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 at an in-person meeting which was being simultaneously broadcast and advised on emergency evacuation arrangements.

Councillor Sam-Casey Rerhaye tendered apologies. Jo Robb, as substitute, attended the meeting remotely.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the Planning Committee minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 27 April 2022. 

RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 27 April 2022 as a correct record and agree that the Chair sign these as such.

To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting.  

There were no declarations of interest.

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circumstances which have made the matters urgent and to receive any notification of any applications deferred or withdrawn.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

The committee requested a site visit for item 12 on the agenda – application P22/S0584/FUL.

RESOLVED: to agree a site visit for application P22/S0584/FUL and for the application to be deferred from the meeting until such a visit had taken place.

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.

Full planning permission for the erection of a new Wellness Spa, Bistro, Garden Villas, Garden Rooms, Pavilions and Storage Barns, minor extensions and alterations to the existing Grade II* Manor House, former Stables building and Staff Facilities building, new highway access, internal road and car parking areas, limited demolition and associated works

(amended plans and information September 2021, Archaeological Evaluation Report October 2021 and Amended plans and additional information April and June 2022).

The committee considered application P21/S0343/FUL for full planning permission for the erection of a new Wellness Spa, Bistro, Garden Villas, Garden Rooms, Pavilions and Storage Barns, minor extensions and alterations to the existing Grade II* Manor House, former Stables building and Staff Facilities building, new highway access, internal road and car parking areas, limited demolition and associated works (amended plans and information September 2021, Archaeological Evaluation Report October 2021 and Amended plans and additional information April and June 2022).

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 provided the context of the site and explained that this was referred to the planning committee due to the size of the scheme and its departure from greenbelt policy. If the application was approved, it would then be referred to the Secretary of State to issue a direction to identify whether they wish to determine the application themselves. The proposal was over 4000 square metres in floor area and the scheme was designed to provide an upgrade to the hotel and Michelin star restaurant.

The planning officer then provided the detail of existing and proposed buildings on the site masterplan and also highlighted the two new car parking areas. The employee number would go from 176 to 259 and the parking spaces would increase by 160 spaces to a total of 250 parking spaces. The planning officer then explained that the replacement conservatory would extend beyond the existing conservatory. With reference to the bistro, the roof would be clay tiled with the walls clad in green oak. The presidential villa would have Cotswold rubble stone as elevations, as would other buildings with a mixture of clay tiled roofs and flat sedum-roofs.  Within the envelope of the manor house gardens, officers were not concerned with the proposed development. Whilst the application conflicted with policy regarding the greenbelt, there was not considered to be material harm to the openness of the landscape and green belt.

The planning officer then discussed the outer-field, and advised that parking would be valeted, and solar canopies would be located in the visitor parking area. The planning officer illustrated the public footpath and its location on the field. The committee were given an update that neighbouring residents were concerned about the water flows from the site and the potential impact on surface water flooding and biodiversity on nearby areas. The planning officer confirmed that an extra requirement was proposed for the drainage condition which would require a water management plan to address the release of water off-site. A letter of support from the local public bus company was also highlighted in favour of the application, and the officer identified terms for the Section 106 agreement in relation to the subsidy for the local bus service. Officers had requested a continuation of the bus subsidy for five years with a review built in after 3 years and the 3 year  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

Listed building consent for internal and external alterations and minor extensions, repair and refurbishment works to the Grade II* Manor House (amended plans September 2021 and amended plans and information received April and June 2022).

The committee considered application P21/S0438/FUL for listed building consent for internal and external alterations and minor extensions, repair and refurbishment works to the Grade II* Manor House (amended plans September 2021 and amended plans and information received April and June 2022).

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 explained that the Grade II Manor House was dated from the 15^th century and had undergone development over the course of its existence. The principal works on this application were to the manor house with a replacement to the conservatory, and the relocation of an Edwardian period window. The new window would be altered from a three bay window to a five bay window. The planning officer continued and, in the presentation, highlighted the planned location of the first floor dormer extension, and where the conservatory building would be located. The committee were also informed of a condition which would require details of the conservatory to be submitted to the planning authority. A further condition was also proposed for the submission of a report to record the opening up of the building and works of alteration to be submitted for the archive. Subject to amendments and conditions, Historic England evaluated the harm to be of low concern. Therefore, the planning officer confirmed that subject to conditions, the listed building consent was recommended for approval.

Jeremy Blake, the agent, spoke in support of the application.

The committee asked the planning officer whether the record of the works would be both photographic and in writing. The planning officer confirmed this would be the case.

A motion moved and seconded, to grant planning permission including the additional condition was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to grant listed building consent to application P21/S0428/LB subject to the Secretary of State confirming that they do not intend to issue a direction on application P21/S0343/FUL and the following conditions:

Conditions:

1.     Commencement three years – Listed Building Consent

2.     Approved Drawings and Documents

3.     Details of Manor House Conservatory

4.     Samples of Materials for Listed Buildings

5.     Record of works

Proposed demolition of existing garage and conservatory, part single, part two storey rear extension and alterations to the existing dwelling, subdivision and erection of new dwelling and alterations to the vehicular access and parking (amended plans received 15 April 2022 to reduce depth of rear extension, and to extend red line area to enable visibility splays for access).

The committee considered application P22/S0713/FUL for the proposed demolition of existing garage and conservatory, part single, part two storey rear extension and alterations to the existing dwelling, subdivision and erection of new dwelling and alterations to the vehicular access and parking (amended plans received 15 April 2022 to reduce depth of rear extension, and to extend red line area to enable visibility splays for access).

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 explained that the application was referred to the committee due to an objection from Wheatley Parish Council, due to concerns over the appearance of the area, car parking, highway safety, and the impact on the neighbouring property due to a loss of light. The planning officer then provided the background to the site, explaining that it was an ex-council estate from the 1950’s and had been brought to the committee due to an objection from Wheatley Parish Council over the character and appearance of the area, car parking and highway safety, and the impact on neighbouring amenity in terms of loss of light. The planning officer then added that over time, most of the surrounding properties had taken two storey side extensions and in the view of officers, this had changed the character of the area.

Addressing the application site and the proposed development, the committee were told that the single storey extension to the rear of the site would not go beyond the depth of the existing conservatory. Additionally, the footprint of the application would extend northwards, but would not cause a harmful impact on neighbouring properties in relation to a loss of light. For the side facing windows, the committee were told the window would be obscured glazing so as to respect the privacy of neighbouring residents. The planning officer also confirmed that a condition was added that would remove permitted development rights which would protect any further impact on neighbouring amenity. As the benefit of the application was considered to outweigh the harm, the planning officer recommended the application for approval, subject to conditions.

Mark Flanagan, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application. The committee asked the speaker for clarification on his verbal statement on whether preliminary work had begun at the application site. The speaker responded that the applicant had already split the garden and put a fence up, with work taking place up to around 10pm at night. An additional question from the committee was raised to the speaker to clarify their view on the extensions and whether they were in character with the area. The speaker answered that in their opinion, the character of the area would be harmed by the application, as it contrasted in appearance to existing buildings and other approved extensions.

Councillor Alexandrine Kantor, local ward member, spoke on the application.

The committee asked the planning officer how a semi-detached house would improve the area,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

Variation of condition 2 (Approved plans) on planning application P21/S1647/FUL to vary the style of the external appearance (two storey side extension, demolition of existing garage and erection of a new two storey house and associated parking).

Councillors Tim Bearder and Ian Snowdon left the meeting before the item was considered.

The committee considered application P22/S0332/FUL for a variation of condition 2 (Approved plans) on planning application P21/S1647/FUL to vary the style of the external appearance (two storey side extension, demolition of existing garage and erection of a new two storey house and associated parking).

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 confirmed that planning permission was granted by the planning committee in the previous year for a two-storey extension to the existing dwelling and for a new detached dwelling. The new proposal sought to vary the existing approved plans for the detached dwelling. The only difference for the proposal related to its external appearance. The cladding was proposed for natural vertical timber with slate roofing. Whilst the site was located in an Area of Outstanding Beauty, it was within a built-up settlement. As the site was a post-war site and architecturally unremarkable, planning officers were not satisfied that a different style would cause harm. Subject to conditions, the application was therefore recommended for approval.

Selena Craig, the applicant, spoke in support of the application. The committee asked the speaker whether the material was wood or plastic imitation wood to which the speaker confirmed it would be natural wood. A second question from the speaker sought confirmation on the impact of water impact on the face of the building based on the design. The speaker explained that they had used their architect for the design but could not directly answer the query at the meeting. The speaker was asked by the committee whether the vertical cladding was natural timber or black. The speaker responded that the wood was painted black to fit the style of the village.

Jo Robb, the local ward member, spoke in objection to the application.

A motion moved and seconded, to grant planning permission was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to grant planning permission to application P22/S0332/FUL subject to the following conditions:

1.     Development in accordance with approved plans

2.     Development in accordance with specific materials

3.     Carbon reduction energy efficiency measures to be implemented

4.     Proposed access to be provided prior to occupation and existing access to be stopped up

5.     Vision splays to be provided and maintained

6.     Parking and turning areas to be provided prior to occupation

7.     Landscaping details to be provided in accordance with approved details prior to occupation

8.     Tree protection to be in accordance with approved details

9.     Bird and bat boxes to be installed prior to occupation

10.Surface water drainage to be provided in accordance with approved details prior to occupation

11.Foul water drainage to be provided in accordance with approved details prior to occupation

12.Electric vehicle charging point to be provided prior to occupation

Proposed agricultural barn (as amended by plan received 14 April 2022 to reposition the building further from the protected trees).

Application P22/S0584/FUL was deferred to enable a site visit to take place.

Erection of a new bungalow. As clarified by Agent's emails received on 9 May and 7 June 2022 regarding access.

Councillor Jo Robb left the meeting before the item was considered.

The committee considered application P22/S1434/FUL for the erection of a new bungalow. As clarified by Agent's emails received on 9 May and 7 June 2022 regarding access.

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 explained that the application had been referred to the committee as the applicant was related to Councillor Jane Murphy. The site was located near a care home which was to the west of the site and flats for the elderly to the south of the site. The application site was otherwise surrounded by residential dwellings. The site would include two parking spaces and a private garden area. The site was previously occupied by a repair service for agricultural vehicles and the principle of residential development was considered acceptable. The neighbour impact and design were found to be acceptable, and the parking and garden size were compliant with the standards. There were no objections and subject to conditions, the planning application was recommended for approval.

Alan Thompson, the local ward member, spoke in support of the application.

A motion moved and seconded, to grant planning permission was declared carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED: to grant planning permission to application P22/S1434/FUL subject to the following conditions:

1.     Commencement three years – Full Planning Permission

2.     Approved plans

Pre Commencement Conditions

3.     Surface Water Drainage

4.     Tree Protection

Compliance Conditions

5.     Energy statement verification

6.     Electric Vehicle Charging Point

7.     Provide bird box

8.     Retain hedges (biodiversity)