Agenda item

(Councillor Derek Rawson had declared a personal interest in this application and in accordance with Standing Order 34 he remained in the meeting during its consideration).

It was reported that two further letters of objection had been received raising concerns to matters already covered in the report.  Furthermore, a request had also been received that consideration of the application be deferred until all Members of the Committee had visited the site.  Members attention was drawn to the guidance set out in Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3).  It was reported that the County Engineer had suggested an additional condition requiring further details of the access drive were provided prior to the commencement of development.  In response to comments made by the Consultant Architect regarding the dormers being inconsistent between the plans, it was proposed that an informative be added to any permission to clarify that the dormers as shown on the elevations were the ones approved and not those as shown on the block plan.

Mr N Lyzba, the applicant’s agent, made a statement in support of the application.  He noted that infilling development was causing much concern locally but stated that the application before the Committee met both Government planning guidance and District Council Planning Policies.  He referred to the support of the Council’s Consultant Architect and reminded the Committee that the density of the proposed development was at the lower end of the density scale.  He considered that the design and layout of the scheme was imaginative and referred to the retention of trees and the provision of a wildlife corridor as part of the development.

One of the local Members, present at the meeting referred to the level of local concern regarding the increasing amount of infilling development in the area.  He expressed disappointment that the proposed development and a previous development permitted at 7 Dean Court Road had not included provision for affordable housing, which was required locally.  He supported the comments of his fellow Ward member, as set out in paragraph 4.5 of the report, regarding drainage problems in the locality and made mention of a letter on the Planning file from the Council’s Drainage Engineer regarding flooding.  In this regard he asked whether these concerns were covered by the proposed drainage condition.  He expressed concern at the impact of increased traffic and asked whether a traffic assessment had been undertaken.  Finally, he suggested that separate drainage conditions to address surface water and foul water be attached to any permission and that similar wording be used as detailed at condition 15 on page 39 of the agenda. 

In response, the Officers confirmed that the development site was not within any Flood Zone and the proposed drainage condition covered the views of the Council’s Drainage Engineer.  Furthermore, the drainage problems being experienced in the local area were caused by severe weather conditions and not the capacity of the drainage system.  In respect of the access arrangements, the County Engineer had expressed a preference for the access to be off Dean Court Road.

Other Members of the Committee made the following observations:-

• Support the comments of the Consultant Architect that chimneys or some other feature be incorporated into the design to break the long ridgelines.
• The dormers were not shown consistently on all of the drawings.
• Need for a slab level condition.
• Development sites were being broken up to avoid providing affordable housing.
• Need to ascertain from Thames Water, as a matter of urgency, what plans it had in place to address drainage problems in the local area and that the response be reported back to the Development Control Committee.

By 13 votes to 1, with 1 abstention, it was

RESOLVED

(a)        that authority to approve application CUM/19835 be delegated to the Chief Executive  in consultation with the Chair and/or Vice-Chair of the Development Control Committee and Councillor Derek Rawson subject to:-

(1)     the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure the required financial contribution;

(2)     the conditions set out in the report, together with a slab level condition and separate drainage conditions for surface and foul water, such conditions to  reflect the wording of condition 15 on page 39 of the agenda;

(3)     the design of the proposed dwellings being amended to include chimneys or finial’s to break up the long ridgelines;

(4)     an informative being added to any permission to clarify that the dormers as shown on the elevations were the ones approved and not those as shown on the block plan;

(b)        that authority to refuse application CUM/19835 be delegated to the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) in consultation with the Chair and/or Vice-Chair of the Development Control Committee and CouncillorDerek Rawson should the Section 106 Agreement not be completed within the 13 week period (which ends on 9 February 2007);

The Reason for refusal would be based on the lack of necessary financial contributions towards improving local services and facilities;

(c)        that the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) be requested to write to Thames Water, as a matter of urgency, to ascertain what plans it had in place to address drainage problems in the North Hinksey/Cumnor area and that the response be reported back to the Development Control Committee.