Agenda item

Refused, reasons to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 14/02004/OUT an outline planning application (all matters reserved except for means of access) for a mixed use development comprising: up to 1,200 dwellings, including affordable housing and up to 120 unit care village (C2) with associated publically accessible ancillary facilities; site for a new primary school; up to 930sqm of retail space; up to 13,800sqm of locally led employment (B1/B2/B8) including transport interchange; site for a Football Association step 5 football facility with publically accessible ancillary facilities; public open space; associated infrastructure, engineering and ancillary works at Land South Of Perdiswell Farm, Shipton Road, Shipton On Cherwell for The Vanbrugh Trust and Pye Homes Ltd.

Councillor Simon Holland, addressed the meeting as a local Ward Member.

Huw Mellor, on behalf of Woodstock Town Council addressed the meeting in objection to the application.

Nigel McGurk and John Hoye of Blenheim Palace Estate addressed the meeting in support to the application.

In reaching their decision, the Committee considered the officers’ report, presentation, written update and the address of the Ward member and public speakers.

Resolved

That application 14/02004/OUT be refused for the following reasons:

1.            The proposed development would result in unnecessary and undesirable new housing development in open countryside in that the  application site is not allocated for development in either the adopted Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031, the West Oxfordshire Local Plan 2011, or the Submission West Oxfordshire Local Plan  2031 . Cherwell District Council is able to demonstrate that it has a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land  and the development of land at Woodstock does not accord with the Council’s development strategy of focussing development at Banbury and Bicester and allowing only limited development in rural areas, and therefore the proposal is contrary to Policies BSC 1 AND Policy Villages 1 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 and to Policy H18 of the saved policies of the Cherwell Local Plan (1996)

2.            This substantial development proposal would result in a significant loss of open countryside and have a substantial and adverse impact upon the character and appearance of that countryside and therefore be contrary to Policy ESD13 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031.

3.            It has not been demonstrated that the development, by reason of its siting, size, and height of buildings, will not have a significant and adverse detrimental impact upon the Blenheim Palace and Park World Heritage Site , the Grade 1 listed building, and the Listed Garden, or the Blenheim Villa Scheduled Ancient Monument, which would impact upon the setting of these assets and visitors experience of the WHS and other heritage assets both on their approach to it from the south along the A44, and whilst within the park,  and would therefore be contrary to Policy ESD16 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031. It is considered that the evidence to support the applicants case for securing the future of the World Heritage site is not sufficient to outweigh this concern

4.            The proposed development would be poorly connected to the existing facilities offered by Woodstock, with the principle effective pedestrian/ cycle route being along the A44 .Additional proposed connections through existing housing estates are considered to be indirect and of lesser attraction to users as they do not lead to the facilities sought. Given the size of the site walking and cycling distances from the southern/eastern extremities of the site are excessive. The proposal is therefore considered to contrary to Policy SLE 4 of Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031

5.            Given the refusal of planning permission by West Oxfordshire District Council for their part of the site the remaining development would result in an unconnected and isolated  community in an unsustainable location poorly related to  either Woodstock or Bladon, and it has not been demonstrated that the necessary facilities for the community could be provided in a satisfactory manner within the remaining area, and therefore the proposal would be contrary to Policies PSD1,Policy Villages 1 and 2, and Policy INF 1

6.            The transport interchange (formerly Link & Ride) car park is contrary to transport strategy as set out in the Oxford Transport Strategy that forms part of the adopted Oxfordshire County Council Local Transport Plan 4, 2015 – 2031.

7.            The provision of employment development of the scale proposed is inconsistent with the Cherwell Local Plan strategy which focusses employment development at Banbury and Bicester or on existing employment sites elsewhere. No attempt has been made to address the criteria set out in Policy SLE1of the adopted Cherwell Local Pan 2011-2031 and therefore the proposal is contrary to that Policy

8.            It  has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of either the Local Planning Authority or Sport England  that the proposed sports facilities have been planned in a  positive and integrated way in accordance with Paragraph 70 of the NPPF and may not therefore be fit for purpose, accessible and sustainable, and therefore the proposal is contrary to Policies BSC10 AND BSC 11 of the adopted Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031

9.            By reason of a lack of a satisfactory completed S106 legal agreement to ensure that the development adequately mitigates its impact on community infrastructure and secures the provision of affordable housing, the local planning authority cannot be satisfied that the impacts of the development in this respect can be made acceptable. Consequently the proposals conflict with the requirements of Policies BSC3 and INF1 of the Cherwell Submission Local Plan as well as paragraphs 17, 203 and 204 of the National Planning Policy Framework