Agenda item

Demolition of 22 and 24 Blacklands Road and the erection of 17 dwellings, including 6 affordable homes.

Felix Bloomfield and Richard Pullen, the local ward councillors, stepped down from the committee and took no part in the debate or voting on this item.  Toby Newman took the chair for this item. 

The committee considered application P15/S4227/FUL for the demolition of 22 and 24 Blacklands Road and the erection of 17 dwellings, including 6 affordable homes, on land to the rear of 22 and 24 Blacklands 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.

Officer update: a further letter of objection had been received from a neighbour.  Also, the Defence Infrastructure Organisation had made an objection that insufficient noise mitigation information had been provided with the application, and on safety grounds in the event of an emergency at RAF Benson.  Also, Environmental Health had raised no objections subject to noise mitigation conditions. 

Jon Fowler, a representative of Benson Parish Council, spoke objecting to the application.  The parish council’s concerns included:

·         there were already 241 homes approved for Benson, 35 per cent over the indicative figure given in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment; it was unfair that Benson had to take more housing

·         the Benson Neighbourhood Plan was at an advanced state, hopefully going to referendum in January 2017; why should the neighbourhood plan be completed if this committee ignored it and continued to allocate housing on other sites? 

·         the site was not overgrown, it was a valuable home to wildlife, and protecting biodiversity was important

·         the development was not sustainable

Stewart Fryatt, a local resident, spoke objecting to the application, his concerns included:

·         road safety—the road was a rat run, with many parked cars, and would worsen if this development was allowed

·         this development was not part of the local plan

·         there would be a loss of privacy from overlooking for local residents, spoiling the enjoyment of their gardens

·         there was a variety of wildlife on the site and this should be protected

Rob Wood, a local resident, spoke objecting to the application, his concerns included:

·         the development was too dense, representing overdevelopment right up to the site boundaries

·         this would cause overlooking and noise disturbance

Simon Sharp, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application:

·         the unadopted Neighbourhood Plan carried little weight

·         there were no objections from the county highways officers

·         to reduce potential overlooking, the velux windows could be obscure glazed

·         there was sufficient distance to the adjacent properties

·         the council did not have a five-year housing land supply

·         the benefits of the proposed development outweighed the harm

·         there was no landscape harm as this was a derelict site

·         the development was sustainable and would support local services

·         there would be affordable homes

·         the density was comparable with housing nearby

Felix Bloomfield, one of the local ward members, spoke objecting to the application, his concerns included:

·         the site was outside the built up area of the village

·         it conflicted with policy CSR1 and was contrary to policy D1

·         the development was too dense

·         it had a poor layout and would have an adverse impact on the residents of Blacklands Road and Brook Street and was unneighbourly

·         the harm outweighed the benefits of this proposal

·         there was little landscaping in the proposal

The committee considered that the proposed development was of poor design, had a poor layout, lacked amenity space and landscaping, did not protect the biodiversity of the site, did not provide sufficient distance to adjacent property, and was overbearing.  The neighbourhood plan was also close to completion and approving this application would be contrary to the aims of neighbourhood planning. 

Contrary to the officer’s recommendation, 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/S4227/FUL for the following reasons:

1.             That the scheme represents an overdevelopment of the site;

(i)        the layout is cramped and does not allow for adequate landscaping to provide well designed external areas at the entrance to or within the site and would detract from the character of the area contrary to Policy CSQ3 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Core Strategy and Saved Policies G2, D1 and H4 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Local Plan;

(ii)       the layout does not allow for the provision of open space to mitigate the loss of biodiversity contrary to Policy CSB1 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Core Strategy and Saved Policy C6 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Local Plan; and

(iii)      the layout does not provide for adequate standards of residential amenity for the occupants of the dwellings/flats on plots 16, 17, 11 and 14 because the private amenity areas are below the Council's minimum standard contrary to Saved Policy D3 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Local Plan and advice in the South Oxfordshire Design Guide.

(iv)      The harm identified to the character of the area, biodiversity and the amenity of occupants of the units would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing a net gain of 15 houses to the district's housing land supply and paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework should not override the development plan policies in this instance.

2.         That, having regard to the location and size of the flats above garages on plots 16 and 17 in relation to 14, 16, 18 and 20 Blacklands Road, the proposal represents an unneighbourly form of development which would be oppressive and overbearing detracting from the residential amenity of the occupants of those properties. As such the proposal is contrary to Saved Policies D4 and H4 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Local Plan. The harm identified to neighbour amenity would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing a net gain of 15 houses to the district's housing land supply and paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework should not override the development plan policies in this instance.