Agenda and minutes

To receive any announcements from the chairman and general housekeeping matters.

The chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and outlined the procedure to be followed in a virtual meeting.

To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting.  

Ken Arlett declared a non-pecuniary interest for item P20/S3543/HH as a colleague of his was a neighbour of Byron House. He agreed to only speak as Town Councillor and District Councillor. He would not take part in any of the debate or vote on the application.

To receive notification of any matters which the chairman determines should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances which have made the matters urgent and to receive any notification of any applications deferred or withdrawn.

The Development Manager informed the committee that since the publication of the agenda, that the inspector’s report for the emerging local plan had been received. The inspector’s report confirmed that the emerging plan was sound and as a result the policies included within the plan would now carry substantial weight. However, this did not affect any of the recommendations in the officers’ reports for this meeting. 

There were no proposals for site visits.

To receive any statements from members of the public that have registered to speak on planning applications which are being presented to this committee meeting. 

The list showing members of the public who had registered to speak had been sent to the committee prior to the meeting. Statements from the public received prior to the meeting were circulated to the committee and would be published on the council’s website.

Demolition of bungalow and garage and erection of two 2-bedroom houses and two 2-bedroom flats and provision of parking including additional parking at rear of No.54 (number of proposed units reduced from five to four and layout and design revised as shown on plans and supporting documents received 26th March 2020, drainage details received 1st April 2020 and reduction in ridge and eaves height and pitch and introduction of gable ends to Plots 1 & 2 as shown on amended plans received 2nd July 2020 and site area corrected to include rear of No.54 as shown on plans received 3rd November 2020).

The committee considered application P19/S4054/FUL for the demolition of bungalow and garage and erection of two 2-bedroom houses and two 2-bedroom flats and provision of parking including additional parking at rear of No.54 (number of proposed units reduced from five to four and layout and design revised as shown on plans and supporting documents received 26th March 2020, drainage details received 1st April 2020 and reduction in ridge and eaves height and pitch and introduction of gable ends to Plots 1 & 2 as shown on amended plans received 2nd July 2020 and site area corrected to include rear of No.54 as shown on plans received 3rd November 2020), at 52 and 54 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.

Councillor Ken Arlett, a local town councillor, spoke objecting to the application.

David Parker, the agent, spoke in support of the application.

The planning officer received questions from committee members relating to the shortfall in the level of parking spaces provided and the public parking availability. The officer responded that while there would be a shortfall of two off-street parking units, as confirmed by the Highway Liaison Officer, the proposal would be within close proximity to Henley Town Centre and due to good public transport it would be unlikely to present significant adverse impact on the highway network.

The committee expressed concerns that the proposed development would have an adverse impact on the character of the area.  It was bulky and was considered an over-intensive use of the site and had a lack of off street parking spaces.

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

RESOLVED: to refuse planning permission for application P19/S4054/FUL for the following reasons:

1.    The proposed development did not keep in character with the surrounding area.

2.    The proposal would be an overdevelopment of the area.

3.    The application contained a shortfall of parking.

Erection of a two-and-a-half storey apartment building comprising 4 x two bed and 1 x two/three bedroom units with associated parking, cycle storage and amenity space provision (height, width and depth of building reduced next to western boundary, front dormer reduced, rooflights altered, corrections to balcony screening and addition of chimneys as shown on amended plans received 30th July 2020).

The committee considered application P20/S1405/FUL for the erection of a two-and-a-half storey apartment building comprising 4 x two bed and 1 x two/three bedroom units with associated parking, cycle storage and amenity space provision (height, width and depth of building reduced next to western boundary, front dormer reduced, rooflights altered, corrections to balcony screening and addition of chimneys as shown on amended plans received 30th July 2020), on land adjacent to The Gables, Station Road, Lower Shiplake.

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.

An additional condition was proposed by planning officers for securing a permanent retention of the privacy screens along the sides of the rear balconies following the occupation of the apartments.

David Pheasant, a representative of Shiplake Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application. 

Tim Green, who had registered to speak, was unable to join the meeting.  His written statement, which had been circulated to the committee in advance of the meeting, was received. 

Councillor David Bartholomew, a local ward councillor spoke in objection of the application.

A question was raised to the planning officer on the extent that community needs could be factored into a consideration for an application. The officer explained that community needs are not considered within planning terms. 

The committee considered that the proposed apartments did not sit properly within the village of Shiplake.  An apartment block was inappropriate and out of character with this area.  It would be over-intensive development and its form and massing was out of character with its surroundings.  The committee also held the view that the car parking arrangements were inappropriate for this site. 

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

RESOLVED: to refuse planning permission for application P20/S1405/FULfor the following reason:

1.     The application was an intensive development which would cause harm to the appearance and character of the area.

Single storey rear extension (amended plans received 27 October 2020 showing alterations to proposed Bi-fold doors).

Councillor Ken Arlett withdrew from the committee for the duration of the item due to a non-pecuniary interest and took no part in the debate or voting.

Councillor Sarah Gray left during the item and did not take part in the debate or vote.

The committee considered application P20/S3543/HH for a single storey rear extension (amended plans received 27 October 2020 showing alterations to proposed Bi-fold doors) at Byron House, 65 Elizabeth 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. The officer also confirmed that since the publication of the agenda Henley Town Council had withdrawn their objection to the application.  A condition to obscure-glaze the ground floor window on the north elevation had also been accepted by the applicant. 

Councillor Ken Arlett, spoke on behalf of Henley Town Council, reporting that the town council had originally objected to this application but had since withdrawn its objection. 

Catherine Notaras, a local resident, spoke objecting to the application.

Debbie Mason, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Councillor Ken Arlett, local ward councillor, spoke against the application.

In answer to questions from the committee, the planning officers reported that a condition to obscure-glaze the ground floor window on the north elevation had also been accepted by the applicant; a previous decision to remove permitted development rights did not mean that the applicant could not have any windows but would need to seek planning permission for such windows; and the obscure-glazed window would be fixed shut but with an opening fan-light window.  The applicant did not need planning permission for glazed roof lanterns. 

With these questions answered, the committee considered that there were no material planning reasons to refuse the application. 

A motion moved and seconded, to grant planning permission was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to grant planning permission for application P20/S3543/HHsubject 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

4.     Obscure glazing to new ground floor window on the north elevation