Agenda item

Outline planning application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of 241 dwellings (40% of which will be affordable) with associated access; public open space, landscaping, sports provision, nature park and woodland; up to 230 sq.m retail; provision of community facilities including relocated school playing fields, youth hut, skate park and play space.

Felix Bloomfield and Richard Pullen, the local ward members, stepped down from the committee and took no part in the debate or voting on this item. Councillor Toby Newman was nominated and voted in as temporary Chairman for this item.

 

The committee considered application P16/S1139/O for outline permission (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of 241 dwellings (40% of which would be affordable) with associated access; public open space; landscaping; sports provision; a nature park and woodland; up to 230 sq.m retail; and the provision of community facilities including relocated school playing fields, youth hut, skate park and play space on land North of Littleworth Road, Benson.

 

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 confirmed that a further appeal for housing had been allowed since the report was originally prepared and in considering the application the committee should give significant weight to the social benefit of additional housing.

 

Jon Fowler, a representative of Benson parish council, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The proposed development was out of character with the rest of Benson and did not fully comply with several SODC core strategy policies;

·         Approving the application would render a key part of the emerging Benson Neighbourhood Plan null and void, giving a major blow to momentum and viability;

·         The parish council recognises the need for housing, but do not think that this is the best solution.

 

David Rushton and Frank Farquharson, local residents, spoke objecting to the application. Their concerns included the following:

·         The effect of additional traffic and parking on the High Street and inadequacy of parking in the village in general;

·         Concern for the width and quality of roads with the increased traffic;

·         The validity of the flood risk assessment; and

·         Concern for surface water drainage.

 

John Ashton, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application. His speech included the following:

·         The development would help contribute to South Oxfordshire’s housing supply shortfall;

·         The proposal is sustainable with good transport links;

·         There would be positive contributions made to the local community; and

·         No statutory or technical objections had been received.

 

Felix Bloomfield, one of the local ward members, spoke in objection to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         This new quarter for Benson was not wanted;

·         The emerging neighbourhood plan is advancing;

·         The proposed access to bus routes is dangerous as you would have to cross the busy A4074;

·         Overall the proposal is overdevelopment, not sustainable and would have a negative impact on the environment; and

·         He questioned the scheme’s deliverability.

 

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

·         Regarding sustainability, the proposed site is well connected to shops, a school and public transport;

·         The school cannot expand in the existing grounds;

·         The council’s drainage engineers, Oxfordshire County Council and the Environment Agency were all consulted about the drainage and the potential for flooding and had no objections but suggested conditions which are incorporated in the officer’s recommendation; and

·         The flood maps drawn on by the Environment Agency in providing their advice are the most up to date.

 

Jason Sherwood, Locality and Road Agreements Manager at Oxfordshire County Council, made the following points:

·         Current village amenities are within walking distance;

·         The County Council are seeking contributions to public transport to move the current bus stops on the A4074; and

·         A traffic regulation order is designed to restrict heavy goods vehicles through the village and improving safety.

 

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

·         Concern for the playing fields being separate from the main school site;

·         400 homes represent a substantial addition to the village;

·         Supporting the scheme would make a mockery of the neighbourhood development process;

·         If the application is rejected and then won at appeal, the council would lose control over conditions and the S106 agreement and any may therefore not secure all the benefits of the development; and

·         A recognition of the need to follow national guidelines for the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as per paragraph 14 of the NPPF, in the light of the council not having a five year housing land supply.

 

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

 

RESOLVED: to delegate authority to grant outline planning permission to the head of planning for application P16/S1139/O, subject to the completion of the Section 106 agreement and the following conditions:

 

1.    Reserved matters to be submitted – specific.

2.    Reserved matters submission and commencement.

3.    Approved plans.

4.    Archaeology (submission and implementation of written scheme of investigation).

5.    Contaminated land.

6.    Air quality.

7.    Visibility splays.

8.    No drainage to highway.

9.    New vehicular access.

10.Travel plan and travel information pack.

11.Safe routes to school.

12.Off site highways works including new vehicular access.

13.Off site footways and cycleway details.

14.Secured by design.

15.Hours of construction.

16.Construction method statement.

17.Appropriate provision for the control of noise and dust.

18.Foul drainage works (details required).

19.Surface water drainage works (details required).

20.Drainage strategy waste water infrastructure.

21.Flooding.

22.Lady Brook buffer zone.

23.Nature park (details).

24.Badger mitigation strategy.

25.Tree protection (detailed).

26.Adaptable and accessible dwellings.

27.Childrens' play space.

28.Primary education playing field details.

29.Agreement for education expansion.

30.Acoustic report.