Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Housing & Landscape Report
Submission Version 2
Contents
Overall Summary ...... 5
1) Demographics and housing ...... 10 a) Summary ...... 10 b) Bloxham – General Population trends ...... 10 c) Population Structure – Age by Year ...... 11 d) Population Structure – Age Bands ...... 12 e) Population projections ...... 13 f) Additional Data from ORCC Rural Place Profile...... 14 g) Ward level data on Population and Age ...... 14 h) Qualifications of the Bloxham population (2011) ...... 15 i) Type of Employment (2011) ...... 16 j) Household Income of the Bloxham Population ...... 18 k) Deprivation ...... 20 l) Crime data ...... 20 m) Tenure Type (2011) ...... 21 n) Tenure – Over 65s ...... 22 o) Housing Type ...... 22 p) Household Size ...... 23 q) Number of Bedrooms ...... 24 r) House Prices ...... 24 s) House sizes ...... 26 t) Garden sizes ...... 26
2) Housing Need and Availability ...... 30 a) Summary ...... 30 b) Sources of data ...... 31 c) Comparison of Bloxham house-building with national norms...... 31 d) Housing Permissions Data from the Parish Council ...... 32 e) How many more houses should be built in Bloxham ...... 35 f) What affordable housing is there in Bloxham? ...... 38 g) What housing does Bloxham want? ...... 39 h) The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) ...... 41 i) Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) ...... 43 j) Housing Type and the Local Plan ...... 43
3) An Ageing population? ...... 45 a) Summary ...... 45 b) Sources of Data ...... 45 c) Demographic Change ...... 45 d) Why does this matter? ...... 46 e) Physical limitations and Age ...... 46 f) Downsizing and the national context ...... 46 g) Downsizing and the Bloxham context ...... 47 h) Downsizing and the SHMA ...... 47 i) Potential numbers of downsizers in Bloxham ...... 48 j) More flexible and supported accommodation ...... 49 k) Design and quality standards ...... 49
4) The location of new dwellings ...... 51 3
a) Summary ...... 51 b) Sources of data ...... 51 c) To identify or not to identify? ...... 51 d) General Considerations regarding the location of new dwellings...... 51 e) Urban Sprawl around Bloxham ...... 52 f) Inclusive low-carbon connectivity ...... 52 g) Traffic Hotspots and congestion ...... 53 h) Visual impact upon valued landscape objects ...... 53 i) Flooding ...... 56
5) The Rural Nature of Bloxham ...... 60 a) Summary...... 60 b) Bloxham – Town or Village? ...... 60 c) Growth – but not any old growth! ...... 60 d) Sources of Data ...... 60 e) CDC Rural Strategy 2009-2014 ...... 61 f) CDC Building in Harmony with the environment ...... 61 g) CDC Countryside Design Strategy (1998) ...... 61 h) The CDC Landscape Assessment (1995) ...... 61 i) HARAH Design Guide (Sense of Place) ...... 62 j) British Standard BS5489:2003 Lighting Standards ...... 62 k) ILE - Guidance notes for reduction of obtrusive lighting ...... 63 l) CPRE Planning Campaign Briefing 7 - Light Pollution ...... 63
6) Housing Densities and Bloxham ...... 65 a) Summary ...... 65 b) What’s this about? ...... 65 c) Examples of housing densities ...... 65 d) Is high density bad? ...... 66 e) Density and travel patterns ...... 66 f) National Trends in densities ...... 66 g) Urban vs Rural densities ...... 67 h) Bloxham – density changes ...... 67 i) Density and design as impediments to down-sizing...... 68 j) Minimum Space and room requirements? ...... 68
7) Quality of Housing ...... 71 a) Summary ...... 71 b) What is this section about? ...... 71 c) What documents does it draw upon ...... 71 d) An evolving situation ...... 72 e) The Building Regulations ...... 72 f) The CABE BfL12 System? ...... 72 g) The Code for Sustainable Homes...... 72 h) Alternatives to CSH ...... 74 i) NPPF para 95 etc...... 75 j) Lifetime Neighbourhoods ...... 75 k) Lifetime Homes ...... 75 l) CDC Building in harmony with the environment ...... 76 m) Consultation on Revised Building Regulations...... 76 n) The Passivhaus Standard ...... 78
8) Design statements ...... 80 a) Summary ...... 80 b) Simple relative statements or area by area statements? ...... 80 4
9) Mapping the village ...... 82 a) Summary ...... 82 b) Old Bloxham ...... 82 c) Bloxham in Recent Years ...... 85 d) Connectivity ...... 87 e) Education, Health and Churches ...... 88 f) Age of more recent buildings...... 89 g) Indoor Spaces ...... 90 h) Outdoor Sports, Play and Green-Spaces ...... 91 i) Bloxham Conservation Area ...... 92 j) Listed Buildings ...... 93 k) Character Zones ...... 94 l) Visual analysis ...... 95
10) The Variety that is Bloxham ...... 98 a) Summary ...... 98
11) Heritage assets ...... 106 a. Heritage Gateway items ...... 106 b. Archaeology ...... 113
12) Habitats, SEAs HRAs etc...... 115 Introduction ...... 115 a. Ramsar sites ...... 115 b. Special Protection Areas(SPAs) ...... 115 c. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) ...... 116 d. Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) ...... 116 e. Oxon Biodiversity Action Plan ...... 117 f. Local Wildlife sites in Oxfordshire ...... 118 g. Protected species ...... 118 h. Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) ...... 119 i. Habitat checklist: ...... 119 j. Cherwell HRA Check ...... 120 k. Do we need an SEA ...... 121
13) Bloxham Retail Facilities ...... 123 a) Summary ...... 123 b) Location ...... 123 a) Types of store ...... 123 b) The National Picture ...... 126 c) The Bloxham Picture – general perspective ...... 126 d) What factors influence use of the High Street? ...... 126 i) Cycling to the High Street ...... 126 ii) Walking to the High Street ...... 126 iii) Healthy Food – the essential requirement...... 126 iv) Driving to the High Street - parking ...... 128 j) Would an additional store help? ...... 129
14) BNDP Questionnaire Responses upon housing ...... 131 a. Size & shape of developments ...... 131 b. Protecting Bloxham’s heritage ...... 132 c. Preserving the rural feel ...... 132 d. Respecting existing Properties ...... 134 e. Sustainable Homes ...... 135 5
f. Lifetime Homes ...... 136 g. Your present home ...... 139 h. Housing Need ...... 141
15) Young people’s views on housing...... 150 a) Which schools? ...... 150 b) Age or Year Group ...... 151 c) Are the pavements wide enough to walk to school safely? ...... 152 d) Effect of additional houses ...... 153 e) What should new houses look like? ...... 154 f) Should new houses be adaptable to cater for the aged and disabled? ...... 155 g) The importance of Energy Efficiency...... 156 h) The importance of Water Efficiency...... 157 i) What ONE thing about Bloxham do you most like? ...... 158 j) What ONE thing about Bloxham do you least like? ...... 159
16) Questions from the Parish Plan on Housing ...... 161 a) Why so few questions? ...... 161
17) Appendix 1: Access to fresh food radius maps ...... 162
Overall Summary Statistical Data Bloxham is a growing village and there is little sign of demand from developers abating. There are less old people than many rural villages but like the rest of the UK, the age profile is moving inexorably upwards. There is an outward migration of the 18-30 age-ranges. There is an inward migration of people in their thirties to forties Bloxham has fewer single households and fewer very large households than average. Bloxham has a lot of ‘empty-nesters’ under-occupying houses Bloxham has a high proportion of residents with higher than average qualifications and correspondingly high status jobs and salaries. Bloxham has had many affordable homes recently with ever decreasing uptake by people with a village connection. There is both anecdotal evidence and evidence from questionnaires people will downsize where pleasant high quality accommodation is available – but not to dense, ‘off-the peg,’ urban style estates favoured by most developers. Housing Need and availability The extent of recent development in Bloxham is orders of magnitude (*12) greater than the statistical norm for rural areas. We concur with the submitted CDC Local Plan that villages should accommodate small numbers of additional dwellings by infill or minor development. We should seek to match the number of new houses to infrastructure capacity ideally towards the end of the plan period to allow time to assimilate already permitted development. The recent Oxon SHMA data will result in some upward revision of numbers in the final Local Plan. Readers of this report need be aware it’s writing spans both SHMA. 6
The CDC -SHLAA lists land that may be available for development along with brief assessments. We do not necessarily concur with these brief assessments. Because of the rate at which permissions are being granted we should not specify precise locations for development but rather should set out a list of “desirable attributes” against which proposed developments should be measured. Many – probably most - residents have little grasp of the meaning of the term “affordable housing.” Foolishly they think it means what it says without realising access to it is restricted to those on the housing register. Given the huge scale of already agreed development we expect supply of affordable housing to far surpass the need from those with an immediate local connection. An ageing population The changing demographic means there could be significant demand for downsize dwellings. Policies should encourage empty nesters to free-up family homes. Most recent and proposed developments are demonstrably unlikely to appeal to potential downsizers. Smaller high quality developments are snapped up by them. An increasing proportion of residents with mobility problems require a more serious commitment to make new homes and areas disability friendly. Lack of concern about connectivity for pedestrians and wheelchair or mobility scooter users is a very real issue already and can only escalate over the period of this plan. The Location of Dwellings We require: - Avoidance of urban sprawl towards neighbouring settlements; - Low-carbon connectivity (walking & cycling) to key community locations; - Minimal additional congestion through traffic hotspots; - Minimal negative visual impact upon valued landscapes; - Development in areas at risk of fluvial or run-off flooding should be avoided; - Ideally SuDS will provide a degree of flood alleviation rather than just mitigation. The Rural Nature of Bloxham We recognise that Bloxham already has a diverse collection of housing but reject ‘lowest common denominator’ arguments to justify further erosion of our rural nature. Designs and materials should relate to neighbouring streets and public spaces but should, in general, still lean towards local rural rather than urban. The imposition of urban densities in a rural setting is a major issue for residents that is seen to be inflicting cumulative degradation of our rural environment. Boundaries should preserve a rural feel – especially towards the village edges. Lighting, especially at the village edges, should be in accordance with a rural E2 categorisation. Hedgerows should be protected wherever possible and new boundaries be sympathetic to pre-existing ones. The importance of open space and access to traffic-free PROW is important. Housing densities New developments need to be seen in the context of a progressive increase of housing density nationally. The CDC expected norm of 30/ha is qualified with the need to fit the local character. Lower density is one component of the rural character. To preserve this we would expect additional new developments to be a maximum of 30/ha. 7
We have contemplated specifying minimum room sizes and garden sizes as is already the case in some London boroughs but at this stage will hold back from this. Density discontinuities are an issue for residents. Site designs inflicting sharp density discontinuities will existing properties should not be supported.. Potential downsizers tend to prefer lower-density developments. To encourage freeing- up of family homes we will favour developments attractive for downsizers. Quality of housing All new dwellings should - Be compliant with the CABE BfL12 recommendations - Meet the CSH recommendations on energy and water to level 4 or some equivalent type of statement. - Meet the Lifetimes Homes Standards – particularly connectivity, parking and access. - Cater for changing in lifestyle across the entire age range. Design Statement Together the recommendations above constitute the makings of a design statement. Mapping the village This is essentially an appendix that offers some historical context to development locations and connectivity within the village. The variety that is Bloxham This is essentially an appendix offering a photographic collage of the village. Some recent developments are considered poor models for any future development. Heritage assets Bloxham has one of the top 100 churches in England and a conservation area with almost 150 items recorded as heritage assets. Biodiversity and habitats Bloxham doe s not contain SSSIs or SACs but does seem to be an important habitat for some species such as swifts. Retail Bloxham has grown too big for the High St properly to serve the needs of the village. High St Parking is an insuperable problem. In the event of further major estates, there may be a need to re-evaluate the need for one or more additional retail hub. Young people’s views on housing Essentially, they think the volume of new housing will make the village worse. They think houses should look like neighbours or like the older housing stock They approve of energy efficient homes and homes designed to cater for the elderly They bemoan the traffic situation and the limits it imposes on their activity. The main questionnaire Many of the matters referred to above are strongly supported (over 90%) by the residents of Bloxham. Protection of certain key views and areas Proper enforcement of the policies set out in the conservation area report are vital. Certain views and character areas that are of great importance to residents should be protected or developed only with great sensitivity. This would include:The Parish Church, The Bloxham School frontage and views to and from Hobb Hill and the triangle of pubs, houses and green areas around Old-Bridge Road. 8
9
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Demographics of Bloxham Population and Housing
10
1) Demographics and housing
a) Summary
Bloxham is a growing village and there is little sign of demand abating. There are less old people than many rural villages but like the rest of the UK, the age profile is moving inexorably upwards. There is substantially greater number of 16-18 year olds than the England average – probably because of the boarders at Bloxham School. This ‘excess’ of young people reverses in the 20-30 age-range. This is probably influenced by having out-grown social, educational and career opportunities on offer within the village. Consequently they seek to gain qualifications and establish their careers in metropolitan centres rather than rural Oxfordshire. Village house prices are also high for people in the early stages of their careers with a price to Cherwell-earnings ratio of around 7:1 for a simple terraced house: more for a spacious family home. There is a net inward migration of people in their thirties and forties many of whom will have got a foot on the housing ladder somewhere cheaper but who now look to raise their families in the pleasant rural setting offered by Bloxham. Bloxham has a high proportion of residents with higher than average qualifications and correspondingly high status jobs. Relatively few people aged 55 or over migrate into the village. The large majority of people aged 65+ in Bloxham have lived here for at least 20 years.
b) Bloxham – General Population trends Recent census data indicate a village with a population that, to within 1 person, was the same in 1961 as it was in 1801.1
1 Data from A Vision of Britain City Populations ONS Census data. 11
There have been additional permissions since the 2011 census and if the BNDP is implemented we expect around 250 additional dwellings by 2021. Assuming existing persons per dwelling for Bloxham this would give 250 * 2.65 = 663 further residents taking the total to over 4000
Year 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 population 1,358 1,357 1,520 1,573 1,543 1,577 1,538 1,340 1,340 1,335 Year 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 2031 population 1,384 1,080 1,539 1,359 2356 3132 3374 4002
Bloxham has a rapidly rising population.
c) Population Structure – Age by Year
Bloxham% 3 2.5 2 1.5 Bloxham% 1 0.5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100
Cherwell% 3 2.5 2 1.5 Cherwell% 1 0.5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100
This unexceptional pattern differs from the Cherwell graph in two obvious aspects: The results are more spread because of the much smaller sample size than CDC. The unexpected peak in the teenage years for Bloxham which probably stems from having Bloxham School in the village.
12
d) Population Structure – Age Bands
Age Structure (KS102EW) Bloxham Bloxham% Cherwell% England% Age 0 to 4 203 6 6.9 6.3 Age 5 to 7 113 3.3 3.6 3.4 Age 8 to 9 75 2.2 2.2 2.2 Age 10 to 14 228 6.8 6.1 5.8 Age 15 86 2.5 1.2 1.2 Age 16 to 17 167 4.9 2.5 2.5 Age 18 to 19 108 3.2 2.2 2.6 Age 20 to 24 130 3.9 5.4 6.8 Age 25 to 29 122 3.6 6.8 6.9 Age 30 to 44 631 18.7 21.8 20.6 Age 45 to 59 717 21.3 20.1 19.4 Age 60 to 64 227 6.7 5.9 6 Age 65 to 74 327 9.7 8.1 8.6 Age 75 to 84 178 5.3 5.2 5.5 Age 85 to 89 44 1.3 1.3 1.5 Age 90 and Over 18 0.5 0.7 0.8 All Usual Residents 3374 100 100 100
It is easier to spot patterns using Age band data (2011) rather than Age by Year data. Compared to the Cherwell or England data we see: The average age in Bloxham is around 39.8 compared to 38.9 for Oxfordshire and 40.9 for significantly rural setting; A higher percentage of teenagers (Bloxham School boarders); A rather low percentage of people in the 20-30 age bands; A constant inflow of people aged 30-45 that returns the profile of the population to near average; 2 A percentage of older people that is lower than many rural villages3 and only a little different from the general UK average.
2 ONS Neighbourhood Statistics Bloxham Age Structure 3 Statistical Digest of Rural England 2012 - September 2012 13
The most noticeable aspects are the outflow of people around age 20 and the inflow of people in their 30s to 40s. The rural-urban migration of the young is well documented – see above.4
e) Population projections We don’t have projections down to Parish level but the data for Cherwell District in general shows a trend to an ageing population.
In line with national trends Bloxham can expect an increasing proportion of elderly in its population and housing recommendations should take account of this.
4 RSN Rural to urban migration of young people 14
f) Additional Data from ORCC Rural Place Profile
The following diagram is the most up-to-dater migration data that we have access to (2013) from the ORCC Rural Place Profile 5 AND IT supports the interpretation of : Net outward migration of people in the 15-24 range. net inward migration of people in the 25 – 44 age range; relative constancy of the 45 -64 range;
g) Ward level data on Population and Age Insight Oxfordshire have published ward level data projections which may better reflect Bloxham Age and numbers 0-14 15-29 30-44 45-54 55-69 70-84 85-90+ Bloxham and Bodicote 2011 M+F 6090 1058 973 1075 1403 1252 670 125 Bloxham and Bodicote 2012 M+F 6138 1068 962 1065 1411 1272 704 130 Bloxham and Bodicote 2013 M+F 6177 1073 958 1031 1431 1281 731 134 Bloxham and Bodicote 2014 M+F 6231 1078 958 1002 1437 1285 773 137 Bloxham and Bodicote 2015 M+F 6367 1109 956 980 1468 1322 818 143 Bloxham and Bodicote 2016 M+F 6767 1182 965 1024 1531 1450 885 161 Bloxham and Bodicote 2017 M+F 7109 1251 955 1054 1584 1522 977 185 Bloxham and Bodicote 2018 M+F 7251 1279 934 1051 1596 1553 1054 197 Bloxham and Bodicote 2019 M+F 7381 1295 925 1063 1600 1575 1141 201 Bloxham and Bodicote 2020 M+F 7519 1309 930 1062 1595 1614 1204 218 Bloxham and Bodicote 2021 M+F 7655 1319 945 1074 1551 1691 1267 228
5 ORCC Rural Place Profile - Bloxham 15
Bloxham and Bodicote 2022 M+F 7767 1309 959 1101 1551 1722 1325 242 Bloxham and Bodicote 2023 M+F 7882 1311 979 1086 1518 1783 1383 250 Bloxham and Bodicote 2024 M+F 7938 1318 976 1071 1480 1829 1413 268 Bloxham and Bodicote 2025 M+F 7963 1294 997 1049 1421 1870 1430 298 Bloxham and Bodicote 2026 M+F 7992 1281 1003 1038 1402 1905 1454 314 Age and percentage Bloxham and Bodicote 2011 M+F 100% 17% 16% 18% 23% 21% 11% 2% Bloxham and Bodicote 2012 M+F 100% 17% 16% 17% 23% 21% 11% 2% Bloxham and Bodicote 2013 M+F 100% 17% 16% 17% 23% 21% 12% 2% Bloxham and Bodicote 2014 M+F 100% 17% 15% 16% 23% 21% 12% 2% Bloxham and Bodicote 2015 M+F 100% 17% 15% 15% 23% 21% 13% 2% Bloxham and Bodicote 2016 M+F 100% 17% 14% 15% 23% 21% 13% 2% Bloxham and Bodicote 2017 M+F 100% 18% 13% 15% 22% 21% 14% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2018 M+F 100% 18% 13% 14% 22% 21% 15% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2019 M+F 100% 18% 13% 14% 22% 21% 15% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2020 M+F 100% 17% 12% 14% 21% 21% 16% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2021 M+F 100% 17% 12% 14% 20% 22% 17% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2022 M+F 100% 17% 12% 14% 20% 22% 17% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2023 M+F 100% 17% 12% 14% 19% 23% 18% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2024 M+F 100% 17% 12% 13% 19% 23% 18% 3% Bloxham and Bodicote 2025 M+F 100% 16% 13% 13% 18% 23% 18% 4% Bloxham and Bodicote 2026 M+F 100% 16% 13% 13% 18% 24% 18% 4% in 2011 Bloxham has (3374*100)/6090 = 55% of the (Bloxham + Bodicote) ward Approx. Number of post-70 year olds in Bloxham 2011 = 55% of (670 + 125) = 437 Approx. Number of post-70 year olds in Bloxham 2011 = 55% of (1454 + 314) = 972 or increase of 535
Approx. Percentage of post-70 year olds in Bloxham 2011 = (437*100) /3374 = 13% Approx. Percentage of post-70 year olds in Bloxham 2026 = (972*100) /(0.55*7992) = 26% This indicates an increase in the post-70 population by maybe 500 people during the period of this plan. 6
h) Qualifications of the Bloxham population (2011)
Highest Level of Qualification, 2011 Bloxham Bloxham Cherwell South England % % East % % All Usual Residents Aged 16 and Over 2669 100 100 100 100 No Qualifications 337 12.6 19.7 19.1 22.5 Level 1 Qualifications 312 11.7 15.2 13.5 13.3 Level 2 Qualifications 439 16.4 15.8 15.9 15.2 Apprenticeship 105 3.9 4.1 3.6 3.6 Level 3 Qualifications 372 13.9 11.6 12.8 12.4 Level 4 Qualifications and Above 1006 37.7 28.1 29.9 27.4 Other Qualifications 98 3.7 5.5 5.2 5.7
6 Insight Oxfordshire Population Forecasts 16
It is apparent Bloxham has: An unusually low proportion of residents with the lowest qualifications; An unusually high proportion of residents with the highest qualifications.
Basically, an unusually high proportion of the residents of Bloxham have top level qualifications. This may help explain the outward migration of 15-25 year olds in the village as children of highly qualified parents are much more likely to go away to university and subsequently apply for jobs at large companies in metropolitan areas in order to establish their professional status. The BNDP Questionnaire also supports this hypothesis. It also accords with the national trend of migration of more affluent (highly qualified) 30 – 40 year olds to rural areas at the stage where they are raise families. Bloxham has a very well qualified population compared to most UK areas7 8
i) Type of Employment (2011) As one might expect the type of occupation parallels the high level qualifications. The same Table is reproduced on the next page as %ages which more clearly show the point.
Variable Bloxham Cherwell South East England All Usual Residents Aged 16 to 74 2,429 103,269 6,274,341 38,881,374 1. Higher Managerial, Administrative and 390 12,016 789,267 4,045,823 Professional Occupations 1.1 Large Employers and Higher Managerial 93 2,942 182,437 926,352 and Administrative Occupations 1 1.2 Higher Professional Occupations 297 9,074 606,830 3,119,471 2. Lower Managerial, Administrative and 662 23,607 1,466,583 8,132,107 Professional Occupations 3. Intermediate Occupations 318 14,025 850,558 4,972,044 4. Small Employers and Own Account 278 9,820 643,058 3,662,611 Workers Total of 1 - 4 above 1648 59468 3749466 20812585 5. Lower Supervisory and Technical 128 7,909 409,969 2,676,118 Occupations
7 Neighbourhood Statistics 8 Rural Services Network online Neighbourhood Planning – Cherwell 17
6. Semi-Routine Occupations 210 15,024 799,485 5,430,863 7. Routine Occupations 151 11,657 557,852 4,277,483 Total of 5-7 above 489 34590 1767306 12384464 8. Never Worked and Long-Term 33 3,114 234,881 2,180,026 Unemployed L14.1 Never Worked 17 2,099 152,009 1,511,530 L14.2 Long-Term Unemployed 16 1,015 82,872 668,496 Not Classified 259 6,097 522,688 3,504,299 L15 Full-Time Students 259 6,097 522,688 3,504,299 L17 Not Classifiable for Other Reasons 2 0 0 0 Total sum 2429 103269 6274341 38881374
90 80 70 60 Bloxham 50 Cherwell 40 South-East 30 20 England 10 0 Bloxham Cherwell South-East England
Higher level occupations 1 18
Type of Employment (2011) contd.
Bloxham Cherwel S-East Englan Variable % l % % d % 1. Higher Managerial, Administrative and Professional 16.1 11.6 12.6 10.4 Occupations 1.1 Large Employers and Higher Managerial and 3.8 2.8 2.9 2.4 Administrative Occupations 1.2 Higher Professional Occupations 12.2 8.8 9.7 8 2. Lower Managerial, Administrative and Professional 27.3 22.9 23.4 20.9 Occupations 3. Intermediate Occupations 13.1 13.6 13.6 12.8 4. Small Employers and Own Account Workers 11.4 9.5 10.2 9.4 Total of 1 - 4 above 67.9 57.6 59.8 53.5 5. Lower Supervisory and Technical Occupations 5.3 7.7 6.5 6.9 6. Semi-Routine Occupations 8.6 14.5 12.7 14 7. Routine Occupations 6.2 11.3 8.9 11 Total of 5-7 above 20.1 33.5 28.1 31.9 8. Never Worked and Long-Term Unemployed 1.4 3 3.7 5.6 L14.1 Never Worked 0.7 2 2.4 3.9 L14.2 Long-Term Unemployed 0.7 1 1.3 1.7 Not Classified 10.7 5.9 8.3 9 L15 Full-Time Students 10.7 5.9 8.3 9 L17 Not Classifiable for Other Reasons 0.1 0 0 0 Total sum 100.1 100 99.9 100 % higher level of total in occupations 77.2 63.2 68 62.6
Bloxham has a significantly greater than the normal proportion of people in higher skilled jobs. 9
j) Household Income of the Bloxham Population ONS have maps with small area income estimates10 or tables of data on the same.11 They include an area (Cherwell 0008 which is basically Bloxham, Adderbury and Bodicote. In 2008 they quote the household income for this area as £910/week gross (equivalent to £47.32K/annum) which corrected for 8.6% wage inflation since 2008 =£51.39K
At the time of the data it was significantly above the Banbury value of around £700/week or £39.53K/annum corrected for inflation.
9 ONS Neighbourhood Statistics 10 ONS Small Area Income estimates 11 Small Area Model-Based Income Estimates 19
Data taken from the CDC Housing needs estimates (2009) give data for the median household earnings. Although this will be out of date now it seems unlikely the rank order will have undergone major change. Settlement median Settlement median income income Stratton Audley £45,618 Begbroke £37,273 Ardley £45,298 Sibford Gower £36,577 Fringford £44,403 Barford St Michael £36,321 Chesterton £42,936 Fritwell £35,819 Wroxton £41 ,999 Ambrosden £35,517 Weston on t h e Green £41 ,785 Cropredy £34,229 Steeple Aston £41 ,522 Bicester £33,664 Bloxham £40,675 Yarnton £33,410 Launton £40,658 Kirtlington £31,944 Islip (Cherwell) £39,225 Upper Heylord £31,501 Hook Norton £39,038 Arncott £30,142 Upper Wardington £38,344 Oxford £30,046 Mollington (Cherwell) £37,970 Kidlington £29,292 Deddington £37,588 Banbury £26,411 Adderbury £37,461 Source: CACI Paycheck 2008
Bloxham is amongst the top 25% of the local areas with regard to median household income. 12
12 CDC Housing Needs Estimates Produced by B.Line Housing Information June 2009 20
k) Deprivation Bloxham falls into the least deprived decile ranking 31818 out of 32482 on the deprivation mapper13.
l) Crime data Data for 2014 is shown. It is taken from the Thames Valley Police website’s crime maps. We know that the above deprivation map places us in the 8th least crime-affected decile by national standards. We have not carried out any more detailed analysis.
13 DCLG deprivation mapper 21
m) Tenure Type (2011)
Tenure - Households (QS405EW) Bloxham Bloxham Cherwell SE England All Households 1279 100% 100% 100% 100% Owned; Total 1025 80.1 69.3 67.6 63.3 Owned; Owned Outright 501 39.2 30.9 32.5 30.6 Owned; Owned with a Mortgage or Loan 524 41 38.4 35.1 32.8 Shared Ownership (Part Owned and Part Rented) 20 1.6 0.8 1.1 0.8 Social Rented; Total 92 7.2 12.1 13.7 17.7 Social Rented; Rented from Council (Local Authority) 6 0.5 2.6 5.8 9.4 Social Rented; Other Social Rented 86 6.7 9.6 7.9 8.3 Private Rented; Total 117 9.1 16.2 16.3 16.8 Private Rented; Private Landlord or Letting Agency 97 7.6 14.6 14.7 15.4 Private Rented; Employer of a Household Member 10 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 Private Rented; Relative or Friend of Household Member 9 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 Private Rented; Other 1 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.3 Living Rent Free 25 2 1.6 1.3 1.3
It is evident: An unusually high proportion (80.1%) of Bloxham houses are owned rather than rented even for a rural setting.14 Conversely, a low proportion (16.3%) of Bloxham houses are rented. Rented social housing only makes up 7.2% of the total housing stock which is low. The proportion of the total rented sector in Bloxham ( 44%) that are social housing is very similar to the figure (43%) across Cherwell District as a whole. Recent developments all with at least 35% affordable housing, mostly rented, will probably mean this data is already fairly meaningless!
Bloxham has a higher proportion of owned houses than normal. 15
14 Rural Services Network online – Accommodation 15 ONS Household tenure 22
n) Tenure – Over 65s
Tenure - Household Reference Bloxham Bloxham% Cherwell% South England% Person Aged 65 and Over East% (QS404EW) All Households where Ref Person is 338 100 100 100 100 Aged 65 and Over Owned 302 89.3 78.2 78.8 74.1 Shared Ownership (Part Owned 2 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 and Part Rented) Rented from Council (Local 3 0.9 2.8 6.5 10.2 Authority) Other Social Rented 19 5.6 12.3 8 8.7 Private Rented 5 1.5 3.8 4.3 4.4 Living Rent Free 7 2.1 2.5 1.8 2.1
The 2011 data for over-65s in Bloxham show almost 90% of them own their homes. This is significantly higher than the national figure. 16
o) Housing Type
Accommodation Type - Bloxham Bloxham% Cherwell% South England% Households (QS402EW) East% All Households 1279 100 100 100 100 Dwelling; Total 1279 100 99.9 99.7 99.6 Dwelling; Total 1237 96.7 89.2 78.8 78.1 Dwelling; ; Detached 663 51.8 30.4 28.2 22.4 Dwelling; Semi-Detached 342 26.7 35.6 28.1 31.2 Dwelling; Terraced (Including 232 18.1 23.2 22.5 24.5 End-Terrace) Dwelling; Flat, Maisonette or 35 2.7 10.4 20.3 21.2 Apartment; Total Dwelling; Purpose-Built Block of 21 1.6 8.3 15.8 16.4 Flats or Tenement Dwelling; Part of a Converted or 8 0.6 1.5 3.5 3.8 Shared House (Including Bed-Sits) Dwelling; Flat, Maisonette or Apartment; In Commercial 6 0.5 0.7 1 1 Building Dwelling; Caravan or Other 7 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.4 Mobile or Temporary Structure Shared Dwelling 0 0 0.1 0.3 0.4
It is evident from the 2011 census data 17 that:
16 ONS Statistics – Family 17 ONS Statistics – Family 23
Bloxham has a noticeably higher proportion of detached and 4 bedroom homes than the national average Inevitably it therefore has correspondingly fewer semi-detached and terraced houses flats, maisonettes or apartments than the average. Again recent developments will have significantly changed this picture but at the time of writing we do not have quantitative information to update it.
The data poses several questions for the Neighbourhood Plan: Are demographic patterns following the available housing or vice versa? Are there adequate smaller houses for young people with a village connection? Is the outward migration of people in the 20-35 age range unable to find suitable properties here or do their lifestyles better match living and working in a livelier urban setting? Are there adequate appropriate smaller houses for elderly residents who may want to downsize within the village – especially given the projected demographic change for this group?
p) Household Size
Household Size (QS406EW) Bloxham Bloxham Cherwell South England East All Household Spaces With At Least One Usual Resident 1279 100% 100% 100% 100% 1 Person in Household 264 20.6 25.2 28.8 30.2 2 People in Household 520 40.7 36.3 35.1 34.2 3 People in Household 219 17.1 16.7 15.5 15.6 4 People in Household 200 15.6 15.1 13.9 13 5 People in Household 64 5 4.6 4.7 4.7 6 People in Household 9 0.7 1.6 1.5 1.7 7 People in Household 2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 8 or More People in Household 1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3
Bloxham has fewer one person households than average and significantly more two person households than average. The number of 3, 4 and 5 person houses is pretty much average. The number of 6, 7,and 8 person households is well below the UK average.
24
Bloxham has few single person and few very large households. 18
q) Number of Bedrooms
Number of Bedrooms (QS411EW) 19 Bloxham Bloxham Cherwell SE England All Household Spaces With At Least One Usual Resident 1279 100% 100% 100% 100% No Bedrooms 1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 1 Bedroom 34 2.7 9 11.6 11.8 2 Bedrooms 248 19.4 22.9 26.2 27.9 3 Bedrooms 435 34 44 38.9 41.2 4 Bedrooms 427 33.4 18.3 17 14.4 5 or More Bedrooms 134 10.5 5.6 6 4.6
Pre-occupation with the number of bedrooms rather than the floor area is an almost uniquely British habit that has led to extra bedrooms being crammed into unsuitably small areas and new British homes becoming the smallest in Europe. Nonetheless, the data reveals people moving to Bloxham seem to have preferred 4 bedroom homes.
This again illustrates the fact that the distribution Bloxham dwellings seem to have indicate the curve is shifted one bedroom up from many areas.
r) House Prices The high values for Oxfordshire are doubtless influenced by high property prices in Oxford itself. The census data does not include house prices but limited data for March 2013 is available from the Rural Services Network (RSN) 20 for Cherwell though not specifically for Bloxham
House Prices (March 2013) Cherwell Oxfordshire South East All houses £236,971 £299,952 £284,634 Detached 333,248 435,531 448,476 Semi-detached 235,120 274,023 261,045 Terraced 195,428 266,455 228,210
18 ONS Statistics – Family 19 ONS Statistics – Family 20 RSN online – house-prices 25
The RSN also note prices had fallen 1.2% in the nine months running up to the March 2013 evaluation. Both asking and selling prices have risen sharply since then. The website home.co.uk provides the following prices for OX15 postal area which consists of villages broadly similar to Bloxham.21
OX15 Selling Prices OX15 Asking Prices Nov-12 Nov-13 Change Feb-13 Feb-14 Change
Detached £444,944 £449,700 1% £467,029 £532,092 14%
Semi £217,000 £297,800 37% £337,902 £288,320 -15%
Terraced £196,900 £235,000 19% £255,398 £272,300 7%
Flat - - - £176,690 £166,089 -6%
All £325,389 £371,722 14% £368,624 £372,939 1%
Below is a random collection of recent House prices in Bloxham at the time of writing.
13th Nov Detached, 61 Courtington Lane, Bloxham, Banbury OX15 4HS £410,000 2013 24th Oct Detached, Chart House, Milton Road, Bloxham, Banbury OX15 4HD £655,000 2013 28th Oct Detached, 2 Barford Road, Bloxham, Banbury OX15 4EX £325,000 2013 30th Oct Detached, 6 Ludford Gardens, Bloxham, Banbury OX15 4TS £399,950 2013 31st Oct 2013 Detached, Ash House, Milton Road, Bloxham, Banbury OX15 4HD £645,000 5th Nov 2013 Terraced, 5 Bridges Close, Bloxham, Banbury OX15 4FS £225,000
House prices are above urban but broadly in-line with village prices in Cherwell.
21 Home.co uk asking prices 26
s) House sizes
It’s easy to be parochial and think what you’re used to must be OK but both RIBA in their 2011 document - The Case for Space22 and more recently research from Cambridge23 shows that the UK has the smallest new homes in Europe.24
This may seem to be good news from the perspective of “efficient use of space.” The same cannot be said of either mental or physical health where overcrowding was seen to contribute to mental illness, depression and asthma. Indeed the research recommends more work to ascertain the costs incurred by the NHS as a result of the U.K.s cramped housing.
(Graphic is taken from Daily Telegraph.25)
Whether customers seek such Completions Position Developer compact accommodation is 2012-13 dubious given the plethora of 1 Barratt Developments 11171 extensions and conservatories that rapidly spring up on new 2 Taylor Wimpey 10180 estates. 3 Persimmon 9360 4 Bellway 4922 Another possibility is that 5 Redrow 2626 market is too heavily dominated by a relatively small 6 Berkeley Group 2544 number of players. 7 Galliford Try 2170 8 Bovis Homes 2045 A third is a shortage of land resulting either from planning 9 Willmott Dixon 2000 objections or from the 10 Bloor Homes 1755 astuteness of landowners and Total top 10 48773 26 speculative developers in Total completions 107,820 maximising financial yields to both. %age 45 Data from housebuilding Federation27
t) Garden sizes Research on changes in garden size is hard to find but anecdotal evidence indicates they are shrinking even more rapidly than the houses leaving an ever-reducing area of private space. This seems not to be driven by any disinterest in gardens. Surveys28 indicate two-thirds of people
22 RIBA – The Case for Space 2011 23 Quantifying the extent of space shortages: English dwellings, Building Research & Information 24 BBC - 'Shoebox homes' become the UK norm Sept 2011 25 British homes smallest in Europe 26 E.g. See Gladman article in Sunday Times 27 Housbuilding Fereration: Facts and Statistics 28 Preferences, quality and choice in new-build housing Joseph Rowntree 2004 27
looking to buy a house considered a garden to be among the main features sought. Less predictably those who most wanted a garden were in their twenties or thirties, perhaps reflecting their usefulness for households with younger children. The importance of gardens as a key priority is further evidenced by the Chapman Hendy Survey who found it was rated as the second most important factor coming immediately after location. It was also found to be an important factor by the School of Planning and Housing Study of 2001. The Joseph Rowntree 2004 survey was not huge but provides the following data.
Property type m2 Sample size Mid terraces 42.5 70 End terrace 67.1 72 Town houses 141 25 Semi-detached 167.9 243 Detached 175 238
The English Housing Survey also used to provide information about the outside of the house and in 200829 found that 93% of houses had a private plot at both the front and rear although 30% of front plots had been paved to provide parking. Where dwellings had a private plot at the front, these were on average 7.2m deep. Rear plots tended to be larger averaging 15.3m in depth. Both the housing survey data and the Rowntree survey seem reasonably consistent with the picture for gardens in established Bloxham housing developments but certainly not with new-build which have much less outside space. We include this because the BNDP questionnaire shows that ageing empty nesters are simply unwilling to move to dwellings with room sizes and garden sizes that developers have decided are the emerging norm for new homes. This is also not peculiar to Bloxham: it echoes what is already well-researched and documented elsewhere but which house-builders and developers seem not to hear.30 We note the quote, “There can be little doubt that space standards are now in principle capable of being considered a ‘material planning consideration’ and a component of ‘sustainable development’31 “ and are of the opinion that in a rural setting this should also include garden space.
Fig – Contrast garden sizes of new and 1980s housing in Bloxham
29 English Housing Survey Housing stock report 2008 30 LV Research on family home sizes 31 Mayor of London – Housing Space Standards 28
Whether the trend towards what are often described as “postage stamp sized” gardens is driven by purchasers seeking low-management properties, developers seeking high profits or planning authorities seeking efficient use of land remains very unclear. Surveys indicate that the idea that nowadays young people don’t want the bother of a garden applies only to DINKYs. For many an adequate sized garden is a high priority. The prospect of Bloxham empty-nesters downsizing, thereby freeing family homes, is low if the only available homes have gardens of unacceptable size and privacy. 29
Bloxham
Neighbourhood Plan
Housing Need and Availability
Updated July 2014 30
2) Housing Need and Availability
a) Summary
The extent of recent development in Bloxham is orders of magnitude greater than the statistical norm for rural areas. We concur with the submitted CDC Local Plan that villages should accommodate small numbers of additional dwellings by infill or minor development. Since 2012 has already taken many times the number of houses that the various versions of the Local plan are expecting villages like ours to accommodate Because recent development has outstripped any accompanying infrastructure – subject to supporting housing need data - we should use the duration of the plan as a period of consolidation already approved developments until infrastructure catches up with existing permissions. This should apply particularly to primary school places where an absence of places is hugely disruptive to families and highly unsustainable in terms of exacerbating the already dire school-run traffic situation.. We recognise that the recent Oxon SHMA data has resulted in some upward revision of numbers in the final Local Plan. The CDC SHLAA lists some of the land that may be available for development along with brief assessments. We do not necessarily concur with these brief assessments. We do not intend specifying precise locations for development. Locally, those that have done so have found their plans overtaken by events. We will set out a list of “desirable attributes” against which proposed developments will be judged. The aggregation of a multitude of housing concepts into the single term “affordable housing” is (deliberately?) confusing and it is evident that many – possibly most - residents have little or no grasp of what the term means. This has repeatedly been a regrettable impediment to meaningful consultation about this topic. The HNS section of the Questionnaire indicates only 3 people on the housing register seeking accommodation in Banbury. Given the huge scale of already agreed development in Bloxham, supply is certain to surpass need for those with a direct connection to the village. Indeed 80% of those said to be seeking a house in the village were in a dwelling owned by themselves or their family. Recent and proposed developments demonstrate a huge mismatch between the aspirations of empty nesters who might be tempted to downsize and the type of dwellings developers seem to prefer to build. Most will stay rattling around in 4 bedroomed family homes rather than move to high-density developments with ‘no room to breathe, no gardens and roads where two cars can barely pass each other.’ Demand by those with a local connection for affordable rented housing in Bloxham has essentially been satiated by the huge recent growth of the village. Shared ownership housing, however, is something a significant proportion (24%) of the village support. 31
b) Sources of data There is data from Defra’s Statistical Digest of Rural England 201232 Data from the Parish Council Freedom of Information Requests to CDC The SHLAA The SHMA the 2010 Parish Plan the 2014 NP questionnaire The Updated Local Plan (Sept 2014) General sources – Defra, DCLG etc. etc.
c) Comparison of Bloxham house-building with national norms. Defra’s Statistical Digest of Rural England 201233 provides data on house-building as shown in the graph that follows. - The national mean for housing starts in significantly rural areas 2004/5 – 2011/12 was around 21 per 10,000 population per year. - The Bloxham population in 2011 was 3374. I.e. Much less than 10,000. o Bloxham might expect 21 * 3,374/10,000 = 7 dwellings per year - The corresponding period to 2004 -2012 saw Bloxham receive o 233 permissions in 8 years o 233/8 = 29 per year or 29/7 = 4.14 times of the norm for England Since then the rate of permissions has accelerated. - The period from 2008-20012 has seen o 344 permissions in 4 years o 344/4 = 86 per year or 86/7 = 12.28 times of the norm for England
32 Defra’s Statistical Digest of Rural England 2012 33 Defra’s Statistical Digest of Rural England 2012
32
Over the past 10 years Bloxham has seen house building accelerate to over 12 times that of the rural average!
d) Housing Permissions Data from the Parish Council
Recent Housing permissions Even on existing permissions we will have 200 more houses over the next year or so.
No. on Existing YEAR Approved Year Built planning No. Built Location on site permission 1995 1996 2 2 Bradford Court 1999 2000 5 5 Hartshill Court 2000 2001 3 3 Waters Courts 2002 2002 2 2 Barley Croft 2002 2 2 The Old Forge 2004 2007 1 1 Garden 1 Schofields Way 2005 2009 74 74 Collins Drive etc. 2005 2006 14 14 Bloxham Court 2005 2006 2 2 Barford Road 2005 2006 28 1 Godswell Park Care Home 2006 2007 5 5 Bloxham Grove 2006 2007 27 27 Crab Tree Close 2006 2010 2 1 garden 2 Iley house Banbury Road 2006 2011 1 1 Garden 1 Tadmarton Road 2007 2011 3 1 garden 3 May Tree Banbury road 2007 2011 5 1 garden 5 Temple Close 2008 2011/12 61 61 Aldous Drive 2009 2012 2 1 Garden 2 Queens Street 2010 2012 1 1 Garden 1 Rosebank Chapel St. 2012 5 Old Deer Park 2012 2012 2 2 Exchange Lane 2012 2013 2 1 garden 1 Claypits 2012 2013 10 10 Godswell Park Appartments 2012 36 Travellers Site 2013 3 1 garden 3 Greenup 2013 2 1 garden 2 Ebbs Neuk at appeal
2014 75 0 Gladman
2014 60 0 Millers Post March 2014 - 85 0 Frampton Post-March 2014 30 0 TW- Outline application Since 2000 435 223 Since 2005 420 215 Extant permissions 220
33
Housing Growth
34
In terms of housing approvals Bloxham has seen growth of 23% since the 2011 census and almost 43% since the 2011 census. Year Approvals Cumulative %age 2001 0 0 2002 4 0.4 2003 0 0.4 2004 1 0.5 2005 118 10.3 2006 35 13.2 2007 8 13.9 2008 61 19 2009 2 19.2 2010 1 19.2 2011 0 19.2 2012 55 23.8 2013 5 24.3 2014 220 42.6 2020 20 44.3 The 2001 census figure of 1198 dwellings is used as the baseline.
35
e) How many more houses should be built in Bloxham There are 3 pre-existing inputs to this question: 1. The Cherwell Local Plan 2. The BNDP Questionnaire 3. The Parish Plan
1. The Cherwell Local Plan - Villages Policies
We have struggled to keep up with the rate of change in the Local plan and we cannot guarantee all documents have kept up-to-date with what is happening. The Neighbourhood Plan has also been re- worded to make clearer the numbers of “allowable” dwellings that count towards our contribution to the Local Plan. Even so Cherwell have indicated they see the vast bulk of new housing going into the Banbury and Bicester areas and not the villages. The villages are grouped into 3 categories.
Category Villages Development A Adderbury, Ambrosden, Arncott, Begbroke, Bletchingdon, Minor Development Bloxham, Bodicote, Chesterton, Cropredy, Deddington, Finmere, Infilling Conversions Fringford, Fritwell,Hook Norton, Kidlington, Kirtlington, Launton, LowerHeyford, Milcombe, Sibford Ferris/Sibford Gower, Steeple Aston, Weston -on –the-Green, Wroxton, Yarnton B Blackthorn, Claydon, Clifton, Great Bourton, Hempton, Lower Infilling Heyford, Middle Aston, Milton, Mollington, South Newington, Conversions and Wardington C Other villages Conversions
Policy Villages 1 assigns 750 dwellings across the villages. It also assumes 754 windfall dwellings across the entire area. At this stage there is little indication as to how these might be allocated to the villages. There are: 25 category A villages, 11 Category B villages 35 Category C villages plus Upper Heyford We have assumed : Category B and C villages only accommodate a total of 50 dwellings between them Category A villages divide the remaining 700 planned dwellings according to the relative village size This is clearly a high-level approach that would need to be modified should any of the “sustainability tick-boxes” of the CRAITLUS review be found to have not taken account of the capacity rather than just existence of services etc.
36
Av Village Population Houses %Populaton % Houses x 700 Percent Adderbury 3011 1233 6.7 6.7 6.7 47 Ambroseden 2819 1153 6.3 6.3 6.3 44 Arncott 1738 860 3.9 4.7 4.3 30 Begbroke 792 326 1.8 1.8 1.8 13 Bletchingdon 910 357 2 1.9 1.95 14 Bloxham 3374 1279 7.5 7 7.25 51 Bodicote 2126 872 4.7 4.7 4.7 33 Chesterton 850 330 1.9 1.8 1.85 13 Cropredy 717 321 1.6 1.7 1.65 12 Deddington 2123 876 4.7 4.8 4.75 33 Finmere 466 175 1 1 1 7 Fringford 602 249 1.3 1.4 1.35 9 Fritwell 736 288 1.6 1.6 1.6 11 Hook Norton 2117 867 4.7 4.7 4.7 33 Kidlington 13723 5542 30.5 30.2 30.35 212 Kirtlington 988 415 2.2 2.3 2.25 16 Launton 1204 490 2.7 2.7 2.7 19 Lower Heyford 492 209 1.1 1.1 1.1 8 Milcombe 613 248 1.4 1.4 1.4 10 Sibford Gower 508 214 1.1 1.2 1.15 8 Sibford Ferris 476 165 1.1 0.9 1 7 Steeple Aston 947 380 2.1 2.1 2.1 15 Weston on the Green 523 218 1.2 1.2 1.2 8 Wroxton 546 254 1.2 1.4 1.3 9 Yarnton 2545 1046 5.7 5.7 5.7 40 Total 44946 18367 100 100 100 702 * 700 assumes Category B & C villages take 50 dwellings between them. All data from 2011 census
I.e. Purely based on size Bloxham would expect to accommodate 50 of the 750 planned dwellings. In fact Bloxham has seen rapid recent expansion without corresponding improvements in infrastructure. The CRAITLUS report, which allocates Category A status to Bloxham, is heavily flawed insofar as it is a high level report that looks at services but NOT capacity. For example: 1. Schools – CRAITLUS notes we have a primary school but we know it will not accommodate even existing permissions in the short term. (It may just about do so in the medium term.) 2. Connectivity – CRAITLUS assumes Bloxham is sustainable in terms of walking and cycling. A 2015 Sustrans report says just the opposite. That connectivity to services is poor – especially from the south of the village. 3. Shops – CRAITLUS notes we have a larger than average collection of shops in the High Street. However – because the village is now so large two-thirds of dwellings are out of the range people are prepared to walk carrying shopping. 37
If we consider both the 750 planned and 754 windfall rather than simply the 750 planned then our total share would be 102 dwellings.
We would argue we do not have the capacity to take even percentage than our size would indicate appropriate and certainly should not be expected to accommodate a greater share than this. We advocate accommodating the April 2014 permission for 85 houses upon Milton Road East plus a further 20 windfall houses Total 105 dwellings.
Rural Areas Trajectory inc Kidlington Completions 2011-2014 247 196 Permissions 31/03/2014 888 255 New Allocation 2014-2031 750 754 Total Supply 2011 - 2031 1638 754 2014/15 133 58 2015/16 130 58 2016/17 130 58 2017/18 130 58 2018/19 130 58 2019/20 130 58 2020/21 130 58 2021/22 100 58 2022/23 100 58 2023/24 100 29 2024/25 100 29 2025/26 75 29 2020/27 50 29 2027/28 50 29 2028/29 50 29 2029/30 50 29 2030/31 50 29 Total 1885 950
1. The BNDP Questionnaire The questionnaire showed that residents overwhelmingly favoured: only minor development and infill only the minimum number of extra houses required by the local plan
38
2. Data from the Parish Plan
Should more houses should be built in the village (Parish Plan data)
AgeGroup No Yes Don’t Know 8 - 11 50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 12 - 15 66.67% 0.00% 33.33% 16 - 24 73.91% 8.70% 17.39% 25 - 34 77.27% 22.73% 0.00% 35 - 44 66.67% 17.65% 15.69% 45 - 54 68.75% 18.75% 12.50% 55 - 64 77.61% 13.43% 8.96% 65 - 74 75.00% 6.25% 18.75% 75 + 66.67% 14.29% 19.05% Total 71.84% 14.08% 14.08%
There’s not much scope for interpretation here! More houses? No thanks!
f) What affordable housing is there in Bloxham? There is great concern about the confusion caused by the term affordable housing. That this confusion exists is clear from recent public meetings. Most residents understand it as housing that their children might be able to afford to buy. They have no idea your situation must justify a place on the housing register and that new affordable homes in Bloxham may well not be available to them. A recent (July2014) FOI Request to CDC provided the following data.34
Number of affordable Number of shared ownership Year social rented dwellings dwellings 2009 Not available Not available 2010 106 0 2011 106 4 2012 106 4 2013 116 11 2014 120 16 + existing permissions 174 39
34 via Shukri Masseri CDC 6/08/2014 39
The static figure from 2009-2012 doesn’t fit well with the amount of development that was occurring nor with the fact a previous FoI request in May 201235 asking what percentage of the affordable housing that has gone into villages within 5 miles of Bloxham over the past 3 years received a reply that 70% had gone into Bloxham! The 2014 response also stated that information was not available as to what percentage were taken up by people with a village connection. However, 2013 request asking what percentage of the affordable housing in Bloxham had gone to people with a clear connection to the village replied36 that the majority had gone to people with no connection to the village as people from the village had not applied for it.
54 affordable social houses will be available in the coming year 23 shared ownership houses will be available in the coming year.
The 2.3:1 ratio of affordable social housing to shared ownership housing agreed for new developments appears to be consistent with the draft local plan statement,” All qualifying developments will be expected to provide 70% of the affordable housing as affordable/social rented/affordable rented dwellings and 30% as other forms of intermediate affordable homes. “
Development Social rented Shared ownership Ratio Barford Rd 18 8 2.25 Milton Rd 21 9 2.33 Tadmarton Rd 15 6 2.50
This is an ‘over-arching value’ which there is no reason to believe will mesh well with the specific needs of Bloxham.
g) What housing does Bloxham want? The only up-to-date source of information here is the BNDP Questionnaire included a housing needs survey. This collected of data upon issues such as: 1. Residents wanting to move within Bloxham or elsewhere 2. People with a village connection wanting to move into Bloxham 3. The type of tenancies required
4. The type of housing required. 5. Affordable housing and local demand (The data is based on a sample 605 houses representing 45% of the population.)
1. Types of tenancy When asked, “What sort of tenancies does the village need” the replies generated the following response.
35 Carolyn Mangnall CDC 14/5/2012 36 Marianne North, Housing Needs Manager CDC March 2013
40
a. The overwhelming desire, whether from all residents or from those actively seeking homes is self-ownership. b. By far the next biggest category favoured is shared ownership probably because people see this as a ‘foot on the ladder’ to self-ownership with the possibility of ‘staircasing.’ c. This does not accord with the general ratios recommended by CDC although variation from this ratio for the village of Bloxham would be hard to construe as being a challenge to a strategic element of the Local Plan.
2. Residents wanting to move a. A large number of respondents (189 or 32%) said they would be interested in downsizing in the next 2 – 10 years. b. They did, however, have specific criteria for any downsize property (not high-density, garden space, proper on-site parking space etc.) which would rule out many if not most of the properties for which permissions have recently been given. c. 153 households said someone from the household would be looking to move within the next few years – around half within Bloxham and half elsewhere. d. When people who said they needed a new home were asked, “why?” some 36% wanted a smaller home and 26% a bigger home. Some 20% wanted to move nearer to family and 18% set up a first home. 62% already owned their own home.
3. People with a village connection a. 88 people said they knew people who would like to return to Bloxham. We’ve no idea how many households this refers to as different people may be mentioning the same families. b. The most common reason given was to be near family and 96% were said to want detached or semi-detached houses or bungalows. c. Only 3 out of all those seeking a home in Bloxham said they were on the housing register such that they might be eligible for affordable housing.
4. The type of housing a. In answer to the question, “What sort of housing does Bloxham need?” the biggest general category (45%) was bungalows. Interestingly only 27% cited bungalow as a major criteria for downsizing. Even so it seems to indicate a demand for around 40 – 50 bungalows – BUT see 1b above. b. There was little demand for terraced properties whether two storey or bungalows. c. Residents were strongly opposed (458:89) to tall three-storey houses. o There are shared ownership schemes where you buy between 25% and 75% of the home and pay rent on the remaining share. The idea that tenants would staircase: buy an extra share over a period of time but its early days to know the extent to which this will actually happen. It is not clear whether our N.P. could seek that a high proportion of affordable homes should be for shared ownership rather than rent. The F.o.I . data also casts doubt upon the oft-quoted premise that a low number of lower council tax band dwellings imply a need for more affordable housing. It seems demand for smaller units on the newer Bloxham estates by people with a village connection has already been satiated.
There has been more affordable than required by people with a Bloxham connection. Many residents are not at all clear what the term “affordable housing” means. The Housing Needs survey indicates negligible demand from people with a village connection for rented affordable housing but that there was slightly more demand for shared ownership housing. 41
h) The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) A new SHLAA was published in October 2013. It is most quickly assimilated in map form. These are fields that might be considered suitable for development and which CDC have performed some preliminary evaluation of.
The SHLAA contains CDC preliminary appraisals of the various proposed development sites but we are reluctant to take these at anything other than a ‘quick look’ by CDC for reasons including: the most recent SHLAA was never subject to consultation some of the more recently approved sites were never envisaged as appropriate on the previous or present SHLAA. Not all the SHLAA sites are confirmed as being available There are several other potential sites that appear not to have been evaluated. The SHLAA seems to be focussed on land with the potential for larger developments and in accordance with the CDC Local Plan we will be seeking seek only infill or minor development
Sites already having permission The sites in below have already won planning permission. Site Whereabouts What Map BL05 Barford Rd 75 houses
BL015 Milton Rd 85 houses
BL024 Tadmarton Rd 60 houses
42
We would not necessarily concur with the (admittedly brief) CDC SHLAA evaluations. We would weight in favour of proposed developments likely to minimise : - harm to the conservation area, landscape and soft village edges; - additional traffic volume through existing hotspots; - erosion of the undeveloped areas separating Bloxham from its neighbours; - loss of existing village open-space; and - the need for car-use to access facilities within the village. 43
i) Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA)
This was published in March 201437. The revised figures for the SHMA are based on meeting the housing need identified, supporting committed economic growth (including the City Deal) and improving housing affordability as required by Government.
This increase is massively more than previous estimates and has already had major implications for the acceptability of the draft CDC Local Plan.
It concludes that there is a need for up to 93,560 – 106,560 additional homes. Of these 22,800 would need to be in Cherwell as set out below.
CDC has largely stuck to its policy of focusing development in Banbury and Bicester but the revised Local Plan does require villages to carry many more dwellings than the earlier version..
j) Housing Type and the Local Plan The Local Plan update quotes the SHMA conclusions about the types of accommodation required.
1bed 2 bed 3bed 4 bed Market 5 25 45 25 Affordable 25-30 30-35 39-35 5-10 Overall 15 30 30-35 5-10
We would caution any temptation to apply this outside of the urban context in which 81.5% of the population live.38 The drift of younger people to urban centres to study and work is well documented39. These young people make up the majority of those seeking 1 or 2 bedroom accommodation. Our Housing Needs Survey revealed no demand for such accommodation.
37 Oxfordshire SHMA 38 ONS Comparing urban and rural areas 39 Statistical Digest of Rural England 2012 44
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
The Ageing population
45
3) An Ageing population?
a) Summary This section of the report fully supported by the Housing Needs Survey data is available.
During the duration of this plan around 200 households will look to see if there is attractive downsize accommodation in Bloxham. Very few will find it and most will consequently stay put under-utilising family homes. We advocate applying a positive weighting to planning requests for 2 and 3 bedroomed homes that will prove attractive to older people moving from large 4 bedroom properties in pleasant settings. (This does not include high-density urban style estate houses that we know older people in Bloxham will not even consider.) We recommend all new homes should be built to lifetime homes standards with built in adaptability for those with mobility issues. If this is not attainable then at least 20% of open market homes should meet such criteria.
b) Sources of Data Section 1 of this report DCLG Sustainable planning for housing in an ageing population40 Oxfordshire Housing Market Assessment: Final Report December 200741 Oxfordshire Housing Market Assessment 201442 CDC Strategic Housing Market Assessment review and update 201243 Statistical Digest of Rural England 2012 - September 201244 Oxfordshire County Council population forecasts January 2014 Summary report45 BNDP Questionnaire Housing standards review: technical consultation46
c) Demographic Change There are various projections of how the age profile of the population will change nationally and locally as set out in Section 1 of this report. What they all have in common is that the proportion of the elderly will rise steeply during the period of this plan. that enabling them to retain an independent life at home for as long as possible is essential from an economic perspective. We include data from the Oxfordshire Population Forecasts 2014 below as one indication of the size of the challenge.
Cherwell Men >65 % Increase Women >65 % Increase 2011 9700 - 11300 - 2016 11900 22.7 13500 19.5 2012 13800 42.3 13800 22.1 2026 15600 60.8 15600 38.1
40 DCLG Sustainable planning for housing in an ageing population 41 Oxfordshire Housing Market Assessment: Final Report December 2007 42 Oxfordshire Housing Market Assessment 2014 43 CDC Strategic Housing Market Assessment review and update 2012 44 Statistical Digest of Rural England 2012 45 Oxfordshire County Council population forecasts January 2014 46 Housing Standards Review technical consultation Sept 2014 46
– And the increase gets bigger as one moves up the age range. The number of Bloxham residents aged 70+ as calculated in the first section. Approx. Percentage of post-70 year olds in Bloxham 2011 = 13% (approx. 450 people) Approx. Percentage of post-70 year olds in Bloxham 2026 = 26% (approx. 900 people)
d) Why does this matter? There are three major implications if residents are to remain able to manage independently: 1. Size of dwelling: many will be living in homes increasingly too big to manage 2. Nature of dwelling: it’s easier to build to lifetime homes standards than to adapt afterwards. 3. Connectivity: the need to ensure non-car access to services for a less mobile population.
e) Physical limitations and Age From age 60 onwards there is statistical increase in the limitations people experience with regard to activity. 47 This is the cause of the implications previously listed.
Further evidence comes from the ONS United Kingdom: Life expectancy (LE) and disability-free life expectancy (DFLE) tables which give the male life expectancy around 78 but the average ‘disability free life expectancy’ as only 80% of this. i.e. around 63.48
f) Downsizing and the national context Studies on UK downsizing indicate that: 1. There is also strong evidence many older people enter a state of denial about their failing health and tend to defer downsizing until it becomes crisis-driven.49 50
47 ONS Measuring National wellbeing 48 ONS Disability free life expectancy 47
2. There is also evidence that the current housing shortage is encouraging older people to hang on to larger homes than they need as a safety precaution against their offspring becoming homeless. 3. The DCLG publication - Sustainable planning for housing in an ageing population51 notes that much new housing is often unappealing to older homeowners who might otherwise be interested in downsizing. 4. Only 12% of people over-60 do actually downsize in the UK and only half of that number do so locally. (Many of the rest probably move nearer to family members.) 5.
The evidence is of people downsizing where pleasant accommodation is available but not to the dense urban style developments recently foisted upon Bloxham against the wishes of residents. People mostly downsize by one bedroom.
g) Downsizing and the Bloxham context The demographic data earlier in this document makes clear there are many ‘empty-nesters’ in Bloxham rattling around in larger houses than they need52. The main BNDP questionnaire shows that 80% of people feel new homes should be readily adaptable to accommodate older people and those with limited mobility. The BNDP questionnaire also shows a significant proportion of the population (32%) may be interested in downsizing in the period of this plan if suitable properties were available. These same people also think there should be minimal additional new building given the massive recent expansion! The qualities these people would require of a new home do not mesh well with what developers have tended to provide during that expansion. There is much anecdotal evidence that echoes the national findings. I.e. Whilst we have seen a massive injection of smaller urban-style dwellings on the recent “off-the-peg” estates these have attracted very few existing ‘empty-nesters’.53 The same is not true of the high-quality Godswell House apartments where it seems around half were immediately snapped up by local residents. Building more small dwellings is of itself unlikely to be enough to induce empty-nesters in Bloxham to free up family homes. Higher-quality dwellings seems to be the key.
h) Downsizing and the SHMA The mix advocated by the 2007 SHMA54 for downsizing housing is: 1 beds 14% 2 beds 37% 2 beds + space 49%
This distribution may not offer an appropriate solution in Bloxham for a variety of reasons:
49 ILC-UK Factpack 2014 50 Downsizing in later life and appropriate housing size across our lifetime 51 Sustainable planning for housing in an ageing population 52 See 25 million unoccupied bedrooms by the intergenerational fairness Foundation 53 See also The Telegraph Comments - Sept 9th 2015 – Oldies like me would downsize if properties were better. 54 The 2007 SHMA no longer appeared to feature on the CDC website at the time of writing. 48
One person households are around 30% less common in Bloxham than UK or district average. Many residents are used to a 4 bedroomed house and can afford to retain sufficient space to properly accommodate visiting friends and relatives. Downsizing by 1 room is the norm and so 1 bed and small 2 bed houses are unlikely to appeal to our particular ‘downsize population.’
The 2012 SHMA55 notes ‘… in reality households will live in what they can afford, and may substantially over-consume housing if they can afford to do so i.e. under-occupy…’ and also states, “We will need more downsizing homes for sale which will appeal to empty nester owners, and help to tempt them to move out of their family homes, releasing these for potential occupation by families with children. “ The 2014 SHMA notes, “For some of these households, providing attractive smaller properties could be appealing and encourage them to downsize.56”
We have seen little cognizance in recently permitted developments to do other than go for standard urban style estates which have very limited appeal to those who can afford to be choosy. Residents with failing mobility are likely to consider bungalows an attractive proposition and the HNS strongly supports this view although it is only one of several criteria for downsize housing.57
i) Potential numbers of downsizers in Bloxham
We can look at: 1. National data 2. Bloxham Questionnaire data
1. National data National data and the demographic change set out in the first section of the report indicates: a. We have ~ 700 people over 60 (singles and couples.) b. Around 40% of over 60s live in in single households58 possibly rather less in Bloxham. c. This equates to around 280 single households and 210 couples = total 490 dwellings. d. If 12% of over 60s downsize this represents 12% of 490 dwellings = 60 dwellings e. Nationally only half move locally and so 0.5 * 60 = 30 dwellings. This offers a simplistic ‘snapshot’ look at numbers of elderly which in reality may be increasing sharply during the period of the plan.
2. BNDP Questionnaire a. 189 households (32%) said they would be looking to downsize in the next 2 – 10 years. b. Scaling this for all households gives a figure of 428 households – not very different to the above. c. What IS different is these are people who are explicitly saying they would want to downsize if something suitably attractive and convenient was available.
There is a demand for attractive downsize housing but if all that’s available is high- density, urban-style estate housing then most will choose to continue under-occupying 4 bedroom family homes until a move becomes crisis driven.
55 Page 35 Strategic Housing Market Assessment review and update 2012 56 2014 SHMA – Full Report 57 BNDP Questionnaire Results 58 Insight Oxfordshire 49
j) More flexible and supported accommodation The ageing population inevitably has future implications not only for the NHS but also for the need for homes with varying degrees of support. We have not investigated supported accommodation but other sections will deal with the wisdom of adopting lifetime homes standards on all new buildings in Bloxham. There were questions about types of supported accommodation in the BNDP Questionnaire but few people (around 20%) attempted to answer these – possibly as they do not know much about the topic.
k) Design and quality standards Throughout the consultations people were perplexed that - with a rapidly ageing population - there should be design and quality standards to ensure that those living in affordable homes had dwellings that would easily adapt to their changing needs whereas for open-market homes it was deemed that a significantly lower standard was okay. Basically, people found it difficult to comprehend the rationale behind a policy actively encouraging developers to discriminate between the two sectors knowingly designing future problems into one sector but not the other.59
59 Design and quality standards for affordable homes 50
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
The location of new dwellings
51
4) The location of new dwellings
a) Summary Important factors in evaluating the appropriateness of a site location should favour:
Avoidance of urban sprawl towards neighbouring settlements Low-carbon connectivity (walking & cycling) to key community locations. Minimal additional congestion through traffic hotspots. Minimal negative visual impact upon valued landscapes, objects or public green-spaces. Development calculated to alleviate rather than simply mitigate flooding.
b) Sources of data This purpose of this section is to set out factors which should heavily influence whether a proposed developments is accepted or rejected. As such it deals with principles rather than data and so is relatively lightly referenced.
c) To identify or not to identify? At the commencement of the Neighbourhood Plan the assembled team envisaged identification of land as a key part of the process. During the progression of the NP developers have seized upon the window of opportunity offered by the assumption in favour of development clause in the NPPF to gain permission for three quite large estates that would have been unlikely to be granted outside of these circumstances.
The fact that Cherwell Planning Department have argued for relatively few dwellings in rural villages and that Bloxham has already taken a disproportionate amount of housing leads us to the conclusion that we should only be expected to take a very small number of additional houses during the duration of this plan. It should be possible to accommodate these by infill and minor developments.
We will not seek to identify specific location for additional dwellings. Rather we will set out criteria in the Neighbourhood Planning Document against which new planning applications may be evaluated.
d) General Considerations regarding the location of new dwellings. The key considerations regarding location emerging from the consultations are: Avoidance of urban sprawl around Bloxham ; Inclusive low-carbon connectivity (walking & cycling) to key community locations; Minimal additional congestion through the traffic hotspots; Avoidance of development likely to exacerbate flooding; and Minimal negative visual impact upon valued landscapes, objects or public green-spaces. 52
e) Urban Sprawl around Bloxham The Parish Council have continually sought that development avoids urban sprawl eroding the valued undeveloped spaces separating Bloxham from its neighbours, Milton. Milcombe, Barford, Tadmarton, Bodicote and Banbury. We recognise development has to go somewhere but do not welcome proposals equating to strip development between adjoining parishes.
We recommend a significant positive weighting be given to developments that avoid contributing to strip developments between Bloxham and adjacent parishes.
f) Inclusive low-carbon connectivity The Hampshire Alliance for Rural Affordable Housing (HARAH) Design Guide60 points out the importance of safe pedestrian access to the village centre which they assume includes: Community centre/ village hall Local retail outlet Place of worship Primary school Play facilities or a leisure/sports facility For Bloxham we would add two more: the health centre the secondary school
Note also the use of the word inclusive in the HARAH report. We note that on recent developments whilst the design of affordable dwellings has included building access criteria for those with mobility problems the siting of the estates themselves seems to have paid scant regard to non-car connectivity for the elderly or disabled. (See the Infrastructure report for more detail.) Given the projected increases in the elderly this seems remarkably short-sighted.
It’s also worth noting that in answer to the question ‘What do you least like about the village’ directed at 11-18 year olds a very common answer was ‘traffic’ or as one person put it – ‘Not being allowed around the village on my own because of the traffic!’ Likewise very few people in the village consider cycling along the A361 at school-run times a safe prospect (see Infrastructure & business report.) This is a far cry from the picture of a low-carbon sustainable village painted in the recent reports of developers or indeed by the CDC Craitlus report. Such was our concern as to the true situation we commissioned SUSTRANS to provide a detailed independent and objective connectivity survey.
We recommend a significant positive weighting be given to: Developments offering genuinely safe and easy non-car access to services (particularly schools and shops) for both the able and the disabled. Ideally this should include a professional assessment61 of the walkability to primary and secondary schools taking account of pavement widths and the nature, volume and speed of traffic. Developments offering safe cycle access to the Warriner School but only where this does not entail either cycling along the A361 or crossing it other than at a pedestrian crossing.
60 HARAH Design Guide 61 Road Safety GB 53
g) Traffic Hotspots and congestion The Infrastructure reports sets out these issues in great detail which we will not repeat here. Widely recognised congestion hotspots are: The Primary and secondary schools at drop-off times; The Milton Road junction and mini-roundabout at the end of the Barford Rd; and The High Street at many times of the day.
Just about all reasonably distant village locations are likely to equally impact school drop-off points. The main traffic flow is to and from Banbury and so the focus should be on minimising additional traffic at the mini-roundabout and shops – basically High St and Church St.
We recommend a significant positive weighting be given to developments that minimise additional congestion through the village centre.
h) Visual impact upon valued landscape objects There are a number of elements of visual impact that were discussed by the groups. 1. The conservation area 2. Views of particular importance to the ‘sense of place of Bloxham’ 3. Views that confer a softening rural effect upon the village especially, but not exclusively at the village gateways. 4. Buildings beyond the existing built-up boundary
1. The conservation area Valued views within the conservation area are set out in the Conservation Document62 some of which are also included later in this report.
ALL Developments within the conservation area perceived to have a potentially negative visual impact upon valued objects, as set out in the Conservation Area document, should be subject to firm scrutiny and probable rejection.
2. Views of particular importance to the ‘sense of place of Bloxham’ a. Until recent years the church spire would have been seen from every part of the village. The fact that this is no longer the case should not be used as an excuse for downgrading its importance to residents both religious and non-religious. b. The view of Bloxham School with its arches and towers set behind a large green area contributes significantly to the sense of place of Bloxham and should be protected. The importance of this is apparent from the extent to which it regularly features in the school’s own marketing materials. c. The triangle of pubs around Old-Bridge Road are important both from a historic and social perspective and central to this is the Red Lion gardens for which the village is currently seeking heritage status. Any development upon or around these gardens would have a devastating impact upon what is the main community open-space in the village centre.
Developments perceived to have a negative impact upon views of the Church from ANY part of the village should be subject to firm scrutiny and probable rejection. Likewise the visual impact of Bloxham School buildings and greens should be protected. The openness of the triangle of pubs in Old Bridge Road should be sacrosanct.
62 Bloxham Conservation Area 54
55
3. Views conferring a rural softening effect Recent developments and permissions have done much to erode the soft-edges of some of the main village gateways. As already expressed elsewhere we are keen to avoid using poor practice from the past as a precedent for a lowest-common denominator future. We are keen any new developments protect and enhance such soft edges and in particular would want the recreation ground to be protected from any possible development both to avoid the visual impact this would have on this main entrance to the village as to ensure its on-going availability as a recreation space.
The recreation ground should not be developed.
Preservation of the views to and from Hobb Hill also feature highly in the village consciousness. The PROW combines being one of the few traffic-free paths within walking distance of the village centre with some spectacular views of the village.
56
4. The importance of space We also note that in general rural settings are of lower density than urban and the assumption should be that unplanned filling of the remaining open-spaces within the village itself is something that should not happen without leaving adequate space to preserve the rural feel of the village. Apart from the visual impact public access to green-space is also important. Natural England note that 80% of homes in the South-East do not have a green-space within walking distance (300m.) 63 Recent developments in Bloxham are having a major urbanising effect on PROW destroying what young Bloxham residents most liked about the village 64. Developments seeking to remove existing open spaces should be required to demonstrate that they do not negatively impact upon the rural character. In particular, the rural aspect of PROW should be given strong protection.
5. Buildings beyond the existing built-up boundary. Although the main focus has been on visual impact within the existing ‘boundary’ of the village this does not mean we are unconcerned with the visual impact of developments agricultural land beyond this. The parish consists almost entirely of Upstanding Village Farmlands as verified by the Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape study65 and any development of farm buildings should be of a size and style to complement rather than conflict with our ironstone Cotswold-edge setting
i) Flooding
The majority of potential development sites are located within Flood Zone 1. Those in the south west of this area may be partially located in Flood Zones 2 and 3 associated with Bloxham Brook.66
There is also a history of significant “run-off” flooding in the village (see photos.) This does not currently form part of the published FRAs for the village but the Environment Agency is clearly working on these as they now have an interactive map - Risk of Flooding from Surface Water.67
63 An analysis of accessible natural greenspace provision in the South East p27 64 See BNDP Combined questionnaire analysis. 65 Oxfordshire Wildlife and Landscape study 66 CDC SFRA and Maps 67 EA - Risk of Flooding from Surface Water 57
According to the NPPF Para 100 Inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk, but where development is necessary, making it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere.
Bloxham experienced flooding on numerous occasions in recent years. (The photos are from 2007, 2005 & 2013) Flooding in the centre of the village tends to come mostly from the Bloxham Brook for which the EA has reasonably adequate models and monitoring. Flooding at the south-west of the village arises partly from the brook but mostly from run- off for which the EA has only recently published data. It is the latter (photo 1) that) is most problematic and least understood.
We know developers will generally argue engineering solutions (SuDS) to mitigate increased flood risk. We also know Bloxham has a poor record on resilience of electricity supply (see Infrastructure report) which makes drainage systems dependent on electrically pumping rather than gravity a serious concern to the village.
We support the NPPF recommendation of directing development away from areas at highest risk – mostly the south-west of the village. Where proposed developments drain water into the Bloxham Brook upstream of the village we would welcome attenuation capacities calculated to reduce rather than simply mitigate run-off. Where electrically pumped drainage is employed we would seek that designs are such as to avoid flooding of dwellings in the event of temporary electricity failure.
58
59
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
The Rural Nature of our Village
60
5) The Rural Nature of Bloxham
a) Summary.
We recognise that Bloxham already has a diverse collection of housing but reject ‘lowest common denominator’ arguments to justify further erosion of the rural nature of our village. Designs and materials should relate to neighbouring streets and public spaces but should, in general, still lean towards local rural rather than urban styles. Property boundaries should preserve a rural feel – especially towards the village edges. Lighting at the village edges should be in accordance with I.L.E. rural E2 categorisation. Hedgerows should be protected wherever possible and new boundaries should be sympathetic to pre-existing ones.
b) Bloxham – Town or Village? Towns tend to consist of large well-constructed road networks around which cluster a high density of buildings which will include major retail sites, bus/rail stations and many businesses as well as residential properties. A town will consist of a diverse collection of communities often having little in common beyond a few uniting aspects such as the local football team. Villages often have a dominant church and a history largely based around agriculture. Housing tends to be more scattered lower density and of rural design and typically road networks are less effectively developed. There are few retail outlets and limited business parks. A village is much more likely to see itself as a single, largely cohesive, community with its own unique heritage and character. Bloxham is a village and the overwhelming wish of residents is for it to remain that way.
c) Growth – but not any old growth! Bloxham has traditionally been very accommodating of development and expansion. There has undeniably been resistance to some recent developments but this has not been directed at developments per se but at the off-the-peg urban designs plonked into our rural setting with wildly optimistic rationalisations of supporting infrastructure (such as disregard for school capacity, drainage, traffic and connectivity issues) made by those with an interest in pursuing development. Even the fairly recent Keep Bloxham Rural movement NEVER opposed development - indeed its logo positively accepted the idea of growth – but growth sympathetic to the rural sense of place of the village or as it puts it: smarter growth!
The NPPF sets out the need for “protection and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment.” Many residents perceive the reality of its implementation to date to have been one of cumulative urbanisation of a rural Cotswold edge village barely pausing to pay lip-service to the above NPPF statement.
d) Sources of Data Our Neighbourhood Plan seeks to reinforce the above NPPF statement to prevent the otherwise inevitable loss of character of our historic Cotswold-edge ironstone village. In doing so we have drawn upon various pre-existing documents including:
61
CDC Rural Strategy 2009-1468 CDC Building in Harmony with the Environment69 CDC Countryside Design Summary (1998)70 Hampshire Alliance for Rural Affordable Housing (HARAH) Rural Design guide.71 Institute of Lighting Engineers – Guidance notes for reduction of obtrusive lighting.72 CPRE Planning Campaign Briefing 7 - Light Pollution (August 2012)73 Oxfordshire Insight – The Environment74
e) CDC Rural Strategy 2009-2014 This document recognises that Cherwell villages are rich in historic character that is valued highly by its residents. It sets out the need to preserve and enhance Cherwell’s rural built environments and protect and enhance Cherwell’s distinctive landscape characteristics and countryside. We endorse the CDC aim of preserving and enhancing our rural built environment and protecting our distinctive landscape
f) CDC Building in Harmony with the environment The two elements of the above recommendations pertinent to this section are: Landscaping should be integral – not an afterthought. (6.1) Use local materials which are in keeping with the character and appearance of the area. We endorse the CDC aim of proper landscape planning and use of appropriate materials
g) CDC Countryside Design Strategy (1998) ‘The purpose of the Countryside Design Summary is to guide development in the rural areas so that the distinctive character of the district's countryside and the settlements and buildings within it are maintained and enhanced.’ It notes that some 20th century development has taken little or no account of the village’s landscape setting, its historic form or local vernacular. Ignoring the past in this way can lead to the standardisation of the rural areas and is a major concern to local people.
We both note and endorse the concern about creeping urbanisation that is described in this document which, despite its age, is still quoted in the Local Plan evidence base.
h) The CDC Landscape Assessment (1995) The 1995 CDC Landscape Assessment75 placed Bloxham firmly at the centre of ironstone hills and valleys and this document likewise classifies Bloxham as existing within the ironstone downs area which is well reflected within the older parts of the village.
68 Cherwell rural strategy 2009-14 69 CDC Building in Harmony with the Environment 70 CDC Countryside Design Summary 71 Hampshire Alliance for Rural Affordable Housing (HARAH) Rural Design guide 72 Institute of Lighting Engineers – Guidance notes for reduction of obtrusive lighting 73 CPRE Planning Campaign Briefing 7 - Light Pollution (August 2012) 74 Oxfordshire Insight – The Environment 75 CDC Landscape Assessment 62
It notes the need to site developments where they will not be prominent, visually intrusive or out of character. It also notes the prevalence of two-storey terraced and detached houses. Trees and hedges should be retained to conserve the small-scale character of much of the landscape. Where new planting is required to help integrate new development into the landscape, this should reflect local landscape structure and character.
We fully endorse the need to protect and enhance the ironstone downs character of our village. We consider, subject to the results of the questionnaire, that the current fashion for more prominent three-storey townhouses would be out-of-place in this village setting We endorse the need to protect hedgerows and trees – especially those identified as important in the parish’s own hedgerow conservation document
i) HARAH Design Guide (Sense of Place) This 2013 publication76 recommended by the governments Homes and Communities Agency focuses upon affordable homes in a rural setting but it is amongst the best documents we have seen that set out the obligation to not plonk off-the-peg estates into rural settings. Points from this document include: Developments in rural areas must be particularly sensitive to their context and reflect relationships between buildings, spaces, the landscape and other features that are locally distinctive. The design must reflect the preferences of the parish council and the community as well as professionals such as architects, planners and registered housing providers. Design proposals should be based on positive local precedents and not respond to generic or poor local examples. The design should relate to comparable streets and public spaces at similar locations in the village but might still lean towards the local vernacular style Traditions in landscape design, including boundary treatments, often play a significant role in establishing the character of a village.
This broadly encapsulates all the issues that angered people who formed the Keep Bloxham Rural movement and paraphrases much of what we would wish to incorporate into our Neighbourhood Plan.
We recognise that Bloxham already has a diverse collection of housing styles. We agree that designs should be sympathetic to pre-existing neighbours but insist that this should not be used as a ‘lowest common denominator’ approach to justify cumulative erosion of the rural nature of the village. We endorse the importance of traditional rural boundaries that offer soft rural edges and not stark urban ones.
j) British Standard BS5489:2003 Lighting Standards We do appreciate that lighting plays a significant part in encouraging low-carbon modes of travel at night and so expect lighting installations to be complaint with British Standard BS5489:200377
76 HARAH Design Guide 77 British Standard BS5489:2003 63
k) ILE - Guidance notes for reduction of obtrusive lighting We do, however, also recognise the key element of the ILE document78 and its recognition of different lighting environments: E1: Intrinsically dark landscapes National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, etc. E2: Low district brightness areas Rural, small village, or relatively dark urban locations E3: Medium district brightness areas Small town centres or urban locations E4: High district brightness areas Town/city centres with high levels of night-time activity See also ‘Lighting against Crime.’ 79
l) CPRE Planning Campaign Briefing 7 - Light Pollution This 2012 document basically echoes the previous ILE one in recognising that light pollution has a damaging effect on the character of the countryside. This would also contribute to reducing Oxfordshire’s relatively high carbon footprint.80
Subject to the results of the questionnaire we recommend that all developments, especially those towards the edge of the village, should have lighting that accords with an E2 rural classification.
78 ILE _ Reduction of Obtrusive light 79 p 25 Secure by Design – Lighting against Crime. 80 Local Authority Carbon emissions 64
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Housing Density
65
6) Housing Densities and Bloxham
a) Summary
New developments need to be seen in the context of a progressive increase of housing density nationally. The CDC expected norm of 30/ha is qualified with the need to fit the local character. Lower density is one component of the rural character. To preserve this we would expect new developments to be a maximum of 30/ha. Density discontinuities are an issue for residents. Site designs avoiding sharp discontinuities will be favoured. Potential downsizers tend not to favour recent high-density developments. Developments aimed at the empty-nester market will be favoured.
b) What’s this about? Housing density is included as a separate area because it is such an emotive issue largely because in recent years recommended densities in the UK have increased. In 2010 the national indicative minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare was removed from the national Planning Policy but maximisation of developer and landowner profits provide an inevitable push upwards. This means that when new estates are built alongside existing ones they are typically perceived as being high-density although they may often simply meet a typical prevailing Local Planning minimum requirement of 30 dwellings per hectare. Even the CPRE recognises the need for efficient use of land and it’s Design and Density document 81 and its 2005 housing manifesto 82 points out the objection can be more about design than density.
c) Examples of housing densities The following Table is taken from a CPRE 2005 document Housing Density - can we get more homes without sacrificing the countryside? 83 It makes clear that high density is not a new concept.
Type of Dwelling Typical Densities per ha Back-to-Back Nineteenth Century Terraces 150 Pre-1919 Terraces 80 - 100 Central London Average (Present Day) 78 Traditional Cornish fishing villages 60 Tunnel-Back, Middle Ring, Bye-Law Housing 50- 75 Victorian villas with gardens 40 Semi-Detached with Modest Gardens 30 Recent Suburban Residential 25 - 28 Current National Average for New Development 27 Bournville Village, Birmingham 15
81 CPRE Design and density 82CPRE Housing Manifesto 83 CPRE – Housing density 66
d) Is high density bad? Not according to the respected CABE in their document Better Neighbourhoods: Making higher densities work84 - although they are talking mostly about urban settings. When residents comment on new developments they frequently talk of local cramming rather than local planning! Postage-stamp sized gardens and parking-lots that lay empty whilst cars clutter the narrow streets are often factual rather than ‘grumpy-old-man’ responses as is made clear in the government’s own 2007 Manual for Streets Evidence85 where Bloxham features as one of 20 sample study sites representing a low density rural setting.
CABE comment Applies to Bloxham? Higher density housing in existing urban areas creates vibrant, But as late as 2007 the DfT classified successful neighbourhoods, and the number and variety of people who Bloxham as low-density rural. live there support local shops, transport and community facilities Higher density neighbourhoods do not mean all higher density housing But recent estates do not convey is the same (a combination of housing types allows for different designs this variety. at different times in a person’s or a family’s life) Higher density housing allows for private outdoor spaces and for But less dense 1980s housing has shared spaces (such as parks) and shared facilities’ both more private and public space!
A LSE /Cambridge study86 concludes that if higher density implies concentrating on smaller units with smaller rooms this is not building for the future and will not help to ensure sustainable densities and acceptable living standards. It also states high densities are only likely to work well if they accommodate people who have the choice about living in that type of housing and these are likely to be younger, aspirant households who will move on to other types of dwellings as their lifestyle changes. But young aspirant people tend to move to metropolitan centres – not Bloxham. They mostly return to Bloxham when family life assumes an importance on a par with work. e) Density and travel patterns There is much research on density and its impact upon the (high-carbon or low-carbon) travel mode. Initial ideas of a cause and effect link between higher densities/reduced parking and private vehicle use do not stand up well to scrutiny. Any correlation is complicated by the fact that those in higher density accommodation generally have less access to private vehicles in which to travel.87 f) National Trends in densities Over the past 20 years densities have moved inexorably upwards especially in London. Greenfield sites have moved from 20 to around 30 dwellings / hectare.88 According to Inside Housing.co.uk density increased by 84 per cent in the seven years up to 2009.
84 Better Neighbourhood 85 DfT Manual for Streets 86 The density debate – Christine Whitehead 87 The Relationships between Urban Form and Travel Patterns. An International Review and Evaluation 88 Land Use Change Statistics (England) 2009 67
Interestingly whilst London has a set matrix of housing densities linked to transport it also has tried to set minimum recommended sizes for rooms and spaces that some boroughs have taken up that are often not met in far less crowded places like Bloxham.89
g) Urban vs Rural densities Typically urban densities are higher not least because of the greater use of high-rise buildings. e.g. The recommended densities in Singapore are 250 / ha.
The CDC Local Plan refers to the Cherwell Submission Local Plan (2013) - Housing Density - Background Paper90 In this paper it quotes “By contrast, the density in rural areas was often much lower. Traditional development in most villages, including those in the District, was of a lower density“and the context of each development site will be an important factor and housing at all densities will need to reinforce and enhance the character of an area.
The emerging CDC Local Plan notes, “The density of housing development will be expected to reflect the character and appearance of individual localities and the design of the proposed development and should be provided at a density of at least 30 dwellings per hectare, however individual circumstances may dictate more appropriate densities.”
We would argue a maximum density of 30 dwellings per hectare is appropriate to preserve the rural character of our village.
h) Bloxham – density changes Densities in Bloxham vary hugely but it is the sharp discontinuities of density created by recent developments that has prompted such anger.
Drastically higher densities are undoubtedly the case for all recent large developments and permissions. The map of the recent Woodlands Park development (blue) compared to the existing Milton and Barford Rd housing (green) illustrates the point. Residents equate the above mismatches as a cavalier disregard for the existing and historical character of the village. This has created an unhelpfully cynical attitude in some residents who would have previously felt more open to ongoing development. There is only limited national statistical data on garden sizes91 but a quick look at the situation in Bloxham trying to select typical gardens rather than ones that make any point produces the picture shown alongside.
Many gardens are smaller than the recommendations of planning documents in
89 Housing supplementary planning guidance 2012 90 http://www.cherwell.gov.uk/media.cfm?mediaid=14561 91 See page 25 of this report 68
London Boroughs where space is at a much greater premium than Bloxham. The question arises as to whether we should be advocating minimum garden sizes as does the London Plan?
Consultations to date lead us to the conclusion: that the densities of new developments are unacceptably high for our rural setting, that there should be more effort to avoid harsh discontinuities with that of neighbouring dwellings even if that requires a degree of ‘density tapering’ on the new site.
Subject to the results from the questionnaire we recommend a positive weighting be given to proposed developments seeking to avoid sharp discontinuities of density and a maximum density of 30 units/ha
i) Density and design as impediments to down-sizing. The other density issue relates to ‘empty-nesters’ who are dissuaded from down-sizing because they totally reject appropriate sized accommodation in what they consider to be high-density, hard, urban style developments. This is not peculiar to Bloxham. Low density and green spaces, in particular, are highly valued by new-build house buyers92 but all too rarely available. It’s clear that denying flexibility here will have the negative consequence that these people continue to rattle around under-occupying large family homes that could be put to better use. Their aspirations are UK wide93 – but Bloxham folk can often afford to choose!
We recommend a positive weighting be given to individual and minor developments of a size, density and style likely to attract downsizers.
j) Minimum Space and room requirements? In London the London Housing Design Guide sets out minimum standards for overall space, rooms and gardens. Other places similarly have recommended minimum values.
Type of dwelling Bedrooms/people Living space (square metres) Flat 1 bedroom, 2 people 50 2 bedrooms, 3 people 61 3 bedrooms, 4 people 74 4 bedrooms, 5 people 90 Two storey house 2 bedrooms, 4 people 83 3 bedrooms, 4 people 87 3 bedrooms, 5 people 96 4 bedrooms, 5 people 100 4 bedrooms, 6 people 107 Three storey house 3 bedrooms, 5 people 102 4 bedrooms, 5 people 106 4 bedrooms, 6 people 113
In March 2014 the Minister for Communities noted, “We believe that it is right that local communities and neighbourhoods have the ability to shape the nature of new development in their local areas. However, a proliferation of localised and varying space standards creates a potentially
92 Preferences, quality and choice in new-build housing Joseph Rowntree 2004 93 The density Debate – Christine Whitehead 69
significant barrier to delivering housing. We will therefore develop a new national standard – not a Building Regulation - which will offer a consistent set of requirements with regard to the internal area of new homes.”
In Bloxham – where space is at much less of a premium than London and high density is not in accord with our rural character we should adopt the forthcoming National Standard recommendations as offering at least a back-stop protection against the worst ‘shoe-box’ tendencies of some developers. 70
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Thinking about Quality
71
7) Quality of Housing Please note – There have been and continue to be many changes at national level – not all of them good – that will impact upon the notes below. E.g. The Code for Sustainable Homes seems to have fallen out of favour and zero-carbon homes policies are in a state of flux. New ‘Optional Building Regulations’ look promising but are not fully in place at the time of writing and so are not easily used within policies. This section will not necessarily be up-to-date at the time of submission.
a) Summary
Any new developments should: Be compliant with the CABE BfL12 recommendations especially in terms of connectivity Meet the CSH recommendations on energy and water to level 4 Meet the Lifetimes Homes Standards – particularly in terms of connectivity, parking and accessibility. Cater for changing in lifestyle across the entire age range. Include implementing some of the optional parts of the proposed revisions of the Building Regulations.
b) What is this section about? This section is about creating housing that provides high quality accommodation through the various stages of life and which pays more than just lip-service to the needs of the environment.
Ignoring increasing energy costs, climate change and the rapid increase in the numbers of elderly is a foolish strategy. Taking account of these at the build stage is massively more economical than subsequently trying to adapt unsuitable buildings. This is about creating high-quality sustainable homes.
c) What documents does it draw upon Our ideas upon these matters draw heavily upon these sources: The Building regulations94 The CABE Building for Life documents95 The Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH)96 NPPF para 95 The Lifetime Homes and Lifetime Neighbourhoods initiatives.97 CDC Building in harmony with the Environment.98 Housing Standards Review technical consultation Sept 201499 Next steps to zero carbon homes100
94 Building Regulations 95 CABE Building for Life 96 Code for Sustainable Homes 97 Lifetime Homes and Lifetime Neighbourhoods 98 CDC Building in harmony with the Environment 99 Housing Standard Review 100 Next steps to zero carbon homes 72
d) An evolving situation Note –Much of the content was discussed within the context of the Code for Sustainable Homes and the Lifetime Homes initiatives. However shortly before going out to consultation (Oct 2014) the government has commenced consulting upon embedding a simplified form of these into Building Regulations options. We leave in the original content but our recommendations may now be phrased in terms of the content of these regulations. (See later.)
e) The Building Regulations These represent a basic minimum standard with which all new buildings must comply. For recently proposed changes see the end of this section.
f) The CABE BfL12 System? We have drawn heavily upon the CABE Building for Life approach. The original 2008 edition101 posed 20 questions about the environment, character, streets and parking and design and construction. The later 2011 edition102 is known as BfL12 because it poses 12 questions. The answers are assessed on a ‘traffic-light’ basis where the ideal is a score of 12 greens! The 12 areas are: Connectivity Facilities and services Public transport Meeting local housing requirements Character Working with the site and its existing context Creating well defined streets and spaces Easy to find your way around Streets for cars and social spaces Car parking Attractive public and private spaces External storage and amenity space
There are detailed descriptions of how to assess each area and the housing group was generally in accord with these with the exception of parking where the experience here (and elsewhere) does not bear out the CABE recommendations.
Our design statements will reflect most of the thinking behind BfL12
g) The Code for Sustainable Homes.
The Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) is the national standard for the sustainable design and construction of new homes. It aims to reduce carbon emissions and promote standards of sustainable design above those of the current minimum set out by the building regulations. The code provides 9 measures of sustainable design:
101 CABE 2008 102 http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/Building%20for%20Life%2012_0.pdf 73
energy/CO2 water materials surface water runoff (flooding and flood prevention) waste pollution health and well-being management ecology
It uses a 1 to 6 star system to rate the overall sustainability performance of a new home against these 9 categories.
Although CSH formed part of government policy it dropped this in August 2013. So - unlike the Building Regulations this is not enforceable unless included as a requirement of local planning policy.
We wish our design statement to incorporate aspects of the CSH as a requirement for all new dwellings and in order to minimise further strain upon our seemingly vulnerable infrastructure we place particular emphasis upon moving towards 5 star ratings with regard to energy /CO2 and surface water run-off.
There is considerable documentation on CSH including: The code for sustainable homes: technical guide103 sets out the requirements of the latest version of the code, and how a code assessment is reached. (See also previous technical guide versions of the code.) The code for sustainable homes: latest official statistics104 shows the number of homes that have been certified to the standards set out in the code’s technical guide. The cost of building to the code for sustainable homes: updated cost review105 sets out the changing costs of code levels in comparison with previous years. The code for sustainable homes: case studies106 provide examples of new homes that have built using the code. They show how the homes have been designed, planned and built and what they are like to live in.
The cost of CSH5 There is a substantial amount of costing data on CSH. For example achieving Level 5 on all areas was estimated to add around £26K to total building costs of a 4 bedroomed house in 2006. Since then some costs will have increased but others (like solar panels) will have fallen dramatically. The typical asking price107 of a 4 bedroom house in Bloxham is around £450- £500K and the additional 5% is unlikely to be an impediment to sale, especially in a period of rising prices and increasing energy costs.
103 Building Sustainable Homes – technical guidance 104 Building Sustainable Homes - Statistics 105 Building Sustainable Homes – Updated Cost Review 106 Code for Sustainable Homes – case-studies 107 Asking prices – Bloxham 74
h) Alternatives to CSH The government has back-pedalled on CSH and although the CSH content remains valid it probably less politically astute to use it. We therefore considered other ways of expressing the desire for genuinely sustainable homes especially w.r.t. energy and water.
Energy The Building regulations use a Target Emissions Rate (TER) that new-build must comply with. The actual Dwelling Emission Rate (DER) should not exceed the TER. Cherwell will doubtless set a local TER. There is also currently consultation108 upon allowable solutions for taking homes towards zero- carbon– some onsite and some by what amounts to carbon offsetting. We do not know when legislation upon this will take place. The expectation is that this will become a requirement for all large developments from around 2016 and will equate to raising the standard of the Building Regulations from around Level 3 to Level 4 under the code for sustainable homes.
We seek that all developments comply with the energy requirement specification of CSH level 4 until such time as the revisions stemming from the referenced document are implemented nationally. We encourage even minor developments to comply with the above.
Water and drainage Cherwell is in an area of water stress and the Local Plan (ESD3) requires a higher level of water efficiency than the Building Regulations, with developments achieving a limit of 110 litres /person/day.
In order to alleviate drainage capacity and water pressure issues we had intended to seek designs to achieve a maximum of 90% of the prevailing local plan water usage requirement (Currently this would equate to around 100 litres /person/day water usage which still only equates to CSH level 3-4.109) We return to this later in the light of proposed changes to the Building Regs
Bloxham is regarded as a flood hot-spot on FRA maps and many residents report having issues with both drainage capacity and water pressure. There is also concern about the increasing amount of pumped drainage when the Bloxham electricity system is historically of poor resilience. Consequently we will require at least this same emphasis on water efficiency.
We would expect designs of new homes to demonstrate that the flooding of property would not occur in the event of local drainage system failure (caused either by extreme rainfall or a lack of maintenance.110 )
108 Next steps – zero carbon homes 109 Building Sustainable Homes – technical guidance p82 110 Building Sustainable Homes – technical guidance p125 75
i) NPPF para 95 etc. The NPPF set out the need to “actively support energy efficiency improvements to existing buildings; and when setting any local requirement for a building’s sustainability, do so in a way consistent with the Government’s zero carbon buildings policy.
We do not go so far as to demand zero-carbon buildings but our recommendations on CSH5 are in the same direction of travel.
j) Lifetime Neighbourhoods Various factors are set-out in the discussion documents Towards Lifetime Neighbourhoods: Designing Sustainable Communities for All (DCLG:2007)111 and the final document DCLG Lifetime Neighbourhoods (2011)112 as important to allow developments for people across the age range. Many of the existing Bloxham estates fail to match-up to the suggestions especially in terms of offering walkable environments for those with mobility challenges. Important issues include: Access – Enable residents to get out and about in the areas in which they live – both physically and virtually – and connect with other people and services in the immediate neighbourhood and beyond. Services and amenities – Affordable access to a range of services such as health, post offices, banking facilities or cash machines. Outdoor spaces – And Locally accessible’ green-space’ that promote social contact.
Incorporating these concepts will, at the same time, create a more disability-friendly environment. Planning permission should take full account of these Lifetime Neighbourhood concepts.
We would weight favourably proposed developments offering disability friendly access to a wide range of village services.
k) Lifetime Homes Only 3.4% of homes have features to make them accessible to a person with mobility problem113 yet the experience in London show that the costs of meeting the Lifetime Homes Standards are low and the homes, once built, offer the potential for huge savings. Many planning authorities have recognised the need to take on-board the present demographic change. E.g., the document Planning for an ageing population (Windsor & Maidenhead)114 contains many useful recommendations as does the previously mentioned document DCLG Lifetime Neighbourhoods (2011)115 Many of the Lifetime Homes Standards 116 are already mandatory for affordable housing yet not implemented on the housing in general. There are sixteen areas set out in the standards and ones we would seek to particularly emphasize are:
111 Towards Lifetime Neighbourhoods 112 Lifetime Neighbourhoods 2 113 English Housing Survety 2011-12 114 Planning for an Ageing Population - Windsor & Maidenhead 115 Lifetime Neighbourhoods 116 Lifetime Homes Standards 76
The distance from the car parking space to the dwelling should be kept to a minimum. Internal and external doors should be of a width to accommodate wheelchairs. Entrance level WC and shower drainage such that someone could ‘live’ on the ground floor and WC and bathroom walls should be capable of firm fixing for grab rails.
Cost of LHS There have been a number of studies into the costs117 and benefits of building to the Lifetime Homes standard and in 2007 we were only talking about £454 per dwelling where design criteria were designed into developments from the outset
We will expect all new dwellings in Bloxham – not just affordable homes – take account of LHS standards
Beyond LHS We would wish to extend the concept slightly to recognise that changing needs come not only with old-age but also with changes such as increased working from home. We would encourage all family homes have at least one room pre-designed to be easily turned into a home office? (E.g. have good daylight, good sound insulation, adequate electrical and broadband sockets etc.)
l) CDC Building in harmony with the environment
This document118 appears to date back to 2000 but contains many recommendations that we would seek to reinforce including: Placing sites in locations that minimises the need for car usage. (3) Providing pedestrian and cycle routes segregated from other forms of transport (5) Landscaping as part of the design – not an afterthought. (6) Do not compromise on privacy (7) Use of active solar energy designs (9) Energy efficient buildings through good insulation (10) Water conservation (16)
All of these simply are consistent with the other recommendations contained within this section.
m) Consultation on Revised Building Regulations.
This has been added late in the day as we have become aware that central government concerns about regional variations in planning regulations such as space, water usage etc. Although the consultation period is still open at the time of writing it probably makes more sense to express things in terms of the most likely regulations rather than ones that the government has already ‘let go.’
117 Lifetime Homes - Costs 118 Building in Harmony with the Environment 77
National Space Standards119 Although part of the above consultation this is not intended as part of the Building Regulations but rather as a free-standing document to replace an emerging multiplicity of local space standards. (See also section on housing density.) It sets out requirements for the Gross Internal (floor) Area (GIA) of new dwellings at a defined level of occupancy as well as floor areas and dimensions for key parts of the home, notably bedrooms, storage and floor to ceiling height. Requirements may be exceeded but at the very least should be met.
Given concern over what residents describe as “shoe-horning” houses into spaces we seek that all new dwellings should at least meet these emerging National Space Standards
Water120 We believe CDC will be seeking designs aimed at 110 litres/person/day. If this does not part of the approved Local Plan we would seek that it still becomes part of the Bloxham N.P.
Given water pressure issues and flooding issues set out in the infrastructure document we would seek that all new Bloxham dwellings are designed to the optional 110/l/p/d specification.
Access to and use of Buildings121 These set out 3 categories of dwellings: M4(1) Category 1 - Visitable dwellings M4(2) Category 2 - Accessible and adaptable dwellings M4(3) Category 3 - Wheelchair user dwellings
Category 1 is the baseline regulation that should apply to all new dwellings. Basically, they are dwellings that can be visited by a wide range of people, including some wheelchair users. Category 2 are dwellings that provide a higher level of accessibility that is beneficial to a wide range of people who occupy or visit the dwelling, and provides particular benefit to older and disabled people, including some wheelchair users; Category 3 are dwellings that are suitable, or potentially suitable through adaptation, to be occupied by wheelchair users
The section on demographics sets out the rapid increase in our ageing population and we already have several residents who are essentially trapped in their own homes as regards independent travel within or beyond the village because of poor accessibility either within the dwelling or immediate neighbourhood.
We would seek that: 3% of homes are wheelchair user dwellings (category 3) 12% of homes are accessible and adaptable dwellings (category 2) 85% of homes are visitable dwellings (category 1)
119 National Space Standard 120 Water Efficiency Standard 121 Access to and use of Buildings 78
n) The Passivhaus Standard We have not followed this up but are aware of the standard which exceeds anything we are looking for in terms of energy efficiency and has been used for affordable homes e.g. in Burnham Overy Staithe, Norfolk.122 It demonstrates that seeking high standards of energy efficiency is not something to be tossed out as unaffordable.123
122 Passivhaus Trust 123 Parish Council Guide to affordable housing 79
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Design Statements 80
8) Design statements
a) Summary We may need to pull all of the content of this document together into a statement that sets out a set of criteria against which proposed developments can be judged. At the time of writing no such decision has been made.
If we do decide to produce a draft design statement the list below may offer some useful prompts. Many are gleaned from resident comments at meetings and pop-up exhibitions.
• Housing Density How squashed together are they? • Housing age Medieval through to 2013 • Housing materials Brick, ironstone, slate, tile, etc. • Housing quality Which level of housing standards? • Sustainability Insulation, solar energy, water harvesting and recycling • Housing size Number of bedrooms • Housing type Detached, semis, terraced, apartments, ‘supported housing’ • Housing height Bungalows, 2 storey, 3 storey, more than 3 storey! • Garden size Large through to postage stamp! Concrete or plants? • Parking location On street, remote parking plot, on driveway, integrated garage • Parking capacity 1 car? 1.4 cars!!! 1.7 cars!!!! 2 cars more • Street-line Directly onto street, small front garden, large front garden • Screening None, fences, walls, trees, shrubs and hedges • Visual impact What impact upon valued landscape objects? • Location SAFE travel to schools, shops, recreation facilities. • Connectivity How easy to get to other parts of the village in general • Drainage Capacity to cope with climate-change and resist flooding. • Others What’s important to you.
b) Simple relative statements or area by area statements? It’s easy to focus on just the central medieval part of the village. Whilst this really does need protecting we also have to offer protection to the rest of the village from the off-the-peg urban housing that developers seem to prefer - urban and rural alike.
Relative design statements such as ‘ fit with the surrounding dwellings’ risks a lowest- common denominator approach by developers. Absolute statements means we must identify specific areas or types of housing to which they apply and this is difficult given the existing diversity that is Bloxham.
The general tenor of the discussions has been one of respect for and avoidance of sharp discontinuities with pre-existing nearby properties whilst leaning towards rural rather than urban design. It is not yet clear whether we will create a design statement or simply produce policies covering the above issues. 81
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Mapping the Village
September 2013 82
9) Mapping the village This is essentially an Appendix showing some of the work people have done to gain an overview of the village before leaping into the detail. Not every map has been included.
a) Summary
1. This is basically an Appendix that provides a quick insight to the village via maps. 2. Bloxham remained a small village from medieval times through to the 1960s. 3. At this point Bloxham commenced its inexorable expansion. 4. The village has only one road north-south and only one major route east-west. 5. Increasingly the Milton Rd is a busy village gateway leading to traffic issues in the area of the Barford Rd. 6. Bloxham has a high-quality conservation area and one of the top 100 churches in the UK. 7. Fanning out from the village centre are layers of housing of different eras and styles. 8. Health provision and churches are based largely centrally in the village. 9. State Schools are at the north and south-west village periphery 10. There are two major recreation grounds one at the south and the other north-central. 11. The available indoor community spaces are fairly well spread around the village although there is no space big enough for a major event other than St Mary’s Church. 12. The main retail hub is in the centre which, in consequence, suffers major traffic problems. 13. The garage, at the south, has morphed into a 2nd significant retail hub. 14. All recent and proposed development has been to the south of the village exacerbating traffic and transport issues to work (in or beyond Banbury) and schools. 15. The village is low on green-spaces. 16. There is an undoubted desire to preserve a rural ‘sense of place’ to the village and to protect landscape views both at the major gateways and within the village itself.
b) Old Bloxham
Bloxham changed little for almost five hundred years.124
124 Most maps courtesy of John Leighfield lecture 19/Feb/2014 83
…And still little change through to the 1900s.
84
…Nor even to the early 1940s – but by the 1960s things were changing.
85
c) Bloxham in Recent Years
More Recent Housing Developments There has been a gradual increase in population and consequently in the housing to support it. The late 19th century saw building along the Banbury Road This was followed by development of The Avenue. More recently came Chipperfield Park in the 1960s Bloxham Park estates in the 1980′s respectively.
The recent past - has seen, as well as many smaller developments, the larger ones listed below. Bloxham Court (Old Squash Club) - CrabTree Close (Bloxham Rd) – 2007 27 dwellings Collins Drive (Milton Rd) 2009 75 dwellings Aldous Drive (Milton Rd) 2012 61 dwellings
The future – most residents would like to see inappropriate large-scale urban-style development replaced by smaller more appropriate development accompanied by proper attention to upgraded infrastructure.
86
The cavalier brushing aside by would-be developers of real but imponderable issues like the traffic and parking in the high street or congestion at the mini-roundabout has undoubtedly polarised the attitudes a significant number of residents from “yes if” into a simple, “No more development. “
Gladmans (Barford Rd) 2014 75 dwellings definitely Framptons (Milton Rd) 2014 85 dwellings definitely Millers (Tadmarton Rd) 2015 60 Dwellings definitely
Vehicular access problems to the village centre mean that If the proposed developments go ahead there may be good reason to start thinking about the village as consisting of a centre with a number of ‘service-hubs’ rather than as a single entity.
87
d) Connectivity Where are the main routes? We need to look at how these connect to community resources and whether as a village that will inevitably grow over the years some decentralisation of resources towards a ‘hub’ model is inevitable. To an extent this is already happening. 125
125 See also more recent Sustrans Report 88
e) Education, Health and Churches State primary and secondary schools are at opposite ends of the village. The churches and Health facilities are at the south/central part of the village.
89
f) Age of more recent buildings. Basically a design statement sets out to establish what does and does not constitute appropriate design within the prevailing context. A starting point might be to describe the age and character zones both within and beyond the conservation area.
90
g) Indoor Spaces There are several indoor spaces that can be hired within the village. Some of these, like the Godswell Theatre, the Baptist Church, the Bowls Club or Bloxham School Hall allow use of the facility only by special arrangement. Others are normally available to hire. Most are small and ‘dated.’ .
91
h) Outdoor Sports, Play and Green-Spaces
Green spaces are meant to be areas that the public have access to where they might spend time relaxing. Many of the CDC identified spaces fail to meet one or both criteria! We have included ‘The square in Queen St which is private land that has nonetheless been accessible for several years. There are recreation grounds at either end of the village.
92
i) Bloxham Conservation Area Bloxham has a conservation area126 dating back to medieval times that extends over much of the central village – although some areas, like Bloxham School, are a mix of older and newer buildings.
126 http://www.cherwell.gov.uk/media.cfm?mediaid=2089 93
j) Listed Buildings The conservation area documents all the listed buildings and monuments
94
k) Character Zones Within the conservation area it is possible to identify broad character zones as shown on the CDC map below that should be taken into account in the event of any infill development.
95
l) Visual analysis
High Street There are several key views along the High Street. These are dominated by the two spires in Bloxham, that of the School and of St. Mary’s Church which sit on the peak of the two hills slopes on which Bloxham is built.
96
Views into and out of the conservation area
There are key views into and out of the conservation area to the east, across the valley from Godswell House to the north accentuating the topography and also views up and down the High Street. This map is taken from the conservation area document but a similar approach could be used to other areas especially with regards to views of the church.
97
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
The Variety that is Bloxham 98
10) The Variety that is Bloxham Again this is essentially an appendix highlighting the scope of the overview that was formed before formulating policies.
a) Summary
This is essentially an Appendix illustrating the wide range of housing that already exists in Bloxham. Whilst we accept and embrace this variety we are also aware that it is not all equally architecturally appropriate and a key element of the design statement would be the avoidance of use of precedent to justify a poor approach to future development. The views we repeatedly heard from residents related to embracing new materials and designs such as to improve performance and avoid unnecessary uniformity but at the same time seeking development that was sympathetic to existing properties and the wider village in terms of general style, density and appearance: admittedly a difficult path to walk!
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Bloxham Heritage Assets
June 2014
106
11) Heritage assets
a. Heritage Gateway items
Bloxham has a large conservation area and a heritage gateway search brings up 149 recorded items. These are listed in the subsequent Tables. A map of the assets gives a quick idea of the extent of this heritage.
This is only the briefest “tour” as there is a separate report on heritage assets.
Asset Type Grade Location Road MILESTONE APPROXIMATELY 200 METRES NORTH WEST OF Milestone approximately 200 metres north west of Listing II
BLOXHAM SCHOOL bloxham school Banbury road
BREWHOUSE AND LAUNDRY AT BLOXHAM GROVE FARM Listing II Brewhouse and laundry at bloxham grove farm Bloxham grove road
TRAPHOUSE AT BLOXHAM GROVE FARM Listing II Traphouse at bloxham grove farm Bloxham grove road
BARN APPROXIMATELY 15 METRES WEST OF STREET FARMHOUSE Listing II Barn approximately 15 metres west of street farmhouse Bloxham road BARN APPROXIMATELY 20 METRES SOUTH EAST OF MANOR Barn approximately 20 metres south east of manor Listing II
HOUSE house Bloxham road
BARN ATTACHED TO WYKHAM MILL FARMHOUSE Listing II Barn attached to wykham mill farmhouse Bloxham road
BRIDGE OVER RIVER SWERE Listing II Bridge over river swere Bloxham road
CROUCH FARMHOUSE Listing II Crouch farmhouse Bloxham road
DOVECOTE APPROXIMATELY 50 METRES EAST OF MANOR HOUSE Listing II Dovecote approximately 50 metres east of manor house Bloxham road GATEWAYS, WALLS AND GATEPIERS WITH WROUGHT IRON GATES Gateways - walls and gatepiers with wrought iron gates Listing II
ATTACHED TO C17 RANGE TO NORTH EAST OF C19 HOUSE attached to c17 range to north east of c19 house Bloxham road
STREET FARMHOUSE Listing Street farmhouse Bloxham road
WYKHAM MILL FARMHOUSE AND ATTACHED SHOP Listing II Wykham mill farmhouse and attached shop Bloxham road WYKHAM PARK (TUDOR HALL SCHOOL) C17 RANGE TO NORTH Wykham park (tudor hall school) c17 range to north east Listing II
EAST OF C19 HOUSE of c19 house Bloxham road Bloxham road - church
MANOR HOUSE Listing II Manor house - lane
IVY COTTAGE, BLOXHAM SCHOOL Listing II Ivy cottage Bloxham school
BEAUCHAMP HOUSE Listing II Beauchamp house Chapel street DOVECOTE APPROXIMATELY 6 METRES SOUTH OF BEAUCHAMP Dovecote approximately 6 metres south of beauchamp Listing II
HOUSE house Chapel street
GARDEN LEE COTTAGE Listing II Garden lee cottage Chapel street
MANOR FARMHOUSE Listing II Manor farmhouse Chapel street
ROSEBANK Listing II Rosebank Chapel street WALL TO MANOR FARMHOUSE FRONTING CHAPEL STREET AND Wall to manor farmhouse fronting chapel street and Listing II
EXTENDING TO REAR OF PROPERTY extending to rear of property Chapel street TWO BLOXHAM MONUMENTS IN CHURCHYARD, APPROXIMATELY Two bloxham monuments in churchyard approx 4 Listing II
4 METRES SOUTH OF CHANCEL, CHURCH OF ST MARY metres south of chancel Church of St Mary BARN APPROXIMATELY 20 METRES SOUTH OF RECTORY Barn approximately 20 metres south of rectory Listing II
FARMHOUSE farmhouse Church street CHEST TOMB APPROXIMATELY 10 METRES EAST OF CHANCEL OF Chest tomb approximately 10 metres east of chancel of Listing II
CHURCH OF ST MARY church of st mary Church street 108
CHEST TOMB TO ROGER MATHEW AND WIFE ANNE Chest tomb to roger mathew and wife anne APPROXIMATELY 30 METRES SOUTH EAST OF CHANCEL OF Listing II approximately 30 metres south east of chancel of church
CHURCH OF ST MARY of st mary Church street
CHURCH STREET STORES Listing II Church street stores Church street COFFIN STONE APPROXIAMTELY 6 METRES WEST OF CHAPEL OF Coffin stone approxiamtely 6 metres west of chapel of Listing II
CHURCH OF ST MARY church of st mary Church street DOUBLE HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 8 METRES NORTH EAST OF Double headstone approximately 8 metres north east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street
GREYSTONES Listing II Greystones Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 11 METRES EAST OF CHANCEL OF Headstone approximately 11 metres east of chancel of Listing II
CHURCH OF ST MARY church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 2 METRES SOUTH EAST OF CHANCEL Headstone approximately 2 metres south east of chancel Listing II
OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 20 METRES EAST OF CHANCEL OF Headstone approximately 20 metres east of chancel of Listing II
CHURCH OF ST MARY church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 27 METRES SOUTH EAST OF Headstone approximately 27 metres south east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 29 METRES EAST OF CHAPEL OF Headstone approximately 29 metres east of chapel of Listing II
CHURCH OF ST MARY church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 30 METRES NORTH EAST OF Headstone approximately 30 metres north east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 32 METRES SOUTH EAST OF Headstone approximately 32 metres south east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 5 METRES EAST OF CHANCEL OF Headstone approximately 5 metres east of chancel of Listing II
CHURCH OF ST MARY church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 6 METRES NORTH EAST OF CHANCEL Headstone approximately 6 metres north east of chancel Listing II
OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE APPROXIMATELY 8 METRES EAST OF CHANCEL OF Headstone approximately 8 metres east of chancel of Listing II
CHURCH OF ST MARY church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 16? APPROXIMATELY 12 METRES SOUTH EAST Headstone dated 16? Approximately 12 metres south Listing II
OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1635 APPROXIMATELY 19 METRES EAST OF Headstone dated 1635 approximately 19 metres east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1641 APPROXIMATELY 28 METRES SOUTH Headstone dated 1641 approximately 28 metres south Listing II
EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1647 APPROXIMATELY 27 METRES SOUTH Listing II Headstone dated 1647 approximately 27 metres south Church street 109
EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary HEADSTONE DATED 1661 AND 1672 APPROXIMATELY 21 METRES Headstone dated 1661 and 1672 approximately 21 Listing II
EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY metres east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1661 APPROXIMATELY 20 METRES EAST OF Headstone dated 1661 approximately 20 metres east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1663 APPROXIMATELY 10 METRES SOUTH Headstone dated 1663 approximately 10 metres south Listing II
EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1664 TO WILLIAM ? APPROXIMATELY 29 Headstone dated 1664 to william ? Approximately 29 Listing II
METRES EAST OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY metres east of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1666 APPROXIMATELY 14 METRES SOUTH OF Headstone dated 1666 approximately 14 metres south Listing II
CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1666 TO THOMAS ? APPROXIMATELY 34 Headstone dated 1666 to thomas ? Approximately 34 Listing II
METRES EAST OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY metres east of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1675 APPROXIMATELY 31 METRES EAST OF Headstone dated 1675 approximately 31 metres east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1681 APPROXIMATELY 12 METRES SOUTH Headstone dated 1681 approximately 12 metres south Listing II
EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1686 APPROXIMATELY 12 METRES SOUTH OF Headstone dated 1686 approximately 12 metres south Listing II
CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1686 APPROXIMATELY 15 METRES SOUTH OF Headstone dated 1686 approximately 15 metres south Listing II
CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1699 APPROXIMATELY 15 METRES SOUTH OF Headstone dated 1699 approximately 15 metres south Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1699 APPROXIMATELY 15 METRES SOUTH OF Headstone dated 1699 approximately 15 metres south Listing II
CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1699 APPROXIMATELY 17 METRES SOUTH OF Headstone dated 1699 approximately 17 metres south Listing II
CHAPEL DOORS OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of chapel doors of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE DATED 1700 APPROXIMATELY 23 METRES EAST OF Headstone dated 1700 approximately 23 metres east of Listing II
CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO ? GASCOINE DATED 1691 APPROXIMATELY 15 Headstone to ? Gascoine dated 1691 approximately 15 Listing II
METRES SOUTH OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY metres south of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO ANNE DAUGHTER OF THOMAS WARNER Headstone to anne daughter of thomas warner APPROXIMATELY 30 METRES SOUTH EAST OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH Listing II approximately 30 metres south east of chapel of church
OF ST MARY of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO ANNE WIFE OF JOHN HAWTIN APPROXIMATELY 30 Headstone to anne wife of john hawtin approximately Listing II
METRES SOUTH EAST OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY 30 metres south east of chapel of church of st mary Church street 110
HEADSTONE TO DOROTHY WIFE OF ROBERT SHILTON Headstone to dorothy wife of robert shilton APPROXIMATELY 30 METRES NORTH EAST OF CHANCEL OF Listing II approximately 30 metres north east of chancel of church
CHURCH OF ST MARY of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO MARGARET WIFE OF JOHN HAWTIN Headstone to margaret wife of john hawtin APPROXIMATELY 30 METRES SOUTH EAST OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH Listing II approximately 30 metres south east of chapel of church
OF ST MARY of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO MATHEW HAILE APPROXIMATELY 23 METRES EAST Headstone to mathew haile approximately 23 metres Listing II
OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO MATHEW POTTER APPROXIMATELY 5 METRES Headstone to mathew potter approximately 5 metres Listing II
EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO ROBERT SHILTON APPROXIMATELY 30 METRES Headstone to robert shilton approximately 30 metres Listing II
NORTH EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY north east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO THOMAS GASCOINE AND WIFE APPROXIMATELY Headstone to thomas gascoine and wife approximately Listing II
14 METRES SOUTH OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY 14 metres south of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO THOMAS WARDER APPROXIMATELY 30 METRES Headstone to thomas warder approximately 30 metres Listing II
SOUTH EAST OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY south east of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO WIFE OF ? GASCOINE APPROXIMATELY 15 METRES Headstone to wife of ? Gascoine approximately 15 Listing II
SOUTH OF CHAPEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY metres south of chapel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO WIFE OF BENJAMIN ROBBINS APPROXIMATELY 30 Headstone to wife of benjamin robbins approximately Listing II
METRES EAST OF CHANCEL OF ST MARY 30 metres east of chancel of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO WIFE OF JOHN AMO? APPROXIMATELY 23 METRES Headstone to wife of john amo? Approximately 23 Listing II
NORTH EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY metres north east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO WILLIAM BLOXHAM APPROXIMATELY 22 METRES Headstone to william bloxham approximately 22 metres Listing II
EAST OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street HEADSTONE TO WILLIAM GOFFE APPROXIMATELY 34 METRES EAST Headstone to william goffe approximately 34 metres Listing II
OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY east of chancel of church of st mary Church street
HOME COTTAGE Listing II Home cottage Church street
HOUSE TO RIGHT OF THE OLD FORGE Listing II House to right of the old forge Church street
MANOR HOUSE FARMHOUSE Listing II Manor house farmhouse Church street
RECTORY FARMHOUSE Listing Rectory farmhouse Church street ROW OF 5 HEADSTONES APPROXIMATELY 6 METRES SOUTH EAST Row of 5 headstones approximately 6 metres south east Listing II
OF CHANCEL OF CHURCH OF ST MARY of chancel of church of st mary Church street
THATCHERS Listing II Thatchers Church street THE COURT HOUSE AND ATTACHED WALL AND DOORWAY DATED The court house and attached wall and doorway dated Listing II
1610 2 METRES TO RIGHT 1610 2 metres to right Church street
THE OLD COTTAGE AND HOUSE TO LEFT Listing II The old cottage and house to left Church street 111
THE COTTAGE THE WEBB Listing II The webb the cottage Church street
YEW TREE HOUSE Listing II Yew tree house Church street 53 church
EASTER COTTAGE WEAVES AND WAXES Listing II Easter cottage street|weaves and waxes
BLOXHAM LODGE Listing II Bloxham lodge Crofton lane
CUMBERFORD COTTAGE Listing II Cumberford cottage Cumberford hill
CUMBERFORD HOUSE Listing II Cumberford house Cumberford hill
IVY COTTAGE PRINTS COTTAGE WACKERFIELD Listing II Ivy cottage - wackerfield - prints cottage Cumberford hill COTTAGE APPROXIMATELY 50 METRES WEST OF SCYCAMORE Cottage approximately 50 metres west of scycamore Listing II
TERRACE terrace Flogging lane
SPRING COTTAGE Listing II Spring cottage Frog lane
BLOXHAM SCHOOL Listing II Bloxham school High street BRIDGE AND PUMP APPROXIMATELY 20 METRES WEST OF JOINERS Bridge and pump approximately 20 metres west of Listing II
ARMS joiners arms High street
ENTRANCE ARCH TO BLOXHAM SCHOOL Listing II Entrance arch to bloxham school High street
REPTON COTTAGE Listing II Repton cottage High street
ST MARYS LODGE Listing II St marys lodge High street
THE OLD BAKERY Listing II The old bakery High street
THE VICARAGE Listing II The vicarage High street Friends meeting house - horn hill road|friends meeting
FRIENDS MEETING HOUSE Listing II* house Bloxham road
ETON HOUSE Listing II Eton house Humber street
HUMBER HOUSE Listing II Humber house Humber street
THE COTTAGE Listing II The cottage Humber street Humber street - rose
PIGHLE COTTAGE Listing II Pighle cottage bank WYKHAM PARK (TUDOR HALL SCHOOL), IMMEDIATELY TO THE Wykham park (tudor hall school) - immediately to the Listing II
SOUTH OF C17 WYKHAM PARK HALL south of c17 Bloxham road
GREYROOFS Listing II Greyroofs Kings road
MILDURA Listing II Mildura Kings road
ORCHARD COTTAGE Listing II Orchard cottage Kings road
SEAL COTTAGE Listing II Seal cottage Kings road
THE COTTAGE Listing II The cottage Kings road
WHEATLANDS Listing II Wheatlands Kings road
GREENLAND COTTAGE LEACROFT Listing II Greenland cottage - leacroft Kings road 112
ASHWELL HOUSE Listing II Ashwell house Little bridge road
BROOK COTTAGE Listing II Brook cottage Little bridge road
PARK CLOSE Listing II Park close Little bridge road
STONELEIGH HOUSE Listing II Stoneleigh house Little bridge road
THATCHED COTTAGE OPPOSITE STONELEIGH HOUSE Listing II Thatched cottage opposite stoneleigh house Little bridge road
THE OLD MANOR Listing II The old manor Little bridge road
CROSSWAYS Listing Crossways Merrivales lane
CROSSWAYS COTTAGE Listing II Crossways cottage Merrivales lane
JOINERS ARMS PUBLIC HOUSE Listing II Joiners arms public house Old bridge road
WALL AND DOORWAY TO REAR OF JOINERS ARMS Listing II Wall and doorway to rear of joiners arms Old bridge road
WOODBINE COTTAGE Listing II Woodbine cottage Old bridge road
THE MALTHOUSE Listing II The malthouse Queens street
WALLFLOWERS Listing II Wallflowers Queens street
CRANHAM COTTAGE WEAVRES COTTAGE Listing II Weavres cottage cranham cottage Queens street
LITTLE BENNETTS Listing II Little bennetts Rose bank
PRIMROSE COTTAGE Listing II Primrose cottage Rose bank
ROSE COTTAGE Listing II Rose cottage Rose bank
KILLOWEN HOUSE Listing II Killowen house South newington road
OLD BARN HOUSE THE COTTAGE Listing II Old barn house - the cottage South newington road
STONE HILL COTTAGE Listing II Stone hill cottage Stone hill
STONE HILL HOUSE AND ATTACHED WALL Listing II Stone hill house and attached wall Stone hill
CAMPBELL COTTAGE Listing II Campbell cottage Workhouse lane
COTTAGE TO RIGHT OF ORIEL COTTAGE Listing II Cottage to right of oriel cottage Workhouse lane
HILL HOUSE Listing II Hill house Workhouse lane
ORIEL COTTAGE Listing II Oriel cottage Workhouse lane
WOODLANDS Listing II Woodlands Workhouse lane Workhouse lane -
NUT TREE HOUSE Listing II Nut tree house courtington lane
BARN AT BLOXHAM GROVE FARM Listing II Barn at bloxham grove farm Bloxham grove rd
WINDMILL AT BLOXHAM GROVE FARM Listing II Windmill at bloxham grove farm Bloxham grove rd
No name for this Entry Listing II 11 High street
No name for this Entry Listing II 12 High street
ART BLOCK BLOXHAM SCHOOL Listing II Art block bloxham school High street
SYCAMORE TERRACE Listing II 1-5 sycamore terrace Kings road
No name for this Entry Listing II 7 Merrivales lane
No name for this Entry Listing II 8 Merrivales lane 113
No name for this Entry Listing II 3 4 and 5 Merrivales lane Rosebank - chapel
ELEPHANT AND CASTLE PUBLIC HOUSE Listing II Elephant and castle public house street
No name for this Entry Listing II 1 Unicorn street
b. Archaeology What follows is intended as no more than a selection from a brief heritage search intended to do no more than impart a flavour of the rich variety of history to be found in Bloxham It is in way intended as a definitive list! There seems to be little evidence of prehistoric remains within the area other than a single Neolithic polished stone axe found near the current sewage works. The remains of a small Roman cemetery was found in a field south of the Milton Rd opposite the Traveller site and possible Romano-British burials near Church St. A corn drying oven and Roman coins were also recorded near the junction of the South-Newington Rd Hook Norton Rd junction and the remains of a possible Roman settlement, including a cemetery with at least 30 burials opposite the current primary school. Bloxham is recorded in the Domesday Book and is thought to have derived from a small Saxon settlement. Much of the village centre dates back to medieval times and has already been outlined above. The history of Bloxham church is well documented elsewhere. It considered amongst the top 100 churches in England and landscape views of it are hugely important to the village. Development of the village from 1574 onwards can be understood via the maps in the earlier section of this report. Some more random aspects of the history of Bloxham might include: o Near Crabtree close there is aerial evidence of what may have been a post 1066 windmill mound. o There is widespread evidence of ironstone mining in many areas of the village and drifts and tunnels of C19th ironstone mines were found while digging drainage connections NW of the minor crossroads, west of Queen's Street. o Just off the Banbury Rd (near Hobb Hill) was an old (post 1542 to 1900) brick and tile works. o Between 1887 and 1951 Bloxham had a railway and station and many signs of its existence remain visible across the village. There was also an old gasworks near Cumberford Hill. (A small cottage remains near Yeoman’s garage) o Near the Banbury Rd Ells Rd junction in 1942, the Bloxham Heavy Anti-Aircraft Second World War Gun site once stood and in what was once an old airfield (now a communications base) along the Barford Rd the first jet aircraft (Gloucester Whittle) was tested. Just inside the main gate stands a recent memorial to this. Two key character areas important to the history and sense of place of the in the village are: the triangle of pubs created when the Red Lion was moved because the A361 replaced the old main road through the village Bloxham School which dates to 1854. The English Heritage archives127 contain several photos the historic visual impact of the school buildings and its associated green frontage which they describe as ‘The large school dominating the north of the village:’ something they have done for over 150 years.
127 English Heritage Archive Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Protecting and enhancing biodiversity
115
12) Habitats, SEAs HRAs etc.
Introduction The National Planning Policy Framework is clear that pursuing sustainable development includes moving from a net loss of biodiversity to achieving net gains for nature, and that a core principle for planning is that it should contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment and reducing pollution. The NPPF is clear about the need to protect Special Protection Areas and possible Special Areas of Conservation. The following are probably areas that might flag up the need for a Habitat Regulations Assessment: a. Listed or proposed Ramsar sites; b. Special Areas of protection c. Sites of Special Scientific Interest d. Special Areas of Conservation, e. Oxon Biodiversity Action Plan Areas f. Other This plan does not identify specific sites. Consequently it defers environmental assessment studies until planning applications are made at specific locations.
a. Ramsar sites128 Ramsar sites are protected under EU law. There are no Ramsar sites near Bloxham. (See map)
b. Special Protection Areas(SPAs) 129 Special Protection Areas (SPAs) are strictly protected sites classified in accordance with Article 4 of the EC Birds Directive, which came into force in April 1979. They are classified for rare and vulnerable birds (as listed on Annex I of the Directive), and for regularly occurring migratory species. We have checked the data for Sept 2014 and find there are no SPAs nearby. (See map)
128 Ramsar sites 129 SPAs 116
c. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) The SSSIs in the North of the county are shown on the map below. None is near Bloxham. (Oxford meadows is over 30km away.)
What follows are local rather than European or nationally identified areas
d. Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)130 Oxfordshire’s special areas of conservation are: Oxford Meadows: Lowland hay meadows including the larger of only two known sites in the UK for creeping marshwort; Cothill Fen: Largest surviving example of alkaline fen in central England; Little Wittenham: One of the best studied great crested newt sites in the UK; Aston Rowant: One of the best remaining examples in the UK of lowland juniper scrub on chalk; Chilterns Beechwoods: Extensive tract of beech forest in the centre of the UK range of this habitat; Hackpen Hill: Significant population of early gentian; Hartslock Wood: Yew woodland and chalk grassland supporting one of only three UK populations of monkey orchid; None of these is near Bloxham.
130 SACs 117
e. Oxon Biodiversity Action Plan131 Oxfordshire has had a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) since 2000 but the identified areas lie mostly in the south of the county. None is near Bloxham.
131 Wild Oxfordshire 118
f. Local Wildlife sites in Oxfordshire132
Bloxham does not feature on the local wildlife maps
g. Protected species
132 TVERC Data 119
There are numerous protected species in the general area of Bloxham (see map.) We do not have the expertise to comment upon this other than to say we are aware of significant numbers of bats and swifts. The Neighbourhood Plan will encourage incorporation of swift nesting boxes where this may be appropriate on new developments. We will expect a full ecological survey on any area of land on which development is proposed.
h. Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) are important for people and wildlife; they have features of local biodiversity or geological interest and offer opportunities for learning. LNRs are a statutory designation made by local authorities. There are 11 LNRs in Oxfordshire. One of these LNRs, the Slade Nature reserve is in the south-west of Bloxham
It is recommended that this be identified as a green-space within the meaning of the NPPF and that development of any adjoining sites should evidence that they will not affect this local nature reserve.
i. Habitat checklist:
Type of Area At or Near Bloxham a. Ramsar Sites No b. Special Protection Areas (SPAs) No c. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) No d. Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) No e. Oxon Biodiversity Action Plan No f. Local Wildlife sites No g. Protected species Yes h. Local nature reserves Yes
120
j. Cherwell HRA Check A screening opinion was obtained by Cherwell Planning as part of the Cherwell Local Plan Submission133 lists the international sites within 20km of the Cherwell border. We have added the distances to Bloxham. 134
Oxford Meadows 26km south of Bloxham Cothill Fen SAC 37 km south of Bloxham Little Wittenham SAC 42 km south of Bloxham Aston Rowant SAC 46 km south of Bloxham Chiltern Beechwoods 54 km south-east of Bloxham
133 Cherwell HRA Screening Opinion (Atkins) 134 Joint Nature Conservation Committee 121
k. Do we need an SEA Responses to the pre-submission consultation included: Natural England The Environment Agency Thames Water CPRE Cherwell District Council Oxfordshire County Council
None indicated potential issues although Cherwell noted the absence of an SEA screening opinion at the consultation stage.
We are of the view that we do not need an SEA based upon: 1. An SEA is only required (see NPPG) if where a neighbourhood plan is likely to have significant environmental effects. 2. Development in Bloxham is only a miniscule subset of the Cherwell Local Plan 3. the Cherwell HRA screening concludes no significant impact of the overall Local Plan upon European sites. 4. We are in the far north of Cherwell: the greatest distance in the district away from the nearest SPA, SAC or Ramsar sites the nearest (Oxford Meadows) being over 25km to the south.
It seems inconceivable that Bloxham would need an SEA in the light of the above. 122
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Bloxham Retail
123
13) Bloxham Retail Facilities
a) Summary Bloxham has more shops than many villages Bloxham is the second biggest village in the District and assuming foot access to High St shops across the village is totally to ignore the reality. The only shop offering a good range of healthy food135 is in the village centre. This is within walking distance of less than a quarter of village dwellings. (See Appendix 1) Central area parking – not population – limits custom and therefore viability. Central area parking is severely limited with no land available for expansion. We are reticent to recommend an additional store on the periphery at this stage for fear of worsening the overall situation by adversely affecting the High Street. If Bloxham experiences on-going major developments it may be necessary to reconsider an additional “fresh food hub.”
b) Location By the standards of many villages Bloxham is well served with shops. All the retail facilities are concentrated along the A361 The extent to which these serve the needs of residents is discussed below Seven stores or service outlets in one 100m stretch of the High Street. A shop in Church Street that has recently changed from a very successful delicatessen / café into a premises concerned primarily with beauty products and treatments. Parking here is very poor. The garage which also offers a basic range of food and drinks.
a) Types of store
Type of Service Post Office & Londis High St
Post Office and newsagent. Also a Londis store offering a limited range of ‘grocery basics’ including milk but not fresh food.
135 Food Statistics Pocketbook 2013 - The Eatwell Plate (gov.uk) 124
Orwa’s Barbers High St
Hunt Bespoke Kitchens High St
Coop Store High St
Grocery store includes a reasonable collection of fresh food, bread, milk etc.
Chip Shop High St
125
Pharmacy
High St
Revamp Hair and Beauty High St
Sharlyn Interiors High St
The Loft Church St
The Garage & Costcutter S. Newington Rd
The garage also offers a basic range of food and drink including milk but excluding fresh food.
126
b) The National Picture Around 64 % of grocery shopping nationally is done by car. Only 12% shop on foot - mostly the young or the elderly. Those on foot shop twice as frequently as those that use cars. Shopping at the nearest store is major influencer for those on foot but a minor factor for car based shoppers.
c) The Bloxham Picture – general perspective The BNDP Team has carried out numerous community events immediately next to the High Street shops and have informally noted the method of arrival and, where appropriate, enquired as to the starting point. We have also asked residents in general about their response to parking issues. We would estimate probably 80% arrive in the High Street by car. A considerable proportion of the trade arrives from nearby villages that do not have stores. Many who arrive by car are unable to find parking. Often within 10 seconds the majority simply head on into Banbury’s out-of-town supermarkets where they know parking will be available.
d) What factors influence use of the High Street? Planners often assume increased population equates to increased viability of shops. This is probably true in a small village – but Bloxham is not a small village! The skill of the shop owner / manager and the prevailing economic circumstances obviously matters. Other key factors are likely to be: the population within walking or cycling distance; the ease of parking.
We examine these below.
i) Cycling to the High Street Nationally (unsurprisingly) only around 2% of grocery shopping involves a cycle. A recent Sustrans survey of the entire villages effectively rules out safe cycling along the A361 and notes many impediments to alternative routes. Unsurprisingly vanishingly few customers arrive at the High Street grocery stores on cycles.
ii) Walking to the High Street Village connectivity is poor – especially from the south where inadequately wide footpaths alongside busy roads further deter walking.
iii) Healthy Food – the essential requirement The garage (to the south) sells basic foodstuffs but it’s questionable whether it would be likely to pass the test of offering a healthy shopping basket136 People’s awareness of healthy eating is improving and even the national discount stores are finding they increasingly have to offer more fresh food to stay competitive.137 The only place one can obtain a variety of fresh food is in the village High Street.
Most research on the distance people will walk derives from planning public transport systems and here the answer in a number of first-world countries seems to be around 400m or 1/4 mile.138
136 Food Statistics Pocketbook 2013 - The Eatwell Plate (gov.uk) 137 European Grocery Retailing – Change if the only constant. 138 Human Transit – basics: walking distance to transit. 127
Some other research in Canada explores how the distances people will walk relates to the purpose. It comes out with slightly higher median of around 650m finding people will walk further to work (800m) but less far for shopping (580m)139 . Natural England use a figure of 300m when categorising whether green-spaces are accessible within walking distance of residents.140 We note that in Bicester the Cherwell Local Plan requires new housing developments to be within 800m of a primary school in order to encourage walking. UK Research specifically upon walking and retail indicates141: 500m is the furthest one would expect able-bodied person without children, ‘buggies’ or disabilities to walk with a full shopping bag. 250m is the furthest one would expect the elderly, adults with limited mobility or parents with prams / buggies to walk with a full shopping bag. Using this we see that: The High Street Shops are within walking distance of what is basically the original village (the conservation area) for unencumbered able-bodied residents; The High Street Shops are not within walking distance for any of the more recent developments.
Claims of on foot access to healthy food or the post-office from proposed additional developments at the village periphery are totally fatuous and we do not understand why they are not challenged. Bloxham is already too big for pedestrian access by those at the periphery to the village centre shops. For an ageing population or those with young children the appropriate radius will be the inner green circle. Poor village walkability142 exacerbates a reticence to walk to the High Street.
The High Street shops are where one can get an acceptable variety of fresh nutritious food or visit a post-office. Most of the village - around three quarters of dwellings - are already beyond the distance people are willing to walk carrying shopping. Poor footpath connectivity further exacerbates this situation. Most land available for new developments is at least 1000m from the High Street: double the distance even healthy people will walk carrying shopping bags. Suggestions that low-carbon access to village shops is a strong argument in favour of village sustainability (and thus further development) flies in the face both of academic research and casual observation. It is simply wrong!
139 Beyond the quarter mile 140 An analysis of accessible natural greenspace provision in the South East p27 141 A multi-level geographical analysis of the relationship between retail food access,socioeconomic position and dietary intake 142 Sustrans – Walking and cycling in Bloxham 128
iv) Driving to the High Street - parking Parking in the area of the shops is limited and semi-chaotic143 The busy A361 (a designated HGV route) is unconducive to multiple attempts to park. For those on-foot distance is a critical factor. In a car for journeys up to 15 minutes distance is often treated as a secondary consideration. Unsurprisingly many set out to shop in Bloxham, cannot easily park and quickly decide to drive on by into Banbury which offers both easier parking and a wider range of goods.
The factor that limits customer numbers at most times of day is parking not population.
Can existing parking spaces improve the situation?
1. The “pavement” spaces outside the shops As the first photo shows at especially quiet times there may be limited parking outside of the shops. More typical is the second photo with all parking full - both on and off-street.
143 The pre-publication consultation contains many comments to this effect. 129
Sustrans have suggested improvement to the general traffic situation if the pavements were cut back to make on-street parking effectively off-street. In fact, the areas fronting the shops are part of their property. They are unlikely to relinquish what little customer parking space they have to lessen the general traffic chaos.
Stores are unlikely to volunteer to give up land as suggested in the Sustrans survey.
2. The Red Lion car-park The only nearby car-park is a small car-park 250m away at the Red Lion pub which is currently closed and boarded up. The only current “bidders” for this premises is a village consortium but whoever acquires it is unlikely to welcome having this asset clogged by people who were not their own customers.
3. Is additional parking land available? The only possible area of land would be a rugby field owned by Bloxham School in Courtington Lane. It is used for sport and the school are very keen to retain unconstrained access for their own use. This is a valued green-area and at 350m from the High St stores is probably too far to be an attractive proposition to shoppers. Its use would represent an unacceptable loss to both school and village.
There is no obvious way to improve the parking situation near the High Street shops!
j) Would an additional store help?
One possible solution would be to recommend a further fresh-food outlet away from the centre. The renaissance of mini-markets is well documented144 but so too is the impact of ‘Tesco Local’ type outlets upon other shops. IF we were to encourage an additional outlet there is real concern this could quickly reduce the congested village High Street to a state of total non-viability. This outcome would mean we had effectively moved retail from the village centre to the periphery placing an even higher percentage of residents out of walking distance and adding to the already significant village traffic problems.
It is hard to recommend a solution at present. It seems likely that within the lifetime of this Plan convenience stores will evolve a much more catchment centric approach embracing “click and collect” partnerships, local banking facilities etc.145
If the village does expand significantly then we would recommend re-visiting the option of integrating some retail provision as part of such additional development.
We cannot at this stage recommend additional retail provision as an environmentally friendly way of improving local retail provision. If the village does expand more than envisaged by this Plan then this decision may need to be revisited at the time of agreeing any non-minor development t
144 The rise, fall and rise of the mini-supermarket 145 Building convenience store eco-systems 130
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
BNDP Questionnaire Responses upon housing
June 2014
131
14) BNDP Questionnaire Responses upon housing
a. Size & shape of developments
1 The Cherwell District Council (CDC) Local Plan will specify a minimum number of extra dwellings that Bloxham has to take. Assuming we can meet the housing needs of residents should we aim to provide only the minimum number of additional new dwellings we are required to have?
Minimum Extra Dwellings Percent Number Yes 93.8 564 No 4.7 28 Don't know 1.5 9 Total 100 601
2 The emerging CDC Local Plan indicates that additional village developments should be in the form of infill and minor development. (Minor development generally means between 1 and 9 dwellings.) Do you agree with this?
Q2 Percent Number Yes 87 523 No 8.2 49 Don't know 4.8 29 Total 100 601
132
b. Protecting Bloxham’s heritage
Bloxham conservation area document 3 identifies views important to the landscape of Bloxham such as the church, views along High Street and Church Street and of Bloxham School etc. Should such important views be permanently protected?
Q 3 Percent Number Yes 97.3 585 No 1.5 9 Don't know 1.2 7 Total 100 601
c. Preserving the rural feel
Do you think new developments should seek to preserve the existing rural character?
Q4 Percent Number Yes 98.3 593 No 1.2 7 Don't know 0.5 3 Total 100 603
133
5 Should wide grass verges and tree or hedgerow screening be the norm to soften any village edge developments?
Yes 95.7 574 No 1.5 9 Don't 2.8 17 know Total 100 600
6 Should developments anywhere in the village seek to preserve or replace as many trees and hedgerows as practicable?
Q6 Percent Number Yes 98.2 587 No 1.2 7 Don't know 0.7 4 Totals 100.1 598
7 Should new developments, especially those towards the village boundaries, seek to minimise unnecessary light pollution?
Q7 Percent Number Yes 93.2 561 No 2.8 17 Don't know 4 24 Totals 100 602
134
8 Tall 3-storey town-house dwellings are increasingly popular with developers. Are these an appropriate design for the village of Bloxham?
Q8 Percent Number Yes 9.8 59 No 82.7 498 Don't know 7.5 45 Totals 100 602
d. Respecting existing Properties
9 Housing density is about how close together houses are built. Should new developments avoid abrupt changes of density between new and existing housing?
Q9 Percent Number Yes 89.3 534 No 4.8 29 Don't know 5.9 35 Totals 100 598
10 Should the height and positioning of new buildings ensure minimal invasion of privacy for existing dwellings. (E.g. Tall buildings should not be placed right up against and overlooking existing bungalows.)
Q10 Percent Number Yes 98.3 590 No 1 6 Don't 0.7 4 know Totals 100 600
135
11 Is it important that the materials used for new housing complements that of existing neighbouring properties.
Q11 Percent Number Yes 95.7 575 No 2.3 14 Don't 2 12 know Totals 100 601
12 Where a new development is in an area that already has houses with a mix of styles and materials should new dwellings ‘lean towards’ using rural materials and styles wherever appropriate?
Q12 Percent Number Yes 91.3 549 No 4.2 25 Don't 4.5 27 know Totals 100 601
e. Sustainable Homes 13 Should all new homes be built to high energy efficiency standards as recommended in the government’s Code for Sustainable Homes?
Q13 Percent Number Yes 94.5 569 No 2.3 14 Don't 3.2 know 19 Totals 100 602
136
14 Should all new homes be built to high water efficiency standards as recommended in the government’s Code for Sustainable Homes?
Q14 Percent Number Yes 94.2 568 No 2.3 14 Don't 3.5 know 21 Totals 100 603
f. Lifetime Homes
15 We have an ageing population. Should new homes be readily adaptable to accommodate older people and those with limited mobility?
Q15 Percent Number Yes 80.3 482 No 9.8 59 Don't 9.8 know 59 Totals 99.9 600
16 To allow ease of access should all new houses have at least one off-street parking area immediately next to an entrance?
Q15 Percent Number Yes 89.5 538 No 5.8 35 Don't 4.7 know 28 Totals 100 601
137
17 Should new family homes have at least one room that can easily be turned into a home office? (E.g. have good daylight, good sound insulation, adequate electrical and broadband sockets etc.)
Q15 Percent Number Yes 56.4 338 No 23.9 143 Don't 19.7 know 118 Totals 100 599
18 Downsizing If a suitable smaller property was available in Bloxham might you be interested in downsizing to it in the next 2 - 10 years?
Q15 Percent Number Yes 31.8 189 No 59.2 352 Don't 9.1 know 54 Totals 100.1 595
138
Q19 Which of these would be important criteria for any property you might Downsize criteria % Number eventually downsize to? Convenient parking 76 425 (These are things residents have Privacy - not overlooked 72.3 404 mentioned in the past. Tick any number of answers.) Garden Space but manageable 71.6 400 Houses not crammed 69.8 390 Bungalow 26.5 148 Total Respondents 559
139
g. Your present home
54 Is your present home: (Please tick one)?
Q54 % No. Owner mortgage 38.9 234 Owner no mortgage 52.6 316 Shared ownership 1 6 Rent free 0.3 2 Private rented 2.8 17 House Ass rented 3.3 20
Tied to job 1 6 99.9 601
55 What type of property is your Q55 % No. present home? (Please tick one.) Detached house 59.7 357
Semi-detached house 22.9 137 Nationally around 23% of houses Terraced house are detached. 12.2 73 In Cherwell it’s around 30% Flat/maisonette/ bedsit 0.7 4 Detached bungalow 3 18 Semi-detached bungalow 1.3 8 Terraced bungalow 0.2 1 Caravan/mobile home 0 0 Bedsit 0 0 Total 100 598
140
56 How many bedrooms are in your Q56 % No. current home? (Please tick one.) Bedsit 0 0
1 bedroom 1.2 7 Nationally 3 bedroom is the most common (41.2%) followed by 2 2 bedroom 10.2 61 bedroomed (27.9%) and four 3 bedroom 31.9 191 bedroomed (14.4%) 4 bedroom 44.3 265 5 bedroom 12.4 74 100 598
141
h. Housing Need
71 What type of accommodation do you think Bloxham needs? (Please tick all that apply.)
The question somewhat oddly mixes type of house with the need for supported or affordable housing. We have separated these out.
Note 45% are suggesting one or other type of bungalow. This is massively adrift from the homes and permissions recently Q71 % No. agreed with developers. Detached house 11.7 154
Semi house 13 171
Terraced house 7.2 94 Flat 4.3 56 Detached bungalow 13.3 175 Semi bungalow 12.1 159 Terraced bungalow 4.7 62 Affordable 12 157
Supported 10.8 142
None 10.9 143 Total responses 100 1313 Total respondents 562 12% mention a need for affordable housing. We will get around 80 affordable homes with the houses from existing permissions. 11% mention supported homes. See next question
142
Q73 Q73 % No. What type of housing tenure do you think Owner Occupation 43.3 385 Bloxham needs? (Please tick all that Shared Ownership 23.7 211 apply.) Affordable Rented 16.3 145 Note – We know from experience the Private Rented 11.6 103 term affordable housing is very poorly Housing tied to Employment 5.2 46 understood by residents! Total Responses 890 Total Respondents 469
The affordable homes on recent estates have been undersubscribed by people with a local connection.146
We will automatically get 35% affordable homes the majority of which would normally be social rented housing.
This data indicates we should strongly consider requesting a high proportion of affordable housing be shared equity
146 BNDP Housing Report 143
74 Would you be interested in joining the local Community Land Trust? * (Tick one.)
Q74 %age No. Yes 5.8 34 No 68.8 403 Don't know 25.4 149 Total 100 586
75 Would you be interested in participating in Cherwell District Council’s self-build housing programme, Build! ** (Tick one.)
Q75 %age No. Yes 8.6 50 No 79.6 463 Don't know 11.9 69 Total 100.1 582
144
80 Why do you need a new home in Bloxham? (Please tick all that Q80 No. apply.) First home 9
Insecure 0 This fits the previous chart: older Divorce 2 people wanting to downsize, younger families wanting to Retiring 3 upsize and both having reason to Bigger Home 13 be near family. Smaller Home 18 Near family 10 Can't afford rent 0 Special needs 2 Job insecurity 0 Near work 2 Can't afford mort 1 Other 7 Total responses 67 Total respondents 50
145
81 Who owns the home you live in Q81 No. now? Self 33
Relatives 9 Interestingly the majority (62%) Tied to job 1 already own their own homes. Private rent 6 Ha rent 3 Part with ha 1 Other 0 Total 53
82 Does anything affect the type of home you need?
Q82 No. No 40 Mobility 9 Wheelchair 0 Other 1 Total 50
146
83 What type of home do you need? Q83 No. Detached house 22
Semi house 22
Terraced house 10 Some 42% want some sort of Flat 5 bungalow. Detached bungalow 21 The rest are split between Semi bungalow 15 detached, semi and terraced Terraced bungalow 6 houses. Other 0 Total Responses 101 Total Respondents 48
147
84 Please rank your preferences for housing tenure. (Write 1-4 in box. 1= top priority, 4= bottom priority).
Note: There were only 46 respondents but some wrote 1 in more than one of the 4 choices
Total Respondents Private HA Rented Self HA Shared 50 1st Choice 1 6 40 3 27 2nd Choice 8 2 1 16 22 3rd Choice 6 9 1 6 35 4th Choice 13 15 1 6
Respondents Private HA Rented Self HA Shared Total 1st Choice 2% 12% 80% 6% 100% 2nd Choice 29.6 7.4 3.7 59.3 100 3rd Choice 27.3 40.9 4.5 27.3 100 4th Choice 37.1 42.9 2.9 17.1 100
The overwhelming 1st choice is for self-ownership.
148
85 How many bedrooms would your Q86 %age No. new home need? (Please tick.) 1 bedroom 6 3 2 bedroom 42 21 Note – 4 respondents ticked more 3 bedroom 46 23 than one box so the totals don’t 4 bedroom 16 8 cross-check properly. 5 bedroom 0 0
2 and 3 bedrooms are most 5+ bedroom 0 0 sought. Total respondents 50 Multiple answers 4
94 Are you on the Cherwell District Council Housing Register?
Q94 %age No. Yes 10.7 3 No 89.3 25 Total 100 28
Interestingly only 3 out of all those looking for a home in
Bloxham are on the housing register and therefore eligible for affordable housing.
149
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Young people’s views on housing
March 2014
(See Questionnaire report for more detail)
150
15) Young people’s views on housing.
a) Which schools?
What school do you Number attend? BGN 4 Warriner 32 Bloxham Primary 11 Other 5 Sample size 52
Number from Each School
Other BGN 10% 8%
Bloxham Primary BGN 21% Warriner Bloxham Primary Other
Warriner 61%
Sample size = 52
Most of those who were not from Bloxham were youngsters who attended clubs in Bloxham from “satellite” villages.
151
b) Age or Year Group
What year group are you in? Number Year Number Gp
Three 1 Eight 7 Four 3 Nine 4 Five 7 Ten 1 Six 5 Eleven 0 Seven 2 Twelve 25
Number from each Year Group
Three Four
Five Three Four Five Six Twelve Seven Six Eight Nine Seven Ten Eleven Twelve Eight
ElevenTen Nine
The results are dominated by Year 12.
152
c) Are the pavements wide enough to walk to school safely?
Are the pavements in Bloxham wide enough to Number safely walk to school with a friend?
Yes - they are wide enough 3 Mostly they are wide enough but some parts are 20 very narrow. Quite a few parts are very narrow. 13 Don't know 4
Are pavements wide enough to walk safely?
Yes - they are wide Don't know, 4 enough, 3
Yes - they are wide enough
Mostly they are wide enough but some parts are Quite a few parts are very narrow. very narrow., 13 Quite a few parts are very narrow.
Mostly they are wide enough but some parts are very narrow., 20
This question has produced a very mixed response. This is perhaps unsurprising as it will depend where students are coming to school from. Pavements at the North of the village tend to be adequate. Pavements at the South of the village much less so. The don’t knows tend to be those who arrive on bus from nearby villages. 153
d) Effect of additional houses
Bloxham will probably take another 200 new Number houses over the next 3 years. What do you think about this? It will make Bloxham better 6 It will make Bloxham worse 36 Neither better nor worse - just different 14 Sample Size = 56
Effect of more houses upon the village
It will make Bloxham better Neither better nor 11% worse - just different 25% It will make Bloxham better
It will make Bloxham worse
Neither better nor worse - just different It will make Bloxham worse 64%
Quite an interesting spread here. Around two thirds thinking it will make things worse and the rest seeming more open to whatever it might bring. There didn’t seem any huge variations across the age range insofar as one can tell from a relatively small sample. 154
e) What should new houses look like?
What do you think new houses in Bloxham should look like Number on the outside? Be like the latest designs in towns. 3 Fit in with whatever the neighbouring houses are like 21 Look like the old village houses in Bloxham 24 Don't know 6 Sample Size 54
What should new houses look like on the outside?
Be like the latest designs in towns. Don't know 6% 11% Be like the latest designs in towns.
Fit with Fit in with whatever neighbouring houses the neighbouring 39% houses are like
Look like the old village houses in Bloxham
Don't know
Look like the old sample size = 54 village houses in Bloxham 44%
The overwhelming opinion is that they shouldn’t just be copies of urban estates. There is a fairly equal divide between fitting with neighbouring properties and erring on the side of the old ironstone village properties. Given the simplicty of the question which makes no attempt to delineate between older and newer parts of the village, this seems to fit with a desire to maintain a rural feel to the village.
155
f) Should new houses be adaptable to cater for the aged and disabled?
Should new houses be built so that they can Number easily be adapted for older people and those with disabilities? No 6 Yes 40 Don't know 11 Sample size 57
New houses adaptable for aged and disabled?
Don't know 19% No 11%
No
Yes
Yes 70%
A clear (7:1) majority believe new homes should be built in a manner that makes them easily adapted to the needs of the older and disabled people.
156
g) The importance of Energy Efficiency.
How Important is it that new houses should: Be energy efficient? Number
Not important 2 Important 28 Very Important 23 Don't know 4 Sample size 57
How important new houses should be energy efficient?
7% 4%
Not important Important
40% Very Important 49% Don't know
Unsurprisingly younger people tend to be very aware of the climate change debate and it is probably this that led to the 12:1 ratio for very important: Not important ratio. 157
h) The importance of Water Efficiency.
How Important is it that new houses Number should:Where appropriate, use rain-water instead of tap-water? Important 15 Not Important 12 Very Important 15 Don't Know 2 Sample size 44
Use of water efficiency measures
Don't Know 5%
Important 34% Very Important Important 34% Not Important Very Important Don't Know
Not Important 27%
Fewer young people chose to respond to this question and the answers are much more spread. 158
i) What ONE thing about Bloxham do you most like?
Beautiful fields and the boys brigade The Church Good places to dog walk Cottages Lots of walking paths Fields Jubilee Park Friendliness of the village and how pretty the Jubilee park village is the large sports fields and how the are either Friendly side of the village Green space The park - Jubilee It has a nice feeling to it. boys brigade It's small Clubs Nice place Bloxham primary school Old monuments School Rural, nice, green Chip shop Scenery Chip shop small Chip shop small Chip shop The church chip shop The Church Co op The Old streets of bloxham Coop The parks, open spaces and the ruralness it's also Coop nice and relatively quiet and clean. Coop The rural aspects Having shops and parks nearby The size, it is big enough and has everything you Shop, dentist, recreational areas. want. Shops The war memorial and church Nothing really Going to the park The people Nice walks
If one had to try and categorise I guess it would be: The rural ambience, Walking opportunities and recreation areas Shops – especially the chip shop!
159
j) What ONE thing about Bloxham do you least like?
Question: What ONE thing about Bloxham do you least like?
New houses being built because its disruptive Congestion, especially in the morning traffic. and makes the village very busy narrow streets New housing sites No parking is around "Road name" is vile and the houses don't suit the Not allowed to walk on my own because too village much traffic That they keep building more and more houses. The main road that they want more houses The main road traffic and “Name of building The amount of houses continuously being built removed” building is also hideous. The style of new house The traffic and lorries how there are lots of village halls that are not The traffic build up in the mornings being used and how they are too small traffic Slow internet Traffic Slow internet traffic It could do with a few more facilities - cinema Traffic Dog poo on the jubilee Traffic congestion. Lack of a skate park / activities to do Traffic in the village! Old people and slow internet The traffic through the centre of the village. Slow internet dunno the smell on occasions Mud The smellof manure Unfriendliness
These were totally open ended. The only change that has been made was to remove a specific road name. Note that around half the comments refer to the impact of traffic and about a quarter to the impact of new developments on the village. Given that the thing young people like most is the rural ambience it is probably not surprising that the things they dislike most are those things that are destroying this – with the possible exception of the chip shop!
160
Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan
Questions from the Parish Plan on Housing
Oct 2013 161
16) Questions from the Parish Plan on Housing
a) Why so few questions? Because the Parish Plan served a different purpose to the Neighbourhood Plan it did not contain many questions on housing.
Question 30 Do you think more houses should be built in Bloxham? o No 72% o Yes 14% o Don't know 14%
Question 31 o If yes, what sort of houses would you like to see? o A mixture that includes affordable housing 22% o Sheltered housing for the elderly 21% o 2 to 4 bedroomed houses 10% o Affordable housing for people with a local connection 28% o Executive housing 8.4% o Single storey housing 6.7% o 1 bedroom dwellings 4.2%
Question 32 Do you think that any future residential development should be limited to within existing village boundaries? o Yes 70% o No 13% o Don't know 17
162
17) Appendix 1: Access to fresh food radius maps147
250m radius of shops selling an acceptable range of fresh food
500m radius of shops selling an acceptable range of fresh food
147 Maps created using mapping distance tool here 163
Proportion of the Village with pedestrian access to shops.
The first three maps show the area of the built-up parts of the village. (Please note the scales of the maps vary.
The North Chipperfield Park Estate, Banbury Rd and Crabtree Close 23.3 ha
Central and west The conservation area, Courtington Lane, Tadmarton Rd and 62.6ha associated estates. (The Bloxham School cricket green should really be discounted at 0.7ha making it 62.6 ha South-east Barford Rd, Milton Rd. (One field we have included now has a 24.1 ha finished development and the other a half-finished development. We haven’t included the “Frampton site” that we include as part of this plan.) Total 110 ha Area within 500m See map in Retail section of this document 17.4 ha of High St shops Around 16% of the village has foot access to the shops