Agenda item
24/00769/OUT Land South of Charlbury Road
Minutes:
Mike Cassidy, the Principal Planner, presented the application for outline permission, with all matters reserved other than principal means of access to the highway, for the construction of up to 104 residential dwellings, together with the provision of open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure.
A statement from Councillor Sandra Coleman, Mayor of Chipping Norton, was circulated to members of the Sub-Committee.
George Hayman spoke in objection to the application and raised the following points: Housing was needed but not such piecemeal ad-hoc development, the application was unsupported by infrastructure, upgrade works would be required to Thames Waters sewage treatment plant, there were concerns around noise from the shared boundary with the rifle and pistol club, The biodiversity net gain would be achieved through land other than on the site itself.
Adam Ross spoke on behalf of the applicant and raised the following points: There was a housing crisis in the District, there was an unmet housing need in Chipping Norton, the Local Plan identified Chipping Norton as a main service centre, Policy H2 stated that new dwellings would be permitted on unallocated greenfield land that adjoins a settlement, the site would deliver forty two affordable homes, there would be a significant biodiversity gain, the site was a sustainable site and outside the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
The Planning Officer’s presentation addressed the following points:
- The application was for outline permission for the construction of up to 104 residential dwellings with the provision for open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure.
- The site was immediately adjacent to Chipping Norton and currently comprised undeveloped agricultural land. The site did not sit within, but to the east of, the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
- The proposal included a 3.4 hectare residential development area. The remaining 2.6 hectares was dedicated to landscape planting, public open space and a community growing area.
- Proposed access to the site was on Burford Road. Improvements were proposed to Charlbury Road. Oxfordshire County Council had reviewed access arrangements and raised no objections.
- The existing public right of way would be retained.
- Site layout was not being considered at this stage, but the proposed illustrative masterplan was presented to the Sub-Committee.
- The Landscape Visual Impact Assessment demonstrated that the proposals did not give rise to long term significant effects.
- Historic England had no objections in relation to the nearby monument.
- Extensive work had been undertaken to look to mitigate the impact of noise from the riffle club. Proposed mitigation included the reorientation of plots 91-104 and a three-metre acoustic living green barrier was proposed. Further noise mitigation could be required at the reserved matters stage.
- There was an acute housing need in Chipping Norton.
- There would be a 17.99% biodiversity net gain on site.
- Cotswold Landscape Board had raised no objections.
- No objections from the Environment Agency or Thames Water had been received and the developer had addressed any concerns.
- The proposal was in accordance with national and local policy and in making the decision there was a need to apply planning balance as directed by paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Adverse impacts would not significantly outweigh benefits hence the proposal was recommended for approval.
The Chair then invited the Sub-Committee to discuss this application, which raised the following points:
- It should be noted that West Oxfordshire District Council owned the property Greystones, which was near the site.
- This application would be unlikely to have been approved if applying the policies in the Local Plan alone. In particular, in reference to Policy OS2 - scale appropriate, logical compliment, protect and enhance local landscape, loss of open space, supports local infrastructure.
- Acknowledgement of paragraph 11 of NPPF was made. The benefits to be considered were: 42 affordable housing units, energy efficient housing, s106 contributions. The adverse effects noted were: encroachment into landscape, loss of open undeveloped area, increased traffic levels in Chipping Norton.
- The impact of additional traffic generated by the development would be profound with no alternative routes with the exception of Lidstone Road, which was a single-track road and was already dangerous. The West Street bottle neck in the town was acknowledged by Oxfordshire County Council (OCC).
- The accessibility and connectivity of the site to services was not impressive.
- There was a danger of encroachment further south of Charlbury Road which was not the direction envisaged by the Council for development.
- The existing pressure on Chipping Norton’s infrastructure, including medical services, schools and sewerage was acknowledged.
- Although Grampian conditions were present, the Environment Agency stated that Chipping Norton did not have capacity to accommodate addition flows from developments. There was uncertainty about how long it would take for Thames Water to undertake necessary upgrades. The possibility of Grampian conditions being applied to the commencement of development was discussed. A Grampian condition already existed on a development that had taken place in the town with necessary works not undertaken to date.
- The biodiversity net gain was only achieved due to additional land off the site.
- It was noted that the nearby Cotswold Gate development was not a suitable site for comparison of the impact of noise from the gun club with the proposed site. This was due to the difference in proximity of the sites. It was also discussed if noise impact testing had been undertaken from the community growing space and with windows of properties open as this was where the impact of noise would be felt.
- The inclusion of solar panels on properties was noted on page 38 of the report, where sustainability was covered, but not mentioned by the Officer.
- The site had been submitted for consideration in the Local Plan and was therefore running ahead of that process. The Planning Policy Manager had stated that it would be more appropriate to consider this plan more holistically as part of the upcoming local plan.
- The relationship to the nearby archaeological site and its visibility from distance would be changed.
- It was noted that there were no objections from statutory consultees.
Councillor Elizabeth Poskitt proposed refusing the application on the basis of traffic concerns. Councillor Mike Baggaley seconded the proposal.
Councillor Andrew Beaney proposed the Sub-Committee instead defer the decision in order to request a written response from OCC Highways to explain why a contribution towards strategic highways infrastructure at Chipping Norton had not been sought.
Councillor Elizabeth Poskitt withdrew her proposal to refuse if the application.
Councillor Rosie Pearson seconded the proposal to defer.
Voting record – The vote was unanimous.
The Sub-Committee Resolved to:
1. Defer the application to request written responses from OCC Highways (or for a representative to attend the Sub-Committee) to explain why a contribution towards Strategic Highways Infrastructure at Chipping Norton (referred to in the Sub-Committee discussions as ‘the link road’) had not been sought; and from the NHS (formally the Oxford Clinical Commissioning Board and now the NHS Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Berkshire West Integrated Care Board) as to whether a contribution towards primary health care was required to be secured by S106 legal agreement in any permission granted.