Skip to main content

Agenda item

Applications for Development

Purpose:

To consider applications for development, details of which are set out in the attached schedule.

Recommendation:

That the applications for development be determined in accordance with the recommendations of the Business Manager for Development and Sustainability, Planning & Strategic Housing.

 

Pages

Application No.

Address

Planning Officer

8-65

22/03240/OUT

Land South Of Burford Road

Minister Lovell

David Ditchett

66-82

23/00837/FUL

Crosswind 128 Brize Norton Road, Minister Lovell

Elloise Street

 

83-88

23/00917/FUL

23 Ampney Orchard Bampton

Elloise Street

 

 

Minutes:

22/03240/OUT-Land South of Burford Road, Minister Lovell.

David Ditchett, Principal Planning Officer, presented the application and gave a brief history of the details.

 

On Tuesday 30 May 2023 the application was deferred for a site visit.

 

On Monday 19 June 2023, the application was removed from the agenda by Officers as a late objection from Buckingham and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust (BOWT) to be responded to by the Biodiversity Officer was received.

 

 

The Principal Planning Officer drew the Committee’s attention to the updated version of the report in the agenda pack. The updated information included;

 

·         Reduced size of site;

·         Reduced number of houses;

·         Access points to and from the site to services via the Bovis Estate;

·         Proposed landscape plan, including the loss of a hedgerow.

 

The Chair advised the Committee and members of the public in attendance that the live webcast of the meeting to the Council’s website, had been stopped due to technical issues.

 

Councillor Liam Walker, Ward Member for Hailey, Minister Lovell and Leafield, spoke in objection to the application.

 

The Chair invited questions of clarification from the Committee, of which there were none.

 

Councillor Jonathan Stowell, Vice-Chair of Minister Lovell Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

 

The Chair invited questions of clarification from the Committee. The Committee asked for clarification on the name of Phil Cox who had been quoted in Councillor Stowell’s address.  The name was corrected to Phil Shaw.

 

Ed Barratt, Planning Director at Catesby Estates spoke in support of the application.

 

The Chair invited questions of clarification from the Committee. Councillors asked for the following points to be clarified:

 

  • Access to bus stops;
  • Pedestrian crossings across main road;
  • Suitable pathways for wheelchair and pushchair access;
  • Over subscription of local primary and wider primary schools.

 

Ed Barratt confirmed that Oxfordshire County Council had not requested a crossing to access bus stops or for safe access across the main road. Mr. Barratt also confirmed a gravel pathway had been added however there was another tarmac path for access which was not much farther to service points in the village. Mr. Barrett further confirmed that Oxfordshire County Council had asked for a financial contribution towards education which would enable the local school to fund more places and expand.

 

The Principal Planner continued with the presentation which clarified the following points:

 

  • Response to objections as addressed by the Biodiversity Officer;
  • New condition for signage to alert residents and visitors of local wildlife site;
  • Housing numbers reduced as the site has been reduced in size;
  • Contributions of S106 reduced to reflect the number of houses;
  • Total numbers of housing, which included the categories; first time buyers; affordable houses, shared ownership and self-built plots;
  • A £400,000 contribution to a village hall;
  • The development time frame for being completed in 2 to 4 years;
  • S106 contribution to nursery and primary school. 

 

The Chair invited the Committee to discuss the application, which raised the following clarification points:

 

  • Provision for Sewage, water provision, senior schools, work opportunities and primary health provision;
  • The location of the site in relation to the village;
  • Potential harm to the character of the Charter Village settlement;
  • For affordable properties more suited to serviced centres;  
  • Increased commuter traffic to secondary schools and workplaces;
  • Pressure on the limited services in the area;
  • Location of bus stops and road safety concerns when crossing to get to bus stop. Oxfordshire County Council would have to request a pedestrian crossing;
  • Potential problems with sewage treatment capacity in the area;

 

The Chair stated he was abstaining from the vote. 

 

Councillor Dingwall proposed that the application be refused against the Officer’s recommendations.  This was seconded by Councillor Maynard, was put to the vote and unanimously agreed by the Committee.

 

Committee Resolved to;

 

  1. Refuse the application on the following reasons;

1.1  The proposal does not respect the village character and local distinctiveness as it extends the existing C20 development, which further delineates the historic from the modern. Cumulatively, it is not limited development. It would not protect the local landscape or setting of Minster Lovell. It would involve the loss of an area of green space that makes an important contribution to the character and appearance of the area and the scheme causes localised landscape harm by urbanising a Greenfield site. In addition, the site is divorced from key services and facilities on offer in Minster Lovell with future residents reliant on private vehicles to meet their daily needs. While the development would provide up to 134 dwellings to include 40% affordable homes and 5% self-build plots; economic benefits, a children's play area, open space/recreational route, pedestrian and cycle links, biodiversity net gain, and sustainability measures. The adverse impacts identified would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. As such, the proposal is considered to be unsustainable development and is contrary to policies H2, OS2, OS4, T1, T3 and EH2 of the adopted West Oxfordshire Local Plan 2031, the West Oxfordshire Design Guide 2016, and the relevant paragraphs of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

1.2  The applicant has not entered into a legal agreement or agreements to secure the provision of affordable housing, self-build plots, biodiversity net gain or signposting to the Local Wildlife Site; or contributions to education, waste, public transport, sport and leisure, medical facilities, Village Hall, or children's play area. The proposal conflicts with West Oxfordshire Local Plan 2031 Policies OS5, H3, H5, T1, T3, EH3, EH4, and EH5; and the relevant paragraphs of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

At 3.35pm the Chair called for an adjournment to the meeting to allow members of the public to leave the Committee rooms. Councillor Crouch left the meeting.

 

The meeting resumed at 3.44pm

 

23/00837/FUL Crosswind, Brize Norton Road, Minister Lovell.

 

Elloise Street, Planning Officer presented the application for conversion of residential storage / detached garage to dwelling (Class C3) with associated works.

 

Richard White spoke in support of the application.

 

The Chair invited questions for clarification from the Committee. Councillors asked for the following points to be clarified:

 

  • What the building was used for previously- it was for private use;
  • What was the age of the building –it was built in 1984;
  • The proposed property would not overlook neighbour;

 

The Planning Officer continued with the presentation which clarified the following points:

  • Property would be built on previously developed land;
  • It was built in 1984 for mixed agricultural use;
  • There would be no extensions to the building;
  • The design fitted with the surrounding buildings in the area;
  • The building would be restricted to one level;
  • The design would include obscured glazing;
  • There had been no objections from Highways;
  • The permitted development rights will be removed from the site and the open agricultural land will also be restricted by condition.

 

The Chair invited the Committee to discuss the application, which raised the following clarification points:

  • The restriction of the residential curtilage;
  • Restriction on future development on the neighbouring field and how tight this condition was;
  • Clarification on who owned the land behind and it was confirmed the applicant owned the surrounding land;
  • Standards of materials used to insulate the building. It was advised that this fell under building control.

 

Councillor Dingwall proposed that the application be approved in line with the Officer’s recommendations.  This was seconded by Councillor Leverton, was put to the vote and unanimously agreed by the Committee.

 

Committee Resolved to;

  1. Approved the application as per Officer’s recommendations in the report.

 

23/00917/FUL 23 Ampney Orchard, Bampton,

 

Elloise Street, Planning Officer, presented the application for alterations and conversion of part of existing garaging to create a garden office, which clarified the following points:

 

  • Bampton Parish Council had objected to the application over concerns about parking;
  • The current garage did not meet the standards for parking a car, the owner’s car would be parked in a space next to the garage;
  • There would not be an extension to the property;
  • There would be an ancillary condition that the conversion would only be used as an office;
  • The location was sustainable and there would be no harm to the surrounding area.

 

The Chair invited the Committee to discuss the application, which raised the following clarification points:

 

  • On what the parking space allowance was in relation to the 3 bedroom property. It was advised that a property of that size could have up to 2 parking spaces;
  • Was the space serving 23 Ampney Orchard to be used by other residents? In addition can the parking spaces in the street be used other residents or were they used solely by the occupier of the property. It was clarified that all spaces were not physically reserved.

 

Councillor Goodwin proposed that the application be approved in line with the Officer’s recommendations.  This was seconded by Councillor Nicholls, was put to the vote and unanimously agreed by the Committee.

 

Committee Resolved to;

  1. Approved the application as per Officer’s recommendation in the original report.

 

Councillor Goodwin left the meeting at 4.10pm.

 

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages