Agenda and draft minutes
PDF 62 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Woodgreen, Witney, Oxfordshire OX28 1NB. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Apologies for Absence To receive any apologies for absence from members of Sub-Committee. The quorum for the Sub-Committee is 4 members. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs: Godfrey and Walsh |
|
|
Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations of interest from members of the Sub-Committee on any items to be considered at the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest were received from:
Cllr Mead in respect of the Burford Road application 25/00487 in her capacity of Chairman of the Town Council, and in respect of Black Bourton Road application 25/01852/FUL as it lay within her district ward.
Cllr Leverton declared an interest in respect of the Black Bourton Road application 25/01852/FUL as the person at the Ashfield Road property was known to him. |
|
|
Minutes of Previous Meeting To approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 8 December 2025 Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED: That the minutes of the last meeting of the Lowlands Sub-Committee held on 8 December 2025 be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chairman. |
|
|
25/00487/OUT Land (E) 428789 (E) 208512 Burford Road Additional documents: Minutes: The Planning Officer commenced by requesting Members to note the correction at paragraph 8.7 regards foul drainage should refer to condition number 14. During the presentation Members were provided with information regards an outline planning application with all matters reserved except access for up to 350 dwellings (Use Class C3); land for local community use (Use Classes E and F2); detailed means of access from Burford Road; public open space; landscaping; service infrastructure and associated works on land to the south of Burford Road, Brize Norton. This was at the site address of Burford Road Brize Norton, Oxfordshire. The officer recommendation stated that this application should be approved.
In highlighting the main elements of the application, the presenting officer stated that the proposed development provided an opportunity to accommodate 350 dwellings, contributing to WODC's housing land supply shortfall. primarily through the provision of market and affordable housing in a sustainable location adjoining a key service centre within the district. This would create a sustainable new community linked to both Carterton and Brize Norton.
Having considered all relevant factors related to this application, Officers were of the opinion that a development of this scale in this location would form a logical complement to the existing settlements of Brize Norton and Carterton which respected the wider landscape character. There were no demonstrable harms that would outweigh the benefits associated with the provision of 350 new dwellings (35% affordable) towards the Council's housing land supply shortfall. Additional benefits included the provision of 10% biodiversity net gain, two new play areas, new allotments, a flexible use community room and short term and long term economic benefits through employment during the build process and increased expenditure in the local area.
Therefore, the application was recommended for approval, subject to the imposition of the conditions set out on pages 49-58 of the report, and the S106 and S278 legal agreements. A total of 4 participants had registered to speak on the application.
Windrush against Sewage Pollution (WASP) made a number of points in opposition, and was concerned regards the quality and accuracy of the officer`s report. These related to the efficacy of the package plants proposed and the effluent discharge permit conditions negating any calculated flood storage benefit. Furthermore the report did not reference the EA's objection to the proposed use of package plants. It was requested that the council redraft a condition which ensures that Carterton and its network upgrades are made appropriately so that capacity can be created before any approval is granted.
Mr Goble Chairman of Brize Norton Parish Council also addressed the meeting. He stated that the application did not comply with the relevant policies and that if it were to be approved, it would cause unacceptable urban sprawl between Carterton, Brize Norton, Minster Lovell and Witney.
Given that Brize Norton`s was defined as a village, its development would have grown from 382 to 1200 houses. This was considered to be above and beyond its contribution towards the housing requirement of ... view the full minutes text for item 91. |
|
|
25/01852/FUL 44 Black Bourton Road Carterton Additional documents: Minutes: This application sought consent for the redevelopment of the site, including demolition of existing workshops and erection of seven dwellings and associated ancillary development at 44 Black Bourton Road, Carterton. Ashfield Road lay to the north of the application site and Milestone Road was to the south.
The site consisted of existing hardstanding and several dilapidated buildings. To the front of the site (but outside the current application boundary) was an existing detached two-storey building which operated as an HMO. To the north, south and east were residential dwellings. The site was registered as contaminated land and had a long planning history, which was detailed at paragraph 5.4 of the report. The neighbouring site (48 Black Bourton Road) was recently the subject of an appeal for 9 dwellings, which was allowed and was currently under construction. Having taken into account planning policy, other relevant material considerations and the comments of interested parties, Officers were of the opinion that the harms identified significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits of the development and as such the application was recommended for refusal.
The agent spoke on behalf of the applicant stating that, the Officer’s recommendation was contrary to the views of the Town Council, who fully supported the proposals, and there was plenty of public support for the scheme. Furthermore, no statutory consultees had objections to the scheme, including the Council’s own Design and Conservation Officer. It was believed that the Officer’s Report over estimated the potential negative impacts, whilst simultaneously under playing the public benefits of the scheme.
In giving deep consideration to the arguments presented on both sides and having conducted a site visit, Members agreed with the officer`s recommendation and therefore,
RESOLVED: That the application be refused. |
|
|
25/02578/FUL Land Adjacent To Kencot Cottages Kencot Additional documents: Minutes: An application was presented which sought planning permission for the erection of a detached two-storey self-build dwelling with access, parking, amenity space and associated works at Land Adjacent to Kencot Cottages, Kencot. The application site comprised an undeveloped area of paddock and modest open-fronted agricultural building adjacent to the main thoroughfare running through the village. The site was bounded by characterful stone walls and benefited from access via a field gate. It was situated within the Kencot Conservation Area ('CA') and was located approximately 80m to the north of the grade II listed Manor Farmhouse. There were a number of locally listed buildings in close proximity including Kencot Cottages, Shillbrook House and De Rougemont.
The report stated that the application was submitted for consideration, due to the conflict between the Officer's recommendation for refusal and the position of the Kencot Parish Council.
Members were informed that Officers had given very careful consideration to the details of the application, taking into account planning policy, history, other material considerations and the representations of interested parties. The key considerations had included matters of principle, siting scale and appearance, impact upon heritage assets, neighbourly amenity, highways impact, ecology and drainage and flood risk. Having considered all relevant details, the officer recommendation was for refusal of the application.
Mr Cox Chairman of Kencott Parish Council spoke in support of the application, which raised some of the following points:
The applicants, Mr and Mrs Monk had met with their potential neighbours and had been fully supported and at a subsequent parish meeting held on 7 January with 22 villagers in attendance all were supportive. Moreover, the positioning of the last house built in the village was built on the building line as this one proposed to. He stated that he believed that the Council felt that a commercial property should be considered for the site, but that the site was too small to support a business without huge disruption to the village. In conclusion Kencot Parish Council was in support of a house being built on this site as they believe it is the right way forward and this would safeguard it from an unwanted development in the future. The applicants Mr and Mrs Monk were in attendance and also spoke. They stated that, they were registered on the Council self -build register and had bought the plot with a dream of building their forever home close to where they lived and worked. Whilst they acknowledged that their proposal did not fit neatly with planning policies which sought to direct housing to the most sustainable locations, several factors outweighed any potential policy conflict. In discussing the application, many queries were raised and it was felt appropriate to conduct a site visit prior to reaching a final decision. This would be arranged in due course, prior to the next meeting. RESOLVED: That the application be deferred pending a site visit.
|
|
|
24/02837/FUL Plot 4 Viscount Industrial Estate Additional documents: Minutes: The Planning Officer presented an application with regards to the proposed development of the erection of four industrial units and associated works at Plot 4 Viscount Industrial Estate Station Road Brize Norton Oxfordshire. This application site comprised an existing industrial site located at Viscount Industrial Estate situated on the west side of Station Road near Brize Norton Airfield.
The application had been submitted for Members` consideration due to the objection of Brize Norton Parish Council, on the grounds detailed within the report. The report also highlighted that this application was essentially a resubmission of a previously refused application in 2024, on a number of grounds including those relating to parking standards, lack of information on the frequency and size of vehicles anticipated at the site and regards biodiversity.
Having now received additional information on the above matters, and having taken into account planning policy, and all relevant material considerations, the submitted report recommended conditional approval as the application was considered to accord with West Oxfordshire Local Plan 2031 Policies, the Brize Norton Neighbourhood Plan, the West Oxfordshire Design Guide 2016 and NPPF 2024.
Members deliberated during which questions were raised as to the likely effectiveness and enforceability of a highways condition summarised at 5.21 within the report, which aimed to prevent HGV movements through Brize Norton village due to the narrow footways and on street parking. Another Member expressed concern that signage advising vehicles to turn right away from the village at the exit of the industrial estate, would simply result in the problem being redirected to other villages.
Following the debate, it was
RESOLVED: That application be approved in line with the officer`s recommendation. |
|
|
25/01989/FUL 46A Market Square Witney Additional documents: Minutes: This application sought permission for the conversion of the existing office building to a dwelling with works to include erection of a two storey extension with a single storey glazed link, with associated amenity area and two car parking spaces at 46a Market Square Witney.
The case submitted by the applicant stated that Listed Building Consent and Planning Permission was required for the renovation and refurbishment, in an extended form, of an outbuilding to the rear of 46 Market Street, Witney, to provide a two storey three bedroomed house. The proposal would lead to less than substantial harm to the setting of the listed former Bull Inn, but that the public benefits of the proposal would be to provide a new family house, with office space, in a highly sustainable location in the centre of Witney and put this part of the curtilage of the listed building, in a modified form, back into an optimum new and viable use.
The Planning Officer`s assessment included information regarding the background of the application, stating that it has been brought before Members due to its recommendation being contrary to that of the Town Council, which was supportive. Officers had also taken into account planning policy, other material considerations and the representations of interested parties. Officers also felt that the key considerations of this application included the principle of development. design and impact on heritage assets, residential amenity and highways. Having had due regard and consideration to all of the above factors the application was recommended for refusal.
Members considered the application before them, asking a number of questions of clarification, following which they overwhelmingly agreed with the officer`s recommendation.
RESOLVED: That the application be refused, in line with the officer`s recommendation
|
|
|
25/01990/LBC 46A Market Square Witney Additional documents: Minutes: The application before Members sought planning permission for the conversion of the existing office building to a dwelling with works to include the erection of a two storey side extension with a single storey glazed link with associated amenity area and two car parking spaces at 46a Market Square, Witney. The application had been brought before Members due to the officer`s recommendation to refuse being contrary to that of the Town Council, which was supportive.
The officer`s report considered both the background and planning history stating that members had refused permission of similar applications in 2022 and 2023. The report went on to highlight the main aspects of the proposed development, stating that the main consideration of this application was the impact that this would have on Heritage Assets and the conservation area.
Having considered this matter in much detail, officers confirmed that the scale, design and form of the proposed alterations and extensions needed to create the proposed dwelling, would have a harmful impact on the significance, character, appearance and setting of Long Barn, a grade II curtilage listed building, the setting, character and views out from the principal listing building, 46 Market Square. This harm was considered to be at the higher end of 'less than substantial' and would not be outweighed by any discernible public benefits. Consequently, the proposal was contrary to the duty to Section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and Section 16 of the NPPF, and should therefore be refused.
Members asked a number of questions for clarification purposes, following which agreement was reached.
RESOLVED: That the application be refused, in line with the officer`s recommendation. |
|
|
Applications Determined under Delegated Powers Purpose: To inform the Sub-Committee of applications determined under delegated powers.
Recommendation: The report be noted by the Sub- Committee Additional documents: Minutes: The applications determined under delegated powers were presented to Members.
RESOLVED: That the report be noted |
|
|
Purpose: To inform the Sub-Committee of any appeal decisions.
Recommendation: That the report be noted by the Sub-Committee. Additional documents: Minutes: The Planning Officer reported the appeals decisions that has taken place since the last meeting.
RESOLVED: That the report be noted |