Decision details
Non-defence of refusal reasons in respect of impending appeal for the East Witney allocation in the Local Plan
Decision Maker: Chief Executive & Head of Paid Service - Giles Hughes
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
Purpose:
All evidence for the Witney East Public
Inquiry must be submitted by 21 May 2024, yet the Council will only
re-establish itself following the local elections after that that.
However, given the changes made by the developer to the scheme in
preparing for the upcoming Public Inquiry, that WODC join OCC in
deciding to no longer defend the refusal reasons that were applied
when the application was determined by the sub-committee.
Decision:
To agree, in light of the changes made by the developer to the scheme in preparing for the upcoming Public Inquiry, that the Council join Oxfordshire County Council in deciding to no longer defend the refusal reasons that were applied when the application was determined by the Lowlands Area Planning Sub-Committee.
Decision taken by the Chief Executive in consultation with:
- Director of Governance
- Director of Finance
- Leader of the Council
- Executive Member for Planning and Sustainable Development
- Chair of Development Control Committee
- Chair of Lowlands Area Planning Sub-Committee
Reasons for the decision:
When the application was determined it had followed a long period of pre application and application negotiation where officers had been seeking compliance with the policies of the approved plan and the developer had not been prepared to deliver upon those requirements. Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) had also refused consent on highways/technical grounds. In preparing for the Inquiry the developer had adjusted his position on a number of matters and had amended the scheme to address the refusal reasons that the Council would be tabling. Separately negotiations with OCC had progressed such that they have indicated they will not be defending their refusal reason. As such the position now is very different to that which pertained at the time the application was determined such that a review of the expediency of continuing with the appeal was logical - particularly as the weakening of the Local Planning Authority position alongside the recent loss of the 5-year housing land supply had substantially increased the likelihood of an adverse award of costs should the Council continue to seek to defend a weakened case.
It is the opinion of the Business Manager for Development and Sustainability that the clear balance of advantage now that the developer has moved towards the Council’s position is to jointly agree that the Inquiry should be directed at resolving the conditions/Heads of Terms but not the principle of development. This will save the Council costs, negate the risk of an award of costs and slightly improve the Council’s 5-year land supply position.
Alternative options considered:
Continue with the appeal – not preferred due to the reputational and financial consequences of fighting a much-weakened case when the Council has now largely secured the key elements it was looking for.
Urgent item?: Yes
Publication date: 09/05/2024
Date of decision: 07/05/2024
Accompanying Documents:
PDF 74 KB