Hundreds of homes are set to built on a key site in Witney after the council dropped a planning appeal.
West Oxfordshire District Council's lowlands planning committee refused outline application for 450 homes on two parcels of land – Cogges Triangle and Cogges South – in May 2023.
The scheme which is in the 2018 Local Plan will provide 40 per cent affordable homes, housing up to approximately 1,080 people in total.
It will also raise over £6 million of funding contributions towards new slip roads on to the A40 at Shores Green.
A report from planning officer Joan Desmond raised concern over whether the volume of homes could be accommodated on the site.
She added that the proposal “fails to demonstrate a high quality design and development that would be sustainable” or “provide an integrated community that would form a positive addition to Witney”.
She also said it failed to provide good enough connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists or mitigations against harm to biodiversity.
East Witney Consortium lodged an appeal in November 2023 and the inquiry was due to start on June 18.
However, in an unusual step the council's chief executive Giles Hughes has decided that WODC would not defend it.
In his planning appeal report Phil Shaw, Business Manager Development and Sustainability, stated that "improvements to pedestrian and cycle accessibility now on offer is a game changer compared to when the application was determined".
It said an acceptable masterplan "has/is emerging" and details about the design and what will be delivered in terms of built form heights, and views of the development from the church, and landscape mitigation on the higher land and in the Windrush Valley could be agreed at reserved matters stage.
Another reason for refusal, the environmental mitigation package, can be locked in or dealt with by conditions, the report said.
Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) has also decided not to defend its reasons for refusal which were on highways/technical grounds.
The report also said "the recent loss of the 5 year housing land supply had substantially increased the likelihood of an adverse award of costs".
If a local authority can not not demonstrate it can supply enough land to meet housing need for the next five years it will need to take action to increase house building.
The council could potentially save between £150,000 and £200,000 from avoiding an award of costs to the developers plus the £40,000 it would cost to support its own case, said the report.
And it said timing was 'problematic' as all evidence for the inquiry had to be submitted by 21 May yet the council would only re-establish itself following the local elections after that date.
Deputy leader of the Conservative Group Liam Walker said: "It's not only disappointing that key information about the district council not being prepared to fight this housing application was kept quiet until after the local election but also that local residents views won't be heard or addressed through the appeal process."
The council has also dropped its defence against an appeal by Catesby Estates which was refused permission to build up to 134 homes at Burford Road.
Catesby also argued that the council could not demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, and should accept more house building to meet its targets.
Mr Walker said: "The council have thrown in the towel on appealing against this housing site and more recently gave up halfway through the Minster Lovell housing site appeal.
"The coalition at WODC are making a complete mess of housing allocation in West Oxfordshire and developers are having the last laugh.”
Charlie Maynard, executive member for planning, said: "Officers will be publishing WODC’s housing position as of April 1 within the next couple of weeks which will clarify the latest situation.
"We acknowledge the findings at the Minster Lovell appeal."
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