Agenda and minutes

To note the Council has appointed the committee’s Chairman and Vice-Chairman. 

The committee noted that the Council had appointed Councillors Robert Sharp and John Morgan the committee’s Chairman and Vice-Chairman respectively for the 2011/12 municipal year. 

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.

Apologies were received from Councillors Roger Cox and Bob Johnston.  Councillor Judy Roberts was in attendance as Councillor Bob Johnston’s substitute.

To receive any declarations of personal or personal and prejudicial interests in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting. 

The following interests were declared:

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 announcements from the chairman.

None

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.

The committee noted the list of public speakers. 

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.

None

Councillor Robert Sharp declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application and in accordance with Standing Order 34, he left the room during its consideration.  Vice Chairman, John Morgan took the chair.

The committee received and considered an application for the erection of an end of terrace four bedroom dwelling. It was noted that the parish council objected. The committee considered the officer’s report and concluded that the application was acceptable, subject to the proposed conditions.

RESOLVED (13 votes in favour to nil against)

To grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

1. TL1 – Time Limit

2. MC2 – Materials to be approved

3. RE4 – PD Restriction on single dwelling- extensions

4. RE28 – Obscured glazing- window in side elevation.

5. HY7 – Car Parking (proposed house)

6. HY9 – Car Parking Area (details not shown) (existing house)

7. MC25 – Drainage Details

The committee received and considered an application to demolish an existing single storey garage and to erect a link detached one and a half storey rear extension.

Mr Mark Chattoe made a statement to the committee on behalf of the Parish Council, objecting to the application, raising concerns regarding the impact on the conservation area, the bulk and form of the extension and the loss of light to the neighbouring property.

Lorraine Clayton made a statement to the committee objecting to the application. She advised that the proposal would over dominate her neighbouring property and would have an impact on the amount of light reaching her kitchen/dining area.

Nick Worrledge made a statement to the committee on behalf of the applicant.  He explained the design approach and advised of his belief that the form and appearance of the extension would be acceptable in its context.

One member commented that the design and materials were appropriate and did not consider the proposal harmful. He suggested an additional slab level condition.

Other members agreed with this view.

RESOLVED (by 13 votes in favour to 1 against)

(a)       To grant planning permission in respect of application 11/00140/FUL subject to the following conditions:

1 TL1 – time limit

2 MC2 – materials

3 Prior to the commencement of any works full details of any flues, vents, pipes and service boxes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4 CN9 Submission of joinery works

5 Prior to the commencement of any works full details of the glazed link, including details of the link’s junction with the listed building, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

6 RE24 Rooflight sill height (extension)

7 Notwithstanding any details on the approved plans the “steps to garden” shown within the garage shall be omitted and shall not be installed.

8 RE11 Retain garage accommodations

9 The parking area in front of the garage shall be constructed to prevent surface water discharging onto the highway and shall be kept permanently free of any obstruction to its use as a parking area.

10. An additional condition requiring the prior approval of slab level. 

(b)       To grant listed building consent in respect of application 11/00141/LBC subject to the following conditions:

1 TL4 – time limit

2 MC2 – materials

3 Prior to the commencement of works, full details of any flues vents, pipes and service boxes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4 CN9 – submission of joinery details

5 Prior to the commencement of any works, full details of the glazed link, including details of the link’s junction with the listed building, shall be submitted to and approved in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The committee considered an application for the erection of 8 residential units, including access roads, car ports/garaging, ancillary drainage and garden shed with cycle storage to each unit.

Brian Forster made a statement to the committee on behalf of the parish council, objecting to the application. He raised concerns regarding highway safety and highlighted the need for a pedestrian crossing.

Stuart Roberts made a statement on behalf of the applicant. He contended that that the Vale could not required a pedestrian crossing in the area, and that the County Council’s engineer had no objections. He highlighted the need for affordable housing in the area and agreed with the officer’s recommendation.

Councillor Melinda Tilley spoke as ward member, and declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the item, as the site was opposite her property. She commented that she had no objections to the scheme in principle, however agreed that a pedestrian crossing was required on Oxford Road at this point. Councillor Tilley left the meeting room for the debate and voting on this item.

One member commented that the application could not be refused on highways grounds, following the County Engineer’s comments. He found the design of the scheme acceptable and commended the existing site.

Other members commented that whilst they sympathised with the requests for a pedestrian crossing, the absence of one was not a reason to refuse planning permission.

RESOLVED (By 13 votes in favour to 1 against)

That authority to grant planning permission is delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the chairman of the committee, subject to the completion of a legal agreement to ensure the development remains affordable for local people in perpetuity, and subject to the following conditions:

1 TL1 – time limit

2 MC2 – materials

3 RE2 – restriction on extensions and alterations to dwellings

4 RE11 – garage / carport accommodation

5 Prior to the first use or occupation of the new development, the

cycle parking, bin store, pedestrian access, vehicle parking and

turning spaces shall be constructed and provided in accordance

with the details shown on approved drawing number 1308-2 rev A.

The parking and turning areas shall be constructed to prevent

surface water discharging onto the highway. Thereafter, the cycle

and vehicle parking, bin stores and turning areas shall be kept

permanently free of any obstruction to such use.

6 RE7 – boundary details in accordance with specified plan

7 LS1 – landscaping (submission)

8 LS2 – landscaping (implementation)

9 LS4 – tree protection

Councillor Anthony Hayward had declared a personal and prejudicial interest and left the meeting room whilst this item was considered.

The committee considered an application for the erection of a single storey side extension to form an en-suite bedroom.

The committee considered the application to be acceptable.

RESOLVED (13 votes in favour to nil against)

To grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

1. TL1 – Time limit – full application.

2. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

extension shall be Ibstock Roman red blend bricks, slate tiles and Weber

041 Cream render.

The committee considered an application for an extension to the rear of the museum, including some demolition and alterations. It was noted that there were no objections from Wantage Town Council.

One member commented that the plans were pleasing and other members agreed.

RESOLVED (by 14 votes in favour to nil against)

(a)       To grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

1. TL1 – Time limit

2. MC2 – Material samples (including boundary wall)

3. CN9 – Details of all external joinery and fenestration (including rooflights)

4. CN8 – Details of eaves

5. CN8 – Details of glazed link

6. Archaeological watching brief to be submitted

(b)       That listed building consent is granted subject to the following conditions:

1. TL4 – Time Limit

2. MC2 – Material samples

3. CN3 – Schedule of works

4. CN9 - Details of all external joinery and fenestration (including rooflights)

5. CN8 – Details of eaves

6. CN8 – Details of glazed link

The committee considered an application for an extension to the first floor to provide an en-suite bathroom for disabled use.  The committee noted that Abingdon Town Council objected to the application.

The committee considered the application acceptable subject to the proposed conditions.

RESOLVED (by 13 votes in favour to nil against)

To grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

1 TL1 – Time limit

2 RE1 – Matching materials

Councillor Robert Sharp declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application and in accordance with Standing Order 34, he left the room during its consideration.  Vice Chairman, John Morgan took the chair.

The committee considered an application for the erection of a new country house with outbuildings and staff accommodation.

Hilary Deakin made a statement to the committee on behalf of Baulking parish meeting.  She objected to the scale of the proposed development and commented that it was unsympathetic to its surroundings.  She further commented that the design was not groundbreaking.

Mr Matthews made a statement objecting to the application. He commented that the development was unsympathetic, dominating and intrusive.  He agreed that the design was not groundbreaking.

Mr Terry Gashe made a statement to the committee on behalf of the applicant.  He advised that this design was innovative and outstanding.

Councillor Yvonne Constance, ward member, made a statement commenting that this application was rare and she considered that the committee should determine it.  One member commented that the application was not sustainable and inappropriate.  Other members agreed and were supportive of the officer’s recommendation.  One member commented that the design did not meet the requirements of planning policy statement 7, in that it was not groundbreaking or exceptional. 

RESOLVED (by 13 votes in favour to nil against)

To refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

1. The proposed dwelling by reason of its location within the open countryside

with no functional or social need for such a rural location represents an

unsustainable and inappropriate form of development that undermines the

fundamental principle that the countryside should be protected for its own

sake. Furthermore, the proposal constitutes an unacceptable form of

development that is harmful to the Lowland Vale and the setting of the village

conservation area. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies GS2, H13, HE1

and NE9 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Local Plan.

2. It is not considered that the design and nature of the proposed dwelling

reaches the exceptional standards to be truly outstanding or ground breaking

required to justify a departure from the general policies of restraint for new

dwellings in the open countryside. The proposal, therefore, cannot be justified

under paragraph 11 of PPS7 'Sustainable Development in Rural Areas', and so

is contrary to Policy GS2 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Local Plan.

3. It has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning

Authority that the proposed development can be accommodated on the site

without detriment to protected species. Therefore, the development is contrary

to Policy NE4 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Local Plan and to the advice in PPS9, “Biodiversity and Geological Conservation. 

The committee considered an application for the installation of plant, including refrigeration and air conditioning units, with a fence compound.  The committee considered that the conditions addressed any concerns.

RESOLVED (by 13 votes in favour to nil against)

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. The development to which this permission relates shall be begun within a

period of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town &

Country Planning Act, 1990.

2. Prior to the first use or occupation of the retail supermarket, the plant

equipment shall be enclosed with timber fencing in accordance with the

submitted and approved details and, thereafter, the fence enclosure shall be

retained and maintained for the duration of the supermarket use of the site.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and residential amenity (Policies

DC1 and DC9 of the adopted Local Plan)

The committee considered an application to demolish an existing building and erect a new visitors’ centre with associated external works and parking.

Mr Basil Crowley made a statement on behalf of the parish council.  He expressed disappointment that the highways officer had objected to the proposals.  He did not agree with the officer’s recommendation and requested that the committee support the application.

Mrs Marguerite Osborn made a statement to the committee objecting to the development.  She commented that the site was already of great use and value, and objected to the principle of developing a large car park in what was a tranquil place. She raised concerns regarding traffic and the impact on wildlife.

Mr Harry Barton made a statement to the committee in support of the application.  He commented that the site was well visited and beautiful.  However the existing building was the target of anti social behaviour and at present was boarded up.  He commented that the concerns regarding traffic could be addressed.

One member commented that he was concerned about access to the site, and that the current arrangements were not sustainable.  Other members agreed that access was a concern.  One member commented that he was concerned that the access was dangerous.  However felt that negotiations with the highways officers could provide a solution.

It was proposed by Councillor Anthony Hayward and seconded by Councillor Jenny Hannaby and

RESOLVED (By 13 votes in favour to nil against)

That the decision to grant planning permission be delegated to the head of planning, subject to the resolution of access issues.

None