Agenda item

Hybrid planning application for the erection of 100 new residential dwellings including new access road off the A4074, public open space (full application) and the provision of school land (outline application) at Newnham Manor, Crowmarsh Gifford (as amended by plans submitted 26 November 2019, 18 December 2019, 14 January 2020 and 18 May 2020 and revised Arboricultural Assessment received 5 May 2020, and as amended by plans and information received 30 April 2021).

Councillors Elizabeth Gillespie and Alan Thompson left the meeting prior to the discussion of this item and therefore took no part in the debate or vote on this planning application.

 

The committee considered planning application P16/S3852/FUL for a hybrid planning application for the erection of 100 new residential dwellings including new access road off the A4074, public open space (full application) and the provision of school land (outline application) at Newnham Manor, Crowmarsh Gifford (as amended by plans submitted 26 November 2019, 18 December 2019, 14 January 2020 and 18 May 2020 and revised Arboricultural Assessment received 5 May 2020 and as amended by plans and information received 30 April 2021) on land to the south of Newnham Manor, Crowmarsh Gifford.

 

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. A statement from Crowmarsh Parish Council had been sent to the committee by the democratic services officer prior to the meeting. The planning officer reported to the committee that the parish council did not object to the application.

 

The planning officer confirmed that the application site was wholly within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).  The planning officer also reported that since 16 January 2018, when the committee had previously resolved to approve the application subject to conditions and completion of a s106 legal agreement,the scheme had been amended to address highway concerns relating to the proposed means of access and there had been several changes which were material to the consideration of the application. These changes were detailed in the report to the committee.

The planning officer also reported that the Oxfordshire County Council (OCC), the highways authority, originally had concerns regarding the proposals as they affected Port Way, particularly the interface with pedestrians. A new access to the site would be created off the A4074 Port Way, which involved remodelling the Port Way itself and included a staggered ‘traffic light-controlled’ toucan crossing away from the development site/Cox’s Lane staggered junction.  Details of the access arrangements were listed in paragraph 3.4 of the report. The OCC no had no objection.

 

The planning officer also reported that The Crowmarsh Parish Neighbourhood Plan was now ‘made’ and would continue to form part of the development plan.  The neighbourhood plan recognised this site as preferred for development and acknowledged the benefits of housing at the edge of the AONB, where land was available for school use and for landscaping.

 

Councillor John Griffin of Crowmarsh Parish Council spoke in support of the application.

 

Mr. Arron Twamley, the agent, spoke in support of the application.

A statement from the agent had been sent to the committee by the democratic services officer prior to the meeting. In response to a question from the committee regarding the possible installations of heat pumps, the agent replied that this possibility would be investigated. Also in response to a question regarding the ownership of the affordable rented units, the agent responded that they would be in the ownership and management of a housing association.

 

Councillor Sue Cooper, a local ward councillor, spoke in support of the application.

 

Councillor Andrea Powell, a local ward councillor, spoke in support of the application.

 

The committee had concerns regarding the ability of Thames Water’s infrastructure to service the development. The planning officer responded that proposed planning conditions dealt with foul drainage, drainage infrastructure and planning. In discussions with Thames Water, that agency had recognised that this catchment was subject to high infiltration flows during certain groundwater conditions. It had advised that the scale of the proposed development did not materially affect the sewer network and no objections were raised. However, Thames Water had advised that care needed to be taken when designing new networks, to ensure that they did not surcharge and cause flooding. In the longer term, Thames Water were working with partners on a strategy to reduce groundwater entering the sewer networks.

 

In response to a question from the committee regarding the accommodation of the development’s school age children in local schools, the senior planning officer reported that Crowmarsh Gifford Church of England Primary School should take the increased numbers and a new school site on the western edge of Wallingford could take any additional pupils and provide for any increase over time.

 

The committee was concerned about the loss of some trees as a result of the development and asked the planning officer about ensuring the enforcement of good biodiversity standards on the site. The planning officer responded that the impact of the proposed development on local ecology has been assessed and had had regard to council policies; it was considered that the proposals would not have any significant impacts on important habitats or species. The proposed layout had the potential to ensure that the site could deliver a net gain for biodiversity, notably through the planting of native hedgerows and the creation of a wildflower meadow. The scheme was landscape-led, with particular sensitivity to the AONB. Density was at the northern edge of the site and lower density at the southern end, near to the AONB boundary.

 

In response to a query from the committee regarding this site’s contribution to South Oxfordshire’s land supply to 31 March 2026, the senior planning officer reported that based on a year by year and site by site trajectory of the expected housing supply in the district, the council could demonstrate a 5.33 year’s supply of housing land. It was confirmed that this development would make a small but valuable contribution to the council’s housing land supply.

 

The committee were mindful of the need to ensure that the health of the new population was adequately catered for. It was noted that the Oxfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group (OCCG) had requested a contribution towards surgery alterations or capital projects to support patient services. The planning officer reported that the development would be liable for Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and for this type of development the Council would not seek S106 contributions for health services. In accordance with the Council’s CIL Spending Strategy, healthcare infrastructure would be secured under the community infrastructure levy.

 

The committee noted the infrastructure improvement proposals and supported measures to improve connectivity. It was noted that there was a proposal for the provision of a footpath and cycleway through the site onto The Street via the Old Stables residential development. The senior planning officer advised the committee that a condition would be added to the proposed conditions to ensure that this improvement was carried out in the event of permission being granted.

 

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 P16/S3852/FUL, subject to the following;

 

Delegate to the Head of Planning to grant planning permission subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement to cover the matters set out in the report and the following conditions:

 

1.       Commencement of development – full permission.

2.       Commencement of development – outline.

3.       Submission of reserved matters application for the school land

4.       Approved plans.

5.       Sample materials (All).

6.       Removal of permitted development rights for extensions.

7.       Removal of permitted development rights for outbuildings.

8.       No conversion of garage accommodation.

9.       Submission of details of landscaping including hard surfacing and          boundary treatment.

10.      Landscape Management Plan.

11.      Detailed tree protection.

12.      Hours of operation for construction.

13.      Construction Traffic onto A4074 only.

14.      Wheel washing facilities.

15.      Construction Traffic Management Plan.

16.      Travel Plan.

17.      Construction Method Statement.

18.      Off-site Highway Works.

19.      Noise-Acoustic Glazing.

20.      External Lighting.

21.      Electric Vehicle Charging Points.

22.      Efficient Gas Boilers.

23.      Ecological Mitigation.

24.      Biodiversity Enhancement Plan (BEP).

25.      Contamination phased risk assessment.

26.      Contamination remediation strategy.

27.      Foul drainage works (details required).

28.      SUD’s compliance report.

29.      Sustainable drainage scheme.

30.      Adoptable foul drainage scheme.

31.      Thames Water Infrastructure and phasing plan.

32.      New vehicular access onto A4094 Port Way.

33.      Vision Splay Dimensions at Access.

34.      Vision Splay Dimensions at Internal junctions.

35.      Estate Accesses, driveways and turning areas.

36.      Cycle Parking Facilities.

37.      Off-site highway works (implementation as approved)

38.      Archaeological written scheme of investigation

39.      Programme of archaeological evaluation and mitigation

 

Additional condition; provision of footpath and cycleway onto The Street via the Old Stables.