Agenda item

P17/V0441/O - 6-8 Cumnor Road, Boars Hill, Oxford

Demolition of existing 2-storey building and garage and erection of new building consisting of seven apartments and related works.  Associated change of use of site from part A1 retail/part C3 residential to entirely C3 residential.

Minutes:

The officer presented the report and addendum on application P17/V0441/O to demolish the existing two-storey building and garage and to erect a new building consisting of seven apartments and related work; to include an associated change of use of the site from part A1 retail/part C3 residential to entirely C3 residential at 6-8 Cumnor Road, Boars Hill, Oxford

 

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 this meeting.

 

The addendum report included an additional letter of objection having been received and an amendment to the committee report in paragraph 5.9 to include the word “extended” – “point closest to 10 Cumnor Road and extended some 0.35m closest to 4 Cumnor Road.”

 

Vivien Matthews, a local resident, spoke objecting to the application. Her concerns included the following:

·         The proposal does nothing to address the reasons for the previous refusal

·         The footprint of the building has increased in relation to the previously refused scheme;

·         The site would dwarf the neighbouring bungalows and be visible from the main road;

·         Although the number of flats has decreased, the number of bedrooms has increased from 10 to 14, meaning a 40% increase on occupancy;

·         Parking provision is insufficient and the spaces are smaller than highways’ specification; and

·         Harmful impact to the amenity to 1 The Willows and 12 Cumnor Road especially.

 

Adrian James, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application. His points included the following:

·         There are no objections from statutory consultees;

·         The relation between the proposed development and number 10 Cumnor Road will be improved from the previously refused application as it will now be a further 10m away;

·         The parish council have withdrawn their objection; and

·         The commercial use of the current site sees 150 traffic movements a day, therefore changing the site to residential will improve the highways issues, including dedicated parking provision.

 

Questions of clarification were put to the agent and he responded as follows:

·         The closed bin store provision would be an improvement on the current industrial bin storage on site, the arrangement of which can be further discussed at the reserved matters stage;

·         The parking spaces can easily be altered to accommodate a greater width as per highways recommendations;

·         Highways have no objection to the width of the access;

·         The parking allocated at the front of the site is subject to a pending agreement with highways to rationalise ownership, but it will be wholly on site and privately allocated.

 

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate.  The committee did not agree that the proposal would fit in with the street scene or that the concerns raised had been sufficiently addressed by virtue of its scale, bulk, massing, design and location.

 

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

 

RESOLVED: to refuse planning permission for application P17/V0441/O, for the following reason:

 

Having regard to the scale, bulk, massing, design and location of the building, the proposal will have a materially harmful impact on the character of the area and on the amenity of the occupants of 10 Cumnor Road. This is contrary to core policy 37 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1, saved policy DC9 of the Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2011 and advice within the Vale of White Horse Design Guide 2015 and the National Planning Policy Framework. This harm outweighs the benefits of the proposal and no material considerations exist to warrant a departure from the Development Plan.

 

Supporting documents: