Three outline bids landed this month: 200 apartments, a 3.1km circuit and 86,700sqm of floorspace. The NHS says Bicester's GP surgery is already over capacity.

Bicester Motion lodged three outline planning applications with Cherwell District Council on the same day. Together they cover 200 apartments, roughly 86,700 square metres of floorspace and a 3.1km vehicle circuit on the old RAF Bicester flying field.

All three were received on 7 August 2026. One was validated that day and the other two on 17 August.

All three are listed as under consultation, and all three will be decided by councillors on a planning committee rather than by officers. Comments close on 18 September 2026.

The applicant is Bicester Motion Limited. The agent is Edgars Limited of Witney. All three sites sit in Launton parish, in the Launton and Otmoor ward.

What has been applied for

Reference Scheme Scale Decision due
26/01999/OUT The Rushes c. 44,100sqm, 49 acres 6 Nov 2026
26/02001/OUT Motion Living up to 200 flats, 4.3ha 16 Nov 2026
26/02007/OUT The Ranges Connection c. 15,570sqm, 9.6 acres 16 Nov 2026

These are outline applications with all matters reserved apart from access. That means the layout, appearance, scale and landscaping are not being decided now. They would come back as reserved matters applications later.

The Rushes: a 3.1km circuit on the flying field

The largest of the three is The Rushes, on land at the former RAF Bicester off Buckingham Road. The planning statement puts it at about 44,100 square metres of floorspace on a footprint of 23,240 square metres, inside 49 acres of land.

The proposal reuses the airfield’s existing perimeter track. The statement describes:

  • a 3.1km vehicle circuit in total
  • a 1.3km loop and a 1.5km loop that can run independently of each other
  • a 600m mini loop
  • a low friction training surface area

The tracks are “motorsport inspired but are not designed to cater for multi car racing events”, according to the planning statement. It says they are for driver training, time trials, testing, demonstration and experience activities.

This is a revision of a scheme already permitted in 2021 under reference 21/01224/OUT, then called the Experience Quarter. The new version is substantially bigger on a smaller site. The planning statement records that the 2021 permission allowed a 15,441 square metre footprint across 76.5 acres, with 22,338 square metres of floorspace and heights of 5m to 10.5m.

The new application seeks a maximum height of 15m. The statement acknowledges that this is 4.5m taller than the 2021 approval. Buildings towards Bicester Heritage would be capped at 10.5m “to ensure no visual rivalry with the hangars to the south”.

Floorspace sought by the three Bicester Motion outline applications Bar chart comparing floorspace. The Rushes seeks about 44,100 square metres, against 22,338 square metres approved on the same land in 2021. Motion Living seeks about 27,000 square metres for up to 200 apartments. The Ranges Connection seeks about 15,570 square metres. The three 2026 applications total about 86,700 square metres. Three applications, about 86,700sqm of floorspace Gross internal area sought, square metres. The pale bar is what was already approved on the same land in 2021. The Rushes (26/01999/OUT) 44,100 22,338 approved in 2021 Motion Living (26/02001/OUT), up to 200 apartments c. 27,000 The Ranges Connection (26/02007/OUT) 15,570 Source: planning statements submitted with each application, Cherwell District Council planning register, August 2026. Motion Living floorspace is given in its planning statement as approximately 27,000sqm. Graphic by Banbury Online

Motion Living: 200 flats, and the affordable housing is cash

Motion Living is the one that changes what Bicester Motion is. It seeks up to 200 apartments on 4.3 hectares, a density of up to 47 dwellings per hectare, in about 27,000 square metres of floorspace.

The illustrative masterplan shows a cluster of eight apartment blocks on the southern two thirds of the site, outside the perimeter track. The planning statement describes:

  • a mix of one, two and three bedroom apartments
  • national space standards or higher
  • a private balcony for each apartment, plus communal amenity space
  • buildings of four storeys, reaching a maximum of 17.5m with lower ground parking

The affordable housing is the part worth reading closely. Cherwell’s own pre-application response told the applicant the site would “need to meet the requirements for affordable housing (as outside of ‘Bicester’ therefore 35%)”.

The application does not offer 35% of the homes as affordable. It offers money instead. The planning statement lists among the scheme’s benefits “the provision of an affordable housing financial contribution, to be agreed as part of any subsequent Reserved Matters application”. The amount is not stated.

The same pre-application response also flagged the site as being in “a potentially unsustainable position in relation to Bicester town centre”.

The NHS has already objected on GP capacity

NHS Thames Valley Integrated Care Board wrote to Cherwell about Motion Living on 19 August 2026. Its letter is on the register as a planning representation.

The ICB says the practice serving the development has no room. It sets out one practice in the Bicester Primary Care Network:

  • Alchester Medical Group, 21,388 registered patients
  • gross internal area of 1,198sqm, against an NHS standard of 1,250sqm
  • a deficit against that standard

“The table above clearly shows that none of the GP Practices, which serves the development, have sufficient clinical capacity to accommodate any new patients from the development,” the letter says. “Primary care mitigation is therefore required in this regard.”

The ICB asks for an index-linked section 106 contribution, calculated by formula rather than a fixed sum, because the number of homes is not fixed at outline stage. Its formula assumes 2.4 people per dwelling and a build cost of £6,448 per square metre. Applied to 200 apartments, that formula produces a contribution of roughly £185,000.

The ICB adds that it “has no dedicated funding for any primary care estates development in their annual budgets”.

Whether that money arrives, and how quickly it is spent, is a live question in Cherwell. The council’s own statutory return showed £19,729,405 of section 106 money still held at 31 March 2025: see our story on Cherwell’s section 106 balance.

The housing supply argument

The applicant leans on Cherwell’s housing shortfall. That claim checks out against the council’s own figures.

Cherwell’s Annual Monitoring Report 2025 gives a combined 3.1 year housing land supply at 31 March 2025, against the five years national policy expects. The same table records a shortfall of 3,773 homes.

The report splits that figure two ways:

  • Cherwell’s own needs: 4.3 years of supply
  • Oxford’s unmet housing need, which Cherwell must also take: 1.3 years

The council notes it now has to assess the two together, following 2024 appeal decisions and a High Court judgment.

That matters because a council which cannot show five years of housing land has a weaker hand when it refuses housing schemes. It is the reason a 200-flat application on an employment allocation is worth watching.

What the consultation found

Bicester Motion ran its own public consultation before applying. Its statement of community involvement records an in-person exhibition at Bicester Motion on 12 June 2026, with feedback accepted until 25 June 2026.

The sentiment analysis in that document records:

  • 50% positive
  • 17% neutral
  • 33% negative

Aviation was the most frequently raised subject, ahead of support for the proposals and traffic. The document states that the negative feedback related to aviation rather than to planning matters. The two tables in that section give different percentage splits for the themes, so we have quoted only the sentiment figures, which are consistent across both.

The estate itself covers 444 acres. Bicester Motion’s planning statement says the businesses on site have generated 150,000 visitors a year and support more than 1,800 skilled jobs. Those are the applicant’s own figures, made in support of its application, and Cherwell has not tested them.

What it means for you

If you want to comment, you have until 18 September 2026. Comments go to Cherwell District Council through the planning register, quoting the reference number of the application you are commenting on. Each of the three is separate, so a comment on one does not count against the others.

Written comments are published. Cherwell states plainly that they “are publicly available and cannot be treated as confidential”.

Three things are worth focusing a comment on, because they are genuinely undecided:

  • The affordable housing. The council’s own pre-application advice says 35%. The application offers an unnamed sum of money instead, deferred to a later stage.
  • GP capacity. The NHS has already said the surgery is full. What it gets is a section 106 negotiation, not a guarantee.
  • Traffic on the A4421 and Buckingham Road. Access is the one matter not reserved, so it is being decided now rather than later.

Because all three are going to committee, there will be a public meeting with a published officer report before any decision. Target dates are 6 November for The Rushes and 16 November for the other two, though planning targets slip routinely.

For other applications in the district, see our Banbury planning news page.