1. Thame Neighbourhood Plan and
its relationship with the adopted
South Oxfordshire
Core Strategy
Dr Lucy Murfett
Principal Planning Policy Officer
South Oxfordshire District Council

2. What we’ll cover
• The journey: born out of conflict with
the district council, how we achieved
partnership and even an RTPI award
• Timing and relationship with the Core
Strategy examination
• Critical appraisal of outcomes
community-led Thame land
allocations
• Process issues and challenges
• How it’s changed us

3. 3
Neighbourhood plans in South
Oxfordshire as at July 2013

4. Thame frontrunner- the firsts
Planning magazine 14 June 2013
• First NP in the country to allocate land
• First NP in the country to have a hearing

5. A bit about Thame
• Traditional market town
• Population 10,900
• 10 miles south east of
Aylesbury
• Attractive historic
character
• Strong agricultural base
with cattle markets still
held weekly in town
centre
• Healthy number of
independent retailers,
town centre vacancies low
• Good transport links to
M40, plus good bus
service and rail at nearby
Haddenham Parkway
• Good community spirit

6. The genesis: resistance to emerging
SODC Core Strategy
• There was local opposition
to proposals in the
submission Core Strategy
• Examination was being held
about the same time that
proposals for
neighbourhood planning
were emerging
• Thame applied to be a
government frontrunner and
was successful

7. SODC Core Strategy proposed a single
strategic site as a greenfield urban extension
600
homes
here
Plus 175
homes in a
future DPD

8. Foreword to the Thame NP explains:
• “The Town Council wanted the people of
Thame to have a say in all aspects of the
future of the town but most importantly it
wanted local people to decide where new
housing should go, rather than leaving this
decision to South Oxfordshire District Council”

9. A conundrum for the Core Strategy
Inspector
• He held a hearing session on what to
do.
• He decided to strip out the proposed
allocation at Thame and delegate the
decision to the forthcoming Thame
neighbourhood plan.
• We were concerned about the impact
on our 5 year supply, and sought a
contingency option (we failed in this
argument). What would we do if the
TNP failed to keep to timetable? (In
the end this was an unfounded fear)

10. 10
Thame prepared the plan
• Thame Town Council
appointed consultants Tibbalds
• SODC is very positive about neighbourhood
planning at senior management and political
levels
• Some funding was available
• South Oxfordshire DC provided help from a
contact officer (Beryl Guiver then
Lucy Murfett) in the policy team

11. How did we help?
• We saw role of our policy officer as to
– Advise on process
– Ensure they know national and local strategic
policy constraints
– Supplying background information
– Help with policy formulation eg at roundtable
discussions
– Help ensure plan meets local community
aspirations
– Help ensure plan will succeed at examination eg
help with the basic conditions statement
– Carry out the statutory processes eg area
designation, examination, referendum
• Most input at pre-submission draft stage, submission
stage, examination and referendum*
*with legal and democratic services

12. 12
A balancing act
– When to intervene?
– How firm to be?
– When to let things go?
Respecting that it’s not our plan
Realising the difference between our
DPDs and the tests of soundness they
undergo at examination, with the ‘light
touch’ examinations of neighbourhood
plans which assess process more than
content

13. 13
Decisions, decisions
– LA is a statutory consultee and can
comment formally on the plan
– We chose to split our comments into
three parts:
1. matters of general conformity (there were four at
draft plan stage: The Elms, density, viability,
deliverability, but none at submission stage)
2. issues of concern but not matters of general
conformity
3. plus informally we advised on typos, minor
improvements etc
– We respected the different approach
they took to the allocations

14. Thame NP allocations

15. 15
Approach was rooted in options
1. Walkable Thame
2. Public transport Thame
3. Dispersed Thame
4. Contained Thame
Options were tested through SA
(all scored within 10% of each other)
and through public consultation

16. Option 1: Walkable Thame

17. Option 2: Public Transport Thame

18. Option 3: Dispersed Thame

19. Option 4: Contained Thame
The chosen option

20. 20
SODC’s approach at the examination
•We were in a unique plan-making situation
where everyone knew how we would have
distributed the growth (600 to site F)
•But we said at the examination that it doesn’t
matter that the distribution is different from
what we would have done. Ours was a more
technical planning decision giving weight to
public transport, county council advice and the
desire to maximise infrastructure gains
•Seemed entirely right and in line with the
principles of localism for the community to do
it their way, based on local priorities

21. 21
So at the examination
• We made no objections at submission stage
or at the examination.
• We concluded that the basic conditions on
compliance with national policy, general
conformity with the core strategy,
contribution to sustainable development and
compliance with EU obligations had all been
met.
• We supported the community-based
approach and congratulated the Town
Council on their hard work and fast
progress, a through and impressive plan.

22. Examination Hearing
- Organisation
- Format
- Invitees
- Role of DC

23. The examiner agreed:

24. But not everyone agreed…

25. Process issues and challenges
• A whirlwind!
• Hard fitting in alongside our core work
• Processes untested and lack of guidance
• Our constitution didn’t cover delegated powers for
this NP processes
• Key steps in last 8 months:
– Submission 29 Nov 2012
– Appoint examiner Dec 2012
– Consultation 6 weeks 7 Dec 2012 – 24 Jan 2013
– Reps to examiner
– Hearing 19 Feb 2013 – needed Programme Officer
– Examiner’s report end Feb 2013
– Council’s decision statement
– Publish information statement
– Publish notice of referendum
– Referendum 2 May 2013
– “Make” plan 18 July 2013

26. Referendum
LA must:
–Give 28 days notice (excl weekends)
–Publish information statement
–Publish relevant documents
Regulations set the question:
“Do you want SODC to use the
neighbourhood plan for Thame to help
decide planning applications in the
neighbourhood area?”
Only residents vote (except if business area)
>50% vote yes LA ‘make’ plan.
Rules on no public money being spent on
promoting a ‘yes’ vote 26

27. The referendum count
76%
voted
‘Yes’
2779
votes
cast
Turnout
39.8%

28. Legal Challenges
3 challenge periods/ opportunities:
1. The Examiner’s recommendations
and LA decision on them
2. Conduct of the referendum
3. If LA refuse to ‘make’ plan after
>50% vote in favour
All within 6 weeks of relevant decision
28

29. Issues and lessons learnt
• Legislation limited information, light touch
• LA governance procedures
• Referendum influences plan content
• Trust between LA and NP group
• Involvement of statutory consultees
• Pressure from landowners
• High profile - press releases, ministerial
visits etc.
• Thame TC are now seeking more
involvement at pre-app stage.
• Expectation of CIL receipts.
• Keep an open mind! 29

30. Reflections on the relationships
• With the Town Council
• With the consultant
• With the examiner

31. Winners of RTPI 2013 award for planning
excellence – innovation in plan making
Director of Tibbalds Planning and Urban Design, Hilary Satchell:
“It belongs as much to Thame Town Council, South Oxfordshire District
Council and, most importantly, the people of Thame as it does to
Tibbalds."

32. How the Thame NP changed us
• We are now working on our Local
Plan: Sites and General Policies plan
• We are working with our 12 larger
villages to allocate land for 1,154
homes
• Some are doing NPs
• Some are not, but we’re trying to offer
them a community-led process
• We are giving much more focus to
community wishes rather than a more
focussed technical planning approach

34. If you want to find out more
• http://www.southoxon.
gov.uk/services-and-
advice/planning-and-
building/planning-
policy/neighbourhood-
plans/thame-
neighbourhood-pl
• http://www.thametown
council.gov.uk

35. Any questions?