Back in 2013 our councils spent many thousands of pounds of our money on consultants to produce the Oxfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) to determine the future need for housing for the Vale of the White Horse.

This report was the basis of the Local Plan which our district council spent a great deal of time and money developing. The plan states that 35 per cent of all new homes should be affordable and 65 per cent should be open market homes.

For open market housing it states that for every 1,000 new homes, the Vale needs:

59 x 1 bedroom

217 x 2 bedroom

426 x 3 bedroom

298 x 4 or more bedroom homes.

Every planning application in the Vale should match this need until 2031.

So why did the planning officers at the district council planning meeting last week say that less weight should be given to these requirements and developers should be allowed to determine market need?

We all know that developers will build the houses that generate the most profit and that is large houses.

At the planning meeting last week, two item reflected this issue.

First, a variation on planning permission for east of Milton Hill includes 297 open market homes which doesn’t reflect the market need as shown in the SHMA:

Size SHMA Application

1 bedroom 17 0

2 bedroom 64 38

3 bedroom 127 140

4+ bedroom 89 119

The second was the detailed application for Park Farm East Challow which includes 53 market homes. The mix doesn’t match the SHMA though it’s much closer.

Size SHMA Application

1 bedroom 3 0

2 bedroom 11.5 11

3 bedroom 22.5 21

4+ bedroom 16 21

Both these applications were approved.

Yet Core Policy 22 of the Local Plan requires a mix of dwelling types and sizes in accordance with the SHMA unless an independent viability assessment proves otherwise.

As far as we know, there is no independent viability assessment, so the need for one and two bedroom homes must still exist, especially near the employment areas of Harwell and Milton Park.

Surely the council should stick to its own plan – if not, why did they spend hundreds of thousands of pounds of our money developing it?