Autumn 2016
Oxfordshire www.cpreoxon.org.uk
voice
Oxford Green Belt Campaign launched to save the Green Belt & protect historic Oxford
CPRE campaign successes Saving our landscapes and our green fields
Brexit and the British farmer A local view
OXFORDSHIRE
Voice Autumn 2016
Features 2 Chairman’s voice 4
Oxfordshire Local Plan round-up
5 CPRE Density Guidelines 6 Save the Green Belt campaign 8 Need not Greed – fighting back 10 Brexit and its impact on local farmers 11 CPRE campaign successes 12 CPRE members’ events DIRECTORY Views expressed in the Voice are not necessarily those of CPRE Oxfordshire, which welcomes independent comment. Editor: Helena Whall Cover: Ridgeway, North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Photo: Helena Whall Articles, letters, comments and suggestions for articles are welcome. Please contact the Branch Office below. Published November 2016 District Chairmen CPRE Oxfordshire Branch Brian Wood 01869 337904 Brianwood77@aol.com Cherwell North: Chris Hone 01295 265379 Cherwell South: John Broad (acting chair) 01869 324008 john.broad85@talktalk.net Oxford: Rosemary Harris rosemary.cpre@gmail.com South Oxfordshire: Professor Richard Harding 01491 836425 rjh@ceh.ac.uk Vale of White Horse: Dr. Peter Collins St Edmund Hall, Oxford OX1 4AR West Oxfordshire: Justine Garbutt (acting Chair) 01993 837681 andrew.garbutt@btconnect.com Branch Office CPRE Oxfordshire, First Floor, 20 High Street, Watlington, Oxfordshire OX49 5PY (Registered office) T: 01491 612079 E: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk
www.cpreoxon.org.uk
The high SHMA figures have a baleful influence elsewhere. If District Councils do not build the figures into their local plans, they will not be declared sound, and if they do not have an agreed local plan they will be open to speculative development proposals which can be approved on appeal.
I may be fooling myself, but I believe our protestations that the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) figures are far too high may be getting through to some people. While District Councils are still accepting the figures as the basis for their planning proposals, there does appear to be a growing feeling that the figures are too high.
Neighbourhood Plans have to be based on an acceptance of the local plan figures, ie the SHMA figures, which rather undermines their claim to be encouraging localism. Oxfordshire CPRE has appealed for extra funds to continue to maintain the current level of activity opposing these developments. Details of how to contribute can be found on page 8 in this newsletter or on our website. Please help if you can.
Oxfordshire is expected to build 100,000 houses by 2031 from a previous target of 54,700. The original core strategy target for Oxford City was 8,000 houses by 2026, the target now is 28,000 houses by 2031. There is apparently nowhere to build all these houses in the City which means that 15,000 are expected to be built in surrounding districts. To rub it in Wycombe now claims it has nowhere to build 5,000 of its target and is reportedly asking South Oxfordshire to help. These ridiculous figures include homes to provide for 85,000 extra jobs, forecast by the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership and incorporated in the targets without any consultation.
I am now in my fifth year as chairman of CPRE Oxfordshire and will stand down at the AGM next year. We are looking, both externally and internally, for candidates to put themselves forward for consideration. It is a very rewarding role, working with dedicated staff to help to preserve the Oxfordshire countryside (see below).
Brian Wood Chairman, CPRE Oxfordshire
CPRE Oxfordshire seeks new Chair Interested in environmental issues? Care about your countryside? Want to make a difference? As chair of CPRE Oxfordshire (voluntary role) you will provide vision and leadership to ensure a strong and effective voice for the future of the countryside. This is an excellent opportunity to apply your senior level skills and experience. With your help we can do even more to protect the countryside and increase our influence on key decisions affecting land use in the county.
Follow us on Twitter @CPREOxfordshire
For a full role description and further background information please contact:
and like us on www.facebook.com/CPREOxfordshire
E: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk T: 01491 612079 Applications via CV and covering letter please. Deadline: 30 November 2016
CPRE Oxfordshire is registered in England as Charity No.1093081 and Company No. 4443278.
2
Chairman’s voice
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Autumn 2016
Andrew Carter
Warneford Meadow campaigners celebrating Town Green status.
A big thank you to Sietske Boeles Dr. Sietske Boeles has decided to stand down as Chair of Oxford City district after several years of fierce campaigning on issues such as green spaces, the Oxford Green Belt and air pollution, but we are delighted that Sietske will remain on the committee so that we can continue to call on her expertise and experience. Sietske is an awesome campaigner and has worked phenomenally hard for CPRE over the last few years. Before becoming Chair of the City district she spearheaded the hugely successful Warneford Meadow Town Green Campaign – which the branch supported. And during her time as Chair she has been at the forefront of the Northern Gateway and the Save Port Meadow campaign – another big success story for the branch. She has now turned her attention to the Save the Oxford Green Belt and Protect Historic Oxford branch campaign.
Welcome to Rosemary Harris and John Hills CPRE is pleased to welcome Rosemary Harris as the new Chair of Oxford City district. Rosemary has been on the committee for a number of years after first becoming involved with CPRE during the Save Oxpens Meadow campaign, which she championed. Rosemary will be ably assisted by John Hill, who has been Secretary to the Committee for some two years now - a belated welcome to John too! John will be attending BEC meetings on Oxford City district’s behalf.
We are very pleased to have Rosemary and John on board and we look forward to working with them both. We are confident that they will do an excellent job in representing CPRE’s interests within the City.
…and Colin Thomas We are delighted to welcome Colin Thomas to the Board of Trustees. Colin grew up on a family farm in the Cherwell Valley and now lives in the village of Sunningwell in the Vale. He was a founding member of
local countryside and environmental campaign group the Sunningwell Parishioners Against Damage to the Environment (SPADE) – a member of the Need not Greed Oxfordshire coalition.
Going forward, CPRE Henley and Mapledurham, Thame & Bullingdon and Wallingford districts are to be known as ‘CPRE South Oxfordshire’ district.
Arnold Grayson (1929 – 2016) It is with great sadness that we pass on the news that Arnold Grayson passed away in early October. Arnold chaired our Wallingford district committee from 2002 until 2014 and had continued as our Minerals advisor, leading on CPRE Oxfordshire’s representations to the recent Minerals Local Plan Examination in Public. Arnold’s immense knowledge of countryside issues – he was formerly Director at the Forestry Commission and was an eminent local historian – and his enthusiasm for defending the countryside around his home town of Wallingford were of huge value to the branch. He brought intellect, tenacity and energy to all his work on behalf of CPRE and he will be much missed. Our thoughts are with his family and friends.
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
Arnold Grayson receiving a commemorative bowl on stepping down as CPRE Wallingford Chairman.
3
Oxfordshire Local Plan round-up Oxford City Consultation on Oxford City Council’s ‘First Steps’ towards producing a new Local Plan (2016 – 2036) for the City closed in August. The Council wanted the public’s initial views on issues such as housing, jobs and green space. In CPRE’s response to the consultation, we focused on the need for protection of the Green Belt and called for higher density development to save land. We also responded to the consultation on the Osney Mead Masterplan, arguing that the area should be prioritised for housing over employment. You can see CPRE’s response at: http://bit.ly/2dbh1ma
South Oxfordshire This summer South Oxfordshire held a consultation on its Preferred Options for development through to 2032, which included: 1. A new settlement of 3,500 houses at the Chalgrove airfield site. 2. The development of partly brownfield Green Belt sites at Culham and Wheatley. 3. 1,000 additional houses shared between Wallingford and Thame. 4. 2,500 additional houses in the larger villages (increasing their size by another 10%). 5. 785 additional houses in the small villages (increasing their size by another 5%). The most controversial element has been the proposed 3,500 house new settlement at Chalgrove. Whilst we welcome the stated protection of the Green Belt in terms of the new settlement, this does not mean that unsustainable locations elsewhere are appropriate. If no sustainable location can be found, we believe the overall numbers should be reduced accordingly. Certainly the site at Chalgrove remains highly questionable in terms of its rural location, the 4
potential impact on the Green Belt and AONB, and the lack of information on supporting infrastructure, especially in relation to traffic and transport. The response from CPRE South Oxfordshire district argues that the overall housing numbers are flawed. It also argues for higher density development which would reduce the overall land take required and encourage less costly housing. Taken together, this would completely remove the need for a new settlement. You can see CPRE’s response at: http://bit.ly/2bn7oQs
Vale of White Horse Following the hearings into the District Council’s Local Plan 2031 (Part One), the Inspector suggested some modifications in order for the Plan to be found sound. We were delighted that the Inspector ruled out a 1,400 home development in the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and agreed that 15 sites the Vale wished to release from the Green Belt should remain. However, we were dismayed that he allowed 1,510 homes to be built in the Green Belt at north Abingdon, north-west Abingdon, Kennington and north-west Radley. This undermines the key concept of the permanence of the Green Belt and sets a really worrying precedent for further attacks. We do not accept that the alleged need to provide housing around Abingdon and Oxford City is sufficient to justify building on the Green Belt. The Council has since published its Main Modifications, which were the subject of a consultation that ended in September. In CPRE’s response to the consultation we continued to push for removal of the Green Belt allocations, whilst also challenging the adequacy of the Monitoring Report.
You can see CPRE’s response at: http://bit.ly/2dtppyG
West Oxfordshire CPRE is deeply concerned at West Oxfordshire’s recent decision to comply with the SHMA figures and revise its housing targets upwards in its Local Plan. We fully supported WODC’s stand against the SHMA figures on the grounds that they were over-inflated, and do not believe this is in the best interests of the district.
Cherwell Part One of Cherwell’s Local Plan was adopted in July 2015, but Part Two is not due until 2019. However, Cherwell have now commenced a Partial Review of Part One of its Local Plan. The Council intends to publish a draft Partial Review Development Plan Document in November 2016, which will fully consider how to meet its agreed proportion of Oxford’s unmet need (some 4,400 houses).
Oxford’s unmet housing need In September, the Oxfordshire Growth Board announced numbers and locations for the allocation of Oxford’s unmet housing need. A total of 14,850 houses are to spread around the county, beyond those already in the individual District Local Plans. The proposed apportionment is as follows: Cherwell – 4,400 Oxford – 550 South Oxon – 4,950 Vale – 2,200 West Oxon – 2,750 Although the Growth Board says final decisions about where the houses should go will be left to Local Plans, CPRE is concerned that District Councils will have no room for manoeuvre and will be forced to accept the Board’s preferred locations. See CPRE’s Press Release ‘The Great Oxfordshire Stitch-up’ at: http://bit.ly/2dfhCVw
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Autumn 2016
John Broad
Don’t Be Dense about Density
Mallards Way, Bicester (35 houses per ha).
Although CPRE rightly disagrees with the scale of the Growth Board’s inflated forecasts of housing need (see page 4), there can be no doubt that we are going to need a lot more houses to accommodate natural population growth and even the immigration that has already occurred.
houses on every acre of land.
Obviously though, whilst demand may increase, land supply is finite. As Mark Twain said “God ain’t making any more of it”.
Since we started campaigning on this issue earlier this year, it is encouraging that the subject has at least found a paragraph or two in the Oxfordshire Growth Board’s Spatial Strategy, which is proposing a range of densities for various types of site from 25 per hectare in new settlements to 60 in built up areas near transport links.
The only way to accommodate the need for houses whilst losing as little as possible of the countryside is to increase density – that is to build more
To do that yields the massive additional benefit that it provides less expensive housing, the very kind that is most needed, since a large percentage of the cost of a house arises from the cost of the land it stands on.
But this still falls woefully short not only of pre-National Planning Policy Framework Government Policy of 3555 per hectare, but of the historical densities of 75 per hectare in (now highly desirable) Victorian Terraces, over the whole of Kensington and Chelsea, and for that matter in many of our villages. The Growth Board’s density targets are wholly inadequate either to minimise land use or provide the lower cost housing people actually need, even though they themselves recognise that even a modest increase in build density could deliver thousands more houses on the same amount of land. Raising density targets to historical levels would not only save vast swathes of countryside from development, but enable many more of the houses Oxford needs to be built in the City itself. That, and provide far less expensive houses too. It is time for Councils to stop being dense about densities. Find out more about CPRE’s Density Guidelines at: http://bit.ly/2dkYsMd Michael Tyce, CPRE Trustee
Will you help protect the Oxfordshire countryside for future generations? If you have made or are considering making a Will, could we ask you to think about a gift for the countryside? If you are a CPRE member, you should have received a copy of our new Legacies Leaflet with this newsletter.
For further information, please see our new Legacies Leaflet or contact us on Tel: 01491 612079 or Email: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk
Our vision is of a future Oxfordshire that continues to host thriving rural communities, surrounded by a wonderful landscape that benefits both people and wildlife. We don’t know what challenges we will face, but it seems certain that as our population expands and the need for housing and infrastructure grows, we will need to work harder than ever to make sure development is guided appropriately and that the countryside is cared for and valued. By leaving a legacy to CPRE Oxfordshire, you can help ensure that our precious landscapes are protected for generations to come.
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
CPRE Oxfordshire volunteers helping out at a district event.
5
The Oxford Green Belt is under threat as never before
A number of wealthy landowners, including Magdalen College, are trying to build huge urban extensions out over the Oxford Green Belt. The most immediate threat is to the south of the City at Grenoble Road, where a planning application for 3,500 houses is expected soon, with a further 3,500 also on the cards. If successful, this could quickly lead to moves for further extensions to the north of the City, obliterating the ‘Kidlington gap’, and elsewhere around the Green Belt including Abingdon and Wicks Farm. It is hard to see how if one attack
succeeds others will be prevented, leading to a house of cards dismantling of the Oxford Green Belt. This is happening everywhere. Despite apparent cross-party support for the Green Belt there is growing pressure across the country to use it for housing – over 200,000 homes are proposed to be built on Green Belt across England in various local plans. ‘Green Belt under siege’ CPRE, 2015.
The Oxford Green Belt Langford Lane
TH EO XF OR
Eynsham
T BEL
Cumnor
EN
Cowley
G
RE
OXFORD CITY
D
The Oxford Green Belt protects surrounding villages and countryside from urban sprawl. But it also gives City dwellers access to open countryside and protects the historic setting of Oxford. The City’s medieval layout, network of views and floodplains and historic buildings make it entirely unsuitable for expansion on this scale. Such development is likely to harm the City’s economy, which depends on tourism and being an attractive place to live and work. Just imagine another 15,000 more people trying to get down the Cowley Road to work every day! Three quarters of Oxfordshire residents believe that, however great the need for housing, the Oxford Green Belt should remain intact. In fact housing is seen as the greatest threat it faces (CPRE Oxfordshire Survey, March 2015)
Proposed urban extension (3,500 houses)north of Oxford Kidlington
Why the Green Belt matters
Sandford Lodge Hill
Abingdon
The alternatives – a bigger city doesn’t necessarily mean a better city We should be prioritising brownfield sites in the City such as Osney Mead, look at higher density developments and consider more creative solutions to affordable housing. Most importantly, we need to think about how much growth Oxford and Oxfordshire can accommodate sustainably and whether development should actually be targeted elsewhere in the country, where housing is cheaper and jobs are scarce.
What can you do? Grenoble Road – planning application for 3,500 houses imminent
More than 14,000 houses promoted for Green Belt The Oxfordshire Growth Board’s spatial assessment for meeting Oxford’s unmet need, published in late September, rated a number of sites as ‘green’, ie, suitable for development – many of these were in the Green Belt. By our rough estimates, this brings the total number of houses being promoted at various sites around the Green Belt to more than 14,000. This is based on all those sites rated ‘green’ (11,550), plus an extra 1,300 or so for Grenoble Road (the Growth Board only says 2,200 although we know the City will go for 3,500), plus the 1,500 recently proposed at Elsfield by Christ Church College.
6
Don’t let a few wealthy landowners like Magdalen College take over the Green Belt at the expense of local people, the countryside and the future prosperity of Oxford. Please help us protect it for generations to come.
Join our campaign to Save the Oxford Green Belt & Protect Historic Oxford Find out more and sign up to our campaign newsletter at www.cpreoxon.org.uk Donate via JustGiving at: http://bit.ly/2etOzxA
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Autumn 2016
Oxford Green Belt – Q&A Q. What is the purpose of the Oxford Green Belt? A. Green Belts were created as planning tools to keep a band of land around cities open, primarily to: prevent further expansion of cities and to stop them sprawling out over open countryside and engulfing neighbouring villages and towns; prevent settlements merging together; protect the historic setting of towns and cities, like Oxford and Abingdon; provide open countryside on city dwellers’ doorsteps; and encourage the re-use of brownfield sites, especially within cities like Oxford.
Q. Isn’t it essential to build in the Green Belt to meet Oxford’s housing need? A. No, because the housing needs of people actually living in Oxford are being more than met with the 8,000 houses being built in the City. The rest of the forecast “housing need” is for newcomers who would take new jobs forecast to be created in the City over the next sixteen years. Instead the City should use any land it has available for housing, and if necessary the new jobs and houses should be created elsewhere, outside the Green Belt.
Q. Is this in line with Government Policy?
do so. Whilst there is a need for more affordable housing, we will have to look at alternative solutions to meeting this requirement. One obvious answer is to build smaller houses at higher densities, which would not only be much more affordable, but take up far less land too.
Q. Surely just building on a small proportion of the Green Belt would leave us with more than enough? A. Releasing just a small percentage of Green Belt sounds an attractive way of releasing land for housing. But once bits of the Green Belt are removed, the integrity is reduced and so its benefits begin to be lost. Permanence is also an important feature of Green Belts so people, businesses and the Government have the confidence to invest in the area on that basis. Conversely, the temptation is removed for people to buy Green Belt land in the hope that it will be de-designated and its notional value for development will increase.
Q. If I live in an Oxfordshire village outside the Green Belt, why should I care if Oxford City expands?
A. Yes. Councils are exempt from meeting local housing need if constraints like Green Belt make it impossible. The Government stated to Parliament in December 2014 that ‘the National Planning Policy Framework should be read as a whole: need alone is not the only factor to be considered when drawing up a Local Plan’.
Loss of the Oxford Green Belt would ultimately have a detrimental effect across all our rural communities, as well as the City itself. If Oxford is allowed to expand exponentially it will become an ever greater ‘black hole’ at the centre of the County sucking in more and more people, with associated infrastructure problems. If this were allowed to happen, the demand for housing in the villages could actually increase, not decrease.
Q. Isn’t a massive increase in housebuilding needed to bring house prices down?
Q. Surely there is no harm in building on the unattractive bits?
A. No, since no conceivable level of new housebuilding would bring down prices, or even the increase in prices to the rate of inflation. This is because in any year only 1% of the houses for sale are new build. Existing houses set the prices, and developers are not likely to sell houses cheaper, unless heavily subsidised to
A. The Oxford Green Belt is intended to contain Oxford and prettiness is not an issue. Lack of attractiveness does not justify removing land from the Green Belt. If it did unscrupulous landowners would immediately set about making it unattractive to reap financial gain from development.
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
Q. What harm would it do if Oxford expanded? A. Apart from the loss of the Green Belt, Oxford is unsuitable to be the heart of a larger conurbation. The street pattern dictated by the historic buildings, the medieval road layout and the rivers and floodplain makes it barely possible for the City to support its present size. Furthermore, Oxford’s economy is crucially dependent on the City and the surrounding areas remaining attractive places to live, and the Green Belt plays a key role in preserving this.
Q. Why is CPRE so committed to the Green Belt? A. We were instrumental in the formulation of the concept of ‘Green Belts’ as long ago as the 1930s, and in the creation of the Oxford Green Belt in 1958, so we naturally have a great deal of pride. However we would not support it if it was not as relevant today as it was then. In fact it is even more relevant. The more crowded our island becomes, the more important it is to preserve our open green spaces and keep settlements separate, and to protect the historic setting of our historic towns and City.
Q. Surely we must build the houses forecast in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) and this will force us to use Green Belt land? A. The Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) is based around a forecast creation of 85,000 jobs, to be filled by workers from outside the County who will require housing. It requires 100,000 houses – two Oxfords, to be built in the next fifteen years. It would be catastrophic for our County’s rural character if this occurred. The SHMA makes it clear that if there is no option but using Green Belt land then to that extent the housing forecast can be cut back, or the new jobs relocated. Find out more about the Oxford Green Belt: http://bit.ly/2e688h0
7
CPRE Oxfordshire Positive Planning Seminar
Need not Greed coalition challenges juggernaut of forced economic growth in Oxfordshire The Need not Greed Oxfordshire coalition, launched earlier this year, has been challenging the county’s ‘forced economic growth strategy’ which lies behind so much of the inappropriate and speculative development from which we are currently suffering.
were not up for debate! However, this didn’t stop the coalition from persuading many members of the public to respond to the consultation calling for a re-think on the overinflated growth targets. The majority of responses to the consultation supported the coalition’s arguments.
Nearly 30 local organisations, including CPRE Oxfordshire (which is providing the Secretariat), have now joined forces to question this undemocratic and aggressive growth strategy, and to set out an alternative vision which focuses on meeting local people’s real needs, including protection of the environment and affordable housing.
Now the SEP Refresh is being considered by our local authorities. But the views of local councillors have been stymied, since many have not been given the opportunity to debate this critical issue at Full Council meetings. Instead, in many Districts the SEP Refresh is only being considered by the Executive. It has only been considered by Councils at all because of the campaigning work by NNGO and CPRE.
Having a say on the future of Oxfordshire In the last issue of the Voice we called on you to respond to a public consultation on the SEP ‘Refresh’ – the Strategic Economic Plan which outlines the economic strategy for Oxfordshire over the next fifteen years, conducted by the Oxfordshire LEP (the unelected Local Enterprise Partnership), which is driving economic growth in the county. This is the plan which proposes the imposition of a dreamt up 85,000 new jobs for the county, irrespective of local employment needs (we have almost full employment in the county). As a result of the jobs projection, over 100,000 houses will need to be built to home these notional employees and their families – a housebuilding target more than double any rate previously achieved (the equivalent of two new Oxfords), leading to a projected 30% increase in population by 2031. While the public were finally given a chance to have their say on some aspects of the SEP ‘Refresh’ during the summer, the overall growth targets 8
What next? The Oxfordshire SEP 2016 is due to be signed off later this year, and while the growth targets are likely to remain the same, we will continue to lobby our Councillors, Leaders, MPs and local policy-makers to: • review the jobs and housing figures in the light of the implications of Brexit, • consider the cumulative social and environmental impacts of this allout growth strategy, and • reconsider priorities for action – i.e. how to provide affordable housing for existing local residents, rather than seeking to attract ever more people into the area making the jobs versus housing balance worse.
Please will you help support this vital campaign? Visit the Need not Greed website: www.neednotgreedoxon.org.uk
Wednesday 23 November St Edmund Hall, Oxford 2pm – 5.15pm, followed by a short drinks reception. All welcome! The Seminar will address issues including affordable housing, Oxfordshire’s green infrastructure, neighbourhood planning and the future of rural Oxfordshire. Speakers will include Jo Lavis, Rural Housing Enabler, Dr Ingo Schuder, Consultant on Green Infrastructure and Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive, National CPRE. A panel session including one or more of our local authority representatives will look at how we can apply lessons learnt to Oxfordshire. Please register at: http://bit.ly/2eehjK0
Thank you! Many thanks to all those who have contributed so generously to our autumn fundraising appeal. At the time of going to print, we have raised over £10,000, putting us halfway to our campaign fund target of £20,000. We are of course still accepting donations! These can be made online via www.justgiving. com/CPREOxon or by sending a cheque, made payable to CPRE Oxfordshire, to CPRE, 20 High Street, Watlington OX49 5PY. Rural Oxfordshire is a wonderful place – with your help, we will fight to keep it that way! CPRE Oxfordshire voice Autumn 2016
Many rural communities around the county are being threatened with inappropriate development on green field sites because of the lack of a Five Year Housing Supply (5YHS). The Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires district councils to identify sites to meet housing demand for the next five years. The 5YHS is built into a Council’s Local Plan and Local Authorities are duty bound to meet these targets. If they don’t, then a vacuum is created which is filled by speculative (rather than Plan-led) development. In the absence of an up to date Local Plan, speculative development proposals can be (and usually are) approved on appeal. There has been a spate of approvals on appeal over the past few months in the Vale of White Horse, South Oxfordshire and West Oxfordshire due to out of date Local Plans (see examples below). Because of the extremely high housing targets in the Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) – more than 100,000 homes by 2031, we believe all Councils are likely
Mind the Green Gap
Ongoing threats to our rural communities The green gap between Didcot and East Hagbourne.
to fall short of meeting their 5YHS going forward. This means we could be seeing speculative development proposals popping up all over the county over the months and years ahead.
West Oxfordshire In Milton-under-Wychwood campaigners have fought hard against a planning application for 62 houses on farmland at the western edge of the village, lying within the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The application was originally refused by West Oxfordshire District Council. However the developer, Sharba Homes, appealed and won planning permission in July on the grounds that the Council could not demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable sites.
Vale of White Horse In East Hagbourne, the ‘Mind the Green Gap’ campaigners persuaded South Oxfordshire District Council’s
planning committee to unanimously turn down a speculative housing application for 170 homes that would have endangered the narrow green gap between Didcot and East Hagbourne. Disappointingly, the developer, Grainger PLC is appealing against the decision. The Appeal is expected to be heard in the spring of next year.
South Oxfordshire A High Court judge recently overruled South Oxfordshire District Council and the wishes of local residents to approve two housing developments, for 120 and 80 houses, in Chinnor. SODC originally rejected the applications on numerous grounds, including encroachment into open countryside, but the judge backed the Inspector’s findings that there was a local housing ‘policy vacuum’. Join CPRE to help us protect our rural communities: http://bit.ly/1GUfr3Q
A way to walk four ways A fantastic updated guide, written by local author Nick Moon, to the 52 mile d’Arcy Dalton Way, running from north of Banbury to south of Abingdon. The d’Arcy Dalton Way named after Col. W.P. d’Arcy Dalton, a notable defender of Oxfordshire’s rights of way and the first chairman of CPRE’s Rights of Way Group, is a long distance path following the western boundary of Oxfordshire. This newly revised edition of Nick Moon’s guide to the route is an essential
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
companion to anyone walking all of, or in stages, the 52 miles which pass through almost wholly unspoilt countryside. As a bonus, there are also descriptions of eight circular walks off the route. The book has been sponsored by CPRE Oxfordshire, with support from the Oxford Fieldpaths Society. Available direct from CPRE Oxfordshire, price £9.99. Find out more at: http://bit.ly/2cykHNR
9
Oxford Cambridge Expressway One of the biggest threats to rural Oxfordshire for decades has emerged in the form of a government sponsored study of an ‘Expressway’, a mini motorway connecting the two University cities designed to improve the transport network. The proposed Expressway would connect Oxford with Cambridge, via Milton Keynes and would extend to the A34 as far as the M4, making use of existing roads where possible and filling the missing links, such as those between the M1 at Milton Keynes and the M40 near Oxford. The Expressway study, worth £512.000, is due to be completed in the autumn of this year. Through better connectivity it is said that economic growth will be
up yet more development pressures.
stimulated as people can travel further in a given time and goods could be transported more reliably. This is one of six major strategic road projects covering the North of England and the outer London region.
In our response to a National Infrastructure Consultation on the merits of the Cambridge – Oxford ‘growth corridor’, CPRE argued that the study area is not a recognisable economic corridor and as such corridor-focused planning is not warranted. Instead, we support the early completion of the East/West Railway and the upgrading of superfast broadband and the early rollout of 5G technologies, thereby removing the alleged need for a new off route ‘Expressway’ standard road network.
The scale of possible development that could be accommodated along the Oxford – Cambridge ‘corridor’ is only now starting to emerge. The Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) see the possibility of major development along the route and 1 million new homes. This could be in the form of a dozen new towns.
Contact CPRE Oxfordshire for a copy of our consultation response.
At the same time, a new eastern bypass of Oxford is being suggested across the Green Belt linking the A34 north of Abingdon to the M40 in the Wheatley area. Such a road could open
Jim Fletcher CPRE Transport advisor
Brexit and its impact on the British farmer As I write this, we have begun planting autumn sown crops and have harvested some forage maize. The cereal harvest is now a distant memory with yields having been more variable to those we have been accustomed. The season has clearly shown how problems in certain fields, for example blackgrass infestation, and the weather affect results. That said we have enjoyed a very good run of weather throughout most of the harvest period and have not had a stop/start nature to proceedings as in recent years. There is much to concern the British farmer at present as most sectors are struggling to emerge from a period of low prices, brought about as much by political decisions as supply and demand. In thinking how Brexit may impact us we might reflect on how we fared in the European Union (EU). The simplistic approach of subsidising production initially per tonne and 10
subsequently on an acreage basis, over huge areas, has not worked in the farmers’ favour in the long term. It has removed mixed farming and encouraged monoculture type arable farming where the subsidy runs through the farmers’ fingers and lodges in the grasp of the supply chain, (to him and from him), as everyone likes a piece of the cake. The post-Brexit era is potentially a hugely exciting prospect for agriculture in this country; if we can get some honesty into the debate and leave the single issue bias out, we could move towards a more balanced and diverse agriculture. However, this is likely to be hampered since so much of the infrastructure to support this has disappeared – think of the local dairies, bakers and abattoirs that were closed because they were inconvenient, messy and noisy. Under the tenure of the EU all that mattered
were inspections, food hygiene and low prices. The big box processor and ‘truck it for miles’ approach fitted perfectly with the supermarket model. It has been suggested that this sterilisation of food is likely to be part of the reason people’s immunity levels have shrunk and the NHS doles out so many antibiotics. Change will happen I am sure, but we need to remember not to be confused by all that we see. Farms are generally getting bigger; machinery technology plays a huge part in this – in common with many other sectors, as do huge advances in knowledge. New techniques need to be disseminated in a practical and honest way that engages with farmers who will be challenged to find individual solutions that work for them, whilst still providing for the nation’s food security. See CPRE’s New Model Farming – Resilience through diversity, August 2016: http://bit.ly/2bt9j83 Angus Dart CPRE Farming advisor
CPRE Oxfordshire voice Autumn 2016
Helena Whall
CPRE campaign successes
Over the past year, we have achieved some real successes. Here are some of the highlights.
Harwell Campus viewed from the Ridgeway.
Saving our landscapes We helped to save the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) from the largest proposed housing allocation in an AONB anywhere in the country. Working alongside the North Wessex Downs AONB Partnership, we helped to fight off a major proposal by the Vale of White Horse District Council for 1,400 homes in the AONB around the Harwell Campus. If allowed to go ahead, this housing allocation would have had an adverse effect on the landscape setting of the AONB and would have set a dangerous precedent.
Protecting the Oxford Green Belt
from around the Vale, we persuaded the Inspector of the Vale’s Local Plan Part One to delete 15 sites within the Green Belt which the Council were proposing to release. These sites were not identified for development but may have been considered as part of preparing the Vale Local Plan Part Two. We are hopeful that these sites are now safe from development. Sadly though, the Inspector accepted the 20,560 housing target for the Vale, and agreed that 1,510 houses across four Green Belt sites should go ahead (including North and North West Abingdon, Kennington and Radley).
CPRE launches Save the Oxford Green Belt Campaign
CPRE ensured that 15 Green Belt sites were withdrawn from the Vale of White Horse Local Plan.
With 3,500 houses in the pipeline for the Green Belt to the south of the City, at Grenoble Road, we have launched a new campaign to raise awareness and help protect the area.
In alliance with local campaign groups
See pages 6 & 7 for more information.
Saving our precious green fields Last autumn, CPRE was delighted to learn of a decision by West Oxfordshire District Council and Cherwell District Council to refuse a planning application from Pye Homes for a 1,500 house development on the Blenheim Estate in Woodstock. Woodstock Action Group – a local campaign group set up to fight the proposal, was instrumental in fending off this application. CPRE was pleased to be able to offer support and advice to campaigners. However, earlier this year Pye Homes sent out a leaflet to all residents concerning a proposal to build 280 homes on a smaller site, on land South East of the town. Residents are awaiting submission of the 280-homes re-branded planning application which is expected any day now.
Jo Schofield
Save the Vale Green Belt Walk, Spring 2016.
Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE
11
In early May, on a beautiful spring day, we went to Chalgrove in south Oxfordshire, a quiet village with some attractive old buildings bypassed by the busy road to Oxford. Most people probably know it as the site of a Civil War battle in 1643 or of a WWII airfield, both just outside the village, but few know that the village is home to two nationally important buildings, St. Mary’s Church and the Manor House. We first went to the church where we were able to see the superb set of 14th century wall paintings which have been recently restored. They illustrate the life of the Virgin Mary and are not only rare but are of great historic interest and are among the best preserved in the country. After lunch in the Red Lion pub (owned by the church!), we walked on to the other end of the village to Chalgrove Manor. When Paul and Rachel Jacques bought this property in 1977 they had no idea of what lay behind the external rendering and the modern internal walls. Gradually, as renovation work began, they realized they were the owners of a rather special medieval moated hall house, dating from the latter half of the 15th century. They gave us a fascinating tour of the house, even letting us crawl into the attic where we could see the finely moulded roof timbers and evidence of the smoke louvre indicating that the original hall was open to the roof. Oxfordshire’s countryside is subject to an unprecedented push for economic growth and Chalgrove Airfield may end up as the site of 3,500 homes to satisfy Oxford City’s unmet housing need. A future visit to Chalgrove might
Phil Crockett
CPRE Members’ events
Sulgrave Manor
reveal a much changed landscape and community. For our final event in September, we travelled just across the border into the Northamptonshire Cotswolds, to Sulgrave Manor, home of George Washington’s English ancestors. We were again lucky with the weather, with sunshine and blue skies. We were given an excellent tour of this small but fascinating Tudor-origin house built by Lawrence Washington in the mid-16th century. The Great Hall and the chamber above it were exactly as
Our visit to Oxford University’s “Laboratory in the Woods” at Wytham in June proved both absorbing and a bonding exercise for the twenty or so members who took part, since it must have been the wettest evening of the whole summer! Listening attentively to the excellent commentary from our guide, Nigel Fisher, the Warden of the site, we squelched determinedly through the undergrowth to view the various long-term experiments set up by the research staff and students of the university. Wytham is unique in providing a setting for experiments running not just over a few years but over decades, making it possible to trace the rise and fall of generations of animal, bird and plant species – and, no, contrary to popular belief, they didn’t film Morse here!
built by Lawrence Washington, but the kitchen wing was added later after dilapidation of much of the original house. The Washington family’s coat of arms is prominently displayed above the main door. Its simple red stars and bars are said to have influenced the design of the American flag. We ended our tour at the Buttery for delicious home-made soup and bread, and were then free to wander round the gardens of the manor. Another enjoyable day. Judy Crockett, CPRE South Oxfordshire District Committee
In August, members were given a conducted tour of the first phase of the eco-town in NW Bicester by representatives of A K Dominion, the developers of the site. After an introductory talk and a visit to the show house, built to the highest eco standards, we walked around the 100 or so completed houses and viewed the just-finished area power generating plant. While most CPRE members will have misgivings about the current levels of development in the county, we were all impressed by the attempt being made to achieve truly sustainable development and the ethos of A K Dominion, the housing association which underpins it. Gill Salway CPRE Vice-Chairman
Oxfordshire Voice
Branch Office
CPRE Online
Published biannually by the Oxfordshire Branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.
CPRE Oxfordshire, First Floor, 20 High Street, Watlington, Oxon OX49 5PY (Registered office)
Oxfordshire: www.cpreoxon.org.uk
Design: Rob Bowker T: 01491 825609 Print: Severnprint Ltd with vegetable inks on recycled paper using renewable energy.
T: 01491 612079 E: administrator@cpreoxon.org.uk
Twitter: @CPREOxfordshire www.facebook.com/CPREOxfordshire National: www.cpre.org.uk