Campaigners have won a 'landmark' case to stop a housing scheme at a protected woodland site.
The High Court has quashed West Oxfordshire District Council's decision to push through the contentious development on the edge of Rushy Bank near Charlbury in the Cotswolds Area of Natural Outstanding Beauty (AONB).
Friends of the West Oxfordshire Cotswolds has spent seven years fighting the building of 25 homes and a 12-bedroom supported living facility at the site.
READ MORE: Vandalised Oxford LTN a 'serious concern' to road safety
They argued that the development should never have been permitted beyond the town boundary and so close to the woodland.
The charity, backed by local residents and other supporters, said it breached national, AONB and local plan policies.
In his judgment, Judge Jarman KC found that the district council had failed to deliver the minimal ancient woodland protections required by its own planning permission.
READ ALSO: Latest results from Oxford Magistrates Court
He also highlighted that the original plans did not comply with national standards for protection of ancient woodland.
It is the second time that the High Court has intervened in the council’s approvals of the development.
James Whitehead, spokesman for the charity, said: “According to the Woodland Trust, ancient woodland covers just 2.5 per cent of the UK and is protected as an irreplaceable habitat.
"We find it bewildering that the council seems to have ignored national requirements and the guidance given by Natural England and the Forestry Commission to try and push through this ecologically damaging development.”
Woodland Trust lead campaigner Jack Taylor added: “Ancient woodlands are irreplaceable, rich with wildlife and a vital component of the British landscape. They are nature’s cathedrals.
"Yet, there are hundreds of ancient woods currently under threat from new development.
“The decision made by the High Court in this case is hugely significant.
"Not only does it ensure the protection of this individual wood, but it also recognises the importance of wider protections for ancient woodland.
"We highly commend the efforts to stand up for their local woods and wildlife and are delighted with this decision.
"Ancient woodland must be protected at all costs.”
The court’s ruling also highlighted errors and inconsistencies in the submissions of senior planning officers which, the Friends believe, require formal investigation.
West Oxfordshire District Council first approved the plans in November 2015 but a judge revoked planning consent in July 2017.
The application was reapproved by the authority – subject to a legal agreement – in January 2020.
Mr Whitehead said: “We are dismayed at the way taxpayers’ money is being squandered. Surely public money could be better spent fixing potholes or improving local schools?”
He added: “Serious questions need to be asked about the competence and judgement of pursuing this action.”
A council spokesperson said: “The council has received the decision taken by the Judge on this case and will be reviewing it over the coming days to see what actions may be taken.
READ ALSO: Popular village pub given maximum rating for food hygiene
“Alongside the Judicial Review we have been working proactively to resolve the issues with regards to providing the required five-metre buffer zone around the ancient woodland.
"We have already approved an updated planning application that includes the protections for the woodland highlighted in this case."
The spokesperson added: “This development is community-led and has been consistently supported by the local parish council, the district council and county council and many local residents.
"It will deliver affordable homes, self-build homes, a dementia care home and other infrastructure to the local area.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel