"At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development . For plan-making this means that: Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs… unless: any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted ."
"To boost significantly the supply of housing, local planning authorities should: Use their evidence base to ensure that their Local Plan meets the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the housing market area, as far as is consistent with the policies set out in this Framework , including identifying key sites which are critical to the delivery of the housing strategy over the plan period."
"159. Local planning authorities should have a clear understanding of housing needs in their area. They should: • Prepare a Strategic Housing Market Assessment to assess their full housing needs, working with neighbouring authorities where housing market areas cross administrative boundaries. The Strategic Housing Market Assessment should identify the scale and mix of housing and the range of tenures that the local population is likely to need over the plan period which: – meets household and population projections, taking account of migration and demographic change; – addresses the need for all types of housing, including affordable housing and the needs of different groups in the community (such as, but not limited to, families with children, older people, people with disabilities, service families and people wishing to build their own homes); and – caters for housing demand and the scale of housing supply necessary to meet this demand."
"73. Access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the needs for open space, sports and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. The assessments should identify specific needs and quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses of open space, sports and recreational facilities in the local area. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sports and recreational provision is required." "74. existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless : an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss."
"The Government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence."
"83. Local planning authorities with Green Belts in their area should establish Green Belt boundaries in their Local Plans which set the framework for Green Belt and settlement policy. Once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, through the preparation or review of the Local Plan. At that time, authorities should consider the Green Belt boundaries having regard to their intended permanence in the long term, so that they should be capable of enduring beyond the plan period."
"The Local Plan will be examined by an independent inspector whose role is to assess whether the plan has been prepared in accordance with the Duty to Cooperate, legal and procedural requirements, and whether it is sound. A local planning authority should submit a plan for examination which it considers is "sound" – namely that it is: Positively prepared – the plan should be prepared based on a strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements, including unmet requirements from neighbouring authorities where it is reasonable to do so and consistent with achieving sustainable development. Justified – the plan should be the most appropriate strategy, when considered against the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence. Effective – the plan should be deliverable over its period and based on effective joint working on cross-boundary strategic priorities. Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the Framework."
"Critically Oxford's housing capacity figures have not been properly tested. The City's Local Plan timetable is significantly behind the programmes for the 4 surrounding Authorities – a classic example of putting the cart before the horse." "
"The affordable housing issues were (and still are) so significant that it justified doing as much as could be considered deliverable to help meet affordable housing need…" "
"The PPG states in paragraph 024 (Reference ID: 2a-024-20190220), that the total affordable housing need can be considered in the context of its likely delivery as a proportion of mixed market and affordable housing developments, taking into account the probable percentage of affordable housing to be delivered by eligible market housing led developments. An increase in the total housing figures included in the plan may need to be considered where it could help deliver the required number of affordable homes. As stated in paragraph 6.49 of the OAN Update, any increase above the OAN would increase delivery of affordable housing. On the basis of the 50% affordable housing policy an affordable housing need of 678dpa would require a supply of 1,356dpa. The same approach was taken to identifying Oxford's housing target in the 2014 SHMA. An affordable housing net need per annum of 1,029 was identified for Oxford in the 2014 SHMA. Because of Oxford's long-standing policy requiring 50% of housing to be delivered on site, the affordable housing need was doubled to take into account likely delivery. I.e. if 2,058 homes were delivered it would be expected that, with half of these delivered as affordable homes, this would result in delivery of the needed 1,029 affordable homes per annum (whereas the demographic base + shortfall was 792 per annum). However, this represented a growth rate that was not considered achievable. The need figure identified (1,400) was based on a growth rate per annum that was considered a deliverable growth rate (based on assessments of high growth rates achieved elsewhere), that if the land was available, could be met by the housing market. Thus, the housing need figure identified for Oxford in the original 2014 SHMA was not based on the application of an 85% uplift; the 85% figure merely describes the amount of uplift from the demographic starting point. The starting point in identifying the final figures in the 2014 SHMA and the update was the ambition to meet affordable housing need in full, which in the 2014 SHMA was tempered by application of a realistic growth rate. It is simply that now the growth rate, which the OAN Update considers to still be relevant, gets much closer to meeting affordable housing needs in full."
"The Oxford City SHMA Update 2018 identifies an OAN for Oxford City of 776 dwellings per annum. This figure is in line with adopted plan figures for similar areas across the South East of England. The figure of 1,400 dwellings per annum in the Oxfordshire SHMA 2014 was an outlier and should be disregarded. The figure proposed by Oxford City of 1,356 dwellings per annum to meet all affordable housing need is based upon a substantial over-estimation of affordable housing needs and is also an approach which is flawed and without precedent across the country." "…the OAN for Oxford City has fallen from 1,400 dwellings per annum to 776 dwellings per annum between the two studies. A drop of this magnitude requires explaining and there are a number of factors behind the changes." "…the figure of 678 dwellings per annum for affordable housing need is an overstatement and therefore, a figure of 1,356 dwellings per annum to meet this affordable need is also an overstatement of need. Therefore, the approach proposed by Oxford City council is not necessary. High Court judges have been very clear that the approach adopted by Oxford City Council does not give the OAN and it is in fact again without precedent across the country. No Council that we are aware of has sought such a large uplift to their OAN to meet their affordable housing need."
"We therefore consider that Plan be sent back to Cherwell for reconsideration or the EIP should be halted at this point and considered in the context of whatever emerges from the Oxford Local Plan" (EIP submission on behalf of GreenWayOxon) "
"The latest evidence indicates that Oxford's unmet housing needs in the plan period would be substantially lower than when the figure of 4400 homes for Cherwell was proposed…. In its submitted plan Cherwell claims that the first of twelve supposed 'exceptional circumstances' for removing land from the Green Belt is the putative 'urgent and pressing need to provide homes for Oxford.' The plan also makes clear that this is based on the 2014 SHMA's OAN for Oxford of 1,400 dpa and the working assumption which follows from it…this is now incorrect."
"When Oxford City Council [published] its plan on1 November 2018 it also published an OAN Update, also referred to as the 2018 SHMA. This report had been produced by the same consultancy as the 2014 SHMA. I read this with interest and noted that, on a like for like basis, need arising from baseline demographic growth had fallen from 755 dwellings per annum ('dpa') to 543dpa, a reduction of 28%..." "
"Issue 1 - Whether the plan's calculation of housing need is sound Introduction: overall housing need 19. Oxford's overall housing need is 1,400 dwellings per annum (dpa) as indicated in paragraph 3. 7 of the submitted plan. This is derived from the 2018 Objectively Assessed Need Update (HOU.5), itself an update of the 2014 Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (HOU.3). It is a substantially higher figure than the local housing need (LHN) calculation of 810 dpa uncapped, or 746 dpa capped. 20. The housing need figure of 1,400 dpa reflects the number of homes required to meet Oxford's affordable housing need of 678 dpa, or 13,560 affordable homes over the 20-year plan period. Most affordable housing is delivered as a percentage of the total number of homes in market housing schemes; in Oxford this is 50%, based on viability evidence, as required by Policy H2. So, if 50% of the new homes on every housing site in Oxford were affordable, the total number of homes theoretically required to deliver 678 dpa would be 1,356 dpa. In practice, the percentage of affordable homes achieved overall is likely to fall below 50% owing to site-specific and development-related adjustments and the fact that non-major sites do not qualify (see Issue 3). Consequently, even at 1,400 dpa, affordable housing delivery would be likely to fall below overall affordable housing need. 21. The 1,400 dpa is referred to as a housing need figure rather than a requirement because only a proportion of the number of homes required to meet it can be accommodated within Oxford. The soundness of this need figure and the calculations that have led to it are discussed below. Housing affordability and equality 22. Oxford stands out among cities as having unusual housing problems which point towards a higher level of housing need than that derived from the standard method calculation... the Centre for Cities publication ''Cities Outlook 2018" {HOU.29) shows Oxford as the least affordable city in Britain with average house prices 17.3 times higher than average earnings.....it points towards a severely skewed housing market with a strong bias towards more expensive homes compared with income distribution......all affordability calculations show that, over the long term, homes in Oxford have been consistently much less affordable than nationally, and all calculations show that there has been a significant long-term deterioration in housing affordability in the city (PSD.15). The equality analysis in "
"34. It has been suggested that the housing need figure should be reduced, or that development needs should be met away from the city, in response to environmental constraints. This point needs to be considered in two parts: the city itself and the wider Oxfordshire area." "35. As far as the city itself is concerned...... "36. As regards environmental considerations in the wider Oxfordshire area, these are a matter for the local authorities themselves, but it is notable that the local plans referred to above, two of which are already adopted and two are at examination, have already addressed the growth needs for the majority of the Oxford Local Plan period. They have rigorously evaluated the balance between growth and environmental considerations and have been subject to sustainability appraisal."
"The scale of new housing need 3.6 The Oxfordshire SHMA 2014 covers the period until 2031 so a roll-forward was commissioned by the City Council in order to understand housing need to 2036. The SHMA roll forward has used the same methodology as the previous SHMA but has used the most up to date household forecasts… The 2018 SHMA roll-forward to 2036 found that, in order to meet Oxford's affordable housing need in full based on a policy of 50% delivery of affordable housing, 1356 dwellings per annum would be required. As identified above affordability is a critical factor for Oxford. The Oxfordshire Housing and Growth Deal with Government signed by all of the local authorities in Oxfordshire in February 2018 commits the Oxfordshire authorities to work together to delivery 100,000 homes in the 20 yar period to 2031. The assumption built into this overall figure was the 1,4000 dwellings per annum were identified as required in Oxford until 2013. Therefore, the housing target remains as it was in the 2014 SHMA."
"Context of the Plan 8. In the Cherwell Local Plan, adopted in 2015 (Local Plan 2015), the Council undertook to continue working with all other Oxfordshire authorities as part of the DtC to address the need for housing across the Housing Market Area (HMA). The authorities concerned had all understood that the City of Oxford might not be able to accommodate all of its housing requirement for the 2011 -2031 period within its own boundaries. 9. The Local Plan 2015 made clear that if joint work revealed that the Council, and other neighbouring authorities, needed to meet additional need for Oxford, then this would trigger a 'Partial Review' of the Local Plan 2015. As set out below, that joint work has revealed just such a requirement. The resulting 'Partial Review' is the Plan under examination here. 10. It is useful to recognise too the challenges faced by the City of Oxford. It is the driver of the County's economy and makes a significant contribution to the national economy. alongside other constraints, the tightness of the Green Belt boundary around the city leads to intense development pressure because of the demand for market housing, the need for more affordable housing, and the parallel economic priority that must be given to key employment sectors."
" Issue 3: Are the exceptional circumstances necessary to justify the alterations to Green Belt boundaries proposed in the Plan in place so that the Plan is consistent with national policy? 44. Paragraph 83 of the Framework says that once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, through the preparation ·or review of the Local Plan. Evidently, in preparing a Plan that proposes changes to the boundaries of the Oxford Green Belt, the Council has met the second part of that requirement. 45. In relation to the first part, there a number of factors in play that combined, lead me to the firm conclusion that the exceptional circumstances necessary to justify the alterations proposed to Green Belt boundaries have been demonstrated. 46. Chief amongst these is the obvious and pressing need to provide open-market and affordable homes for Oxford; a need that Oxford cannot meet itself. On top of that, in seeking to accommodate their part of Oxford's unmet need, the Council has undertaken a particularly rigorous approach to exploring various options. That process has produced a vision and a spatial strategy that is very clearly far superior to other options. There is a simple and inescapable logic behind meeting Oxford's open market and affordable needs in locations as close as possible to the city, on the existing A44/A4260 transport corridor, with resulting travel patterns that would minimise the length of journeys into the city, and not be reliant on the private car. On top of that, existing relationships with the city would be nurtured. Finally, this approach is least likely to interfere with Cherwell's own significant housing commitments set out in the Local Plan 2015. 47. It is important to note too the scale of what is proposed. The Oxford Green Belt in the District of Cherwell covers 8,409 Ha. As submitted, and I come on to further removals below, the Plan makes provision in Policy PR3 for the removal of 253 Ha, a reduction of 3%. That is a relatively small reduction that must be seen in the context of the regional and indeed national benefits that would flow from meeting Oxford's unmet need in such a rational manner. 48. On top of that, as the evidence base, and notably the Green Belt Studies, show that while existing built-up areas of Oxford, Kidlington, Begbroke and Yarnton would be extended into the surrounding countryside, there would be clear, defensible boundaries, both existing ones that could be strengthened further as part of development proposals, and new ones, and whilst the release of some land parcels would result in harm, the overall sense of separation between Kidlington and Oxford in particular, would not be harmfully reduced. Further, the setting and special character of Oxford would not be adversely affected. In that context, the purposes of the Green Belt, as set out in paragraph 80 of the Framework, would not be undermined to any significant degree. Conclusion 49. Overall, it is my judgment that the exceptional circumstances necessary to justify the alterations to Green Belt boundaries proposed In the Plan are in place. The Plan is therefore consistent with national policy."
"65. Following the main hearings, I made plain that notwithstanding the value placed on the North Oxford Golf Club, the site it occupies is an excellent one for the sort of housing the Plan proposes, given its location so close to Oxford."
"66. Moreover, Policy PR6c - Land at Frieze Farm allocates land for a replacement golf course and from what I saw of the existing course, it could, if necessary, provide equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality, on a site very close to the existing facility."
"Policy PR6b 102. Policy PR6b allocates the site currently occupied by the North Oxford Golf Club, on the opposite side of the Oxford Road from the Policy PR6a site. There are some specific points to deal with here too. 104. Criterion 17 requires any planning application that flows from the allocation to be supported by sufficient information to demonstrate that the tests contained in paragraph 74 of the Framework are met, so as to enable the redevelopment of the golf course. 105. I expressed my concerns about this criterion during the hearings and afterwards because it is difficult to see how the allocation could be justified if there remain questions about compliance with paragraph 74. I do understand that the existing golf course is well-appreciated by its users but those that propose its replacement with housing have shown that it is underused, and that there are lots of other facilities where golf can be played nearby. Even if they are wrong on those points, the Plan includes in Policy PR6c that I deal with below, provision for a replacement golf course and, given the requirements of that policy (as proposed to be modified) I see no good reason why it need be inferior in quality or quantity to the existing course."
"Policy PR6c 107. While it is not an allocation that includes housing, it is as well to deal with Policy PR6c at this juncture. In the form submitted, the policy allocates land at Frieze Farm for the potential construction of a golf course, should this be required as a result of the development of the site of the Policy PR6b allocation. It goes on to explain that the application for development of the golf course will need to be supported by a Development Brief prepared jointly, in advance, by representatives of the landowner(s) and the Council, in consultation with Oxfordshire County Council. It is then explained that the intention is that the Development Brief will incorporate design principles that respond to the landscape and Green Belt setting (the site is intended to remain part of the Green Belt) and the historic context of Oxford. 108. As I have explained above, I consider that the extent of the site is such that it could provide a facility that would be similar, or superior, in quality and quantity to the existing course so there is no difficulty in principle here. Nevertheless, the examination showed the policy as drafted to be rather lacking in coverage and detail. There are constraints that will influence any provision of a golf course and associated facilities on the site that need to be addressed. These need to be identified as requirements for the Development Brief referred to above and, as a result, the policy requires significant expansion."
"51. In a case such as the present, it seems to me that, having undertaken the first-stage of the Hunston approach (sc. assessing objectively assessed need), the planning judgments involved in the ascertainment of exceptional circumstances in the context of both national policy and the positive obligation located in section 39(2) should, at least ideally, identify and then grapple with the following matters: (i) the acuteness/intensity of the objectively assessed need (matters of degree may be important)…(§51) (underlining is Claimant's emphasis) and on the analysis of 'exceptional circumstances' by Sir Duncan Ouseley in Compton PC v. Guildford BC ( [2020] JPL 661 ): "
" 50. In this case, both appellants took an active part in the debate on housing need –which included the question of unmet need in Woking – in the course of the examination process, before the hearing, at it, and afterwards in the main modifications stage. It is not suggested that they were unable to put their evidence and arguments before the inspector, as did other participants whose evidence and arguments were different. They cannot complain that the inspector overlooked what they had to say, or that the evidence before him was insufficient for the assessment he had to make."
"The factors described above, and the limited supply of new homes, have led to what can reasonably be described as a crisis of affordable housing need in the city. HOU.5 states that the situation in Oxford is one where there is a clear, acute affordable housing need beyond that in any of the comparators it examines." [§24] "
" Oxford's overall housing figures"; "the extent of unmet need" and "the balance between housing and employment sites that the city had struck."
"25. The concept of 'openness of the Green Belt' is not narrowly limited to the volumetric approach suggested by [counsel]. The word 'openness' is open-textured and a number of factors are capable of being relevant when it comes to applying it to the particular facts of a specific case. Prominent among these will be factors relevant to how built up the Green Belt is now and how built up it would be if redevelopment occurs … and factors relevant to the visual impact on the aspect of openness which the Green Belt presents."
"Para 74 requires that, where open space land is to be built upon, the loss will be replaced by "equivalent or better provision"
"The inspector at a planning inquiry is a technical tribunal himself and he is entitled, it seems to me, to make decisions – make value judgments or subjective judgments – about planning matters that fall within his qualification and expertise which in most cases is very great. He does not have to have planning experts on both sides to tell him what the planning issues are or anything of that kind. He is perfectly able to make up his own mind for himself. There must be many many cases in which the decision turns on what is the view – the value judgment in planning terms – of an experienced inspector on any planning proposal. I cannot see that that is a matter with which this court can or should interfere. This court is not composed of planning experts and it seems to me that in the jurisdiction of this court one is not dealing at all with the question of whether on technical matters of this kind there was sufficient evidence or insufficient evidence of an inspector to come to some planning judgment on a matter before him" [261]. "
" the Inspector's conclusions will invariably be based not merely upon the evidence heard at an inquiry or an informal hearing, or contained in written representations but, and this will often be of crucial importance, upon the impressions received on the site inspection. Against this background an applicant alleging an inspector has reached a Wednesbury unreasonable conclusion on matters of planning judgment faces a particularly daunting task"
"42. … Site PR6c is approximately of a similar size to the existing golf course (30ha compared to 32ha) and could accommodate an alternative course / facility if required."
" 11.9 … England Golf latent demand analysis suggests that there may be the potential for more demand, but in Cherwell the current 18-hole dominant format may be hindering this potential. … 11.19. The national governing body commented that the number of affiliated clubs and driving ranges in Cherwell which have pay and play access in addition to membership, means that there is good open access to golf, though there are no Par 3 courses or other shorter formats which are more suitable for the beginner and for younger people. … 11.29. Typically, shorter than 18-hole format will be more attractive to younger players. This would suggest a need for more Par 3 and other short format courses, especially as there is only one 9-hole course in the district (and it is not a Par 3)."
" When compared to other golf courses in the surrounding catchment area NOGC is not obviously better than the majority of alternatives, and in some respects, notably site area, drainage, practice and clubhouse facilities, it could be regarded as poorer."
" 3.12 Sport England welcomes the identification of a replacement golf course site on land at Frieze Farm (Policy PR6c), to replace the facility lost through development of North Oxford Golf Course, in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF (Representation PR-C-1403). 3.13 The parties agree that a replacement golf course will need to be provided unless an assessment shows that there is not a need or the tests in the NPPF are met."
"We would suggest that a site of 60+ hectares be considered for the relocation of the North Oxford Golf Club. With modern safety margins between golf holes and boundaries a larger site than is currently used would be ideal. The 60+ hectare site would see a comparable 18-hole golf course of similar length and challenge but also include a practice academy region for the continued growth of existing members but also to attract non-members and non-golfers to start to take up the game."
"The prime reason for saying this is the limited size of the provisionally allocated site. A modern-day golf course when completed occupies a footprint surface area of at least 75ha , to include access, clubhouse building and parking, practice range, maintenance buildings, etc."