Proposed development at Rushy Bank, Forest Road

Wed 1 Apr 2015, 21:06 (last edited on Wed 1 Apr 2015, 22:43)

As per my last post, the Friends of the Evenlode Valley group has sent a detailed planning assessment to wodc (am being censored here for too many capitals - I do my best not to shout! Except maybe when caught at third slip...). Below are the conclusions it reaches. The full version can be seen here:

publicaccess.westoxon.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=NJYPPPRKH3900

The conclusions are:
14.1 This is not intended as a summary but as a conclusion on the balancing exercise inherent in a (planning) decision such as this. On the one hand, we acknowledge the housing needs and aspirations of people with local connections, as well as the laudable objectives of the YDUK element. Substantial weight can be attached to them, especially the former. On the other hand, this would not be a sustainable development for the reasons we have given, so there is no presumption in favour of it. Even if that is not accepted, the National Planning Policy Framework presumption is subject to the restriction imposed by the location in the aonb and the site has to be treated as one both subject to that designation (to which "great weight" should be attached) and in the open countryside for policy purposes. The fact that wodc may not (yet) be able to demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land does not mean that all residential proposals should be allowed" - they still have to be assessed on their merits.

14.2 Creating a new 'satellite' housing estate well outside the town, with the associated urbanising impact on the countryside and the AONB is not the right way to meet the Applicants' needs nor have they presented a convincing case that a scheme on this scale is necessary to provide for them. The present scheme conflicts with a range of development plan policies, both adopted and emerging, as well with national guidance. To allow it would only offer encouragement for other more or less harmful schemes to come forward which it would then be more difficult to resist. Given the long standing wodc assessments of the quality and sensitivity of the surrounding landscape, and that their preferred mechanism for exploring options for growth in the area will now be available, we maintain that the scales are firmly weighted against this proposal. We therefore respectfully, if somewhat reluctantly, ask that it be refused.