North Hinksey Neighbourhood Plan, I’m IN!

North Hinksey PC has asked us if we are for or against a neighbourhood plan for our area. I sent in my consultation response this morning. Here’s what I said.

Dear Alan,

Both my husband and I are in favour of a Neighbourhood Plan for our area. I am willing to help.The PC’s letter claims there is no more undeveloped land in North Hinksey. In my opinion, that’s not quite true and is only part of the picture anyway. There is the very large plot up beside the A420 behind Elms Road and Hazel Road for potential housing development. Additionally, there are plans mooted to remove lands from the protected Green Belt status, which could escalate in coming years. Also, there will likely be many more applications to demolish one or two family homes to build blocks of flats. Also, there was the hotly debated Oxford Brooke’s University’s master plan to redevelop their campus, which I expect to hear more about in future. And of course, we have no locally produced plans to help West Way development to meet local needs; if the current application is refused, there may be an opportunity for us to be more proactive in defining what this community needs from the West Way shopping area.

Another benefit, and maybe the largest one for us, isn’t mentioned at all in your letter. If we have a NP in place, the parish will get a guaranteed and larger share of the CIL money that comes with every new development. This money is for the parish to use in any way it sees fit to enhance the quality of life in the parish. I don’t understand why the PC decided not to let people know about this aspect.

Creating a Neighbourhood Plan is a proactive step we can take that can help us control development in the parish.

My understanding is that the first step is for the PC to apply for a Neighbourhood Area designation. Nothing has to be in place prior to this. Once we have that status, then there is advice and help available for the next steps. This isn’t a commitment to anything except exploring the usefulness of a NP for North Hinksey.Your letter and the choices for feedback (all in or not interested at all) makes it sound like there are only two choices. IN or OUT of Neighbourhood Planning.

In reality, there’s a third choice: Take the first step of designating this a NP area, because there’s a lot of public interest, and then we can find ways to explore how this could benefit the community and take the next steps if appropriate. I would have voted to do that.

And finally, we have an area here that we call ‘Botley’, which is larger than just North Hinksey. Botley has shown a keen interest in planning issues in our area. Please consider whether it might be appropriate to collaborate with Cumnor Parish in this effort.

Regards,

Debby

Deadline for reply is 15 April. You can email the parish clerk: nhpcclerk@msn.com

 

35-37 Yarnells Hill stalled

If you’ve driven up or down Yarnells Hill lately, you may notice that the demoltion work at this address stopped before it barely began. The house has part of the roof and some windows gone. Then the workers just left. Like, 2 months ago, or so? Abandoned.

I asked Vale Planning Enforcement about it. They said the developers there hadn’t yet satisfied some of the conditions that were to be met prior to beginning devlopment. So Enforcement are happy that work has stopped, otherwise the developers would be in breach of planning permission.

I do wish the developers had thought of this before they started. It’s not nice to have a half-demolished building sitting there.

On a positive note, I noticed a SOLD sign on the property across the street from the site. I’m glad they successfully sold. For the benefit of future neighbours; the construction work won’t be going on forever.

 

 

A Neighbourhood Plan for Botley; guest post

Guest post by Mr Tony Wood.

A Parish Council meeting on 27 Mar will discuss again the Neighbourhood Plan. It’s open to the public, and starts at 8pm at Seacourt Hall.

Legislation requires local planning authorities (in our case, the Vale) to pass on 25% of all Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments collected as a result of development in the area back to the community, provided there is a Neighbourhood Plan in place. It’s likely that most developments will be required to make CIL contributions. This could be significant if we have some large developments in the area.

If we don’t have a Neighbourhood Plan, then the maximum we can earn is 15% of CIL money collected. The planning authority can cap that payment based on a formula that they control. Money not given back to the community is retained by the Vale for them to spend on facilities anywhere in the Vale. In truth, it’s unlikely we would get 15% of CIL. The community could lose the right to spend considerable sums of money on local community facilities.

If you saw the Oxford Mail report about neighbourhood planning, you heard that Thame calculated that their Neighbourhood Plan could be worth £3m over the next 15 years. Whilst we are smaller than Thame, if we have a Neighbourhood Plan in place, we will certainly earn considerably more than we have done under the old section 106 process.

If we implement a Neighbourhood Plan, then we can change the profile of developers who work in the parish. Speculative developers want areas with limited planning policy; it’s easier to propose an outrageous development and get away with it. All they need is one success out of several attempts to make a profit. The policies in the other documents that make up the local development framework are more strategic and general. Neighbourhood planning is much more specific whilst being complementary to the other documents. In neighbourhood plan areas, developers typically pursue lower risk strategies. In neighbourhood plan areas, there is extra planning certainty and clarity and it makes it easier to design development projects that will be supported by the community. It is lower planning risk, but everyone understands the possibilities and value of sites. It can be that the developer makes less money. But their motivation is that they increase their chances of steady work and ensure that they and their employees are employed into the future. Drayton saw this happen even before their plan was fully adopted. Given that renewal development is fundamental to a healthy vibrant community, I for one prefer the later type of developer!

The Government is very keen for us to write a plan. There are the grants available that should cover most if not all the costs involved in producing it. The right to produce a Neighbourhood Plan is guaranteed, and the resulting document has real legal weight. If we have any pretension to have any influence on future planning decision making we have to have a Neighbourhood Plan. The Vale have a team dedicated to supporting our needs. However, we are still in a period of austerity and the funding is only guaranteed until this time next year. Government has application deadlines every quarter and the Vale needs 3 months to complete their preparation work in advance of applying for funding. The next deadline for us is the end of the month – maybe the first week of next. So this is urgent.

So what to do? All that is required to get started is a standard letter (that has already been written) and a map with our parish boundary marked on it to be sent to the Vale planning department. The trouble is, we need the Parish Council to write the letter. Those that came to the Parish AGM will have heard some councillors and the parish clerk opposing the idea of a plan. One gentleman stood up and tabled a motion from the floor which was overwhelmingly supported by the other members of the public. Unfortunately the Parish Chairman and clerk continued to show resistance. However, some of the other councillors are changing their view and are beginning to side with Cllr Sellers and Cllr MacKeith who have supported this from the start. So if we can keep up the pressure and continue to ask the council to write the Neighbourhood Plan designation letter than we will eventually get there.

You can write or e-mail the parish clerk and councillors directly.

If you please copy the Botley Neighbourhood plan steering group  botleyneighbourhoodplan@yahoo.co.uk, we can keep you informed about what happens.

Parish councillor contact details: http://www.northhinksey-pc.gov.uk/Core/North-Hinksey-PC/Pages/Contact_UsCouncillors_2.aspx

Fingers crossed common sense prevails!

 

 

 

Three important things

I’ve been ill, and I’m sorry for radio silence recently.

Two important things for people who check out my blog. OK, three important things.

First, the deadline for submitting your objections or reasons for support to the Vale about Doric’s plans is the 27th of March. You can see what others have said on the Vale planning website here.

Second, there are two recent planning applications to demolish single family homes in order to erect a block of flats. Little Dene in Yarnells Hill, and 2 Lime Road + 50 Laburnum Road.

We are vulnerable here in North Hinksey because of the lack of a Local Plan (due to Vale delays) and also a lack of a Neighbourhood Plan (due to Parish Council delays).

Want things to change? There is to be a by-election for three vacant seats on the North Hinksey Parish Council. Deadline to get your name on the ballot is 26 Mar. Contact me for more info. Or contact the parish clerk.

NPPF and Saved Policies inform planning decisions

When the planning officer considers the Doric planning application for West Way, he will use two policy documents in his considerations.

The National Planning Policy Framework (commonly called ‘NPPF‘) is considered in its entirety. (It’s only 47 pages long, so not too onerous.)

The policies that have been saved from the old Local Plan 2011 (commonly called ‘Saved Policies‘) carry weight too.

And that’s all. We currently have no Local Plan in the Vale. And we have no Neighbourhood Plan in North Hinksey Parish either. Only the two documents above  inform planning decision-making in Botley.

You can read or download the NPPF from the Communities and Local Government site here.

You can read or download the old Local Plan 2011 from the Vale website here.

You can read or download a list of Saved Policies from the Vale website here. (See the list of policies that begins on page 4.) You’ll have to cross reference them yourself to the Local Plan 2011.)

 

Material Planning Considerations

When you object to any planning application, it’s not enough to say, ‘We don’t want this disgusting development!’

Proper objections use material planning considerations.

To see an explanation of what is a ‘material planning consideration’, check out the Vale website page here.

You can see a list of what’s considered a material consideration, and some examples of what is NOT a material consideration (eg, loss of view, loss of property values).

 

Planning Committee meeting in Botley?

A question was put to the Vale planners: “Can we hold the eventual meeting of the planning committee that will decide about this apllication in Botley so local people can more easily attend?”

Stuart Walker said that the request is noted, but it’s too soon now to determine that. That committee meeting is months away. Once the date is clearer, planning officers will seek to find a venue large enough to hold the expected number of attendees.

 

 

98-100 West Way set a precedent

12 Flats at 100 West WayWhen the Vale planning committee approved the development of flats at 98-100 West Way, their decision included the argument that the new build was not overpowering its neighbours, nor was it an overdevelopment of the site.

I disagree.

Now, in a similar application for 6 flats on the property at 102 West Way (just next door to the left of this larger development), the planning officer cites the building at 98-100 West Way as a precedent. The officer says it was not overbearing and is recommending permission be granted for 102 West Way.

West Way flats loom over bungalowHere are photos I took in August 2013. To me, the bungalow at 96 (I think it’s 96) is completely overhwhelmed by the flats.

What were the Vale planning committee thinking? Maybe you might ask Cllr Eric Batts of North Hinksey, who sits on the planning committee.

I think it was poor decision. As a precendent for future West Way residential development, it’s beyond disappointing.