VALP Proposed Submission
Results for Arncott Parish Council searchNew search
VALP Proposed Submission
S6 Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople provision
Representation ID: 986
Respondent: Arncott Parish Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to the allocation of Oaksview Park, Boarstall. It is a isolated site in a prominent position in open countryside. It overlooks residential properties and size is not in keeping with the appearance and character of that open and rural area. There are 19 pitches on the site plan, not 13. It has poor access to services, Arncott is nearest village, there are no footpaths or public transport and Arncott only has limited facilities.
The Oaksview Park site has been unlawfully occupied since June 2004. Several applications have been made, all being refused except for temporary permission in 2009.
From email sent 2/12/17: Arncott Parish Council objects strongly to the proposal in the AVLP to
site a permanent gypsy and traveller site within a few hundred metres
of Arncott Village. While Arncott is classified as a category A
village within the CDC Local Plan, planners have acknowledged that it
does not have the facilities which would normally be expected of a
village of this category - it has a pub and a shop, but no school and
the nearest doctor's surgery open on a regular basis is in Bicester.
The Village has a limited and irregular bus service, and expects bus
users to leave the bus while it goes into St George's Barracks and
wait in Arncott for some 20 minutes until it resumes its journey.
A site in this location therefore is not sustainable other than in a
From emailed response form 13/12/17:
With reference to the proposed submission of the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan 2013 - 2033 dated November 2017, policy S6, page 51, table 4.
Whilst Arncott Parish Council acknowledge the national need to provide suitable sites for the Gypsy and Traveller communities, it disagrees with and is strongly opposed to the proposed inclusion in the local plan document of Oaksview Park, Boarstall being considered as an appropriate and sustainable site for the possible permanent residence of Gypsies, Travellers and / or Travelling Showpeople.
Oaksview Park is an isolated site located in a prominent position in open countryside. The site overlooks local residential properties and its presence and size is not in keeping with the appearance and character of that open and rural area. Page 51, table 4 in the proposed plan indicates the potential number of pitches to be allocated as thirteen. Previous planning applications and submitted site plans will show the number of pitches as nineteen. The site can hardly be considered as small scale.
The site has very poor sustainability. It does not have ready access to local schools, public transport, health centres, shops, other services or facilities. Arncott is the nearest village to the site and is approximately 1/2 - ¾ mile distant. There are no footpaths from the site into the village. The site does not have a public transport service.
Although Arncott village is classified as a category 'A' village within the CDC Local Plan, the planners acknowledge that the village does not have the facilities that a category 'A' village would be expected to have. Arncott has a limited bus service, a public house, a small hotel and a shop. The nearest school is in the village of Ambrosden. The nearest health centre that is open on a regular basis is in Bicester.
The Oaksview Park site has been unlawfully occupied since June 2004. Since that time several applications for planning permission have been submitted together with the many associated documents. All of the applications and associated documents have been considered at length by AVDC planning control. With the exception of temporary permission being granted in 2009 for a period of three years, all other applications have been refused - the latest refusal being AVDC document 16/03442/APP dated 31st August 2017.
AVDC's own planning control department have consistently refused to grant planning permission to the site for each application and the reasons for each refusal are typically the same.