This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Second planning application for commercial development by Nethercote
20/02/2023
An appeal for the first application is yet to be heard
The developer who wants to build up to 140,000 square metres of commercial property near the small hamlet of Nethercote has submitted a second outline planning application for their scheme – despite an appeal for their first application not yet having been heard.
A speculative planning application by Greystoke CB seeking to build on the fields east of the M40 and north of the A422 was submitted in May 2022, despite the site not being earmarked for any kind of development in the current Cherwell Local Plan. The Council received a number of objections to the application, including submissions by Oxfordshire County, Banbury Town and local Parish Councils.
The application was yet to reach the stage where local Councillors were able to make a decision, but that was taken out of their hands when the applicant lodged an appeal directly with the Planning Inspectorate. That inquiry is set to begin in April.
Now the applicant has submitted a new application which they note as a revision of the original scheme. The work to assess this new plan must now begin. All those who commented of the previous application will need to do so again for the latest application as previous comments will not be carried forward.
Keep Nethercote Rural has been campaigning against development on the rural site. Lisa Phipps from the campaign said: “The resubmission of the Huscote Farm planning application creates a completely new application. It is hard to understand how this can be allowed when the original application is yet to be determined at Public Inquiry.
“However the Council have to operate within the current planning rules and therefore are obliged to use their valuable resources in dealing with this additional application. People should take the time to raise concerns about this confusing situation with their MP as planning rules are made by government.”
Last week Cherwell’s Planning Committee determined they would have rejected the original application, had it progressed in the normal manner. Councillor Rebecca Biegel proposed refusal noting the large number of reasons why the scheme should not proceed.
Councillor Biegel said: “I think we can point to the fact that of the 15 reasons for refusal no less than five actually relate to traffic and sustainability, highway safety and the ability of the junction to support the increase in traffic.
“I don’t think I need to say much more. I would just urge this committee to support the officer’s recommendation that this application be refused.”
Officers will use this decision and the evidence they had gathered so far when the appeal case is heard.
Meanwhile the new application was registered at Cherwell on February 9 with comments from the public due by March 16. In the covering letter the applicant indicates they have not been required to pay for this latest application. They say this is because it is “the first revision of an application for a development of the same description by the same applicant and is made within 12 months of the period when giving notice of a decision on the earlier valid application has expired, where an appeal was made on the earlier application on the grounds of non-determination.” An application fee of £99,370 was paid for the original application.
Lisa Phipps hopes people will understand both applications need to be addressed separately.
She said: ”It is really important that people understand that the Public Inquiry for the original application is due to take place in April and that this additional application will be dealt with separately and in isolation by the council. This means that anyone who sent objections to the original application 22/01488/OUT must now resubmit those to the new application 23/00349/OUT as the original comments will not be considered on the new application.
“We would urge people to please take the time to resubmit their previous comments either through the council portal https://planningregister.cherwell.gov.uk/Planning/Display/23/00349/OUT or by writing to the council quoting the application no 23/00349/OUT.
“Developing the area would present as a starkly industrial mass of metal in the rolling, open countryside and have a hugely detrimental impact on our landscape and local heritage. It would increase traffic with accompanying air pollution and place further pressure on the M40 roundabout which is already insufficient for the volume. It would increase noise from alarms and machinery for nearby homes and remove the natural habitat for wildlife and birds and increase flooding risks by removing permeable surfaces.
“The two warehouses opposite have yet to be filled and nearby warehouses struggle to recruit enough people locally for the jobs available so it is hard to understand how this proposed devastation will benefit local residents.”
Published: by Banbury FM Newsteam
lorna wheatley On 20/02/2023 at 9:15 pm
stop letting developers take away all the beautiful countryside, our town is going to have nothing left, it’s all going down hill in the banbury area stop stop building on our lands
Helen Harris On 22/02/2023 at 3:23 pm
objection it’s a beautiful countryside and needs to remain as one