Funding boost for Rushy Bank

Article in Witney Gazette, June 2016

Last week saw the welcome announcement that a cash boost of £200,000 from a West Oxfordshire District Council grant had been given to the Young Dementia UK Homes project for Rushy Bank. This money will help build the first residential facility for people suffering from early onset dementia in the country in Charlbury.

Since West Oxfordshire District Council's resolution to grant planning permission last November, the Rushy Bank Partnership have been working hard to satisfy a number of planning conditions for the site, including finalising road layouts, an archaeological dig, and the legal agreement over financial contributions (section 106). With these now almost resolved, the partnership is looking forward to formal planning consent in the near future.

Rushy Bank planning permission

On 2 November the Uplands Area Planning Sub Committee approved the Rushy Bank Partnership's planning application by 9 votes to 3!

The publicly available minutes of the meeting give a very balanced and useful account of the discussion and the democratic way that these issues are handled:

Land South of Forest Road, Charlbury

"The proposed layout of the site was shown and amendments to the previously submitted scheme were outlined. In particular it was noted that there was a smaller number of units and the layout on site changed.

Mr Rod Evans addressed the sub-committee in objection to the application. A summary of the submission is attached as Appendix E to the original copy of these minutes. Mr Evans, in response to Mr Beaney, clarified that he was not against development in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) but any growth needed to be sustainable.

Councillor Liz Leffman, local ward member, addressed the sub-committee in support of the application. A summary of the submission is attached as Appendix F to the original copy of these minutes. Mr Cotterill asked Ms Leffman if she considered the site suitable for dementia care. Ms Leffman indicated that the facility would provide support and help for residents and would be well managed.

Mr Jeremy Smalley, agent for the applicant, addressed the sub-committee in support of the application. A summary of the submission is attached as Appendix G to the original copy of these minutes.

The Development Manager continued his presentation and advised that the main issues for consideration were principle, precedent, siting design and form, landscape impact, highways, amenities, archaeology, benefits and S106 contributions.

The sub-committee noted there was an element of self-build in the application and that the development was considered sustainable in the proposed location. It was acknowledged that it was an on balance decision relating to aspects of sustainability.

The Development Manager concluded by recognising there was a range of views both for and against the proposal. It was highlighted that the scheme was being locally led and the amendments to the previous scheme were an improvement and acceptable in their own right. The Development Manager suggested that the benefits accruing from the development outweighed the harm when the relevant policy and other tests were applied and as such an on balance approval could be recommended.

The Development Manager advised that consultation responses were still awaited from Oxfordshire County Council in respect of highways and archaeology. The recommendation was therefore for approval subject to clarification of the legal agreement and the receipt of responses in respect of highways and archaeology. It was confirmed that if the outstanding responses raised objection then it would be referred back to members.

Mr Graham highlighted concerns about the previous application but acknowledged the considerable amount of consultation since then. Mr Graham suggested that it was still a difficult decision.

Mr Graham acknowledged that the development was on the edge of Charlbury and the changes that had been made to reduce the impact on the AONB. Mr Graham advised that, on balance, the development was acceptable and the increased buffer zone would help reduce the impact.

Mr Graham then proposed the officer recommendation and this was seconded by Mr Owen.

Mr Owen indicated that the scheme had been developed over some time and was a local project that showed innovation and vision and was well designed.

The Development Manager, in response to Mr Cotterill, confirmed that the road within the site would predominantly remain private.

Mr Colston expressed concern that the houses were an adjunct to the main development and probably would not be acceptable on their own. Mr Colston suggested the dementia unit was some distance from the town and sought clarification on whether there would be time limits on construction of the self-build units.

The Development Manager indicated that there was a waiting list of people wanting to construct their own homes and whilst there were some legal options it was likely that applicants would have a financial imperative to complete as soon as possible.

Dr Poskitt indicated concern at the location of the footpath and access to Charlbury. Dr Poskitt advised that it was important that the archaeology situation was clarified on site and asked about the moving of the speed limit on the road. The Development Manager reiterated that if there were any issues relating to archaeology then the application may need to be referred back to the sub-committee. The Senior Planner advised that it was proposed to move the speed limit further away from the access.

Mr Saul, in supporting the proposal, asked if the footpath would also access the railway station. The Senior Planner indicated that this could not be confirmed.

Mr Cottrell-Dormer suggested the scheme was too remote from Charlbury and it was wrong for dementia patients to be placed that close to a river and railway line. The Development Manager reminded members that residents safety was primarily an issue for the operators of the home and they had a management plan in place.

On being put to the vote the proposition was carried.

Permitted, subject to a legal agreement, conditions and no objection being raised in respect of highways and archaeology."

Oxford housing crisis & Charlbury

A BBC news item of 19 October makes clear the extent of the housing crisis in our region. Oxford is now one of the most expensive and unaffordable cities in the UK, and those on low and middle incomes are being priced out. This is leading to longer commutes, pressure on the roads and a lack of people to do the jobs that we all rely on to keep places running.

The report discusses objections to new homes in places like Eynsham, who are fearful of the changes that new homes will bring to their communities. But with a main line railway station into Oxford and major new community facilities in the pipeline, Charlbury needs to make a contribution to this local crisis.

Rushy Bank reapplication

Revised layout for Rushy Bank site, September 2015

The Rushy Bank Partnership consisting of Young Dementia UK Homes, the Beacon Project Charlbury and our development partners, resubmitted a planning application for the Rushy Bank site at the beginning of September.

We will be holding a public exhibition of the revised proposals in the Corner House, Charlbury, on 12 September 2015, 10-12pm.

The Revised Development Proposal 

• No housing along the Forest Road frontage. This is to address concerns about the potential for archaeology in that area.
• Previously proposed mini roundabout replaced by T junction
• Reduction of number of homes from 29 to 25
• Further revisions to house design and positioning in response to community comments

The Benefits

• A supported 12 bed living facility for Young Dementia UK Homes for those suffering from early onset dementia
• All homes for sale are custom/self-build with priority for local people. 50% of these are at discounted sale prices to deal with the affordability gap in Charlbury’s housing supply.
• Scheme could make a significant financial contribution towards education (OVER £100,000 based on County Council figures) and other County and District provided services, and funds towards the Community Centre or other priorities identified by the Town Council.
• Sustainable location close to railway station and no further away from town centre than the extent of Ticknell Piece,The Green and Woodstock Road houses. Closer to the Town Centre than the recently approved Ditchley Road housing. 
• Very low visual impact as a result of extensive landscaping, careful siting, low density and location behind the employment area. 
• Up to 12 jobs associated with Young Dementia Home 
• Additional residents will help to sustain local amenities and facilities 
• Improvements to highway safety that will slow traffic as it approaches the town down Forest Road.

It's time to plan!

Forest Road site in Charlbury (source: Google maps)

After three years of discussion and negotiation about a self-build housing scheme for Charlbury families, it looks as though we have got somewhere at last. With the support of our local landowner Cornbury Park, the Beacon Project is now working as part of a development team for a mixed tenure eco housing development on land at Forest Road, opposite the train station and adjacent to the light industrial area. 

NB This is NOT the field behind the Cricket Club! This development would be on land behind the small industrial estate, which was once earmarked for possible expansion of that industrial estate.

We are currently working with the team on all the elements needed for a planning application later in the year, including the housing needs and specifications of the self-build houses themselves, as well as those of our affordable housing provider, Sovereign Housing. We are also looking at the sustainability and environmental aspects of the site and the common spaces.

If you are a Charlbury household (or have strong links to the town) and would like to express an interest in self-building at Forest Road, do get in touch.

Response to Draft Local Plan

West Oxfordshire Draft Local Plan consultation document

West Oxfordshire District Council's Draft Local Plan was published for consultation in October 2012. It contains a wide range of new strategies and provisions that have direct relevance to the aims and objectives of Beacon Project Charlbury, especially in its recognition of the aims of the UK National Planning Policy Framework and the Localism Act. 


The consultation period closed on 19 December 2012, and Beacon Project Charlbury submitted the following specific comments:


3.4. The need for additional housing provision at rural service centres is recognised [Charlbury is designated a rural service centre of the West Oxfordshire district]. 

4.4. The need to sustain rural areas is recognised. 

4.5. The requirement to address the needs of those who cannot afford to buy or rent suitable market housing, including those who wish to self-build is recognised. 

4.6. The overall strategy principles are lauded. 

4.11. The need to respect the local character is welcome although it must be noted that with changes in energy policy, rural as well as urban development may change in nature and appearance due to increasing environmental design requirements such as orientation, passive energy gain, materials and substantially increased Building Regulation requirements under Part L from 2013. The Local Plan should acknowledge that residential design may not in future be a traditional version of the Cotswolds' form but an interpretation of it. 

4.33. 4.34. The additional requirement for housing and the demographic changes for key members of the community in rural areas are recognised. 4.35. The need for an imaginative approach to development including self-build is recognised. What is missing is an acknowledgement that a flexible approach to interpreting the Local Plan may be required to accommodate this approach.




4.37. This is a valuable addition to the Local Plan but clarity is required as if affordable housing is required, formal recognition of the interpretation of this important policy is essential. 

4.93. A separate site allocation approach for suitable development would be welcome as it appears that the development of approved Neighbourhood Plans is likely to be a lengthy process. 

5.32 This is a crucial item in the Draft Local Plan for the Beacon Project Charlbury. It reads:


"The NPPF refers to the possibility of allowing some market housing in rural areas where this would facilitate the provision of significant additional affordable housing to meet local needs. Any such proposal will be considered against the relevant policies of the Local Plan including in particular Core Policy 2 – Locating Development in the Right Places. Where the site is in a location that would not normally be considered appropriate for new housing, it will be for the developer or landowner to demonstrate not only why the site is suitable for housing, but also why a traditional rural exception site approach, i.e. one with 100% affordable housing, is not appropriate or achievable. In other words, they will need to demonstrate why the market housing is needed to subsidise the delivery of the affordable housing. In such cases, any market housing would be expected to be a subsidiary element of a predominantly affordable housing scheme."


The Beacon Project welcomes the provision for more flexibility in terms of the delivery of affordable housing, especially with regard to cross-subsidy by market housing. Since many landowners will not sell land for affordable only given the low land prices available for this, a more flexible planning approach will be necessary in order to achieve more affordable housing of a high environmental standard, as well as releasing more appropriate land for community housing projects, self-build projects, and other developments that will keep rural communities alive and dynamic places to live. 

SUMMARY

Generally, the proposed changes in the Draft Local Plan are welcome, however, for a group such as ours, representing a section of the local community who have been trying to self-manage a much-needed community housing project for some years, there remain what at times seem insurmountable obstacles. There are several important clauses in the NPPF which do not appear to be specifically addressed within the Draft Local Plan although general references might apply. These are highlighted as they have considerable significance for a group such as The Beacon Project:

•               The NPPF states that policies in local plans should follow the approach of presumption in favour of sustainable development so that it is clear that development which is sustainable can be approved without delay. All plans should be based upon and reflect the presumption in favour of sustainable development, with clear policies that will guide how the presumption should be applied locally (NPPF para 15). This does not appear to be formally acknowledged in the Local Plan as all presumptions and national objectives are subservient to the Local Plan conditions.

•                The NPPF states that planning policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for that purpose. Land allocations should be regularly reviewed. Where there is no prospect of a site being used for allocated employment use, applications for alternative uses of land or buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the relative need for different land uses to support sustainable local communities (NPPF para 22).

•               The NPPF states that if sufficient edge of centre sites cannot be identified, set policies for meeting the identified needs in other accessible locations that are well connected to the town centre (NPPF para 23). Applicants and local planning authorities should demonstrate flexibility (NPPF para 24).

•               At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking (NPPF para 14). This sections states that local planning authorities should positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area, and local plans should meet objectively assessed needs, with sufficient flexibility to adapt to rapid change. For decision-taking, the NPPF advises where the development plan is silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless any adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against policies in this framework taken as a whole or, specific policies in this framework indicate development should be restricted. (NPPF para 14).

•               The NPPF also states that housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities (NPPF para 55) and that Local Plans should allocate sites to promote development and flexible use of land, bringing forward new land where necessary and provide details on form, scale access and quantum where appropriate (NPPF para 157) and addresses the needs for all types of housing, including affordable housing and the needs of different groups within the community... sic,  and caters for housing demand and the scale of housing necessary to meet this demand (NPPF para 159).

•               The planning authority is charged by the NPPF to use their evidence base to ensure that their Local Plan meets the full objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the housing market area, as far as is consistent with the policies set out in the framework including identifying key sites which are critical to the delivery of the housing strategy over the plan period (NPPF para 47).

  


Changing economic and demographic circumstances, the Localism Bill, Community Right to Build and the National Planning Policy Framework all indicate that a community group such as the Beacon Project should be able to undertake a sustainable community-based project as most stakeholders agree these objectives are essential to keep balanced rural communities. The Draft Local Plan offers encouragement through some new clauses referred to above, yet these steps are all meaningless unless the Local Plan is interpreted flexibly and with the intent to achieve positive outcomes as set out in the NPPF. The principles required to encourage sustainable community-led self-help development especially in the provision of balanced housing now exist, but an innovative interpretation of the changing legislation and overall direction indicated by the NPPF will be necessary from a planning policy perspective.

WODC planning meeting

Forest Road site [source: google maps]

On 13 July 2012 three members of the Beacon Project, along with two members of Charlbury Town Council, met with West Oxfordshire District Council planning officers and other staff, to discuss the proposal for a co-housing and affordable housing scheme for a site off Forest Road, Charlbury, owned by the Cornbury Estate.

The site was at one time earmarked for possible expansion of the adjacent industrial area near Charlbury station. A lively discussion on the topic of sustainable communities followed, as well as the new planning environment of the National Planning Policy Framework and the Localism Act (Community Right to Build).

The Beacon Project has followed up this meeting with a written response, which has been answered by WODC planning officers. The Project is currently reviewing its strategy for the Forest Road site project and will post more details soon.

Rural Exception Sites

source: Rural Housing Trust

In 1986, the Rural Housing Trust proposed – and went on to pioneer – a method of developing affordable homes which requires the participation and support of the local community. It is called the 'exception site' approach. Rural exception sites are now proven to successfully meet housing needs in the places they arise. It is a successful solution because the size of the development is guided by the identified local need, they are affordable for key workers and others, and they are for people either working or living locally, or who are from the area and would like to return for personal reasons, such as caring for relatives. Exception sites are not allocated for development in local plans/Local Development Frameworks. However, exceptional planning consent may be granted if:

• The District/Borough Council has a local needs planning policy 
• The site is well-related to the village development boundary
• There is a demonstrated current and likely future need for the proposed houses
• The proposed scheme meets the demonstrated needs in terms of size, price and tenure
• The proposed scheme conforms to all other planning policies, in terms of design, access, layout and materials
• There are adequate safeguards to ensure that the houses remain available for local people in perpetuity and cannot become part of the open market
• There is general local support, usually demonstrated through the Parish or Town Council, for the use of the site for this purpose.

This approach to building affordable housing in villages is now mainstream policy. It is supported by national government. It is also accepted at parish/town level because the aims are clear, local participation is positively promoted, and long term control of occupancy is guaranteed.

The Beacon Project is currently in discussions with both Charlbury Town Council leaders as well as West Oxfordshire District Council, to look closely at affordable housing needs in Charlbury and the sort of planning framework that would be most appropriate. It may be that the proposal of a rural exception site will be the best option, with an established national track record in bringing sustainable development. Given that the provisions for Community Right to Build as envisaged in the coalition Government's Localism Bill are yet to be fully understood or implemented, this may prove the best option locally in the short term.

in 2009 the Rural Housing Trust published an interesting fact sheet, called 10 Steps to achieving affordable housing on rural exception sites. Read.

Neighbourhood Planning Regulations

Source: Dept Communities and Local Govt.

In the consultation document on Neighbourhood Planning Regulations, published in October 2011 by the Department of Communities and Local Government, a number of recommendations are made about how Community Right to Build groups should be constituted:

13. For the purposes of paragraph 3(1)(b) of Schedule 4C (community right to build orders) to the 1990 Act, the following additional conditions are prescribed—
(a) individuals who live or work in the particular area must have the opportunity to become members of the community organisation (whether or not others can also become members);
(b) the constitution of the community organisation must provide that— 
(i) individuals who live in the particular area control at least 51% of its voting rights;
(ii) one of its objectives is to provide a benefit for the local community;
(iii) any assets of the community organisation cannot be sold or developed except in a manner which the trust’s members consider benefits the local community;
(iv) any profits from its activities will be used to benefit the local community (otherwise than by being paid directly to members);
(v) in the event of the winding up of the community organisation or in any other circumstances where the community organisation ceases to exist, its assets must be transferred to another body corporate which has similar objectives; and
(vi) the organisation has at least 5 members, who are not related to each other, who live in the particular area.


The Beacon Project Charlbury currently meets all of these proposed stipulations for a CRTB group, and will be discussing ways of opening the membership of the project when a site is identified and the extent of potential membership is thereby known.

Community Right to Build

Source: Dept of Communities and Local Govt.

The Coalition Government's Localism Bill, which gained Royal Assent on November 15 2011 potentially introduces important new rights and powers to allow local communities to shape new development in their area. There are two strands to the Bill in this regard: Neighbourhood Development Plans would be taken forward by either town or parish councils to decide what development they would like to see in their area, which would then be put to a referendum of the local population. The second strand is the Community Right to Build initiative, which would enable community organisations to bring forward smaller scale development proposals that are sustainable and bring benefits to their communities. The Bill states that it envisages Community Right to Build in this way:

"As part of neighbourhood planning, the Bill gives groups of local people the power to deliver the development that their local community want. They may wish to build new homes, businesses, shops, playgrounds or meeting halls. A community organisation, formed by members of the local community, will be able to bring forward development proposals which, providing they meet minimum criteria and can demonstrate local support through a referendum, will be able to go ahead without requiring a separate traditional planning application. The benefits of the development, such as new affordable housing or profits made from letting the homes, will stay within the community, and be managed for the benefit of the community. There will be support for communities wishing to bring forward development under the community right to build, providing information, advice and signposting to relevant expertise."


This initiative sits within the wider context of a proposed major shift in planning in the UK to meet the housing crisis and to drive economic growth. The proposed – and controversial – National Planning Policy Framework for instance is based on  three premises: planning for prosperity, planning for people, and planning for places (environmental role). The controversial element is the strong presumption in favour of 'sustainable development', which is as yet to be defined. Within this new framework Local Authorities should:

• Prepare local plans to meet locally assessed development needs
• Approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay
• Grant permission where the plan is absent, silent, indeterminate or where relevant policies are out of date

In other words, where a proposal is consistent with an adopted neighbourhood plan it should be approved unless there is an overriding national interest reason not to, or the proposal impinges upon a site designated for nature conservation, for example under the EU Habitats Directive etc. There is an emphasis upon a 'plan-led' approach in contrast the present system of 'development control'. The sustainable component emphasises the natural and historic environment, full use of public transport, walking and cycling; strategies for health and well-being; promotion of renewable energy etc.


The Beacon Project Charlbury sees this as a potentially important step towards allowing sustainable, environmentally-friendly development in Charlbury which will bring benefits to the community in the form of more affordable, and better quality, housing, as well as potential employment.