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 David Bretherton.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the Planning Committee minutes of the meeting held on 20 February 2024. 

RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 20 February 2024 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.

Councillor Ben Manning declared that he was the ward member for item 7 on the agenda, application P23/S2135/FUL at the Horse and Harrow, Main Street, West Hagbourne, OX11 0NB. Councillor Manning confirmed that he would stand down from the committee and not participate in the debate or vote on the item but would speak in the designated ward member speaking slot. 

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circumstances which have made the matters urgent and to receive any notification of any applications deferred or withdrawn.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.

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.

Change of use of existing public house (Sui Generis) to provide a three-bed dwelling and a four-bed dwelling (Use C3), erection of two four-bed dwellings and a five-bed dwelling (Use C3) on land adjacent to the public house accessed from Main Street, with associated parking and landscaping, along with the demolition of existing outbuilding. (Amended site plan and highways technical note received 15 September 2023 to amend car parking and access and amended red line plan received 10 November 2023 and as amended by plans received 20 November 2023).

The committee considered planning application P23/S2135/FUL for the change of use of existing public house (Sui Generis) to provide a three-bed dwelling and a four-bed dwelling (Use C3), erection of two four-bed dwellings and a five-bed dwelling (Use C3) on land adjacent to the public house accessed from Main Street, with associated parking and landscaping, along with the demolition of existing outbuilding (amended site plan and highways technical note received 15 September 2023 to amend car parking and access and amended red line plan received 10 November 2023 and as amended by plans received 20 November 2023), on land at Horse & Harrow, Main Street, West Hagbourne.

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 application was brought to the committee due to the objection of West Hagbourne Parish Council. The parish raised concerns that the pub was not marketed, was intentionally rundown, and that the application would have an adverse impact on the conservation area.

The planning officer informed the committee that a previous application on the site was refused by the council as it was determined that the public house was viable, and that this decision was currently under an appeal with the planning inspectorate. He noted that the only difference between the current and previously refused application was an additional bedroom being added to plots four and five, along with a slight increase in floor space and an additional viability assessment and tenants’ letter of support.

The planning officer noted the concerns of the parish council, and that the pub was the last community facility in West Hagbourne. However, the new viability assessment indicated that the village was too small to sustain a pub, and that there were numerous other pubs within a short distance that could be used by the residents – although noting the closure of a nearby pub the George and Dragon in Upton. On the other factors involved in the pubs non-viability, the planning officer noted the non-use by residents, no food offering due to the kitchen’s limited size, not being on a major road, and that the historic investment of £195,000 had failed to turn around the business.

On the parish’s concern that the pub had not been marketed, the planning officer highlighted that, although not a policy, the supporting text in the Local Plan was clear that the property should be marketed. However, he brought members’ attention to the viability assessment which claimed that, even if the property was marketed, it would likely receive minimal interest due to the £150,000 of investment needed.

The planning officer concluded by acknowledging the council’s past decision to refuse the previous application but indicated that he thought the new viability assessment provided new material grounds to support the application. For this reason, he recommended that the application be approved.

Sheila Taylor spoke objecting to the application. 

Jake Russell, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 176.

Construction of three bedroom house. (As amplified by arboricultural information received on 26 September 2023, amended by plan 833 1 C to reduce the red site area received 12 December 2023, revised site plan received 18 December 2023 and ecological assessment and biodiversity metric calculation received 8 January 2024).

The committee considered planning application P23/S1723/FUL for the construction of three bedroom house (as amplified by arboricultural information received on 26 September 2023, amended by plan 833 1 C to reduce the red site area received 12 December 2023, revised site plan received 18 December 2023 and ecological assessment and biodiversity metric calculation received 8 January 2024), on the site at the entrance to the track to Warren Farm, Holton.  

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 Holton Parish Council as they believed that the application did not constitute infill development.

The planning officer informed the committee that the site was considered to be agricultural and formed part of the Shotover Estate, within in the Oxford Green Belt. She believed the principle of development to be acceptable as it was considered to be limited infill in a village, something permitted in the Green Belt, as it formed part of a continuous line of development along the road. Holton was also noted as being a village where infill developments were acceptable.

The proposed dwelling was in a traditional style and in keeping with the surrounding character of the area, whilst providing generous private amenity space and not impacting neighbouring amenity. The planning officer also highlighted that the application had received no objections from Highways, and as they entered into the Great Crested Newt licensing scheme, there were no objections from the ecologist either. 

The planning officer did note that she only considered one dwelling at the front of the site to be infill and any further development would be subject to a separate planning application.

As the application was considered to be infill development, and that there were no objections from technical consultees, the planning officer recommended that the application be approved.

Brian Pridmore spoke on behalf of Holton Parish Council, objecting to the application. 

Councillor Tim Bearder, a local ward councillor, spoke objecting to the application. 

The committee asked the planning officer about the definition of infill and in response she clarified that that development in the Green Belt was inappropriate unless it came under one of several circumstances, limited infill in a village being one example. As she believed that the application site was a small gap in an otherwise continuous built-up frontage, she believed it was infill and therefore acceptable.

Members enquired into the possibility for the removal of permitted development rights and the planning officer confirmed that this had been a suggested condition on the approval of the application. 

In response to a question about if a development in the proposed garden would also be considered infill, the planning officer indicated that each application would need to be assessed on its merits, and that the current application was considered infill development.

Members discussed the surroundings to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 177.

Conversion of part of building adjoining existing dwelling to provide additional living space, and related works, including change of metal cladding to timber, altered fenestration and re-arrangement of external parking.

The committee considered planning application P23/S3949/FUL for the conversion of part of building adjoining existing dwelling to provide additional living space, and related works, including change of metal cladding to timber, altered fenestration and re-arrangement of external parking, on land at Glendale Barn, Glendale Farm, Northend.  

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 Watlington Parish Council.

The planning officer informed the committee that site was within the countryside between Northend and Christmas Common and sat within the Chilterns National Landscape. He also noted that the barn was erected over 20 years ago.

The planning officer highlighted that a certificate of lawfulness had been given for the end bay of the barn on the basis that it had been present for more than four years. He noted that the application before the committee was for the extension of that dwelling into the two adjacent bays which were not used for agricultural purposes.

The dwelling was proposed to be entirely contained within the existing barn and included vertical timber cladding and several additional windows, a number of which would be obscured by timber fins. The planning officer believed that the design of the dwelling would not be out of character with the surrounding area.

He also noted that the existing parking arrangements and garden used from the existing dwelling would continue to be used for the proposed application. However, he did indicate that a view of the extension would be possible from the nearby public right of way.

Overall, as the planning officer believed that landscape would not be harmed by the design and form of the building, he recommended that the application be approved.

Gill Bindoff spoke on behalf of Watlington Parish Council, objecting to the application. 

Henry Venners, the agent representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application. 

The committee enquired into the use of the other bays of the barn and the planning officer confirmed that the last bay had been turned into a commercial workshop under permitted development rights, but that the other bays would be retained for the limited agricultural work that continued to be done near the site.

Members asked the planning officer if the applicant could change their windows under permitted development rights and he responded that this was possible, although the scope for them to do this would be limited with the suggested condition for the removal of permitted development rights.

The committee agreed that, in order to properly assess the impact of the proposal on the National Landscape, they wanted to examine the site from the nearby footpath. Therefore, they agreed that the application be deferred in order for a site visit to take place.

A motion, moved and seconded, for a site visit was carried on being put to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 178.