Agenda and minutes

To receive any announcements from the chairman, and general housekeeping matters.

None.

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.

None.

To receive an up date of housing figures relating to commitments for major housing schemes to address the council’s housing land shortfall.

The committee noted the latest cumulative housing figures.

To record the attendance of substitute members, if any, who have been authorised to attend in accordance with the provisions of standing order 17(1), with notification having been given to the proper officer before the start of the meeting and to receive apologies for absence.

Councillors Anthony Hayward, Sue Marchant, Helen Pighills and Catherine Webber had all sent their apologies for absence.  Councillors John Amys and Richard Webber attended as substitutes for Councillors Anthony Hayward and Helen Pighills respectively.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the minutes of the committee meeting held on 19 June 2013 and 10 July 2013 (circulated separately). 

Minutes from the meetings on 19 June 2013 and 10 July 2013 were approved and it was agreed that the chairman sign them.

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

There were no disclosable pecuniary interests.

Councillors declared the following interests:

Any statements and/or petitions from members of the public under standing order 33, relating to planning applications, will be made or presented at the meeting.

A list of public speakers wishing to speak to planning applications was tabled at the meeting.

Any statements and/or petitions from the public under standing order 32 will be made or presented at the meeting.

None.

To consider any materials submitted prior to the meeting of the Committee.

Any materials submitted will be on display prior to the meeting.

The committee viewed the materials samples provided for the site at Nalder Estate, East Challow (P12/V1261/FUL), and agreed the following materials were acceptable:-

Bricks

IbstockThakenham Red Multi

IbstockLaybrook Muti Orange Stock

Ibstock Capital Multi Stock

Ibstcok Berkshire Orange Stock

Natural Stone as sample on site

Tiles

Marley plain concrete tiles in Smooth Brown, Natural Red, Moss Red and Dark Red

Imerys Natural Red Clay Tile for tile hanging

The officer presented the report on an application to construct a class B8 home deliveries centre with vehicle maintenance building, gatehouse, vehicle fuelling and washing facilities, van and staff parking, service yard, revised access from the A4103, emergency access from Featherbed Lane, landscaping and associated infrastructure. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Updates from the report

·       An on-site archaeological study was stated as having commenced, this was not the case however the County Council were content to use conditions.

·       The power to be generated from photovoltaic cells had not been confirmed.

·       The S106 agreement with Oxfordshire County Council was likely to be signed shortly.

Ms J Palmer, representing Infinium UK, spoke objecting to the application. The points she raised included:

·           the adverse impact of noise, particularly from vehicle reversing beepers, from the loading areas on the business’s company headquarters;

·           the adverse impact on road safety of the increased traffic moving on and around the site, and onto and off the A4130.

Mr P Edwards, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application. The points he raised included:

·       this was the first phase of a scheme which had consent for distribution and industrial use;

·       the centre would create less traffic than the previously permitted scheme;

·       there would be additional signage on the A4130;

·       the noise assessment had taken Infinium into account;

·       vehicle reversing beepers would be turned off on-site;

·       deliveries to the centre would generally be between 9pm and 6am.

Councillor Bill Jones, one of the ward councillors, spoke about the application. The points he raised included the need for better access for emergency vehicles and to the A4130; and that this would be a dominant building in the landscape.

The committee considered this application, with advice from officers where appropriate; the discussion covered the following points:

·           Highways, traffic generation, and road safety;

·           Employment and economic benefit;

·           The impact of the building, and the potential impact of signs on the building.

A vote to confirm the officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission with additional conditions to require an agreed travel plan, encourage the use of major not minor roads in the area, and to restrict the use of the vehicle facilities to the distribution centre operator was carried.

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote):

That following a S278 and S106 agreement with the County Council, planning permission for application P13/V1139/FUL be granted, subject to the following conditions:

1.    Commencement three years - full planning permission.

2.    Approved plans.

3.    CN12 - Access for archaeological investigation. (Full).

4.    LS2[I] - Landscaping scheme (implement) (Full).

5.    Drainage – SUDS scheme – surface water and sewage – prior to occupation.

6.    Archaeology – watching brief, unless otherwise agreed in writing.

7.    Materials – submission.

8.    Contamination clause – where further pollution is discovered.

9.    Contamination – water courses.

10.Agreed travel plan.

11.Use of the vehicle maintenance building, vehicle fuelling and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 359.

The officer presented the report on an application to refurbish the existing building into eight one-bedroom apartments and build six mews terrace houses. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

The planning officer confirmed that the school would not close and development would not start until the school had relocated.

Mr J Harding, a local resident, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·           residential amenity would be adversely affected by the three-storey town houses which would be overbearing and cramped on the site;

·           there was insufficient parking on site and no off-site parking on the already overcrowded surrounding streets.

Mr K Dijksman, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application. His speech included the following:

·           the plans had planning’s and conservation’s approval;

·           Oxfordshire County Council highways considered that office use would generate more traffic than housing;

·           the distances between buildings exceeded the minimum standards necessary to prevent overlooking.

Councillor Jim Halliday, one of the ward councillors, spoke              objecting to the application. The points he raised included the following:

·           the development was too large and was cramped;

·           the additional cars would add to the traffic problems in the area and there was already a shortage of parking spaces;

·           the conversion of the main building was acceptable, the additional housing was tolerable, but the lack of parking provision was not tolerable.

The committee considered this application, with advice from officers where appropriate; the discussion covered the following points:

·           there were no reasons on planning grounds to refuse this application;

·           the parking for this application met the required standards and Highways had not objected;

·           the local authorities needed to consider the cumulative impact of traffic growth in the area.

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote):

to authorise the head of planning in consultation with the committee chairman and vice-chairman to grant planning permission for application P13/V0679/FUL to the head of planning subject to:

i. A S106 agreement with both the County Council and District Council in order to secure contributions towards local infrastructure and to secure the affordable housing.

and

ii: Conditions as follows:

1.    Commencement three years.

2.    Approved plans.

3.    Sample materials to be agreed.

4.    Access, parking and turning in accordance with plan.

5.    Bicycle parking as per approved plans.

6.    No drainage to highway.

7.    Submission of landscaping scheme.

8.    Implementation of landscaping scheme.

9.    Drainage details (surface and foul) to be agreed.

10.Sustainable drainage scheme to be agreed.

11.Boundary details to be agreed.

12.Refuse storage to be agreed.

13.Construction traffic management plan to be agreed.

14.Slab levels to be agreed.

15.Code Level 4 to be achieved in the new units.

16.Tree protection to be agreed.

17.Archaeological investigation to be agreed.

18.Scheme of archaeological mitigation to be agreed

19.Restriction on use of roof as balcony.

20.Second floor rear facing mews house windows to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 360.

The officer presented the report on an application to demolish the existing bungalow and build one detached dwelling and a pair of semi-detached dwellings with associated parking, turning, landscaping and access. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Ms J Gibson, from Blewbury Parish Council, spoke objecting to the application. The parish council’s concerns included overdevelopment, the unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties, and that the two-storey development was out of character.

Ms P Newman, representing a local resident, spoke objecting to the application. Her concerns included the new garage being too close to the bedroom window of Mountain Ash and the new houses being too close to the neighbouring gardens, overbearing and impacted on the outlook and openness of the gardens.

Mr M Pettit, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application. He explained that he considered the design acceptable in terms of scale, design and the impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties.

Councillor Janet Shelley, one of the ward councillors, spoke objecting to the application. Her concerns included the overall effect being overbearing and harmful to the amenity of the neighbours and the character of the area.

The committee considered this application, with advice from officers where appropriate; the discussion covered the following points:

·       the footprint of the buildings was not considered to be so different from that in the extant permission as to warrant refusal;

·       however the orientation of the rooms in this application was considered to be more detrimental to the amenity of the neighbours as it allowed for more direct overlooking of their properties;

·       while the distances between the buildings was above the minimum required in policy, the internal layout of the proposed dwelling to the rear of the site created the potential for overlooking into the neighbouring dwelling, Mountain Ash.

A vote to confirm the officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission was declared a tie. The chairman’s motion to defer the decision to allow officers to discuss the committee’s concerns with the applicant was carried.

RESOLVED:

To defer a decision on application P13/V1000/FUL until officers had discussed with the applicants how to address the committee’s concerns of overlooking into Mountain Ash from the bedroom windows of the proposed dwelling at the rear of the site.

The officer presented the report on an application to build a new dwelling on land to the east of Manor Lodge. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Mr M Pearce, from Longworth Parish Council, spoke in support of the application. The parish supported appropriate controlled developed. His comments included:

·       the house would not be overly visible behind the hedge;

·       it would be an appropriate development in this part of the village;

·       the capital raised would help secure the future of the Manor.

Ms E Walton, the applicant, and Mr Fowler, the architect, spoke in favour of the application. Their comments included:

·       this proposal formed an essential part of raising funds to renovate the Manor;

·       the house was within the village, within the Manor’s garden, and would not be detrimental to the characteristic loose-knit groups of houses in this part of the village.

Councillor Anthony Hayward, one of the ward councillors, sent a written statement in support of the application which was read out by Councillor Roger Cox. He was of the view that the development was not detrimental to the character of the area and was supported by the parish council.

The committee considered this application, with advice from officers where appropriate; the discussion covered the following points:

·       the impact of this development on the loose-knit semi-rural nature of this part of the conservation area;

·       the relevant Local Plan policies had been considered sound in appeal decisions;

·       whether the profit from development was guaranteed to be used for the renovation of the Manor. The committee noted that the use of funds from a new development to preserve a listed building was a material consideration;

·       that the proposed house did not detract from the character of the area;

·       that if the committee were minded to grant permission, the setting of detailed conditions should be delegated to the Head of Planning and consideration as to whether a Section 106 agreement was appropriate should also be delegated; and

·       there must be a condition tying the use of the funds raised from the development to the renovation of the Manor.

A vote to confirm the officer’s recommendation to refuse planning permission was lost.

A motion to grant planning permission, subject to the Head of Planning setting appropriate conditions, including one ensuring the funds raised from the development were used to renovate the Manor, and subject a Section 106 agreement if appropriate, was carried on being put to the vote.

RESOLVED (for 9; against 3)

to authorise the Head of Planning to grant planning permission for application P13/V1304/FUL, with appropriate conditions, including one ensuring the funds raised from the development were used to renovate the Manor, and subject a Section 106 agreement if appropriate.

The officer presented the report on an application to extend the property and subdivide it to create an additional dwelling. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Councillor Roger Cox, one of the ward councillors, spoke in support of the application.

The committee considered this application.

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote)

to grant planning permission for application P13/V0605/FUL subject to the following conditions:

1. TL1 - Time limit - full application.

2. List of approved plans.

3. RE1 - Matching materials.

4. Prior to the use or occupation of the new development, the car parking spaces  shown on approved drawing number A1/A12922/112 rev.B shall be constructed and  surfaced. The parking spaces shall be constructed to prevent surface water discharging onto the highway. Thereafter, the parking spaces shall be kept permanently free of any obstruction to such use.

5. HY19 - No drainage to highway.

6. Notwithstanding any details shown on the approved drawings, the sites internal and external boundaries shall be enclosed in accordance with a detailed scheme and programme of implementation which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The programme shall ensure that the approved boundary treatments for each dwelling are completed prior to the occupation of that dwelling, and the approved boundary treatments for the whole site are completed prior to the occupation of the last dwelling.

7. No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include hard surfacing materials, schedules of new trees and shrubs to be planted (noting species, plant sizes and numbers/densities), the identification of the existing trees and shrubs on the site to be retained (noting species, location and spread), any earth moving operations and finished levels/contours, and an implementation programme.

8. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the details and programme approved under Condition 7 above. Thereafter, the landscaped areas shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or shrubs which die or become seriously damaged or diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of a similar size and species to those originally planted.

The officer presented the report on an application to construct a single front extension, a two storey side extension, a two storey rear extension and internal alterations. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Mr M Golding, the applicant, spoke in favour of the application. His comments included confirming the planned porch extension filled in the corners of the porch and did not extend across the frontage.

Councillor Eric Batts, one of the ward councillors, spoke about the application and the neighbour’s concerns over the potential loss of the cotoneaster tree.

The committee considered this application and noted that the tree under discussion was not subject to a tree preservation order.

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote)

to grant planning permission for application P13/V1153/HH with conditions:

1.    TL1 – Time limit three years.

2.    RE1 – Matching materials.

3.    Approved plans.

The officer presented the report on an application for a certificate of lawful development to demolish the exiting rear conservatory and replace with a single storey lean-to extension. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

The committee considered this application.

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote)

to grant a certificate of lawful use or development for application P13/V1243/LDP with the following:

1. The proposed development falls within Class A of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 ("the Order") and would be lawful development by reference to Section 58 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Article 3 of the Order.

2. No enforcement action may be taken in respect of the proposed operations.

The officer presented the report on an application to alter the ground floor extension to the kitchen. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Councillor Eric Batts, one of the ward councillors, spoke about the application.

The committee considered this application.

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote)

to grant planning permission for application P13/V1372/HH with conditions:

1.    TL1 – Time limit three years.

2.    RE1 – Matching materials.

3.    Approved plans.

4.    HY8[l] car parking spaces (to be detailed).

The officer presented the report on an application for a single storey front extension. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and this site’s planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which forms part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Mr C Lewis, the applicant, spoke in favour of the application. He said he had spoken with his neighbour to address their concerns over parking.

The committee considered this application.

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote)

to grant planning permission for application P13/V1306/HH with conditions:

1.    TL1 – Time limit three years.

2.    RE1 – Matching materials.

Approved plans.