Agenda item

Refused in line with officer recommendation, reasons to be set out in the minutes.

The Committee considered application 24/01908/OUT, an outline planning application for the erection of up to 60 dwellings with public open space, landscaping, sustainable drainage system (SuDS) and vehicular access point with all matters reserved except for means of access (the application was a re-submission of 23/01265/OUT) at OS Parcel 0069 West Of Quarry Close Quarry Close, Bloxham for Gladman Developments Ltd.

Councillor Rob Pattenden, local Ward Member addressed the meeting in objection to the application.

In reaching its decision the Committee considered the officer’s report and presentation, the address of the Ward Member and the written updates.

Resolved  

That, in line with officers’ recommendation, authority be delegated the Assistant Director for Planning and Development to refuse planning permission on the expiry of the press notice for the reasons set out below (and any amendments to those reason(s) as deemed necessary) and that authority be delegated to officers, in consultation with the Chairman of Planning Committee, to add or remove refusal reasons, in the event of an appeal being lodged against the refusal, in light of new evidence becoming available. 

REASONS FOR REFUSAL  

1. The site is located outside the built form of Bloxham and within an area of open countryside. By reason of its location and the proposed scale of development, the proposal would have a poor and incongruous relationship with the existing settlement appearing prominent in the open countryside and filling an important gap to Park Farm. Its development would therefore have an adverse effect on the landscape on the approach to Bloxham to the detriment of the character and appearance of the countryside. It is considered that the development of this site would conflict with the adopted policies in the Local Plan to which substantial weight should be attached and result in unsustainable growth. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policies PSD1, BSC1, ESD1, ESD13, ESD15, Villages 1 and Villages 2 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011 - 2031 Part 1, saved Policies C28, C30 and C33 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996, Policies BL2, BL3 and BL11 of the Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan 2015 - 2031 and Government guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposals due to their distance and poor connection would also not contribute to meeting Oxford’s Unmet Housing Needs and be contrary to Policy PR1, PR4a and PR11 of Cherwell Local Plan 2011 - 2031 Part 1 Partial Review. 

2. By reason of its location more than 800m walking distance from the village centre and any key amenities in the village (e.g., food shop, post office, primary school, GP surgery, public house), the proposal would be poorly connected to existing development, such that future occupiers would not have a realistic choice of means of travel. Therefore, the proposal conflicts with Policies ESD1, ESD15 and Villages 2 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011- 2031, saved Policies C28 and 30 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996, Policy BL3 of the Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan 2015 - 2031 and Government guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.  

3. In the absence of a satisfactory unilateral undertaking or any other form of Section 106 legal agreement, the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development provides for appropriate infrastructure contributions required as a result of the development, and necessary to make the impacts of the development acceptable in planning terms. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policy INF1 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031, CDC’s Planning Obligations SPD 2018, Policy BL9 of the Bloxham Neighbourhood Plan 2015 - 2031 and Government guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework.