MinutesOF A MEETING OF THE
|
|
|
Planning Committee
HELD on Wednesday 10 August 2022 at 6.00 pm First Floor Meeting Space, 135 Eastern Avenue, Milton Park, OX14 4SB |
|
Present in the meeting room:
Councillors: David Bretherton (Chair), Peter
Dragonetti (Vice-Chair), Ken Arlett, Tim
Bearder, Elizabeth Gillespie, Victoria Haval, Lorraine Hillier, Ian
Snowdon, Alan Thompson and Celia Wilson (substitute)
Officers: Candida Mckelvey (Democratic Services Officer) and Paula
Fox (Development
Manager)
Remote attendance:
Ward members: Councillors Anne Marie Simpson, Alexandrine Kantor
Officers: Planning Officers – Sharon Crawford, Simon Kitson and Kim Gould
36 Chair's announcements
The chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting and outlined the meeting procedure to be followed.
37 Minutes of the previous meeting
RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of the meetings held on 8 June, 29 June and 20 July 2022.
38 Declarations of interest
There were no declarations of interest.
39 Urgent business
There was no urgent business.
40 Proposals for site visits
There were no proposals for site visits.
41 Public participation
The list showing members of the public who had registered to speak was tabled at the meeting.
42 P21/S4923/FUL: Cholsey Free Church 26A Honey Lane Cholsey, OX10 9NL
The committee considered a full application for a proposed change of use from a church to residential use as amended by plans received on 4 January. (As amended by plans received on 24 January altering the fenestration details and amplified by bat report received 7 March 2022 and as amplified by bat report dated 27 June 2022).
Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for the meeting.
The planning officer introduced the report. In its amended form, this application sought full planning permission to convert the existing church building into a three-bedroom dwelling with amenity space, bin storage cycle and vehicle parking. The proposal included the partial demolition of a side/rear extension and the insertion of rooflights in the southern and northern elevation and the replacement a window in the western elevation with a high-level window.
Officer recommendation was to approve of the application, the report detailed the officer’s analysis. The proposal would provide a family sized dwelling to an existing building that required renovation, in a highly sustainable area close to good transport links. In terms of traffic to the area, the proposal was the most minimal impact option for the property. The design of the building was not deemed to have any adverse impact on neighbouring property and amenities. Recommended boundary treatment to improve privacy for owners and neighbours. There were similar objections from Parish council and neighbours. Officers did not think it was justified to refuse on highway grounds as the access already existed and under permitted development, other uses of the site could generate more traffic that the proposal presented.
In considering parking, officers concluded that there was no policy regarding conversion of an existing older buildings, and the proposal would improve an attractive building that was in disrepair. Regarding amenity space, this was an acceptable level considering the tight relationship to neighbouring properties and the age of the property.
There were three public speakers present to object to the application. Mr Christopher Bone, Miss Jessica Wells and Mr Mark Billinge addressed the committee. They supported the maintenance of the character of the building. Their main concerns about the proposal were that of privacy, overdevelopment and overlooking. Miss Wells suggested that cill size could be changed to 1.8m from 1.7m and obscured glazing to improve privacy and overlooking from five roof windows. There was concern raised about the addition of traffic to the narrow lane and lack of space for parking on the site (1 car maximum). Earlier consultation with neighbours was felt to be lacking.
The applicant. Mr. Mia, and architect Mr. Mahmood, spoke in support of the application. It was to be a family home. The family had one car and one bike, having plans for bike storage on site. The applicant felt that a cill size of 1.8m could be included to alleviate neighbour’s concerns. The application had been worked on for nine months and the applicant felt that he had worked closely with officers to amend the proposal where needed in response to concerns raised.
Ward member, Councillor Anne-Marie Simpson spoke to the application. There was general support for improving a neglected building as a single dwelling and removal of the side extension. Disappointment about the lack of engagement with neighbours – ward member felt some issues could have been resolved through early consulting rather than at this later stage. The narrow lane was of concern if more than one car was using the space, in terms of lack of space and safety.
The committee, on hearing the evidence, asked questions to officers and public speakers.
Sustainability was discussed, with confirmation from officer regarding easy walking access to shopping area and train station. It was confirmed by officer that the size of the lane could not be negotiated. Officer explained that older properties do not lend themselves to new guidance, so each application needs to be assessed on its own merits. Members concluded that 1.8m for the cill could be added to condition 6.
Committee debated the application. A member motioned that committee should support the officer recommendation to approve the application.
Committee considered the input and importance of local knowledge in such cases. On debating the access and parking, on balance it was considered that the access issue was always present and the village area was sustainable. Some considered that there was no reasonable alternative for this site, with the benefit of restoring a neglected building.
An alternative view was provided from a member that we should consider the access and road safety issue more (OCC Highways objection), and whether we were setting a precedent for derelict buildings with similar narrow access being redeveloped with the risks to road safety and the overdevelopment of small sites.
The motion was put to the vote. The committee voted in favour of the officer’s recommendation to approve planning permission.
Resolved to approve planning permission with an amendment to Condition 6 to raise cill heights of rooflights to 1.8m.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Permission
1 : Commencement 3 years - Full Planning Permission
2 : Approved plans
3 : Materials as on plan
4 : Obscure glazing northern elevation
5 : Obscure glazing southern elevation
6 : Rooflights (specified cill level of 1.8m)
7 : Withdrawal of P.D. (Part 1 Class A) - no extensions etc
8 : Withdrawal of P.D. (Part 1 Class E) - no buildings etc
9 : Landscaping (including boundary treatment)
10 : Bird box to be attached to building pre-occupation
11 : Restricted hours of operation – construction/demolition
43 P22/S0429/FUL: Land at 69 West Chiltern Woodcote, RG8 0SG
The proposal was a full application for a new 3-bedroom dwelling (Amended plans received 30th May 2022, reducing depth of front projection, relocating dormer windows to front roofslope and increasing off-street parking provision).
The application is referred to the planning committee because the recommendation to approve planning permission conflicts with the views of Woodcote Parish Council.
The development was considered in keeping with the area and meeting design guide principles. There was sufficient space between neighbouring properties and additional parking spaces.
Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for the meeting.
There were no registered public speakers.
The committee moved onto questions for the officer. There was reassurance given that materials to be used would be in keeping with the area via photographic submission of these beforehand (this was a concern of Woodcote Parish Council). The building hours restriction was not given because of the smaller scale of the build.
A motion was moved to support the officer recommendation to approve planning application.
Resolved:
Committee voted in favour of supporting the officer recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION
Grant Planning Permission, subject to the following conditions:
Summary:
1. Commencement within 3 years.
2. That the development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans
3. No development above slab level shall take place until a photographic schedule of all materials has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
4. Prior to the first occupation, the parking and turning areas shall be provided in accordance with the approved plan and retained unobstructed except for the parking of vehicles
5. Prior to the commencement of any development above slab level, a scheme for the landscaping of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation and thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved scheme
6. Prior to the commencement of any site works a protected area shall be designated for all existing trees which are shown to be retained, and the trees shall be protected in accordance with a scheme which complies with the current edition of BS 5837: The agreed measures shall be kept in place during the entire course of development.
7. Prior to the commencement of development, a full surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved.
8. Prior to the commencement of development, a full foul water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved.
9. Prior to any development above slab level, details of biodiversity enhancement measures shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, these shall consist of a minimum of one integrated bat box to the front elevation and two integrated bird boxes at the eastern side elevation. The measures shall be implemented prior to first occupation of the dwelling and retained as such thereafter.
10.Prior to first occupation, all carbon reduction energy efficiency measures shall be implemented in accordance with the Energy Statement hereby approved and a Verification Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing
11.The cill level of the rooflights in the rear elevation shall be at least 1.7 metres above the floor level of the associated rooms and shall be retained as such. No additional openings shall be inserted into the rear facing roof slope of the development hereby approved without planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.
12.Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order), no extensions or roof extensions falling within Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A and B of the Order shall be erected without obtaining planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.
13.Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) the provision within the curtilage of the dwelling of any building, enclosure or swimming pool as described in Schedule 2, Part 1, Class E of the Order shall not be undertaken without obtaining planning permission from the Local Planning Authority
44 P22/S1116/FUL: 21 Kellys Road Wheatley, OX33 1NT
This full application was for the demolition of existing detached garage. Erection of new contemporary two storey two bed dwelling. Provision of private amenity space with off street parking utilising existing highway access to Kellys Road. Provision of enclosed bin and bike stores. (As amended by drawing no 21-021-P-001-C and revised Design and Access Statement accompanying Agent's email dated 19 July 2022).
The application was referred to the planning committee because the recommendation to approve planning permission conflicts with the views of the Parish Council, who were concerned that the site was cramped, the design was not in keeping with the character of the area and the parking was inadequate.
Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for the meeting.
Neighbours had no objections but felt that some amendments could be made to improve parking and to avoid parking on the road, which could compound access for emergency vehicles and refuse lorries.
The officer summarised additional comments from a neighbour who could not be present at the meeting highlighting concerns about parking.
Officer explained that there was one parking pace allocated for the new building, and that there was provision for less than the Oxfordshire County parking standard of two spaces for a two-bedroom dwelling, where the property was in a very sustainable area such as this (good transport access, local amenities etc). Officer considered that the area’s buildings were varied in design so the argument of this development being not in keeping was not justified. The change in levels and varied building line helped to re were measures in place within the application to make the development appear less cramped.
There were no public speakers, but ward member Councillor Alexandrine Kantor was present, and she had no strong opinion on the application, but was happy to hear that the neighbours were not in objection to the proposal.
A query was raised about boundary wall maintenance where the wall was against the property. A query about the hedge was raised. Officer confirmed that the existing hedge would be truncated with no loss of biodiversity. Increased biodiversity would be provided through the use of Sedum grass on the new flatroof and another boundary hedge being added.
A motion was moved to support the officer’s recommendation to approve planning permission.
The committee debated the motion. The committee did not have objection overall and no grounds for refusal, although one member felt there could have been more detailed drawings provided. Consideration was given to the mixed style of buildings shown in the photographs. A member spoke about the very sustainable nature of the area, with excellent bus routes to Oxford, therefore extra cars on properties was not needed and should not be encouraged, to ensure public transport infrastructure was supported to continue. Committee voted on the motion.
Resolved:
To approve the officer recommendation to grant planning permission as follows:
RECOMMENDATION
To grant Planning Permission subject to the following conditions
Standard
1. Commencement of development within 3 years
2. Development in accordance with approved plans
Pre-commencement
3. Details of levels to be submitted
4. Details of materials to be submitted
5. Details of surface water drainage to be submitted
6. Contaminated Land - Linked Conditions (1)
Pre-occupation
7. Contaminated Land - Linked Conditions (2)
8. Energy Statement Verification
9. New vehicular access
10.Parking & Manoeuvring Areas to be provided
11.Cycle parking in accordance with plan
12.Landscaping implantation
13.Electric Vehicles Charging Point (implementation)
14.Prevention of overlooking from the balcony
Compliance
15.Withdrawal of P.D. (Part 1 Class A) - no extensions
16.No Surface Water Drainage to Highway
17.Unsuspected contamination
The meeting closed at 7.30 pm
Chair Date
|
|
|
|
|
|