Given that whenever anyone objects to a new development they are immediately labelled NIMBYs it’s heartening to see that the Oxfordshire County Council response to the proposed development on land adjoining the recreation ground pretty-much echoes that of every objection sent in by Bloxham residents. Of course, it’s not them that makes the decision but maybe their opinions are weighed more heavily than are the residents’ views :).

Oxfordshire object on the basis hat the development:

• failing to provide safe and suitable access for all users as required under the NPPF.
• goes against the Neighbourhood Plan Objective 1B (minimise additional traffic congestion), and the LTP4 objective of mitigating the impacts of transport on the local built, historic and natural environment.
• local services and facilities would be within convenient cycle distance of the site. However, cyclists would be required to cycle on-road and this may not be desirable for less confident cyclists, particularly along the stretch of the A361 near to the site access due to the likely vehicle traffic speeds.
• Site partially in Flood Zones 2 and 3. Evidence required from Environment Agency that they have no objection to the proposed development.
• Lack of outline/concept drainage strategy plans to enable technical assessment and audit of the proposal.
• Lack of primary school capacity, without a feasible solution to mitigate the impact of this proposed development.
• to enable the school to grow in an increment that is supportive of effective and efficient provision of education, significant additional accommodation for the school would be required, and to fund this would require a much larger scale of housing growth than proposed in this application or which would be compatible with the Cherwell Local Plan or Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan.
• In the event the development was accepted OCC Education would require £266,000 to pay for transporting primary school pupils to the nearest available spare primary school places

The only aspect they didn’t object on was archaeological issues.

Of course this will all be challenged by the expensive barristers employed by this paricular speculative developer – but we hope Cherwell councillors will have the backbone to face-down a developer that has previously been described as rapacious, confrontational  and playing the system to “concrete over villages”.