Just off the Drayton Road in Abingdon, the first of 159 residencies are taking shape.
There were a number of attempts to stop this development which local people, councillors, and the MP opposed as not being in the right place. But as there was no local plan in place at the time the development was allowed by a planning inspector.
Off the Oxford Road another smaller development is taking place. In this case there was controversy because all the trees were cleared from the site even though that was not in the planning application.
The former home of Status Trophies, 99 Ock Street, is being extended at the back and turned into housing.
Oxford Road: Were the developers brought to book for felling trees without planning permission. If not, who turned a blind eye?
Drayton Road: Which party were in power when a local plan should have been produced?
I found your blog on the City Daily Photo meme. I don’t run into many Alastairs in the blog world, but that’s my name too, even spelled the same way. Although I was born in London I’m in a very different part of the world from you now…
I see that more flats are being created in the old printers offices on Ock Street in front of the sorting office, lovely view they will have out the back!
Peter – I contacted The Veil over that very issues, and whilst they were very fourth coming with information…their answer didn’t really make any sense….
I can’t seem to find the communication, but it basically said that:
There was overwhelming evidence that they (the developer) had breached the planning conditions regarding the mature trees.
but
in the next paragraogh they explained how
oooops….
Peter – I contacted The Veil over that very issues, and whilst they were very fourth coming with information…their answer didn’t really make any sense….
I can’t seem to find the communication, but it basically said that:
There was overwhelming evidence that they (the developer) had breached the planning conditions regarding the mature trees.
but
in the next paragraph they explained how “it was not in the public interest to take any action further” – despite this evidence it would seem…they still think/thought/feel it was/isn’t worth the effort of bringing anyone to book as “their solicitors will just win against our solicitors”. And also that as there is an overwhelming need for housing in Oxfordshire, any delay in building these houses should be avoided.
Regarding Drayton Rd – it matters not who was in power…we were failed by them all. If you want to really really point a finger…the Blue team were in power when it lapsed….and the yellow team let them let it lapse without saying anything. Plus of course, all political colours were agains this development yet it still got through. Basically all the evidence against the proposal along with well argued and factual evidence together with local knowledge and a huge amount of public opinion against the proposal was totally ignored by 8 councillors all of whom have no constituency in Abingdon, yet their vote counted when it went to committee.
Regardless…what is a local plan? What does it mean, or do? is it like a Neighbourhood plan? Doesn’t one supersede the other anyway…and they can all be superseded by government dictat anyway!?
It just shows how fruitless “local argument” are – I would be interested to know where the little people have ever won against a developer.
I think that the full weight of planning enforcement is levelled squarely at you or I, wanting to build a granny annex. God forbid your window is 50mm too wide…but hey…160 houses…bring it on! Picking fights you know you can win? Sounds like bullying to me….
With the great help of a new friend of mine we even sought professional advice against Drayton Rd…but in essence, if it doesn’t break any rules, common sense, local will or opposition makes no difference.
I have my FOI answers to some of my questions about the Drayton Rd development (I made the requests in December) – and the double roundabout traffic calming measures….it doesn’t make great reading…I think it is made to be difficult on purpose…but, to save space here, i’ll post it on AbingdonFirst shortly. I know that that means some people may not read it – as they are more interested in who AbingdonFirst actually is…but I know that most people will just be interested in hearing the facts and the story…and not fussed about the author!
If anyone feels like picking over the bones of those…you may find something interesting. Personally, I feel there must be some technicality to be picked up on somewhere…the Council etc can’t be THAT competent to have got it all right!? Ill try and get them sent in today…
Re 65 Oxford Road, several of us – Friends of Abingdon, two local Councillors, Daniel and probably others – took it up with the Vale and as a result the developers had to submit a detailed plan for replacing the trees, shrubs etc. It specifies certain sizes and types of plants/trees so we will be watching with interest to make sure this happens. Hardly a great victory – they will of course nowhere near replace what has gone – but better than nothing.
Dispiriting as it is, it is important that local people do keep an eye on all these developments and flag up concerns: knowing that we do that – and we do actually care may prevent even worse…
Well I suppose we have to accept the weak ‘get out of it’ argument of the planning people etc that they cannot afford to take on the developer about contraventions of some planning agreements. However what the planners could do is refuse to let these particular developers to build again in the town. But they don’t apply these sanctions do they? They let the same companies continue to build and, no doubt, again flout promises and contractual obligations.
Whilst i agree with the spirit of Daniel’s lengthy post i think he is slightly simplifying the local plan point.
The Process to produce a local plan seems to take several years. The ‘blue team’ were indeed in power when the old plan lapsed but they had only been elected for a matter of weeks before this happened, taking over from the ‘yellow team’, so i think the blame needs to be at the least shared. I don’t know what work had been done previously and whether something could have been produced more quickly but with the best will in the world it would not have been in place in time to stop drayton road.
I went to the display today about the flood alleviation plan for Oxford. The only Flood thought that the Environment Agency have considered for Abingdon was in some way to stop the flooding of the Ock and Stert. I hope that they get this Oxford plan right. When the river is high in South Abingdon the water comes within approximately one inch of the top of the bank on the Wilsham Road Side. One Wilsham Road resident mentioned that at one time we used to have dredgers going up and down right down to Wallingford to dredge out the Thames. He said he has a boat on the Thames and he can vouch that now no dredging occurred the level on the Thames is shallower and he things this contributes to flooding.
Talking of Drayton Road do I notice the beginnings of the development on the western side of the same road going into Drayton from Abingdon… also carrying on along the same road is there more development about to happen going into Steventon on the left. We’re going to have more cars than roads to queue on soon.
There’s nothing wrong with lengthy. Why use 10 words when 20 will do? And there’s nothing wrong with simple. Neither of those are a negative.
It should be simple to clarify what the “hierarchy of plans” is. It would be simpler still if we had a planning policy and process that made sense. Why not simply have a local planning authority that oversees everything? Why have a plan, and another plan at all?
I look forward, one day, to a short, succinct, complicated answer to all this.
The good news is that the Drayton Road development is sufficiently above the Thames to remain dry when the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme is in place and we have a spot of rain. Perhaps this may be regarded one day as excellent planning!
Just flooded and saturated with cars…so glad I don’t live in South Abingdon.
…don’t worry Sasha, 900 houses coming to north Abingdon soon so that’ll be flooded with cars shortly too!
OK Daniel I’ll have a go:
The Local Plan is the main document, produced by the “Planning Authority” – in our case the Vale. These Plans have been around for years and I think probably have a prescribed format. Most of the Plan is Vale-wide, but there are sections which have a bit more detail. The Plan covers a period of about 15 years.
One document which feeds in to the Local Plan is the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) which calculates the number and type of additional houses needed in the area over the period.
There used also to be top-down housing targets imposed by central government or regional authorities – I am not sure if those still exist.
Another complicating factor in this area is the “Local Enterprise Partnership” which has been set up to help promote business growth (eg the Science Vale projects) and support it by creation of the necessary infrastructure including transport and housing. In West Oxfordshire the Planning Inspector has delayed approval of the draft Local Plan because it doesn’t take account of the LEP.
The Neighbourhood Plan concept was brought in by the Coalition government in around 2011 as part of their much-vaunted Localism programme. It was intended to give local communities the opportunity to flesh out the higher-level plans with detail to shape the area in a way the community wanted. It is not allowed to conflict with the LP but can set out standards for things like open space, pedestrian/cycle routes, the character/visual appearance of an area, It also enables parish councils to have more say in the way infrastructure money for larger developments is spent. The format of a NP is not prescribed so it can cover whatever areas the community thinks are important.
A NP is bottom-up: the wider community has to be involved right from the start – including defining the scope of the plan – it is not allowed for the Town Council just to consult on a pre-prepared proposal. Once adopted a NP has legal force: this is the big difference compared with a Community-Led Plan (such as SARP) – those have no legal force.
I hope that helps. The TC are due to discuss again next week whether to launch the NP process for Abingdon…..
Hester
“The TC are due to discuss again next week whether to launch the NP process for Abingdon…..”
Isn’t this just shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted?
It will all come right for sure – Nimby-Schmidt’s Folly (the pelican crossing) is in place to ward off all the traffic problems.
Picking up Iain’s point: By the Spring of 2011 the Vale had consulted on a new Local Plan to replace the one that was about to run out.
I remember helping to organise a well attended meeting at the Preston Road Community Centre at that stage because of concerns about potential developments south and west of south Abingdon.
Local Plans do take some time to get into place but I think it is fair to say that the new Vale administration were wrong to deliberately delay the new plan after they took office in May 2011 and that to still not have a new Plan in place five years later is a pretty poor performance.
The most up to date list of Local Plans I could find is here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/491049/LPA_Strategic_Plan_Progress.pdf
Julian – it certainly would have been better to have got on with it by now, but even a Neighbourhood Plan started now can have some influence over future development, and help ensure that a larger proportion of the CIL money is used locally.
The FOI answers are starting to go up on AbingdonFirst. Some are more helpful than others. I am very grateful for the replies to them though. Dare I say it…almost grateful to the councils (peh, peh, peh). And I am glad that there’s a place/site/blog to have the information made available – so thanks to AbingdonFirst for being accommodating.
Who nose…perhaps a tenacious chap will find a hook…
Basically they can choose whatever consultant they want.
What is consulted does not have to work.
No one from the council is responsible for decisions made after such consultations.
consultants and councils are not obliged to deliver results.
No one is responsible for any failures.
Taxpayer keeps feeding the trough of the said councils and consultants.
Then we have an election and it all starts again.
Colin you doubter ! Te he , like many I went to the EA/occ exhibition on the proposed flood elevation plan, after talking with various “non de scripts” who were in “official attendance” I ended up talking with the main man! The consultant who drew up the plan, after 15 minutes or so of “what ifs” I asked him what his plan was based on? Information, he replied, what information? Who carried out the research? What was it based on ? Eventually he agreed that most was projection ! so then I gave him the big question, they said Titanic was unsinkable ! They said Abits would solve our traffic problems, so based on that evidence of your plan fails and my house in Abingdon fails because your plan didn’t work, willl you compensate me for having a house that will then be unsalable ? don’t be silly was the answer
Yes, but…when the consultant cones here to consult…will he get a free car parking space in the multi story?
Don’t be silly Daniel.
The said consultant will have a chauffeur deliver him to the trough of money awaiting he or she at the council.
You are naively assuming that said consultants actually set foot in the town?? OR I suppose as in the case of Nincompoop-Smith maybe they come on a Sunday afternoon, when driving/parking isn’t a problem at all?
Planning permission/planning ‘regs’ and Granny Annexes-extensions. Daniel, It seems that Whichever ‘council’ is responsible for (VOWHDC or SODC??), Now plans are submitted online, as long as they appear to be as described, doesn’t matter if they are not drawn to scale, when ‘approved’, never inspected…It is up to the public, to put in complaints, and then it takes months to do anything. So when plans show a large gap between properties, when in fact it is 1 inch, nothing can be done. Because of the cuts in manpower, one person is responsible for ‘dealing’ with complaints. Why not in the public interest to continue, allow building to take place. Worry about the trees after completion.