Point F of the Response Form:

Sustainable Development.

Bloxham is already approaching its sustainability limits in terms of its current environmental capacity and this is made clear in the published sustainability report which forms an appendix to the plan.  It’s in plain English and it’s well worth a read!

• We’ve seen issues of school capacity – especially the primary school – recognised too late in the day to prevent inevitable problems as the new estates fill up. Developer cash for places outside of the village is not a sustainable alternative to matching the village population to the number of in-village school places. The Bloxham N.P. should achieve this in the medium-term.
• Bloxham is a flood hotspot and Thames Water have recently voiced concerns as to the capacity of the drainage system downstream of recent proposed developments. The Bloxham Plan seeks properly to address this issue prior to permissions being granted.
• The CDC CRAITLUS report assumes an ageing population will walk along substandard pavements from new estates at the village periphery to village shops and facilities that are 3 or 4 times what research shows to be an acceptable distance away. Factor in lack of High St parking and – yes – residents drive to Banbury for most of their shopping! Further development beyond the built-up boundary does not offer the oft-quoted low-carbon sustainability.
• The Road Safety Foundation finds the stretch of the A361 which bisects the village to be the eigth most dangerous road in the UK with 46% of injuries pedestrians or cyclists. Additionally the Sustrans report makes clear that provision for pedestrians and cyclists in Bloxham is sub-standard. Neither report indicates a village conducive to low-carbon life-styles.
• We have already seen a requirement to solve traffic problems at the mini-roundabout (recorded by the planning inspector at the Barford Rd development inquiry) bring zero subsequent action –  despite the associated development going ahead.  Further increases in traffic levels in the High St, Church St and the mini-roundabout, Milton Rd junctions and around the schools cannot be regarded as  sustainable without guaranteed improvements to the associated highway infrastructure – if indeed such improvements are at all feasible .
• We’ve already moved to a situation where we have less than the recommended level of quality playing pitches for our expanding population. E.g. Bloxham F.C. travel to Banbury for their practises!
• Sustainability also includes protecting the character of places – something that further major developments or overly-intensive infill would undoubtedly put at risk.
• Further development beyond what’s in the neighbourhood plan will be sustainable only subject to a level of infrastructure investment that we have absolutely no evidence  is likely to be forthcoming and appropriate infrastructure is a requirement of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF.) Indeed expert reports suggest some aspects – such as pedestrian connectivity, highway improvement and primary school places –  may simply be impossible or uneconomic in the setting of Bloxham.
• The Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan represents the most highly evidenced objective  assessment of sustainable development in Bloxham to 2031.

Point G of the Response Form.

Does the Bloxham Plan conform with the Local Plan

• We expect there to be around 220 new dwelling completed in Bloxham during the Plan period – many from permissions too early to count towards the Cherwell Local Plan projections.
• We are supporting the previously permitted 85 dwellings on the Milton Rd as part of our Plan (Policy BL1). This can justifiably count towards our contribution to major development within the Cherwell villages projections.
• Additionally we accept (Policy BL2) there will be some minor development, infill and conversions within the built-up area making a further contribution to the Cherwell totals.
• Together these policies put us in compliance with the Cherwell Local Plan in that we are taking a more than proportionate share of the Local Plan’s projected number of new village dwellings.