Any statements and/or petitions from the public under Standing Order 32 will be made or presented at the meeting.
Minutes:
The Committee was advised that two members of the public, Mr Derek Rawson and Mr John Rees had each given notice that they wished to make a statement at the meeting as follows:-
(1) Mr Derek Rawson made a statement concerning report No 95/07 – Cumnor Hill Conservation Area - Proposal by Cumnor Parish Council.
Mr Rawson reported that he had been asked to speak on behalf of Cumnor Parish Council in view of his involvement with the preparation of the submission for the proposed Conservation Area in his former capacity as District Councillor. He considered that it was important that this application had come from residents of the Parish, rather than being instigated by the Parish or District Councils.
Mr Rawson advised that he had been asked by a group of local residents what could be done to prevent the change in the environment of Cumnor Hill and Third Acre Rise as a result of multiple planning applications to increase the density of development in the area. Mr Rawson commented that the low density of development was part of the special character that made this area so attractive to visitors and residents.
Mr Rawson referred to his surprise at the high response and majority of residents who were in favour of the application being submitted when surveyed.
Mr Rawson responded to the comments in paragraph 5.5 of report 95/07 that suggested the area at Cumnor Hill was not based around clearly defined groups of listed buildings by highlighting that at page 8 of the English Heritage advice in Appendix 1 it was suggested that clusters of housing might be more appropriate than listing individual homes.
Mr Rawson responded to the point made in paragraph 5.5 of the report that approval of this application would result in other areas seeking similar status, by stating that this ought to be welcomed by the Vale as it showed that residents were concerned about their environment. He suggested that the approval should send a message to residents elsewhere, that the District Council supports the protection of areas that represented a particular style of housing and environment.
In response to the statement at paragraph 5.6, that the boundaries had been arbitrarily drawn, Mr Rawson said that it had been felt that to include 70 properties was sufficient.
Mr Rawson advised that the first half of the 20th Century was not fairly represented in the list of designated conservation areas. He referred to the fact that many of the properties had been built in the 1920s and 1930s.
Mr Rawson expressed concern that the Supplementary Planning Guidance route would not provide the protection required to deal with the urgent situation of multiple planning applications in this area. He urged the Committee to recommend that a Conservation Area be designated on the lower slopes of Cumnor Hill and Third Acre Rise as set out in Appendix 1 to report 95/07.
The Chair thanked Mr Rawson for his statement which he advised would be taken into account when the Committee considered report 95/07 later in the meeting.
(2) Mr John Rees made a statement concerning Report No 95/07, Cumnor Hill Conservation Area – Proposal by Cumnor Parish Council.
Mr Rees commented that the analysis of the Parish Council’s application by the District Council’s Conservation Officer was helpful and perceptive. He agreed that that the application described in considerable detail how the age, style and relative merits of the buildings, topography and open spaces contributed to the character of the area. Mr Rees advised that he therefore welcomed his analysis both as a local resident and as someone who was professionally involved day by day in the preservation and enhancement of this Country’s heritage and its setting, in his capacity as the Registrar of the Church of England’s system of control of its listed building, where he appreciated very much all the support and work that local planning authorities did to preserve and enhance distinctive areas through designation and special guidance. Mr Rees referred to paragraphs 4.2 and 5.5 of report 95/07 which identified maturity; spaciousness; low density and sylvan wooded character as features in the area of Lower Cumnor Hill and Third Acre Rise commenting that it seemed there was agreement that this was an area with distinctive character and one which in one way or another needed to be protected.
Mr Rees commented that his understanding of the report was that the Committee was being asked to work towards production of supplementary planning guidance to come into effect the year after next (through the route of the wider “development framework” that would be being put together by the Council’s consultants during the next year or so). He suggested that the matter could not wait that long commenting that residents in this area received tempting offers from developers nearly every week. He commented that most weekends residents listened to the sound of chain saws cutting into the sylvan setting and clearing sites in readiness for development often well ahead of making planning application. He reported that one garden in the centre of this area had been almost totally denuded of its mature trees in the last few weeks.
Mr Rees urged the Council at the very least to go further and issue a Supplementary Planning Guidance document for Lower Cumnor Hill and Third Acre Rise based on these reports now. He advised that the Council had the legal power to do this, albeit that the guidance would be informal until it was integrated into the new framework in 2009 and he asked for the Council’s response in this regard. However, he pressed the Council to go further. He commented that the report seemed to suggest that the absence of clearly defined groups of listed buildings or other acknowledged features such as ancient monuments and historic parks and gardens was a reason not to support the application. He drew Members’ attention to paragraph 4.2 of Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 15 which stated that it was the quality and interest of areas, rather than of individual buildings which should be the prime consideration in identifying conservation areas; the historic layout of property boundaries and thoroughfares on a particular mix of uses; on characteristics materials; on appropriate scaling; street furniture and hard and soft surfaces. He commented that the range was very wide, but the important point was that it was not confined to groups of listed buildings, ancient monuments and historic parks (each of which had its own form of separate protection). He commented that Conservation Areas were about areas which had some distinctive character overall. He referred to the report noting that it identified precisely the sort of features that made it a distinctive area of that sort. He explained that there was architecture which was highly unusual (even if not worthy of separate listing) and there was a mix of design typical of the Vernacular Revival with Arts and Crafts element and some between the wars International and Modernist style. He commented none on its own was of particular significant but that it was not what PPG 15 required. He advised that all taken together described the kind of area PPG 15 described as being worthy of preservation and enhancement commended by Section 9 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
The Chair thanked Mr Rees for his statement which he explained would be taken into account when the Committee considered report 95/07 later in the meeting.