Agenda item
25/01834/HHD 29 Oxford Road, Woodstock
Minutes:
Nathan Harris, Planner presented the application for the erection of both single and two storey rear extensions.
The Planner’s presentation addressed the following points:
- The Planner brought the Sub-Committee’s attention to the additional representation report which included the objections from the Town Council.
- The planner highlighted the red line on the site plan and explained the Tree with the protection order would not be affected by the proposed extensions.
- The property shared a boundary with Blenheim Palace, a World Heritage Site, but the application would not impact the boundary.
- The proposal would be a modest increase to the footprint of the site and the first floor extension would align with the side elevation of the existing building.
- The design was in keeping with the current property and neighbouring properties.
Hardip Boparai spoke in objection to the application which raised the following points: There were objections from the Town Council, the extensions would not fit in with the character of the street and the proposal would be over development, the design was of an industrial theme and not in keeping with the original house and there was a Tree Protection Order within the property.
Mr Whitfield, the application addressed the sub-committee which raised the following points: The house was purchased less than 2 years ago, the protected tree would not be near the construction works and there were conditions included to protect the tree, there would be little impact to the street view and surrounding houses.
The Planner continued with the presentation and addressed the following points:
- The proposed materials would match the rendering with a tiled roof and aluminium frame glazing would be used for the rear glazing.
- The site was well screened by mature trees from the A44 Oxford Road and there would be no harm to the character and appearance of the street scene.
- The separation distances and the residential context of the site, the proposal was not considered to result in any harm to the setting of the adjacent conservation area, the grey two listed boundary wall or the wider World Heritage site.
- There were no windows proposed on the side elevation and the flat roof on the ground floor extension will not be used as a balcony.
- Conditions were recommended to prevent the use of flat roof as an amenity space thereby safeguarding the privacy of the neighbouring occupiers.
- The tree officer confirmed the proposal would not adversely affect the protected tree at number 31 subject to a condition ensuring that no works occurred within the root protection area.
- The recommendation was for approval with conditions as set out in the officer’s report.
The Chair then invited the Sub-Committee to discuss the application, which raised the following points:
- Members raised concerns over the protection of the cedar tree and acknowledged that over the past few years many of the houses along the street had been extended.
- Members asked how condition 4 would be enforced. The planner confirmed that enforcement action could be taken if there were reports of a breach of use.
- Members raised concerns regarding traffic levels, the Planner confirmed that due to the scale of development a traffic management plan was not needed.
Councillor Elizabeth Poskitt proposed that the Sub-Committee approve the application in line with the officer’s recommendations. This was seconded by the Chair and put to the vote.
Voting Record – the vote for the proposal was unanimous.
The Sub-Committee Resolved to:
- Approve the application in line with the officers’ recommendations.