Agenda item

Recommended: to delegate authority to grant planning permission to the head of planning, in consultation with the committee chairman and vice chairman, subject to section 106 agreements and a reserved matters application, and also subject to conditions.

The officer’s report was introduced and described the outline application. The proposal was the same as a previous application considered by the planning committee in September 2011, which had been refused. The committee was advised that an appeal hearing was scheduled for 21 February 2012 regarding that decision and that the committee was being asked to consider the proposal again ahead of the hearing.

The committee was advised that the officer’s report partly relied on the draft Interim Housing Supply Policy (IHSP). However, the IHSP should not be taken into consideration by the committee when reaching their decision as it was to be informal supplementary planning guidance and had not yet been approved. However, the committee should still consider the issues raised by the IHSP: councils are required to maintain a supply of deliverable sites which are sufficient to deliver their housing targets for the next five years (Planning Policy Statement 3 Housing (PPS3)).  If a council has less than five years supply of deliverable housing sites, they should take steps to improve housing supply, including considering planning applications for housing more favourably.  The Vale of White Horse District Council is currently short of the required five-year housing land supply. The IHSP (draft) gives a clear indication of the council’s “direction of travel” and is intended to inform decision making in the short term. Therefore, the officer’s recommendation should not be seen as reliant on the IHSP (draft) as outlined in several paragraphs of the report but, instead, is made due to the current lack of a five year supply of housing land.

Doug Jackson, a Wantage Town Council councillor, spoke in objection to the application. He was concerned that, put together with the proposed development in Newbury Street, there would be 41 new residential units in this area of Wantage, which would put stress on the local infrastructure; he was particularly concerned about potential drainage problems with this site.

Simon Leech also spoke in objection to this application. Notwithstanding the draft IHSP and need for a five year housing land supply, the grounds on which the previous application had been refused still remained. Nothing had changed since the previous presentation to planning committee.

The proposed development was in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) which was afforded the highest level of landscape protection. He felt that there was a good chance that a planning committee refusal would be upheld on appeal. The Grove airfield site would deliver at least 500 houses within the next five years and therefore this site was not required. The Local Plan did not suggest any AONB sites for potential development, and should still be the key document in decision making.

Councillor Charlotte Dickson, ward councillor, spoke in objection to this proposed development. She felt that developers were “taking advantage” of the requirement to provide additional housing and she was concerned about parking, road safety and schools in the area.

The applicant’s agent Peter Lawson (Turley Associates) spoke in favour of the application. He said that there was no evidence that the Grove airfield site would deliver 500 houses in the timeframe required. The situation has changed since the last refusal due to the IHSP (draft) and the reasons which have given rise to it. This site satisfies the selection criteria for the IHSP and he felt that is should be considered favourably as it is not on green belt land. He considered that the proposed development would have no material impact on the AONB.

The committee then went on to debate this application at length. Issues which were debated included the following:

• The Council has proactively solicited submissions from developers in light of the IHSP (draft)
• There is a shortfall of currently identified housing land within the Vale (excluding the Grove airfield site).
• The AONB was last reviewed in 1972
• The Grove airfield site is allocated for development in the Local Plan and the outline planning application is expected to be submitted any day.
• There is already too much street parking in relation to the nearby school.
• Use of the all weather pitch at the sports centre would create a loss of amenity for people who live in the proposed houses
• There is a holding objection on drainage
• There are infrastructure issues associated with this development
• There are concerns about the habitats of bats which a previous report confirmed are in this area
• This proposed development would need 22 conditions attached to it, which demonstrates some of the complexities and controversies associated with it.
• The local school is already oversubscribed

Overall, the committee decided that the situation had not materially changed since the last time the application was refused (see below). The IHSP was a draft document and was only to be guidance. There was a general belief that the Grove airfield site would come on stream within the next two years. The proposed development is in an AONB and there are significant environmental concerns. This area of Wantage is already struggling in terms of infrastructure, including traffic and schools.

On 14 September 2011, the committee had refused this application on the following basis:

The majority of the application site sits outside the Wantage development boundary and the proposal is considered to be unjustified development in the open countryside.  Given the resultant change in the character of the landscape and the scale and siting of the buildings, the proposal is considered to be harmful to the rural character and appearance of the area and would not preserve or enhance the natural beauty of the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  As such the proposal is contrary to Policies DC1, GS2, H13 and NE6 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2011.

A motion, moved and seconded, to grant planning permission in accordance with the officer’s recommendation, on being put, was declared lost. (For 4; Against 11; Abstentions 0).

A motion, moved and seconded, to refuse the outline planning permission for this site, for the reasons described above, on being put, was declared carried.

RESOLVED (For 12; Against 3; Abstentions 0)

To refuse outline planning permission for this site for the following reasons:

The majority of the application site sits outside the Wantage development boundary and the proposal is considered to be unjustified development in the open countryside. Given the resultant change in the character of the landscape and the scale and siting of the buildings, the proposal is considered to be harmful to the rural character and appearance of the area and would not preserve or enhance the natural beauty of the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. As such the proposal is contrary to Policies DC1, GS2, H13 and NE6 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2011.