Agenda item

Erection of detached 4-bedroom dwelling house with garage revised application to extant permission P14/S0338/FUL (As amended by plan ref 20-IH-001B PL rev B which reduces the eaves and pitch of the roof and includes and single roof configuration. 

Please note that version 2 of the officer’s report is attached, correctly referencing the plans. 

Councillor Alexandrine Kantor left the meeting prior to the consideration of this item.

Councillor Sarah Gray, the local ward councillor, stepped down from the committee and took no part in the debate or voting for this item.

The committee considered application P20/S0245/FUL for the erection of a detached 4-bedroom dwelling house with garage revised application to extant permission P14/S0338/FUL (as amended by plan ref 20-IH-001B PL rev B which reduces the eaves and pitch of the roof and includes and single roof configuration) at Terence House, on land to the rear of Holton Cottage, Holton.

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 planning officer that the plan at paragraph 5.24 of the report, as originally communicated to the committee, was incorrect. The correct version was sent to the councillors before the meeting and published on the council’s website.

The planning officer also reported that with respect to this application, the committee would be requested to agree two additional conditions, one relating to surface water drainage and the other to the removal of permitted development rights.

With reference to paragraph 2.1 of the report, the planning officer reported that the council’s ecologist now had no objection, as information had been  received from the applicant in respect of great crested newts, a protected species, in a neighbouring garden to the site.

The planning officer reported that the application site was located within the Oxford Green Belt and advised the committee on the National Planning Policy Framework policy on the green belt. It referred to limited infilling in villages being appropriate development in the green belt. Planning officers’ opinion was that the site was located within the built-up limits of Holton and therefore was an infill site, and as such the principle of development in the green belt was acceptable. In addition, the principle of new buildings in the green belt on the site had been established by the extant planning permission. In the view of officers, the proposal would not have any further material impact on the open character of the green belt than the approved scheme. The site was located within the built limits of the settlement and would be surrounded by other buildings which were of a comparative height.

The planning officer reported on the impact of the development upon neighbouring properties, notably Holton Cottage. In the application’s amended form, all the first-floor windows in the elevation facing Holton Cottage would be obscure glazed and a condition was recommended that these remain so. As such, there would not be any direct overlooking into the private rear garden of Holton Cottage. It was the planning officers’ opinion that the property was designed in such a way that the more visually prominent, two storey part of the property was sufficiently distant from Holton Cottage to prevent the property from being unacceptably overbearing or oppressive. Only one neighbour had objected on the basis that the development would be overbearing to Sheilings; officers considered that the new property would not result in an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupier of Shielings.

The committee was informed by the planning officer that Holton Parish Council was concerned about construction traffic connected with the development. The planning officer had discussed this with the highways authority, which considered that the scale of the development did not justify a construction management scheme.

Councillor Robert Barter, a representative of Holton Parish Council, spoke objecting to the application.

Mr. Ian Halliday, the agent, spoke in support of the application.

Councillor Sarah Gray, the local ward councillor, spoke to the application.

In response to a question, the planning officer, clarified the details of the height of the proposal, stating that the site was located within the built limits of the settlement and would be surrounded by other buildings that were of a comparative height.

The planning officer concluded by stating that the principle of a dwelling on this site was acceptable, given its location within Holton and the precedent set by the extant planning permissions. The current proposal would not result in unacceptable amenity issues for neighbours and would meet the council’s standards in relation to garden size and parking. The proposal accorded with development plan policies and government advice.

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/S0245/FUL subject to the following conditions:

1.         Commencement three years - Full Planning Permission.

2.         Approved plans.

3.         Existing vehicular access.

4.         Parking & Manoeuvring Areas Retained.

5.         No Garage conversion into accommodation.

6.         Schedule of materials required (walls and roof).

7.         Great Crested Newts – additional assessment and action required.

8.         Obscure glazed windows in south east elevation.

The two extra conditions were

9.         Surface water drainage works (details required)

10:       Withdrawal of permitted development rights – Part 1 Class A