Agenda and minutes

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

The vice-chairman, in the chair, announced that there had been changes to the committee’s membership.  Councillor Aidan Melville had been replaced by Councillor Catherine Webber.  The chairman asked that the committee’s thanks were passed on to Councillor Melville for his work on the committee. 

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 Robert Sharp (Chairman), Helen Pighills and Catherine Webber had all sent their apologies for absence.  Councillors Gervase Duffield and Ron Mansfield attended as substitutes for Councillors Robert Sharp and Catherine Webber respectively. 

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

The committee noted that the minutes of its meeting held on 19 June 2013 would be available at the next committee meeting. 

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.

Tabled at the meeting was a list of public speakers wishing to speak to planning applications. 

The chairman reported that the King’s Avenue and Chancel Way Residents’ Group wish to present a petition objecting to the application at King’s Field, Marcham.  They would do so when speaking to the application later in 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.

None

Erection of 43 dwellings with associated means of access, car parking, new footpath links, amenity space and landscaping (as amended by Drawing Nos: 3947_SK and 13025-T03 Revision B accompanying agent's letter of 23 May 2013 and email of 13 June 2013 and clarified by Drawing C13025-C001 accompanying agent's email of 25 June 2013).

Recommendation: to delegate the authority to grant outline planning permission  to the head of planning, in consultation with the committee chairman and vice-chairman, subject to S106 agreements and conditions

If the required section 106 agreements are not completed, and planning permission cannot be granted by the determination deadline of 24 September 2013, it is recommended that authority to refuse planning permission is delegated to the head of planning in consultation with the chairman and vice-chairman.

The officer presented the report on an outline application for 43 dwellings on King’s Field to the north of the built-up area of Marcham village.  The report set out the proposal, representations received following consultation, the policy position and planning guidance, and the site’s planning history. 

Updates to the report

The planning officer reported that since the publication of the report, the council had received a further six letters objecting to the application.  He also corrected his report by advising that Marcham only had one public house and that there had been two previous planning applications in 1978 to develop the site, both of which the planning inspector had rejected on appeal against the council’s decisions.  However, the planning officer still recommended the committee delegated authority to approve the application subject to conditions and a section 106 agreement but if the agreement was not completed by 24 September 2013, then the application should be refused. 

Public speaking

The chairman invited the public who had registered to speak to this application to address the committee. 

David Walton spoke on behalf of Marcham Parish Council objecting to the application.  His concerns included:

·        the application was on a site on the edge of the village and the proposal was disproportionate to the size of the village

·        the village had the equal lowest number of amenities of all the ‘large villages’ in the Vale of White Horse district and therefore this development was not in a sustainable location.  New residents were likely to drive to Abingdon to access facilities 

·        the site was on higher ground, presenting a greater risk of flooding to other areas in the village as the drainage system and sewerage system was already overloaded

·        there were likely to be more children from the development than estimated in the report and the applicant should pay for an additional classroom at the local primary school

Lorraine Young of the King’s Avenue and Chancel Way Residents’ Group objected to the application and presented a petition containing 89 signatures on behalf of the group.  Her concerns included:

·        the development was on greenfield land and would result in the loss of agricultural land and trees

·        the location of the site would mean new residents were likely to use their cars adding traffic to the village

·        the village could not sustain any more development

·        the cumulative effect of housing developments at Marcham was having a detrimental impact on the village’s services and facilities, including the school

·        there were poor sight lines from the access road

·        the development was contrary to many local plan policies

·        it would cause drainage problems in the village

·        the development would not benefit the village

Mike Robinson, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application.  He believed:

·        Marcham was a sustainable location for housing development with good facilities

·        the land was of poor agricultural quality and therefore was suitable for development

·        the design fitted in with the character of the area

·        the site was in single ownership and could be delivered quickly  ...  view the full minutes text for item 345.

Demolition of existing dwelling.  Erection of 11x2 bed flats and 1x1 bed flat in three separate two and three storey buildings.  Alterations and extension to existing access, 20 car-parking spaces, cycle parking, bin storage and landscaping.

Recommendation: to grant planning permission, subject to conditions.

The officer presented the report on an application for the demolition of one dwelling and its replacement with 12 flats in three buildings at 66 Cumnor Hill, Oxford.  The report set out the proposal, representations received following consultation, the policy position and planning guidance, and the site’s planning history. 

Updates to the report

The planning officer reported that since the publication of the report, the council had received a further three letters objecting to the application.  Following one of the late submissions, the planning officer removed reference in his report to the planning inspector’s decision in 2010 having regard to the residential design guide. He also reported that the developer had agreed to contribute a further £10,000 to the county council for transport measures. 

However, the planning officer still recommended the committee to delegate authority to approve the application subject to conditions and a section 106 agreement, but if the agreement was not completed by the target set in the planning performance agreement, then the application should be refused. 

Public speaking

The chairman invited the public who had registered to speak to this application to address the committee. 

Brian Stopps spoke on behalf of Cumnor Parish Council objecting to the application.  His concerns included:

·       the proposed density was excessive for such a small site and the development would be out of character with the surrounding area

·       the developers had not dealt with surface water drainage

·       there needed to be a hydro-geological survey of the whole Cumnor Hill area

·       too much ground disturbance would cause problems for others

Jerry Avery spoke in objection to the application.  His concerns included:

·       the proposed density was high for this area 

·       there was a danger that the construction would disturb ground conditions and the developers must guarantee to repair any damage to neighbouring properties

·       the cumulative effect of this and other developments adversely affected the area

·       there would be a loss of amenity and loss of light suffered by the neighbouring property

Simon Sharp, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application.  He believed:

·       the proposed density of the development was appropriate for the site

·       there was a need for two-bedroom accommodation in the area

·       the site was in a sustainable location

·       permeable surfaces would be used to prevent excessive water run-off

·       the foundations would be carefully designed to stop disturbance to other properties

·       the majority of the planting would be retained to provide good screening

·       the design fitted in with the area

·       no habitable windows faced the neighbouring property at no 64 Cumnor Hill

Councillor Dudley Hoddinott, one of the local ward councillors, raised concerns about the application.  His points included:

·       there would be overshadowing of the neighbouring property no 64 Cumnor Hill

·       block A should be moved further away from no 64

·       the proposed development would have an adverse impact on flooding locally and would likely affect the underground water flow

·       the car parking areas should be screened

Committee debate

The committee considered this application, with advice from officers where  ...  view the full minutes text for item 346.

Outline planning application for a residential development comprising up to 65 dwellings with associated highway works, landscaping and infrastructure improvements.

Recommendation: to delegate the authority to grant outline planning permission to the head of planning, in consultation with the committee chairman and vice-chairman, subject to S106 agreements and conditions

The officer presented the report on an outline application for 65 dwellings on land south of Grove Road, Harwell.  The report set out the proposal, representations received following consultation, the policy position and planning guidance, and the site’s planning history. 

Updates to the report

The planning officer reported that since the publication of the report, the drainage engineer had removed his holding objection to the application, subject to conditions.  He also reported that the developer had agreed to contributions towards public transport, the Police, and upgrading facilities for the village. 

The planning officer recommended the committee to delegate authority to approve the application subject to conditions and a section 106 agreement.  He also recommended consulting the local members before approving the application. 

Public speaking

The chairman invited the public who had registered to speak to this application to address the committee. 

David Marsh spoke on behalf of Harwell Parish Council speaking in support of the application.  He believed that:

• the developer had carried out a good consultation, taking into account local people’s suggestions
• the parish council supported new housing in the village
• the developer had agreed to contribute to the renovation works at the village hall 

Julia Dionian spoke in objection to the application.  Her concerns included:

• the traffic speeding along Grove Road presented a danger to new residents at this site
• traffic calming was needed at the village entrance on Grove Road, together with a footpath to the village shops

Steven Neal, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application.  He believed:

• local people supported the application as they had been engaged through to the outline application stage
• the proposal included bungalows, it was a high quality design, and would result in a significant contribution to the village hall renovation works

Philip Wrigley spoke in favour of the application.  He believed:

• the village needed new housing
• the village hall needed renovating and he welcomed the developer’s contribution towards the renovation works

Councillor Margaret Turner, one of the local ward councillors, supported the application and the comments of the parish council.  Although she had highway safety concerns about Grove Road there was an alternative pedestrian access through Westfield.  Affordable housing would also benefit the village. 

Committee debate

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

• the developer and parish council were praised for working together to get the best out of the proposed development
• new housing and affordable housing were welcome in the village
• the officers should discuss with the applicants and the county council the need for additional traffic calming measures at the entrance to the village on Grove Road before the detailed application stage
• there was an alternative pedestrian access to the village centre, the primary school and other facilities through Westfield
• there should be an informative attached to the permission stating that affordable housing should be distributed through the site
• the head of planning should also consult local members before determining the application

RESOLVED  ...  view the full minutes text for item 347.

Erection of a summer house building in the rear garden to be used by the school for meetings and children from the church.

Recommendation: to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

The officer presented the report on an application for a summer house building on land at Radley School House, Church Road, Radley.  The report set out the proposal, representations received following consultation, the policy position and planning guidance, and the site’s planning history. 

Updates from the report

• There was sufficient information regarding potential noise disturbance to determine the application

Councillor Bob Johnston, the local ward councillor, supported the application. 

The committee considered this application. 

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote)

to approve application P13/V1007/FUL subject to the following conditions:

1 : Approved plans

2 : MC3 - Materials in accordance with the application (Full)

3 : TL1 - Time limit - Full Application (Full)

Single storey rear extension.

Recommendation: to grant planning permission, subject to conditions.

The officer presented the report on an application for a single storey rear extension at 35 Stonhouse Crescent, Radley.  The report set out the proposal, representations received following consultation, the policy position and planning guidance, and the site’s planning history. 

John Williams, the applicant, spoke in favour of the application.  He reported that he had designed the extension to minimise the impact on neighbouring properties. 

Councillor Bob Johnston, the local ward councillor, supported the application. 

The committee considered this application. 

RESOLVED (unanimous by vote)

to approve application P13/V1057/HH subject to the following conditions:

1 : TL1 - Time limit - Full Application (Full)

2 : RE1 - Matching Materials (Full)

3 : Approved plans

None