Issue - meetings

Refused reasons to be set out in the minutes

The Committee considered application 16/02295/OUT, an outline application for the erection of 10 No dwellings at land South West of Woodbank, Mill for Mr E & G King.

Helen Macbeth, Deputy Chair of Kirtlington Parish Council, addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Paul Brailsford, agent for the applicant and Keith Neill Smith, the architect for the applicant, addressed the committee in support of the application.

Councillor Macnamara proposed that application be refused as it would be contrary to Policies ESD13, ESD15 and Villages 2 of the Cherwell Local Plan (2011-2031) Part 1, saved Policies C8 and C28 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework. Councillor Wood seconded the proposal.

In reaching their decision, the Committee considered the officers report and presentation and the addresses of the public speakers.

Resolved

That application 16/02295/OUT be refused for the following reasons:

1.            The development proposed, by reason of its poorly integrated relationship with existing built development and its extension beyond the built limits of the village, would cause significant and unacceptable harm to the historic linear form of the village and the rural landscape setting of the village as experienced by local residents, visitors and users of Mill Lane and the existing Public Right of Way which runs through and within close proximity to the site. The development would detract from the area's established character and would fail to reinforce local distinctiveness. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies ESD13, ESD15 and Villages 2 of the Cherwell Local Plan (2011-2031) Part 1, saved Policies C8 and C28 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.            In the absence of adequate detail of how the footpath link from the site to Hatch Way would be provided it has not been demonstrated that the development would not have an unacceptable impact upon the three Beech trees protected by TPO, and so the proposed development would potentially have a detrimental impact upon the health and amenity value of these trees and the rural character and visual amenities of the area. The development therefore fails to comply with Policies ESD13 and ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan (2011-2031) Part 1, saved Policy C28 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.            In the absence of the completion of a satisfactory Planning Obligation, the Local Planning Authority is not convinced that the necessary infrastructure directly required both on and off site as a result of this development, in the interests of supporting the sustainability of the village and the development, and in the interests of safeguarding public infrastructure and securing on site future maintenance arrangements, will be provided. This would be contrary to Policies INF1, PSD1, SLE4, ESD1, BSC11 and Villages 2 of the Cherwell Local Plan (2011-2031) Part 1 a