Shrivenham Parish Council's website

Planning Inquiry Summary Day 7

Day 7 was due to start with Housing Land Supply discussion.  However, the Vale key expert advised they were unable to attend due to sickness, thus causing some disruption to the agenda.  For the second time this week, the proceedings had to be adjusted and timetable changed to reflect this.  

The inspector decided to hear golf safety evidence today instead, and the Housing Land Supply matter would now be heard on Tuesday 6^th October.

The Appellant introduced their expert to discuss golf safety.  This focused-on feedback presented hole by hole of the course layout. This included discussion of visibility/blind spots, boundaries and proximities to public footpaths.  There was also a discussion of the accident book that had been shared earlier in the week.  It was noted that there were 8 entries last year, and one so far this year, and in total since 2003 a total of 13 "ball strikes" recorded in 23 years.  The appellant suggested that the accident book was not complete and some data had been removed.

On cross examination the witness was asked when they were instructed to prepare this work - this was confirmed as late August, 2026.

It was clarified that due to one garden in Oxford Square receiving a number of golf balls in their garden that the course was changed with a new tee to address the issue. 

It was also confirmed that in the written evidence there was no indication or discussion of mitigation options for the perceived concerns that could be implemented cost effectively.  It was indicated that this could be done quite easily with signage and a "bell" system.  It was also pointed out that Golf Etiquette and knowledge of the public footpaths was well established by users of the course.  The accident log book was discussed again, and 3 particular ball strike entries, with 2 being due to "Bounce back" in the practice area, with the other being one golfer accidently hitting their playing partner when a shot was sliced, did not involve golfers on another hole or the general public. It was noted that there were a very low number of incidents over the 22 years, and so it was put that it was not a high-risk course.  It was also noted that there was no comparison to other courses in the evidence provided.

The Inquiry then closed for the day.  The inspector asked the appellant for possible alternative courses to visit.  He was advised to consider visiting Broome Manor, Bassett Down, Brinkworth and South Cerney.  

Wrag Barn was also mentioned, but noted it was of a different standard, but could be visited as a reference point.

The inquiry is now adjourned, and will restart at 9:30am on Tuesday 6^th October.  All being well, the Housing Supply topic will be the focus.  The inquiry is still planned to finish on Thursday 8^th October.

Planning Inquiry Summary Day 6

Procedural matters were covered quickly and moved to main content of the day which was focused on Golf matters, principally the assessment of needs and the available supply/provision of Golf in the area.

The first witness was Mr Jupp for the Vale and his evidence walked through the discussion around the Leisure Facilities Assessment Strategy (LFAS) of the Vale.  

In summary, the National policy framework is to protect recreational areas such as a Golf Course unless there is a better alternative provided to replace it, or if there is clearly a surplus of such facilities.  This was the main debate of the day.  The Vale local plan is based on the national policy, and states that development needs should be assessed against the LFAS.  

This LFAS is a district council wide assessment, whereas the Bloor work as a specific site needs assessment.  A lot of discussion during the day focused on "cross border" considerations and the difference between the Vale work as the planning authority, and Bloor's view that cross border view should be taken. 

The vale team pointed out that without Shrivenham Park Golf Club, the LFAS would be identifying a shortfall in the provision of golf in this part of the Vale.

Cross Examination of Mr Jupp challenged on the validity of the LFAS, and that a wider 30 minute drive view should be considered.  They also challenged on the interpretation of "what assessment" should be done to comply with the National Policy.

On Re-examination, Mr Jupp clarified that clearly residents of Swindon use Shrivenham as a course and vice versa as golfers like to use a variety of courses.

The Inquiry then went on to hear evidence from the Bloor expert witness, Mr Grady, to give evidence focused on the "surplus to requirement" test.

In summary, a lot of data and statistics were presented on participation rates, average memberships etc and the 30 minute drive test.  Courses were quoted including Bassett Down, Broome Manor, Brinkworth and South Cerney. All were quoted as having capacity and within 30 mins.

The Shrivenham Golf finances were then discussed in terms of challenging viability etc and being able to cope with any increases in lease costs from the owners.

Mid-afternoon the cross examination of Mr Grady took place from the Vale team.  They started to re-confirm that as far as Vale Policies are concerned in respect of the Local Plan under which they operate, that they look to the policies and data for the jurisdiction under which they have authority.

Unfortunately Cllr Howell had to leave mid-afternoon, but the cross examination was expected to continue all afternoon.

Day 7 will start at 9:30am and is expected to be focused on Housing Supply data.

? Planning Inquiry Summary Day 5

The Inquiry re-started on day 5 with some procedural and agenda clarifications. Unfortunately, Mr Anderson representing the Vale on Golf matters has advised he was unable to attend today.

The day then focused on hearing representations for Mr Charlie Maynard MP, and other representatives from the community, primarily covering Golf ⛳, the Doctors surgery ?, and local infrastructure concerns ?️.

Mr Charlie Maynard spoke to the Inquiry principally regarding four key concerns:

• the loss of recreational and community facility ?️

• the loss of separation and trees between the two villages ?

• sewage and Thames Water concerns ?

• the new information on the possible site for a Doctors surgery ?

In particular, he stressed the failure of the sewage works and the fact it was pumping sewage into Tuckmill Brook (1635 hours over a 12 month period). He also explained that there are other options for a Doctors surgery, including possible MOD options, and that he was talking to parties to move things forward.

Mr Maynard was then cross examined, particularly with regard to the housing supply and the need for affordable housing ?️.

The rest of the day was taken by representatives of the community. In total 11 residents made representations to the Inspector on similar topics, with a lot of focus on Golf, Health, and community benefits of the area — with many questions being asked by the Bloor representatives.

Thanks should go to all those who took the time to prepare and speak ?, and also undergo at times some very detailed questioning from the appellant team.

? Day 6 Wednesday 30th September starting at 9:30am will be focused on the presentation of Golf evidence from both parties and cross examination.

• A member of the public asked in response to the discussion on emissions whether the data analysis had factored in possible increased vehicle movements with a possible new Doctors Surgery being proposed.  The Appellant team advised that this had been included as it would have been covered by their "worst case" scenario and modelled on some available standard modelling of trips to doctors surgeries.
• A member of the public asked about the statement around the ground cover at Wellington Wood, pointing out that she had seen bluebells and orchids in this area.

• Has the EIA considered badger sets on the SSSI and the impact of loss of foraging area.  Was answered that the enhanced new open spaces will provide enhanced area, but some loss of space
• Has appropriate fencing been considered for wildlife movement such as hedgehogs.  This was answered that it would be covered in detailed design matters but the appellant was aware.
• Question on road drainage and how water would be dealt with.  The appellant answered that there were attenuation areas. It would be checked whether the water would run to the main sewage system
• Finally, a question raised on whether it was possible for the part of the SSSI that falls on the Golf Course could long term form part of the land management of the Earth trust.   It was answered that this was for later consideration and would need to be followed up with the Vale and Bloor.

Summary of the opening day of the Planning Inquiry

A brief summary of the opening day.

Planning Inspector Matthew Jones opened proceedings and welcomed everyone to the Inquiry.

A special thank you to the 100+ residents from Shrivenham and Watchfield who attended the proceedings and were exceptionally well-behaved (mostly ?!).

Introductions were made, and it was explained that the Inquiry may need to run into a third week due to new information received in recent days regarding the Vale's five-year housing land supply. As a result, Shrivenham Memorial Hall is likely to be booked for an additional three days, 6–8 October (to be confirmed).

The Inspector highlighted that the Inquiry will focus on several key issues: the suitability of the site for development, the character of the area and potential harm, the loss of sport and recreation facilities, and housing need and land supply across the Vale.

The timetable was outlined, and the process was explained, including witness statements, cross-examination, and opportunities for members of the public to question witnesses.

Opening statements were then made by the Appellant team (Bloor Homes' representatives), followed by the Vale of White Horse District Council (the “defendants”). These outlined the core cases for and against the appeal.

The Inspector then invited representations from the room. Cllr Howell requested that, due to availability issues, some members of the Golf Club and members of the public who were unable to attend this week be allowed to speak next week. It was agreed that further public representations would be heard on Tuesday 29 September, after Charlie Maynard MP has addressed the Inquiry.

Public speaking then began with the planning consultant engaged jointly by Shrivenham and Watchfield Parish Councils, followed by cross-examination.

In total, seven representations were made, covering golf, health and wellbeing, the use of the area by community groups, the future of the doctors' surgery, urbanisation of the settlement gap, highways, and sewage and water infrastructure. The relevance of the Swindon Eastern Expansion was also raised, alongside discussion of Oxford's unmet housing need.

All public speakers did a fantastic job, particularly in responding to the cross-examination process.

The afternoon concluded with a witness presenting evidence on affordable housing need.

When the formal proceedings ended, the Inspector carried out an unaccompanied private visit to the site.

Day 2 will commence at 9.30 am in the Large Hall at Shrivenham Memorial Hall.

Reminder: Public Inquiry for plans to build on the Golf Course starts Tuesday 22nd at 10am in the Main Hall, Shrivenham Memorial Hall.

The public are welcome to attend and show the "Best of Shrivenham" and that we care greatly about this area and all the benefits it brings to the villages.

We expect to hear how the inquiry will run on the first day and how we can make representations, as well as the introductions of the parties involved and the key areas of focus.

Updates and news will be published as soon as we have more info.

Message from Cllr Simon Howell.

How to apply

For either role, please send your CV together with a covering letter explaining your suitability to Bob Sheldon, Chairman of Shrivenham Parish Council, email: bob.sheldon@shrivenham.org

For an informal discussion, please contact the Parish Office on 01793 782925.

Closing date: 12 October 2026

Please note: Applications will be reviewed as they are received, and we reserve the right to close this vacancy early if a suitable candidate is identified. Early applications are therefore encouraged.