Agenda and minutes

To receive any announcements from the chair and general housekeeping matters.

The chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, outlined the procedure to be followed and advised on emergency evacuation arrangements.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Ali Gordon-Creed, who was substituted for Councillor Jo Robb, and Councillors Tim Bearder and Sam James-Lawrie.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the Planning Committee minutes of the meeting held on 7 June 2023, 19 April 2023, 21 September 2022, 17 May 2022, and 1 September 2021. 

RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of the meetings held on 7 June 2023, 19 April 2023, 21 September 2022, 17 May 2022, and 1 September 2021 as a correct record and agree that the Chair sign these as such.

To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests, other registrable interests and non-registrable interests or any conflicts of interest in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive notification of any matters which the chair determines should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances which have made the matters urgent and to receive any notification of any applications deferred or withdrawn.

There was no urgent business.

Members proposed a site visit for application P22/S4211/HH at The Annexe, The White House, Bolney Road, Lower Shiplake, RG9 3NR as they believed that visiting the site would provide a clearer understanding of the issues around the application than could be gained through looking at the plans.

A motion, moved and seconded, to defer consideration of application P22/S4211/HH until a site visit was held was carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to defer consideration of planning application P22/S4211/HH until a site visit had occurred.  

To receive any statements from members of the public that have registered to speak on planning applications which are being presented to this committee meeting. 

The list showing members of the public who had registered to speak was tabled at the meeting.

Retrospective change of use of the agricultural Dutch barn to provide outdoor dining area associated with the public house, including additional seating area, external storage and kitchen containers. Addition of timber cladding to barn and screening fencing around containers. (As amplified by floor plan and elevation plans submitted 08 March 2022) (As amended by plans 2023-02-10 to revise external appearance, provide additional parking, remove retail/shop within barn). (As amplified and amended by Transport Statement and plans to increase overflow car parking received 31 March 2023).

The committee considered planning application P21/S1733/FUL for the retrospective change of use of the agricultural Dutch barn to provide outdoor dining area associated with the public house, including additional seating area, external storage and kitchen containers, addition of timber cladding to barn and screening fencing around containers (as amplified by floor plan and elevation plans submitted 08 March 2022) (as amended by plans 2023-02-10 to revise external appearance, provide additional parking, remove retail/shop within barn) (as amplified and amended by Transport Statement and plans to increase overflow car parking received 31 March 2023), on land adjacent to the Bottle and Glass Inn, Bones Lane, Binfield Heath.  

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. 

The planning officer introduced the report and noted that since the publication of the agenda an additional letter from a neighbour was sent in supporting the application citing its community benefit. The planning officer then highlighted that the application itself sought retrospective permission for the change of use of an existing agricultural barn into an outdoor dining and seating area for the Bottle and Glass Inn. A shipping container was proposed to be used as a kitchen and would use an extracting unit and external flu pipe. The barn itself was proposed to be enclosed with cladding to assist with weather proofing the structure. In addition to the retrospective permission, it was noted that the application also included a proposal for an extension to the barn to the rear, in order to provide toilet facilities, and an extension to the car park, so that there could be overflow parking.

The planning officer believed that the principle of the development was acceptable as the barn had assisted the pub during the COVID-19 pandemic and that the works that would be carried out would not be detrimental to the site, and subject to an enhanced landscaping, would not be detrimental to the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

In addition, noise, odour, and lighting were assessed rigorously and officers did not believe there would be any significant adverse effect on neighbouring amenity, with some noise mitigation measures already being implemented. The planning officer also clarified to members that conditions were proposed to limit live music, lighting, and events outside of the barn.  

Finally, it was noted that highways had no objection subject to cycle storage on site, which could be secured through condition, and that biodiversity net gain could also be secured through conditions.

Overall, the planning officer was satisfied that the proposed application was in accordance with the Local Plan and recommended it be approved subject to conditions.

David Holliday, one of the applicants, spoke in support of the application. 

The committee had conducted a site visit prior to the discussion of the application at the committee meeting. The committee begin by asking about the recommended conditions around music and if the parameters of it could be clarified. In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

Conversion and sub-division of vacant public house to two dwellings and erection of a detached dwelling and carport and formation of new vehicular accesses on Main Street & Deer's Lane (number of new build dwellings reduced from two to one and layout and design of new build dwelling and parking altered as shown on amended plans received 10th February 2023 & as amplified & amended by information received 17 February 2023 and visibility splays and tracking provided on amended site plan received 19th April 2023).

The committee considered planning application P22/S3447/FUL and P22/S3448/LB for the conversion and sub-division of vacant public house to two dwellings and erection of a detached dwelling and carport and formation of new vehicular accesses on Main Street and Deer's Lane (number of new build dwellings reduced from two to one and layout and design of new build dwelling and parking altered as shown on amended plans received 10February 2023 and as amplified and amended by information received 17 February 2023 and visibility splays and tracking provided on amended site plan received 19 April 2023), on land at The Four Horseshoes, Main Street, Checkendon.  

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. 

The planning officer introduced the report and highlighted that the application was brought to the committee due to the objection of Checkendon Parish Council.

The planning officer informed the committee that there were two applications before them; one was for full planning permission for a new detached dwelling and car port with vehicle access on Main Street and Deer’s Lane and the other was a listed building consent application which sought permission for the conversion and subdivision of the existing public house on the site.

The planning officer highlighted to the committee that it was his opinion that the existing building remained unviable as a community facility due to the previously granted permission for its total residential conversion. Therefore, he believed that the subdivision would be acceptable in Local Plan policy terms. The planning officer then detailed the proposed works to the listed building which included a single storey extension, reconstructed outbuilding, detached garage, and internal alterations. The conservation officer’s representations also stated that the subdivision would result in some loss of significance for the building, but only result in a low level of harm as it was achievable in a sensitive and reversable manner.

On the proposed new dwelling, the planning officer believed that the proposal would be considered infill and that, although it would be a significant increase to the built form of the area, it would reflect local vernacular. The conservation officer’s representations also noted that the new build dwelling would erode some space of the listed building and cause increased enclosure to the road junction in the Checkendon Conservation Area, but that this would primarily be seen from closed views next to the proposed dwelling. The local highway authority considered that the proposed new dwelling would also be acceptable on access and parking grounds and the planning officer confirmed that the proposal met the council’s requirements around housing mix, and that landscaping, drainage, and external lighting could be dealt with via conditions.

Overall, the planning officer highlighted to members that the public benefit needed to be weighed against the harms of the development and it was his view that the primary benefit – the continued use of the listed building for future generations and the provision  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

Erection of detached two-storey dwelling with parking and amenity space. (As amplified by additional contamination information received 27 March 2023 and amended by revised application form removing 'layout' from the proposal and making it a reserved matter).

The committee considered planning application P22/S2640/O for the erection The committee considered planning application P22/S2640/O for the erection of detached two-storey dwelling with parking and amenity space (as amplified by additional contamination information received 27 March 2023 and amended by revised application form removing 'layout' from the proposal and making it a reserved matter), on land at 15 Tollgate Road, Culham.  

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. 

The planning officer introduced the report and highlighted that the application was brought to the committee due to the objection of Culham Parish Council. The planning officer informed the committee that the application was an outline application in order to establish the principal of a two-storey dwelling with access on the site and that all other matters would be reserved for the future with the exception of the access.

The planning officer noted that infill development was not inappropriate in Culham, based on housing policy, nor in the Green Belt, as it was one of the few exceptions. Therefore, as the planning officer considered the proposed outline dwelling to be situated in the village of Culham and to be an infill development, he believed it to be acceptable.

It was also noted that there had been a historic decision on the site to refuse a previous housing application. However, this was 45 years’ ago and the planning officer informed members that the understanding about what was in and outside of a village, and what was and was not considered infill development, had evolved since then. It was the officer’s view that the site was located withing the village and that, as it was closely surrounded on three sides by development – houses to the north and south and a Thanes Water pumping station to the west – it was also an infill development.

Finally, on highways safety, the planning officer noted that there was no objection to the access by the local highway authority.

Overall, as the planning officer believed that the dwelling would be considered infill development in Culham, and that the access was acceptable on highways terms, he recommended that the application be approved.

SiobhamSargeant spoke objecting to the application. 

Jake Collinge, the agent representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application. 

Councillor Sam Casey-Rerhaye, a local ward councillor, spoke objecting to the application. 

The committee asked the planning officer about the details of the outline application and he confirmed that this application only dealt with the principle of development and access and that a future reserved matters application would cover the details of the dwelling. It was also clarified that applicants were entitled to apply for outline applications and the council must assess every application on its own merits.

Members also noted there was a spring located on the site and asked about what impact this would have on the current application. In response, the planning officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

Retention of extensions to existing annexe building and additional replacement barn for domestic uses ancillary to The White House.

The committee deferred consideration of the application until a site visit had occurred.

Proposed first floor extension.

The committee considered planning application P23/S1539/HH for the proposed first floor extension, on land at 35 Damer Gardens, Henley-on-Thames.

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. 

The planning officer introduced the report and highlighted that the application was called into the committee by the local ward member, Councillor Ken Arlett, based on the objections from Henley-on-Thames Town Council.

The planning officer informed the committee that planning permission was sought for a first-floor side extension above an existing garage for a 1960s style linked detached dwelling in the Damer Gardens cul-de-sac. This cul-de-sac was noted as comprising a mixture of linked detached and terraced dwellings alongside each other.

The proposed extension would be set back from the front of the dwelling and set down from the original roof line. Also, as the surrounding area has a mixture of linked detached and terraced dwellings, the planning officer did not believe that the proposed linking of the dwelling with the adjoining property would be out of character with the area.

Overall, as the planning officer believed that the scale and design of the development was in keeping with surrounding area and would not harm the amenity of neighbours, they recommended the application be approved subject to conditions.

Ronald Chalk spoke objecting to the application. 

Jeremy Collins-Haest, the agent representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application. 

The committee asked about the potential for the extension to overlook the neighbours and affect their amenity, but the planning officer clarified that there would be some overlooking but that the neighbours had a conservatory obscuring some of the garden and as the properties were situated in a built-up area there would be some mutual overlooking. In addition, there was not considered to be any significant loss of light caused by the proposed development. Members then inquired into the precedent for the proposed type of extension in the area, but the planning officer reminded members that each application needed to be taken on its own merits. On neighbouring amenity, members were satisfied with the comments by the development manager that these were not strong grounds for refusing the application.

On parking, members asked about the number of bedrooms in the proposed development, and it was confirmed that the proposed dwelling would have two bedrooms. Due to the increase in accommodation level, the existing pressure in the area for off-street parking, and the ease of conversion of one of the multiple studies into a further third bedroom, the committee believed that the provision of one off-street parking space was not sufficient for a development of its size.

The committee then expressed concerns about the proposed design of the extension. It was noted that the cul-de-sac was of a very distinctive unique 1960s design and as the proposal would cause a loss of the link detached building, replacing it with a terraced effect, it would also be a loss  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.