Hundreds of residents of Banburyshire village wait for decision on huge development request

Hundreds of residents of Bloxham are waiting on tenterhooks for a decision on a huge development application on the edge of the village.

The contentious plan asks for consent to build up to 130 homes between the Barford Road and A361 South Newington road. The proposal has received more than 200 objections from all over the village. They fear the village, which has grown exponentially over recent years, does not have the infrastructure to cope with the extra people.

However Cherwell planning officers are recommending approval for the outline application subject to conditions.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Applicant William Davis Homes submitted the outline application for the land south of Hartshill Close, Bloxham, last September.

A diagram of the site for a proposed 130 houses on the Barford side of BloxhamA diagram of the site for a proposed 130 houses on the Barford side of Bloxham
A diagram of the site for a proposed 130 houses on the Barford side of Bloxham

The development would include public open space, a play area and drainage, and the primary means of vehicular access would come from the A361.

The application was initially for 150 homes, but this was reduced to 130 after Cherwell District Council asked the developer to submit a proving layout.

A decision on whether to approve the scheme will be made at Cherwell District Council’s planning committee meeting this Thursday (May 15).

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

So far 231 objections have been received, which raised concerns about the impact of flooding on the site, the impact it would have on highways entering and existing onto South Newington Road, whether existing infrastructure could cope with the new homes, as well as the impact the development would have on congestion, ecology and the character of the village.

Bloxham Parish Council also objected to the plans, arguing the development would conflict with the Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan and that it would put additional strain on infrastructure within the village.

Only two supporting comments were received.

Thames Water objected to the development due to concerns over the ability of the existing foul water network infrastructure to accommodate the needs of the proposal.

It added that a condition should be attached to the scheme which means that none of the homes can be occupied until necessary upgrades to accommodate the development had been completed, or a development and infrastructure phasing plan had been completed.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Planning officers recommended the scheme for approval, subject to overcoming the objection from Thames Water.

In a report issued after the meeting, the officers said: “Cherwell’s current poor housing land supply position means sites previously considered unsuitable and not require need to be re-considered providing the adverse impacts of granting consent do not outweigh the benefits.

“At the same time, the government through the National Planning Policy Framework makes clear reference to the need to significantly boost the supply of housing.

“This has been reiterated through the government’s written ministerial statement and the need to build 1.5m homes over the next four years.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“It has been demonstrated that the development will not have a significant adverse impact on landscape, highways, flood risk and drainage.

“At the same time the applicant has committed to meet current shortfalls in infrastructure as a result of the development through financial contributions which will be secure by way of a Section 106 agreement.”

Within the development, 35 per cent of homes would be affordable homes.

The existing 7.8-hectare site is agricultural land used for grazing of livestock.

A separate outline application for 120 new homes to be built in Bloxham has also been submitted to the district council.

Related topics:

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.

News you can trust since 1838
Follow us
©National World Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice