Agenda and minutes

Felix Bloomfield declared that in relation to application P16/S3587/FUL – land adjacent to Eyres Lane and Eyres Close, Ewelme, he would be leaving the room due to his property neighbouring the site.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the minutes of the committee meeting held on 23 November 2016.

RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2016 as a correct record and agree that the Chairman sign these as such.

None.

Application P16/S1140/FUL – Longwood, Maidensgrove was deferred for consideration to allow for an ecological assessment of the site.

None.

This application has been deferred for consideration to allow for further ecological assessment.

Proposed demolition of the existing dwelling house and associated structures and the erection of three detached dwellings and detached garages with separate access arrangements.

This item was deferred for consideration to allow for an ecological assessment of the site.

Full planning application for a residential development comprising 17 residential units, together with associated access, car parking, cycle storage, landscaping and drainage, following the demolition of all existing buildings.

Richard Pullen arrived part way through the consideration of this application and was therefore unable to take part in the discussion and voting for this item.

Joan Bland, one of the ward councillors, stepped down from the committee and did not take part in the debate or voting for this item.

The committee considered application P16/S2459/FUL for a full residential development comprising 17 residential units, together with associated access, car parking, cycle storage, landscaping and drainage, following the demolition of all existing buildings at 116-118 Greys Road, 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.

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

·         The figure of 29% affordable housing is contrary to the neighbourhood plan and the South Oxfordshire Local Plan, which both set a 40% minimum;

·         There is no site in the Henley and Harpsden neighbourhood plan that could not accommodate 40% affordable housing;

·         A lack of affordable housing is an issue in Henley, especially among young people;

·         This would be a perfect site to contribute to the five year land supply deficit.

Tracey Puttock, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application:

·         Following consultation with neighbours, concerns have been addressed;

·         A newsletter containing the changes to the scheme have been sent to residents;

·         Affordable housing is the only outstanding issue;

·         If 40% affordable is provided, the site becomes unviable; and

·         To meet the standard industry profitability, there would be no affordable housing on site – the applicant is therefore forgoing the standard profit.

Joan Bland, one of the local ward members, spoke objecting to the application.

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

·         This is a good opportunity to provide five affordable homes;

·         Disappointed that 40% affordable homes could not be achieved; and

·         To achieve 40% affordable, the applicant would need to cut costs and increase density.

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 P16/S2459/FUL, subject to:

i.        The prior completion of a Section 106 agreement to secure the affordable housing, financial contributions and other obligations stated above; and

ii.        The following conditions:

1. Commencement three years - full planning permission.

2. Approved plans.

3. Materials, surfacing and boundary treatments to be agreed.

4. Levels to be agreed.

5. Compliance with recommendations in ecological appraisal.

6. Details of access and visibility splays to be agreed.

7. Details of widened footpath on Greys Road to be agreed.

8. Parking to be provided and retained.

9. Construction method statement to be agreed.

10. Construction traffic management plan to be agreed.

11. Travel information packs to be provided.

12. Landscaping scheme and management to be agreed.

13. Surface water drainage to be agreed.

14.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 163.

To construct on to the end of an existing terraced row of houses two independent one bedroom studio flats in a two storey extension.

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

The committee considered application P16/S2785/FUL to construct two independent one-bedroom studio flats in a two storey extension on the end of an existing terraced row of houses at 35 Marston Road, Thame.

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.

Andrew Scholey, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application:

·         There is a shortage of affordable housing in Thame; and

·         The proposal will not affect the garden area of number 35 Marston Road.

Jeanette Matelot, one of the local ward members, spoke objecting to the application. Her concerns included the following:

·         There would be a detrimental impact on the neighbour’s amenity regarding overlooking;

·         Smaller units can be provided in already allocated developments in Thame;

·         There is a lack of infrastructure in the Lea Park estate;

·         The additional flats would add to the parking difficulties along Marston Road; and

·         This is an over-development of poor design.

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/S2785/FUL, subject to the following conditions:

1.    Commencement of development within three years.

2.    Development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.

3.    Materials to match existing building.

4.    First floor south east facing window to be obscure glazed or 1.7 metres above internal floor level.

5.    No additional windows, doors or other openings in the south east elevation at first floor level.

6.    The landscaping of the site, including the planting of live trees and shrubs, the treatment of the hard standings, and the provision of boundary of the development hereby approved shall be implemented as per the approved plans prior to the first occupation of the dwellings or otherwise first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7.    New vehicular access to be provided prior to occupation.

8.    Vision splays to be provided prior to occupation.

9.    Parking and manoeuvring areas to be provided in accordance with approved plans.

10.No surface water drainage to the highway.

New 2 bedroom attached house and associated works, including new entrance porch to adjoining property (7 Gidley Way) and vehicle access.

Joan Bland left the committee during the consideration of this application and was therefore unable to take part in the discussion and voting of this and any subsequent items.

The committee considered application P16/S35156/FUL for a new two-bedroom attached house and associated works, including vehicle access and a new entrance porch to the adjoining property 7 Gidley Way, Horspath.

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.

Pamela Wyles, the applicant, spoke in support of the application:

·         The plot is larger than those either side and can therefore accommodate a modest two bedroom property;

·         There have been no objections from neighbours;

·         The property would have no impact on neighbour’s homes.  On the contrary; it would add to their insulation.

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

Concerns were initially raised about parking at the property by members, but these were allayed after closer consideration of the diagrams. Committee agreed to amend condition 5 for parking details to be provided in accordance with the agreed scheme.

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/S3516/FUL, subject to the following conditions:

1.    Commencement three years - full planning permission.

2.    Approved plans.

3.    Withdrawal of permitted development (Part 1 Class A) - no extensions etc.

4.    Withdrawal of permitted development (Part 1 Class E) - no buildings etc.

5.    Plan of car parking provision to be submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Dwelling house with garden and parking and associated works.

Felix Bloomfield and Richard Pullen stepped down from the committee and took no part in the debate or voting; Toby Newman acted as chairman for this item.

The committee considered application P16/S3461/FUL for a dwelling house with garden, parking and associated works at 25 Henley Road, Shillingford.

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.

Bill Oscroft, a representative of Warborough parish council, spoke in support of the application:

·         Based on the evidence within the design and access statement and architect’s letter, overlooking and overdevelopment are not a concern;

·         The application is outside of the conservation area and designed to fit in with the surrounding area;

·         Space between neighbours is sufficient;

·         Traffic generation will be negligible; and

·         There have been no neighbour objections.

Richard Pullen, one the local ward members, spoke in support of the application:

·         There is an error at paragraph 6.12 of the officer’s report, which should read Warborough parish council, not Clifton Hampden parish council.

·         There have been no neighbour objections;

·         The impact on the greenbelt would be negligible; and

·         The application is more in keeping with the conservation area than that which is currently approved.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate. Committee members did not agree that the application would significantly harm the greenbelt or have a detrimental impact on parking, neighbour amenity or highways.

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application and go against the officer’s recommendation was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to delegate authority to the head of planning to grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

1.      Commencement three years.

2.      Approved plans.

3.      Sample materials.

4.      Withdrawal of permitted development Class A.

5.      Withdrawal of permitted development Class E.

6.      Parking and manoeuvring areas retained.

7.      Written scheme of investigation.

8.      No building or raising land levels.

9.      Archaeological evaluation.

10.   Vision splays.

11.   Development in accordance with the October 2014 flood report.

The Farmhouse: Application to remove condition 9 (agricultural occupancy) on P10/W1125.

(Erection of an agricultural worker's dwelling APP/Q3115/A/10/2140369)

Breach Farm Barn: Application to remove condition 5 (agricultural occupancy) on application P11/W0903.

(Alterations and extensions to stone barn to form a dwelling house for occupation by an agricultural worker and associated ground works.)

NB. A unilateral undertaking has been drawn up to transfer the agricultural occupancy conditions (above) to Bramble Cottage and Blackberry Cottage (previously approved as open market residential accommodation).

This legal agreement forms part of the current application.

The committee considered applications P16/S2292/FUL and P16/S2293/FUL to remove agricultural occupancy conditions at The Farmhouse and Breach Farm Barn, Wheatley Road, Stanton St John and to transfer the conditions to two other dwellings on site.

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.

Robin Bradbeer, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application:

·         Since permission was granted for the two dwellings with agricultural occupancy conditions, the 2014 planning reforms (Class Q permitted development rights) allowed for two further dwellings by conversion, which are not subject to agricultural occupancy conditions under the prior approval process; and

·         There are no sound planning reasons to refuse the application;

John Walsh, the local ward member, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The justification for construction of the farmhouse was allowed at appeal and largely based on bio-security reasons – it is unclear why this position has altered with the current application;

·         There is a lack of agricultural accommodation in the area; and

·         Concern for the future use of this development.

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

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve both applications was declared carried; each application (P16/S2292/FUL and P16/S2293/FUL) was put to a separate vote.

RESOLVED: to grant planning permission for applications P16/S2292/FUL and P16/S2293/FUL, subject to the unilateral undertaking signed September 2016.

P16/S2292/FUL

1.      No conditions.

P16/S2293/FUL

1.      No conditions.

Change of use of land for the siting of up to five residential caravans.

Richard Pullen stepped down from committee and took no part in the debate or voting on this item as he was speaking against the application as the ward member. Felix Bloomfield left the room for the item as he is a neighbour to the site; Toby Newman acted as chairman for the item.

The committee considered application P16/S3587/FUL for a change of use of land for the siting of up to five residential caravans on land adjacent to Eyres Lane and Eyres Close, Ewelme.

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: the contamination officer had previously raised concerns with the lack of assessment information; this has now been provided and considered. The contamination officer has withdrawn his objection based on the additional information provided, subject to a more detailed assessment by condition. The second refusal reason within the officer’s report is therefore no longer valid.

Paul Humphrey, speaking on behalf of Eyres Close residents, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The application is not in keeping with the local area due to its style, scale and construction and therefore contrary to policy;

·         The harmful impact of ten parking spaces and associated vehicles movements;

·         Lack of transparency; and

·         The residents of Eyres Close accept and acknowledge that this site will be developed and would like to work with the applicant for the best outcome.

Richard Pullen, the local ward member, spoke objecting to the application.

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

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/S3587/FUL, for the following reason:

1.    The Development Plan allows for the provision of mobile home sites where they accord with the housing policies of the Development Plan. Saved policy H4 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan sets out that housing is permitted as long as the design, height, scale and materials of the proposed development are in keeping with its surroundings, and the character of the area is not adversely affected. This is amplified by the design policies of the Development Plan.

Within the tightly contained residential street of Eyres Close, the character of a mobile home site would appear incongruous in close proximity to the brick built dwellings in a village setting. The development would be unable to draw from the vernacular of the close through the provision of a mobile home site. By reason of the harm to and incompatibility with the character of the immediate area, the development is contrary to saved policies D1, H4 and H15 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan and policy CSQ3 of the South Oxfordshire Core Strategy.

Creation of a new vehicular access (retrospective) (As amended by location/block plan and technical note attached to the agent's email dated 17 October 2016).

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

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.

Dr Graham Chandler and Mrs P M Vincent, two local residents, spoke objecting to the application. Their concerns included the following:

·         The applicant has breached the screening condition of the original planning permission;

·         They would like the screening returned to its original state;

·         In its current state, the new planting is too widely spaced and will take years to fill out; and

·         A row of bamboo could be planted as a measure to mitigate the loss while waiting for the oak hedge to grow.

In response to matters raised, the planning officers reported that:

·         It was unfortunate that the condition had been breached, but according to the forestry team the hedge would grow out over a two to three year period, which would reduce the visual impact on the neighbours; and

·         The back to back distances comply with policy regarding loss of privacy and overlooking.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate. Committee members were not satisfied that the original screening condition had been breached due to the impact on the neighbours’ amenity.

A motion, moved and seconded, to refuse the application was withdrawn following officer advice.

A motion, moved and seconded, to defer the application was declared carried upon being put to the vote to allow for further negotiations with the applicant regarding the planting scheme.

RESOLVED: to defer planning permission for application P16/S2623/FUL to negotiate a new planting scheme to improve the neighbours’ amenity.