Fences added to 200-home-field in North Abingdon

January 6, 2019

200 home field
Outline Planning Permission was granted for 200 homes in a field north of Abingdon on 13th February 2018. The land was already part of the local plan.
200  field
Last week fences were added, probably to allow an archaeological survey. Meanwhile the detailed plans are being reworked. No building work will happen until they are approved.
200 home field
The site is on the field bounded by Tilsley Park, the Wootton Road, Dunmore Road, and the A34 (pictured above.)

Detailed plans were submitted but withdrawn in October, pending a rethink.

Among the comments to those plans were the Oxfordshire Clinical Commissiong Group who said ‘This development would realise an extra 480 patients on average, for the GP’s in the area …‘ Before they could approve the plans extra financial support would be needed for the local health economy.

The Friends of Abingdon suggested that the developer had underestimated the walking distance to a number of local facilities.

The Vale urban design officer suggested the plan ‘presents a lacklustre scheme with a measure of spatial inefficiency’.

Filed under: building work

9 Comments Leave a Comment

  • 1. Daniel  |  January 6, 2019 at 10:06 pm

    ‘presents a lacklustre scheme with a measure of spatial inefficiency’. However the developer can make a tidy profit, and that’s what counts. Consider it built!

  • 2. ppjs  |  January 6, 2019 at 10:56 pm

    Why not build 1000 homes on Albert Park or 10,000 on Tilsley Park? Who cares about traffic problems or space congestion? GIMME MONEY!

  • 3. Julian Annells  |  January 7, 2019 at 7:02 am

    All that land at Blenheim Palace…could get a whole village/town there? I bet they wouldn’t though…. funny that?

  • 4. Lyle Lanley  |  January 7, 2019 at 11:24 am

    Actually, they are doing exactly that Julian..
    Blenheim estate is building all over its land on the east of Woodstock.

    As for the Dunmore Road building, we all know its going to be built, regardless of suitability, local infrastructure, or traffic impact.
    But we knew that from the moment they changed the Wooton road roundabout..

    Maybe if they built that monorail, there wouldnt be the issue with walking distances…

  • 5. Badger  |  January 7, 2019 at 11:56 am

    ‘Blindly onwards’ they forged regressing with yet greater momentum.

  • 6. rudi  |  January 7, 2019 at 6:51 pm

    let he who doesn’t live in a house built on a former greenfield site cast the first stone.

  • 7. Daniel  |  January 7, 2019 at 9:17 pm

    That’s no excuse Rudi for a complete lack of common sense, poorly served communities, purely for profit at the expense of all else, ill thought out development.

    I think you miss the point.

    But you are correct.

    I guess by our very existence, we are indeed part of the problem.

  • 8. Deedee  |  January 8, 2019 at 3:57 pm

    As referred to in the previous feature we have town and district council elections coming up in May and that’s the time to air your views, not just on how you want things to develop but more important it’s a time to boot out those who’ve failed us – miserabley!
    Anyone who drives along Dunmore Road in the morning and again in the evening will know if the gridlock that exists for most of its length, which begs the obvious question, what on earth will it be like when the soon to be built extra 1200 houses get built alongside it with little or no apparent improvement to infrastructure?
    Why is this allowed? Why do councillors ignore public opinion? It’s was exactly the same with the new Moreland Garden development, everyone in south Abingdon protested about it but the Tory councillors overseeing it completely ignored public opinion and allowed the decision be made by a fellow Tory councillor who doesn’t even live here! Why? Easy !
    For each new build created within a district council central government gives them a kick back ( inducement!) of, I think £400, so it’s a no brainier for immoral councillors who see extra income more important than public opinion, sadly though thatsniw seriously back fired on the vale because there are strict criteria which that money can be used for and the vale have been caught out! That’s why they’ve had to put on hold some major projects they’ve already started!
    Incompetent and immoral, perhaps we should remember that when placing our next crosses on the ballot paper !

  • 9. Daniel  |  January 8, 2019 at 5:16 pm

    Deedee – all fair points, and you (we) are well within our rights to be angry, dismayed and disappointed.

    However….the councillors aren’t necessarily to blame. They are merely given the advice to approve or reject by the nameless, faceless, unaccountable, unelected council officers.

    Dare I say it, I almost feel sorry for the councillors making a decision and getting the blame for it..when they are only enacting what the paid minions and ex-sperts and consultants have deemed appropriate.

    You are right to use Moorland Gardens as an example of just how bad – or fruitless – things are. Everyone – councillor wide, and locally was against the development – before infrastructure changes and guarantees – yet it still got approved…because it had to.

    still. We have a cinema now, and the flowers look lovely. so…should’t complain.

Leave a Comment


(required), (Hidden)

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL  |  RSS feed for comments on this post.

Blog Archives


Local Blogroll (Active) Local Blogroll (In-Active) Abingdon Sites