments to as deemed necessary), with authority delegated to officers, in consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, to add or remove refusal reasons, in the event of an appeal being lodged against the refusal, in light of new evidence becoming available.

1. The proposal would be an urbanising form of development, would result in the permanent loss of open greenfield land at the northern edge of Cropredy and would extend built form into the Upper Cherwell Basin landscape. It fails to adequately recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of this part of the countryside, nor would it be sympathetic to the landscape setting of the northern edge of Cropredy and the Oxford Canal corridor. The proposal would adversely impact the rural setting of the village and would result in a harmful visual intrusion of development into the landscape and open countryside and would therefore result in harm to the rural character and appearance and quality of the area, and to views from sensitive public receptors, particularly users of the Oxford Canal towpath. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies ESD13 and ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, Saved Policies C8 and C28 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996, Policies SP1, CSD25, COM2, COM10, COM14, COM26 and COM27 of the draft Cherwell Local Plan 2042 and the National Planning Policy Framework including paragraphs 135 and 187.

2. The proposed development would be sited in a geographically unsustainable location with poor access to services and facilities and therefore future residents would be highly reliant on the private car to meet their day to day needs which would not reduce the need to travel and would result in increased car journeys and hence carbon emissions. The proposed development therefore conflicts with Policies ESD1 and SLE4 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, Policies CSD1, CSD22 and CSD23 of the draft Cherwell Local Plan 2042 and Government guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. This identified harm would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits associated with the proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

Refused against officer recommendation. Reasons to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 25/02895/OUT, an outline application with All Matters Reserved except for access, for up to 95 dwellings (Use Class C3) with associated works at Land Adjoining And West Of Bloxham Recreation Ground, South Newington Road, Bloxham for David Wilson Homes South Midlands.

Councillor Rob Pattenden addressed the Committee as Local Ward Member.

Neil Homer, on behalf of Bloxham Parish Council, addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

Eleanor Gingell, agent on behalf of application, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Hingley and seconded by Councillor Webb that application 25/02895/OUT be refused, against officer recommendation, as the proposal would result in an urbanising form of development and would be detrimental to the Slade Nature Reserve and its landscape setting and would result in a harmful visual intrusion of development into the landscape and open countryside. The proposal would also detrimentally affect the village entrance and rural setting and result in significant adverse effects to the character and appearance of the area. The proposal was not allocated for developments in the emerging Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan 2024-2042 and given its scale would be contrary to the housing strategy of the Plan. The proposal was contrary to Policies Villages 2, ESD13 and ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, saved Policy C33 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996, Policies BL1, BL3 and BL9 of the emerging Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan 2024-2042 and the National Planning Policy Framework including paragraphs 135 and 187.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officer’s report and presentation, the addresses by the public speakers and the written updates.

Resolved

That, against officer recommendation, application 25/02895/OUT be refused for the reasons below.

1.         The proposal would result in an urbanising form of development, and the permanent loss of open greenfield land in a prominent location at the entrance to the village of Bloxham, and would be detrimental to the Slade Nature Reserve and its landscape setting and would result in a harmful visual intrusion of development into the landscape and open countryside. The proposal would also detrimentally affect the village entrance and rural setting though the formation of a hard surfaced, three metre wide cycleway which would result in the loss of grass verge and vegetation inappropriate to the rural context. The proposal would therefore result in significant adverse effects to the character and appearance of the area. In addition, the site is not allocated for development in the emerging Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan 2024-2042 and given its scale would be contrary to the housing strategy of the said Plan, which has now reached an advanced stage in the plan making process, and the proposal would have an adverse cumulative impact on the character of the village. The identified harm significantly and demonstrably outweighs the benefits of the proposed development. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies Villages 2, ESD13 and ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, saved Policy C33 of the Cherwell Local Plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

Approved in line with officer recommendation, subject to conditions (and any amendments as deemed necessary) and completion of a S106 legal agreement, details to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 25/02918/OUT, an outline application (All Matters Reserved except for Access) for the development of up to 150 homes (Class C3), up to 70-bed care home (Class C2), up to 65 no. retirement/assisted living units (Class C2/C3) and associated facilities, car parking associated with the neighbouring land use (sui generis), public open space, pedestrian and cycle links, play area, drainage, landscaping, and all other related works including the removal of fuel storage tanks and associated engineering/remediation works and demolition of associated structures and buildings at Land At Islip Fuel Depot, Adjoining Oxford to Bicester Railway, Bletchingdon Road, Islip for Barwood Development Securities Ltd and NCM Real Returns Property GP Ltd.

Dennis Price and Andrew Smith on behalf of Islip Parish Council addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

Sarah Butterfield, agent on behalf of the application, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

It was proposed by Councillor Dr Thornhill and seconded by Councillor Brasha that application 25/02918/OUT be approved in line with officer recommendation.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officer’s report and presentation, the addresses by the public speakers and the written updates.

Resolved

(1)      That, in line with officer recommendation, authority be delegated to the Assistant Director - Planning to grant permission for application 25/02918/OUT subject to:

i)       The conditions set out below (and any amendments to those conditions as deemed necessary) and

ii)      The completion of a planning obligation under section 106 of the town and country planning act 1990, as substituted by the planning and compensation act 1991, to secure the following (and any amendments as deemed necessary):

·      Expansion and efficiency improvements of Household Waste Recycling Centre. £22,253.

·      Increase Capacity and Stock at Kidlington Library Service: £23,844

·      £258,264 towards creation of additional clinical capacity at Islip Medical Practice or an identified primary care estates project in the local area to serve the development.

·      The Recreation and Leisure Team at Cherwell District Council have requested the following contributions towards:

·         Enhancement of Community Hall Facilities in the locality based on 2.4 person per dwelling = £165,301.20

·         Outdoor Sport provision based on £585,650.00. This contribution is considered to accord with policy BSC11 and the CDC Playing Pitch Strategy which identifies the need for improved pitches at Islip or Kidlington sports facilities.

·         Indoor Sports provision contribution £219,882.00. This contribution will go towards improving indoor sport provision.

·         Community Development Worker contribution of £37,449.61. The Community Development Worker would help integrate residents into the community and wider area.

·         Community Development Fund. £12,825.00. This contribution is considered to accord with the aims of Chapter 8 of the NPPF and promoting health and safe communities, specifically the aim of promoting social interaction.

·         Public Art. A contribution of £250 per dwelling plus 5% management and 7% maintenance has been requested towards public art. Based on the above this would amount to £73,870.00 No details have been provided on what public art this will be used to fund so I do not consider that it would meet the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

Approved in line with officer recommendation, subject to conditions (and any amendments as deemed necessary) and completion of a S106 legal agreement, details to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 25/02863/OUT, an outline application for the development of up to 76 dwellings, green and blue infrastructure, open space and associated works, with All Matters Reserved apart from access at Part Of Os Parcels 1864 And 3655 South West Of Milestone Farm Broughton Road Banbury for Kler Group.

Councillor Kieron Mallon addressed the Committee as Local Ward Member.

Richard West, agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the applicant.

It was proposed by Councillor Dr Thornhill and seconded by Councillor Brasha that application 25/02863/OUT be approved in line with officer recommendation.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officer’s report and presentation, the addresses by the public speakers and the written updates.

Resolved

(1)      That, in line with officer recommendation,authority be delegated to the Assistant Director for Planning to grant permission for application 25/02863/OUT subject to:

i)    The conditions set out below (and any amendments to those conditions as deemed necessary) and  

ii)   The completion of a planning obligation under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as substituted by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991, to secure the following (and any amendments as deemed necessary): 

a)    Provision of 30% affordable housing on site

b)    contribution to CDC for the provision or enhanced facilities at The Hill, Sunshine Centre or community facilities at Woodgreen Leisure Centre - £83,742.68

c)    contribution to CDC towards outdoor sport provision - £214,237.00

d)    contribution to CDC towards indoor sport at Woodgreen Leisure Centre or a new indoor sport facility in the locality - £81,171.00

e)    contribution to CDC towards public art within the vicinity - £21,280

f)     payment of the District Council’s monitoring costs of £5,000

g)     contribution to OCC of £120,000 for Highway Works

h)    contribution to OCC of £103,664 for enhanced public transport services

i)     contribution to OCC of £14,864 for enhanced public transport infrastructure

j)     contribution to OCC of £4,224 for Traffic Regulation Order

k)    contribution to OCC of £750,186 for secondary education provision

l)     contribution to OCC of £72,468 for secondary education land

m)  contribution to OCC of £70,823 for special education needs

n)    contribution to OCC of £7,866 for household waste and recycling centres

o)    payment of the County Council’s monitoring costs – TBC and

p)    contribution to BOBICB for health care enhancements – £68,870

Conditions

Time Limit

1.  The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 

Reason - To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 

2.  In the case of the reserved matters, the final application for approval shall be made not later than the expiration of 18 calendar months beginning with the date of this permission. 

Reason: This permission is in outline only and is granted to comply with the provisions of Section 92 of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.