Agenda item

1.      The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 25/02375/FUL in respect of a proposed new dwelling including new landscaping and parking.

2.      Catherine Ireland introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports.

3.      The Chairman asked Mr Goddard if he had any observations relating to the application and he raised the following points:

·       Churn Lodge would be accessed via Acer Lodge to the north, whilst the proposed dwelling would be accessed via the private track to the south.

·       Acer Lodge and Churn Lodge were within the same ownership.

·       As an existing access already served the private track, and the parking and layout arrangements were considered acceptable, no highways objection was raised.

4.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Denis Burke, objector, Mr Nigel Parsons and Dan Fleming, applicant / agent, and Councillor Laura Coyle, Ward Member, addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

5.      Mr Burke addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Eastern Area Planning Committee – recording

Member Questions to the Objector

6.      Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Applicant/Agent Representation

7.      Dan Fleming (agent - Colony Architects) addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Eastern Area Planning Committee – recording

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

8.      Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Ward Member Representation

9.      Councillor Coyle addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Eastern Area Planning Committee – recording

Member Questions to the Ward Member

10.   Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Member Questions to Officers

11.   Mr Till addressed the Committee on a procedural matter raised by the objector in their presentation noting that the Officer’s report did not directly address how the current application was considered to overcome the reasons for refusal of the previous application. Whilst this was considered implicit within the report, he advised that there was a reasonable prospect of judicial review if the application were approved in its current form. He therefore recommended that consideration of the application be deferred to allow amendments to the report, noting that the application could be returned to Committee before the introduction of the national scheme of delegation.

12.   The Chairman advised that, notwithstanding the recommendation to defer the application, Member questions should continue in order to identify any additional matters that could be addressed within the amended report.

13.   Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Construction traffic was considered a temporary impact and could be managed through a Construction Management Plan. It was further noted that spoil removal could be addressed through a planning condition. It was advised that although land stability could be a material planning consideration, Officers had not been presented with evidence to suggest that the proposal would result in land stability concerns beyond the usual impacts associated with construction activities.

·       Officers confirmed that the amenity impacts of the proposal had been assessed and their conclusions were set out in the report. Members could form a different view regarding the impact on amenity or pattern of surrounding development.

·       In response to questions regarding the dwelling's proximity to the highway, it was explained that the proposed dwelling would be set further back from the road than Churn Lodge and that nearby properties were located at varying distances from the highway. It was noted that there was not a strong building line along this part of the Wantage Road.

·       In response to questions regarding discrepancies between the plans, it was clarified that the feature shown closest to the road was an existing garage building and not the proposed dwelling.

·       In response to questions regarding the ownership of land required to access Churn Lodge, it was explained that land ownership was not a planning consideration. Officers advised that if ownership of the land changed and the proposed access arrangements could not be implemented, this could prevent the development from proceeding. It was further noted that rights of access would normally be secured where required to enable a development to be carried out in accordance with a planning permission.

Debate

14.   Councillor Richard Somner proposed that consideration of the application be deferred to a future meeting of Eastern Area Planning Committee in line with the Officer advice provided at the meeting. This was seconded by Councillor Paul Kander

15.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Somner, seconded by Councillor Kander, for deferral of the application. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the item be deferred to a future meeting of Eastern Area Planning Committee.