Agenda and minutes

None.

None.

New access road and erection of 10 new dwellings.

The committee considered application P16/S3001/O for a new access road and the erection of ten new dwellings on land to the rear of Cleeve Cottages, Icknield Road, Goring.

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 this meeting.

Officer update: comments have been received from the Chilterns Conservation Board who have no objections, subject to careful attention being given to the Chilterns Buildings Design Guide at the detailed stage.

The officer also apologised for an error in the report at paragraph 6.29 relating to the commuted sums for affordable housing. The sum of £320,000 as the total sum is correct but the sum per unit of £196,020 is incorrect – it should read £160,000 as the commuted sum for one dwelling.

Paul Knott, a local resident, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The location is unsuitable with a higher density than the surrounding area;

·         Vehicular demands and on-street parking will be an issue;

·         Units on the south side will be shaded out by the trees on his property which has not been addressed in the Forestry Officer’s comments;

·         The arboricultural impact assessment doesn’t comply with testing shade impact on 21 March, as it was carried out on 21 June; and

·         The garden sizes are below standard requirements.

Patrick Haran and Shaun Tanner, the applicant’s agents, spoken in support of the application:

·         There will be a mix of two and three bedroom dwellings;

·         This site is one of four identified sites in the Goring Neighbourhood Plan;

·         It is a sustainable location, suitable for ten dwellings and identified as infill development; and

·         There have been no technical objections.

David Brooker, a representative of Goring parish council, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The proposed development is outside of the village envelope;

·         Request that the affordable housing contribution goes towards affordable rent properties;

·         Request contributions to address traffic calming measures for the High Street as discussed with Oxfordshire County Council; and

·         There is an oversupply of 3/4/5 bedroom houses in the parish, there is a need for 1-2 bedroom properties to cater for young people and down-sizing older people – the parish council would therefore request a condition for the mix of units to reflect this.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate. Their discussion included the following points:

·         Prematurity carries no weight at appeal;

·         The Chiltern Conservation Design Guide would be consulted at the reserved matters stage;

·         The site has been identified in the draft neighbourhood plan as one of the favoured locations within the settlement boundary, suitable for up to ten dwellings;

·         There is no doubt that the properties to the south of the site will be heavily shaded in the summer months, but there will be an element of ‘buyer beware’; and

·         The commuted sum for affordable housing will be used within the parish.

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve  ...  view the full minutes text for item 188.

Variation of condition 10 of planning permission P15/S1166/FUL, to revise the landscaping proposal.

Joan Bland and Lorraine Hillier, two of the local ward councillors, stepped down from the committee for the consideration of this item and took no part in the debate or voting.

The committee considered application P16/S2623/FUL to vary condition 10 of planning permission P15/S1166/FUL, to revise the landscaping proposal at White Lodge, Normanstead, Henley-on-Thames.

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 this meeting.

Stefan Gawrysiak, a representative of Henley town council, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The town council have unanimously voted against this application four times;

·         Bamboo is not indigenous and will be very thin and inadequate for screening purposes; and

·         The developer had agreed to plant an extra row of Quercus Ilex Oak trees but withdrew this in favour of the bamboo, which would have kept all parties happy.

Phyllis Vincent, a local resident, spoke objecting to the application. Her concerns included the following:

·         Unhappy with the light illuminations at night which can now be seen from her property; and

·         Another 13 Quercus Oak would need to be planted to create an instant dense screen according to Paramount Plants.

Robert Edwards, the applicant, spoken in support of the application:

·         Prior to the removal of the hedge, the applicant consulted the neighbours, who welcomed the proposed planting of pleached trees to increase light and give adequate screening;

·         The applicant apologised in failing to advise the change in species of tree being planted prior to removing the conifer hedge and also in failing to notify the planning team in removing the hedge;

·         The bamboo will act as a ‘nurse-maid’ until the hedge has filled out and will give adequate screening in the meantime;

·         The applicant did not agree to planting an extra row of Quercus Oak, as per the town council’s suggestion;

·         Paramount Plants did not supply the trees; and

·         The distance between the trees was recommended by the landscape architect.

Lorraine Hillier, one of the local ward councillors, spoke objecting to the application:

·         The original condition to permanent retention of the trees during construction was required to safeguard the neighbour’ amenity and the trees themselves; and

·         Ignoring the qualifying conditions disregards the work of the officers and makes a mockery of the original decision.

Joan Bland, one of the local ward councillors, spoke objecting to the application:

·         Bamboo is not indigenous and will grow out of control if not looked after; and

·         This shows a disregard for planning conditions.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate. The committee were not satisfied with the planting proposal; the screening was not like for like with that which has been removed and is now inadequate and inappropriate, causing overlooking and a loss of privacy.

A motion, moved and seconded, to refuse the application was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to refuse planning permission for application P16/S2623/FUL for the following reason:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 189.

Construction of a detached dwelling.

David Nimmo-Smith, one of the local ward councillors, stepped down from the committee for this item and did not take part in the debate or voting.

The committee considered application P16/S3672/FUL to construct a detached house at The Strip, Shepherd's Green.

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 this meeting.

Laura Precious, a representative of residents at Lane End House, spoke objecting to the application. Her concerns included the following:

·         There is a lack of compliance with policies of the development plan and NPPF regarding the scale, size, sustainability and location of the proposed dwelling;

·         It would have an adverse impact on the Chilterns AONB, which is afforded a high level of protection;

·         The Campaign to Protect Rural England, National Trust and Conservation Officer object; and

·         It would set an unwarranted precedent here and in other villages in the AONB.

Henry Venners, the applicant’s agent, spoken in support of the application:

·         The proposal is a four-bedroom dwelling for family occupation on land which has been maintained as residential curtilage to the side of the applicant’s property;

·         The application has to be assessed on its own merits, not as setting a precedent;

·         No objections have been received concerning its scale or size;

·         It would fit in with the character of the area, preserving what is currently there; and

·         There is a climate of pushing for growth in all settlements, moving away from constraints.

David Nimmo Smith, one of the local ward councillors, spoke in support of the application:

·         A single home in a rural village is not unsustainable;

·         The size of plot is in keeping with neighbouring properties;

·         The site is well screened and therefore hidden from Shepherd’s Green; and

·         Would recommend a site visit.

Charles Bailey, one of the local ward councillors, spoke in support of the application.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate. Their discussion included the following points:

·         The application is contrary to policy;

·         It is inappropriate development and cannot be classified as infill; and

·         The proposal would cause harm to the AONB and conservation area.

A motion, moved and seconded, to refuse the application was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to refuse planning permission for application P16/S3672/FUL for the following reason:

The proposed development is unacceptable because it does not meet the criteria for infill development, would fail to conserve and enhance the landscape and scenic beauty of the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and would damage the attractive character and landscape setting of Shepherd’s Green by undermining an important open gap in the Conservation Area which contributes to the visual and historic character and appearance of the village, contrary to South Oxfordshire Core Strategy 2027 policies CSR1, CSEN1 and CSEN3 and South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2011 saved policies H4, D1, G2, G4, C4 and CON7.

Demolition of the redundant 'B Use Class' Poultry Building and the erection of one 1.5 storey residential dwelling with associated access and garden amenity.

Sue Lawson, the local ward councillor, stepped down from the committee and did not take part in the debate or voting for this item.

The committee considered application P16/S4196/FUL to demolish the redundant ‘B Class’ poultry building and erect a 1.5 storey residential dwelling with associated access and garden amenity at Parsonage Farm, The Green, Marsh Baldon.

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 this meeting.

Reece Lemon, the applicant’s agent, spoken in support of the application:

·         The existing use for the poultry building is no longer economically viable;

·         The applicant has engaged extensively with officers, the application therefore complies with policy and has received no technical objections;

·         The site is within the greenbelt but designated brownfield on previously developed land;

·         The proposal would reduce the overall massing of what is currently on site; and

·         It has been sensitively designed to minimise the impact on neighbour amenities.

Sue Lawson, the local ward councillor, spoke objecting to the application:

·         The draft neighbourhood plan has been submitted to South Oxfordshire District Council and is therefore not at an early stage;

·         The proposal goes against the neighbourhood plan, which proposes four two-bedroom dwellings on this site, which are greatly needed in the parish; and

·         Another medium/large house is disproportionate to the needs of the village.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate.

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to delegate authority to the head of planning to grant planning permission for application, subject to:

1.    Commencement three years – full planning permission.

2.    Approved plans.

3.    Materials as on plan.

4.    Parking and manoeuvring areas retained.

5.    Wildlife protection (mitigation as approved).

6.    Withdrawal of permitted development rights (Part 1 Class E) – no outbuildings.

7.    Contaminated land risk assessment to be carried out.

8.    Contaminated land remediation strategy to be carried out.

Proposed ground and first floor side extension.

The committee considered application P16/S4108/HH for a ground and first floor side extension at 56 Roding Way, Didcot.

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 this meeting.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate.

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to grant planning permission for application P16/S4108/HH subject to the following conditions:

1.    Commencement three years - full planning permission.

2.    Approved plans.

3.    Matching materials (walls and roof).

Conversion of traditional buildings into office accommodation and three residential conversions, and five new build residential units.

Variation of conditions 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 of P10W0093 to allow construction of the site access before agreement of pre-commencement conditions. And the removal of condition 19.

Variation of conditions 4, 5, 6 of P10W0094/LB to allow construction of the site access before agreement of pre commencement conditions.

The committee considered applications P16/S3997/FUL and P16/S3998/LB to vary conditions 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16 of P10W0093 and conditions 4, 5 and 6 of P10W0094/LB to allow construction of the site access before agreement of pre-commencement conditions; and the removal of condition 19 on application P10/W0093. The original permissions were to convert the traditional buildings into office accommodation and three residential conversions and five new build residential units at Dove House Farm, Cuddesdon.

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 this meeting.

Officer update: Two further comments have been received since publication of the agenda.

Oxfordshire County Council Highways have no objections subject to the original condition(s) being applied to any permission which may be granted on the basis of highway safety and the highway improvements secured in the legal agreement.

One neighbour comment has been received expressing concern about the state of the barn which has deteriorated over time. The neighbour would like to know what action the council will be taking to prevent the loss of this listed building and to maintain the character of the lane.

Phil Brown, the applicant’s agent, spoken in support of the application.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate. They expressed their disappointment that the parish council had not attended the committee to speak against the application.

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to grant planning permission for application P16/S3997/FUL subject to the following conditions:

1.    No change to original condition – commencement.

2.    No change to original condition – approved plans.

3.    Demolish specified buildings.

4.    Sample materials required (all).

5.    Estate accesses, driveways and turning areas.

6.    Construction traffic management.

7.    Roads and footpaths prior to occupation.

8.    Contamination - (investigation).

9.    Foul Drainage.

10.No change to original condition - Surface and foul water drainage works.

11.No change to original condition - Archaeological watching brief.

12.No change to original condition - Implementation of programme of archaeological work.

13.External ducts and flues (details required).

14.Joinery details.

15.Wildlife protection.

16.Landscaping (access/hard standings/fencing/walls).

17.No change to original condition - Vision splay protection .

18.No change to original condition - No surface water drainage to highway.

19.Condition removed - Code Level 4.

20.No change to original condition - Withdrawal of permitted development rights (Part 1 Class A) - no extensions etc.

21.No change to original condition - Withdrawal of permitted development rights (Part 1 Class E) - no buildings etc.

RESOLVED: To grant listed building consent for application P16/S3998/LB subject to the following conditions:

1.    No change to original condition – commencement.

2.    No change to original condition – approved plans.

3.    No change to original condition – demolish specified buildings.

4.    Sample materials.

5.    Detailed specification of external ducts, flue pipes,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 193.