Agenda item

Outline application for the construction of circa 170 residential dwellings with associated vehicular access from New Road, internal access roads, public open space, landscaping and parking (detailed access with all other matters reserved).

The committee considered outline application P15/S3228/O for the construction of circa 170 residential dwellings with associated vehicular access from New Road, internal access roads, public open space, landscaping and parking on land east of New Road, East Hagbourne.

Officer updates: an explanation as to the responses received in paragraph 3.5 of the report.  There are 667 folders on the website, which is not representative of the number of objections. There were 431 objections, conditional support from 4 people and 36 technical consultee responses.

The officer referred to the last sentence of paragraph 6.12 of the report and clarified that the site is not covered by any landscape designations, however the North Wessex Downs AONB is 400m to the east of the site and extends south where the AONB is visible from the site.

The officer also advised that because the proposal is being recommended favourably in view of the five year housing supply situation the applicants have agreed to commit to an earlier than normal commencement of two years to submit reserved matters instead of three years and one year to commence from approval of last reserved matters instead of two years.  

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.

Crispin Topping, a representative of East Hagbourne parish council, spoke objecting to the application.

Anthony Dearlove, a representative of Didcot town council, spoke objecting to the application.

Nick Wright, a representative of Mind the Green Gap, spoke objecting to the application.

Chris Rees, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application.

Jane Murphy, one of the local ward members, spoke objecting to the application.

The committee did not agree that the site was sustainable and that the application would significantly harm:

·         The ‘green necklace’ around Didcot;

·         East Hagbourne’s identity as a small rural village;

·         The setting of the North Wessex Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

There were serious concerns about contributions to infrastructure.

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

RESOLVED: to refuse outline planning permission for application P15/S3228/O due to the following reasons:

1.    The proposed development would occupy farmland that helps to maintain distinct separation between the settlements of East Hagbourne and Didcot, which contributes to the character and appearance of the area and to the enjoyment of nearby public rights of way. The openness of the site affords views to the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) from New Road and from the public footpath immediately to the north of the site, and forms part of the setting of the AONB. Development of this site and the consequential loss of openness would result in a coalescence of settlements that would harm the role this site performs in protecting and enhancing the distinctive and valued landscape setting and identity of East Hagbourne and Didcot. Moreover, development of this site would result in the loss of the distinctive landscape boundaries of the settlements, which would harm the valued landscape setting of the AONB.  As such the development would result in significant and demonstrable harm and is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), in particular but not confined to paragraphs 7.14, 109 and 115, and is contrary to policy CSEN1 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Core Strategy and saved policies G2, G4, D1 (ii and iv) and C4 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2011'.

2.    In the absence of a completed S106 agreement the proposal fails to secure affordable housing to meet the needs of the District contrary to policies CSH3 of the adopted Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.    In the absence of a completed S106 agreement the proposal fails to secure affordable housing to meet the needs of the District contrary to policies CSH3 of the adopted Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.