To receive any questions or statements from members of the public that have registered to speak.
Minutes:
Cabinet received addresses from nine members of the public.
(1) Paul Boone spoke on behalf of Chalgrove Airfield Action Group expressing disappointment that the airfield had not been removed from the housing site options under consideration. He reported that Martin Baker, a business tenant at the site, and the Chalgrove Airfield Action Group would oppose any attempt by Homes England to compulsorily purchase the site. Legal advice suggested that planning permission was a pre-requisite of compulsory purchase and he believed this proposal was likely to fail. The development would also cost more than estimated. He urged Cabinet to support option 2: removing the Chalgrove Airfield housing allocation from the local plan.
(2) Ian Goldsmith, the chairman of Cuxham and Easington parish, spoke against the inclusion of the Chalgrove Airfield site in the local plan as the traffic from the new housing would adversely impact on his village. He urged Cabinet to support option 2: removing the Chalgrove Airfield housing allocation from the local plan.
(3) Caroline Baird spoke on behalf of Save Culham Green Belt, reminding Cabinet that the council had a five-year housing land supply, and the government now required lower housing numbers. She urged Cabinet to review the local plan and remove the Culham strategic housing site. There were no exceptional circumstances to build on the Green Belt and the existing road and rail infrastructure was insufficient for the proposed development site.
(4) Ken Glendinning spoke on behalf of Homes England, in support of retaining the Chalgrove Airfield site as a strategic housing allocation in the local plan. Homes England was continuing to negotiate with Martin Baker over relocation of its business and land for a new runway. If agreement could not be reached, the last resort would be compulsory purchase of the airfield site to allow the housing development to proceed. Homes England had been allocated funds to provide new infrastructure in the first phase of the development.
(5) Richard Turner, spoke on behalf of Taylor Wimpey, supporting the inclusion of its site at East Hagbourne in the local plan as a strategic housing allocation. This was a sustainable location for housing. Also, it was not in the Green Belt, which should only be developed in exceptional circumstances. He believed that currently the local plan was unsound and urged Cabinet to approve option 3: retaining Chalgrove Airfield but adding another strategic housing site, such as Hagbourne Fields, and sites on the edges of existing settlements at Thame and Wallingford.
(6) Gill Bindoff, a Watlington resident, urged Cabinet to review its local plan and make it sound as it was damaging neighbourhood development plans.
(7) Christian Leigh, on behalf of the residents of Little Milton, spoke opposing the inclusion of Chalgrove Airfield as a local plan strategic housing site. He believed that Martin Baker needed the whole airfield to run its business and it would not agree with Homes England’s proposals. He queried the variation in legal advice on this matter and urged Cabinet to remove Chalgrove Airfield housing allocation site from the local plan.
(8) Graham Bell, a Chalgrove resident, applauded the Council’s decision to reject Cabinet’s previous proposals. He believed that the evidence was still against including Chalgrove Airfield in the local plan. There was inadequate evidence that the impact of such a development would be mitigated. He believed that Martin Baker would not surrender its lease of the site. Pursuing this site as a strategic housing allocation was risking the local plan being found unsound, which would put the whole district at risk of development. He urged Cabinet to remove Chalgrove Airfield from the local plan.
(9) Ann Pritchard, a Chalgrove parish councillor, spoke against the inclusion of Chalgrove Airfield as a strategic housing allocation site. She believed that Martin Baker would no longer engage with Homes England and would contest the compulsory purchase of the airfield site. She did not believe that houses should be close to runways. There would be no community benefit from this development unless new infrastructure was built. She urged Cabinet to remove the Chalgrove Airfield site.
The chairman thanked the speakers for their contribution.