Agenda item

Erection of 68 residential dwellings (67 net) including affordable housing provision, access, parking, open space and landscaping following demolition of existing buildings at the site including one dwelling. 

Elaine Hornsby, acting on behalf of 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 P16/S3607/FUL for planning permission to erect 68 residential dwellings, including affordable housing, access, parking, open space and landscaping following the demolition of existing buildings, on land at East End Farm, south-east of Wallingford Road, Cholsey. 

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: the officer reported that since publication of the agenda pack, a further six letters of objection had been received, and a sewer impact survey had been received concluding that the proposed development would have no adverse impact on the existing sewer system. 

Mark Gray, a representative of Cholsey Parish Council, spoke objecting to the application, his concerns included:

·         Traffic on Wallingford Road was too fast and this proposed development would bring additional traffic

·         The developer should provide a more acceptable traffic solution at the proposed junction and a pedestrian crossing also

·         The drainage system might not have sufficient capacity

·         The spaces between the existing and proposed housing were too small

·         Parking provision on the site was inadequate for the number of dwellings proposed

·         There should be covenants to stop garages being converted into habitable rooms

·         The neighbourhood plan would accept a significant number of homes already

·         The parish council was not opposed to sustainable development but it did not believe that this was a sustainable development site

Paul Ramsay, a representative of the Cholsey neighbourhood planning group, spoke objecting to the application.  His concerns included:

·         The pre-submission version of the neighbourhood plan would be published in approximately one month and it did not include this as a housing site

·         The village had already grown recently

·         Local people should decide on the location of new housing

·         Approximately 135 homes had been included in the neighbourhood plan

·         This was not a sustainable housing site

Alex Smith spoke objecting to the application on behalf of Stop Unwanted Development in Cholsey.  His concerns included:

·         The neighbourhood plan would be published in a few weeks and any new development should be plan-led with local support

·         The proposed development did not meet the National Planning Policy Framework policies

·         It would cause harm to the setting of the listed buildings

·         Traffic sped along Wallingford Road and would cause a hazard to traffic entering and leaving this site

·         There had been no road safety audit—this was a requirement

·         Surface water flooding had been experienced at Wallingford Road

·         The spaces between the proposed and existing homes did not meet the council’s design guide minimum standards

Marcus Holford had registered to speak objecting to the application but answered a question to confirm that although there had been surface water flooding in the area, he did not have any evidence that the flood water had entered any residential property. 

Nick Kirby, Max Thurgood and David Knight, the applicant’s agents, spoke in support of the application:

·         This was a sustainable development located close to village facilities and bus and rail transport

·         It would bring less than 60 additional vehicle movements in peak hours

·         The junction design with Wallingford Road had been agreed with the county highways authority

·         Speed cushions would be introduced along Wallingford Road to reduce the speed of passing traffic

·         Thames Water had confirmed that the drainage system had sufficient capacity

·         The neighbourhood plan in its current form had no weight as a material planning consideration

·         The number of homes on the site had been reduced following consultation with local residents

·         A landscaping scheme would be introduced to protect neighbours’ amenity

·         The gap between the new housing and the listed building was 35 metres

Elaine Hornsby spoke on behalf of the local ward councillor, objecting to the application, raising the following concerns:

·         About the mass of the proposed development, the distances to the existing dwellings, and the impact on local residents

·         This was overdevelopment

·         The amenity open space on the site was poorly located

·         The proposed development was unsustainable and unneighbourly

·         There was insufficient infrastructure and services in the village to cope with this additional housing

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate. The committee had concerns about the following:

·         This application would harm the setting of the listed building

·         It was overdevelopment of the site

·         It was unsustainable development

·         No weight could be given to the unpublished pre-submission version of the neighbourhood plan

·         The impact of additional traffic on to Wallingford Road

·         Insufficient school capacity

·         It was unneighbourly to the residents of Rothwell Close

·         There was insufficient parking on the site

The development manager advised the committee that the neighbourhood plan could not be afforded any weight as it was not yet made or published as a pre-submission plan.  There were no technical objections in relation to highway safety or education capacity. 

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 P16/ S3607/FUL, due to the following reasons:

1.         That, having regard to the proximity of the development to the Grade 2 listed property known as Duxford and its design, density and height the proposal would adversely affect the setting of the listed building, detaching a vernacular cottage from its rural setting thereby harming its significance and special historic interest contrary to Policy CSEN3 of the South Oxfordshire Core Strategy and CON5 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2011 and paragraph 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.         The proposed access is located on a stretch of the Wallingford Road where vehicles frequently exceed the speed limit.  Taking this into account and the position of the access relative to the junction of Goldfinch Lane and the bend in the carriageway to the south west of the site, the proposal would fail to provide safe and convenient access for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists and would therefore increase the likelihood of accidents contrary to Policy T1 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2011 and paragraph of the 32 of the NPPF.

3.         There is insufficient capacity for early years education and primary and secondary schools in the local area to meet the demands arising from this proposal.  Furthermore significant other development has already been permitted in Crowmarsh, Wallingford and Benson which means that the capacities of other schools in the locality are also expected to be exceeded.  The development cannot therefore make adequate provision for education infrastructure and is an unsustainable form of development, contrary to Policy CSI1 of the adopted South Oxfordshire Core Strategy and the NPPF. 

4.         That, in the absence of a completed S106 agreement the proposal fails to i) secure affordable housing to meet the needs of the District and ii) secure other on and off site infrastructure necessary to support the development, and as such is contrary to policies CSH3 and CSI1 of the South Oxfordshire Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.