appeal decision - vale of white horsedemocratic.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/documents/s24999...portway...

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 10 December 2013

by David Leeming

an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 27 December 2013

Appeal Ref: APP/V3120/A/13/2195492

Land to the west of Portway Villas, Reading Road, East Hendred,

Oxfordshire

• The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.

• The appeal is made by Pye Homes against the decision of Vale of White Horse District Council.

• The application Ref P12/V1878/FUL, dated 28 August 2012, was refused by notice dated 10 December 2012.

• The development proposed is development of 21 new houses – 13 open market and 8 affordable.

Decision

1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the development

of 21 new houses – 13 open market and 8 affordable, on land to the west of

Portway Villas, Reading Road, East Hendred, Oxfordshire in accordance with

the terms of the application, Ref P12/V1878/FUL, dated 28 August 2012,

subject to the conditions set out in the attached Schedule.

Preliminary Matters

2. The applicants have submitted two section 106 agreements, one to secure the

proposed provision of affordable housing and the other to make various

financial contributions towards the costs of local services and facilities to

mitigate the impact of the development. These agreements accord with the

advice in paragraph 204 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and

are in compliance with regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy

Regulations 2010 (as amended). They have therefore been taken into account

and are considered to overcome the Council’s second reason for refusal.

Main Issue

3. The Council contend that due to the harmful landscape impact and physical

separation from the village, the proposed development is not a sustainable

form of development. It is contended that there is no over-riding need or

special circumstances which exist, including the present shortfall in housing

land supply, which warrant any departure from the adopted Local Plan and

which would outweigh the harm caused to the character of the area.

4. Paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that housing applications should be considered

in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. It

Appeal Decision APP/V3120/A/13/2195492

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 2

adds that relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered

up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year

supply of deliverable housing sites.

5. Having regard to this, given the Council’s acknowledged absence of a five-year

housing land supply, the Council’s housing policies are out of date, inconsistent

with the NPPF and can carry little weight. These include Policies GS2 and H13

in the in the Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2011, which apply to development

outside the built-up areas of towns and villages.

6. The settlement boundaries to which the Local Plan housing policies relate are

based on housing requirements which are now, in effect, ‘time expired’. These

settlement boundaries are now unable to accommodate the quantum of

housing that is necessary to meet the present and future housing requirements

in the Vale of White Horse District.

7. The Council consider that the appeal site is not a sustainable option to help

address the undersupply of housing land provision particularly where more

appropriate options are available. The Council advise that significant progress

has been made in addressing the shortfall by permitting over 1400 dwellings in

sustainable sites. However, it remains the case that the Council cannot

demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable sites. As the NPPF makes clear,

for sites to be considered deliverable, they should be available now.

8. The principal aim of the NPPF is the achievement of sustainable development.

The policies in the NPPF, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of

what sustainable development means in practice.

9. Having regard to the above, the main issue is whether the proposed scheme

is sufficiently sustainable given the circumstances relating to housing land

supply in the District.

Reasons

The benefit of the scheme

10. The benefit of the scheme can be briefly stated. This is the provision of 21 new

homes to reduce the identified shortfall in the supply of housing in the District.

Significantly, 8 of the new homes would be affordable homes, for which there is

a particular local need, as identified in the Local Plan.

The impact on landscape

11. The development would result in the loss of agricultural land that forms part of

the rural edge to the village. At present the land to the north of the A417,

where the development would take place, is essentially rural in character.

There is a deep landscape buffer on the southern side of the main road which,

as the Council point out, creates a green corridor along the roadside and

provides a strong boundary between the built up part of the village to the

south and the open countryside to the north.

12. However, directly to the east of the site on the northern side of the main road

are some existing houses that provide a visual presence of built development

beyond the main area of the village. There is also a further residential

property to the west, off Wood Farm Road. The proposed development would

sit between this existing development. Although there would be some loss of



an existing mature hedgerow that currently defines the southern boundary of

the agricultural land, the proposed development would be set back from the

main road frontage behind a proposed deeper landscaped area. As this

matures this would help to soften the impact of the development in views from

the main road.

13. The site forms part of the Lowland Vale, a local landscape designation. The

Council point out that Local Plan Policy NE9 seeks to protect the long views

across the flat open landscape which characterises this designation. However,

the development would have only a limited effect on such views, this being

principally from a short adjacent section of the A417. The existing landscape

buffer along the southern side of the road effectively prevents long views

across the appeal site from Coulings Close to the south, within that part of the

village. Likewise, the existing houses the north of the main road restrict long

views across the open countryside that would otherwise be obtained from other

parts of the village, along White Road.

14. The Council point out that the site forms part of a larger swathe of land with no

natural boundary to define its extent. Without such a boundary they raise a

concern that it would be difficult to resist future development beyond the

current arbitrary northern site boundary, to the detriment of the locality.

However, the scheme provides for a deep landscape buffer on the northern

edge. This would create a clear separation between the developed land and

the remaining agricultural land beyond.

15. As to the creation of a precedent, it is an established planning principle that

each application or consequential appeal should be determined on its own

merits. As such, a grant of consent in this case would not prevent the Council

from exercising their powers to refuse any subsequent development that failed

to meet up to date development plan and national policy requirements.

The relationship of the development site to the village

16. As noted above, in its location to the north of the A417 the development would

be beyond the recognised edge of the village. However, in the context of the

adjacent housing on the northern side of the road, it would have some

connectivity to this existing fringe area of development. Whilst, compared to

that, it would result in a more significant expansion beyond the limits of the

village, it would nevertheless be closely located to the village, being just across

the other side of the main road.

17. East Hendred is one of the larger villages in the District. It contains a

shop/post office, schools, public houses and a church. It is currently served by

bus routes, including one to Didcot Parkway, where there are rail connections

to London and elsewhere. The scheme involves the provision of new bus stops

adjacent to the site plus a refuge to assist pedestrians wishing to cross the

main road. The village and its facilities are within a reasonable walking

distance from the site. In these circumstances the site is sufficiently close to

the existing village to have a reasonable connectivity to it. As a result, and

having regard to the proposed highway improvements, future occupants of the

development would not be unacceptably segregated from the village by the

main road.



Other Matters

18. The Parish Council and other interested third parties have raised concerns

about the impact of the development on highway safety. The Parish Council’s

views are supported by comments made by a report from a consultant.

Specific concerns are raised about the adequacy and safety of the site in

relation to the volume of traffic using the access, internal site layout, including

parking provision and turning space for large vehicles, and the proposed bus

stops and pedestrian crossing point on the adjacent A417.

19. It is instructive that, despite acknowledging some deficiencies in the layout, the

highway authority concluded, on balance, that they had no objection to the

proposals subject to conditions. The principal concern of the highway authority

related to the provision of a mini-roundabout at the White Road junction.

However, this is no longer part of the scheme. In relation to the two new bus

stops, the highway authority advise that these are situated on a key strategic

public transport corridor which will be delivered incrementally in line with the

anticipated travel demand associated with future employment and housing

growth in the Science Vale Enterprise Zone area. They will therefore have

wider benefits to the village at large.

20. In making their representations, the highway authority noted that the A417 in

the area is near capacity and commented that they were seeking to improve

conditions along this principal road. They made the observation that the

scheme’s proposed provision of footways and crossing, together with traffic

calming measures arising from the off-site highway works would make the site

more accessible and safer for journeys on foot and cycle to the facilities in the

village.

21. The concerns by the Parish Council and others have been taken into account.

However, as the appellants note, they provide no new evidence that

undermines the basic conclusion reached by the highway authority that the

development can be safely accommodated on the road network.

22. Notwithstanding this conclusion, particular concerns have been raised by third

parties about the proposed pedestrian refuge and the bus stops. In this

respect, the adequacy of the size of the proposed pedestrian refuge has been

raised in relation to all those who might want to use it. Potentially this could

include parents with buggies or wheelchair users. As regards the bus stops, it

is noted that there is no provision for a lay-by on the southern side of the main

road, which has implications in relation to traffic flows on the A417. The

appellants have expressed a willingness to look at the details of the off-site

highway works again; and this matter can be re-visited, to see if some further

beneficial changes are feasible, as part of a condition requiring a detailed

scheme for off-site highway works to be agreed and completed before

development commences.

23. Aside from highway safety matters, concerns have been raised by the residents

living in the property to the west of Woods Farm Lane about direct overlooking

from some of the proposed houses. However, the nearest house would be set

some way back from the Lane and it is clear that, having regard to the distance

of the set back plus intervening landscaping, there would be no unacceptable

overlooking.



24. Other concerns have been raised about flooding. However a flood risk

assessment has been submitted and there is no technical or other cogent

evidence to demonstrate that drainage matters could not be effectively

controlled by condition.

Conditions

25. The Council have suggested a number of conditions in the event that the

appeal is allowed. For the most part these are necessary and are being

imposed to ensure satisfactory development, subject to some essentially minor

drafting changes. The exception is the suggested drainage conditions, which

give rise to some duplication. In this respect it is not necessary to impose the

Council’s suggested condition 5 in the light of suggested conditions 6 and 7.

26. As noted above, a condition will require a detailed scheme of off-site highway

works to be agreed and completed. In addition, as recommended by the

highway authority, a condition requiring a Travel Information Pack will be

imposed to encourage sustainable travel by the new residents.

Conclusions

27. Drawing matters together, the lack of a five-year supply of housing weighs

heavily in support of the arguments for allowing the appeal, as does the

contribution the scheme would make towards meeting the Council’s housing

requirements, including the need for affordable housing provision. The

development, whilst not in an ideal location, would be sufficiently sustainable

having regard to the totality of the circumstances. The limited loss of

countryside and impact on the Lowland Vale follow as a consequence of the

need to accommodate necessary housing beyond the recognised limits of the

village. Planning permission is therefore being granted for the development,

subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule.

David Leeming

INSPECTOR



SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS

1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years

from the date of this decision.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with

the following approved plans: 2482.100; 2482.101 Rev C*; 2482.102 Rev A;

2482.103 Rev A; 2482.104 Rev B; 2482.105 Rev B; 2482.106 Rev A;

2482.107 Rev A; 2482.108 Rev A; 2482.109 Rev A; 2482.111 Rev A;

2482.112*; 2482.113 Rev A; 2482.114; 2482.116*; and TR8120209/01 Rev

E, subject to the requirements of other conditions set out in this Schedule

and, in the case of the above-mentioned plans marked with *, excluding the

outdated details shown on these plans relating to off-site highway works.

3. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in

the construction of the external surfaces of the building hereby permitted,

including all windows, window sills and lintels, external doors and rainwater

goods, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local

Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the

approved details.

4. No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until surface water drainage

works have been implemented in accordance with details that have been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Before these details are submitted an assessment shall be carried out of the

potential for disposing of surface water by means of a sustainable drainage

system in accordance with the principles set out in the Technical Guidance to

the National Planning Policy Framework, and the results of the assessment

provided to the Local Planning Authority. Where a sustainable drainage

scheme is to be provided, the submitted details shall:

i) provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the

method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged

from the site and the measures taken to prevent pollution of the

receiving groundwater and/or surface waters;

ii) include a timetable for its implementation; and provide a

management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the

development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by

any public authority or statutory undertaker and any other

arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme throughout its

lifetime.

5. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with

the submitted flood risk assessment Ref: CV8/20209/JR/DW/024 issue 2

dated 28 August 2012 and the foul water drainage and utilities assessment

report Ref: CV8/20209/JR/DW/026 issue 2 dated 28 August 2012.

6. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of both hard

and soft landscaping, which shall include indications of all existing trees and

hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with

measures for their protection in the course of development.

7. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of

landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons



following the occupation of the dwellings or the completion of the

development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within

a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are

removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the

next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local

Planning Authority gives written approval to any variation.

8. Notwithstanding any details shown on the approved plans, the site’s internal

and external boundaries shall be enclosed in accordance with a detailed

scheme and programme of implementation, which shall first have been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The

programme shall ensure that the approved boundary treatments for each

dwelling are completed prior to the first occupation of that dwelling and that

the approved boundary treatments for the whole site are completed prior to

the occupation of the last dwelling.

9. Prior to commencement of development, details of the existing ground levels

of the site and the proposed slab levels of the new dwellings shall be

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The

development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved slab

levels.

10.Notwithstanding any details shown on the approved plans, prior to the

commencement of development, details of vehicular access to the site shall

be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Such details shall include visibility splays in both directions along the A417.

The access and visibility splays shall be provided prior to the occupation or

use of the new development and thereafter be permanently maintained, free

from obstruction to vision.

11.Prior to the use or occupation of the new development, the car parking

spaces shown on approved drawings shall be constructed, surfaced and

marked out. The parking spaces shall be constructed to prevent surface

water discharging onto the highway. The spaces shall be kept permanently

available for car parking.

12.All of the roads and footways shown on the approved layout plans and all of

the ancillary highway works and street lighting within the site shall be

constructed/provided in accordance with the specification in Oxfordshire

County Council’s Residential Road Design Guide.

13.Notwithstanding the details shown on drawing TR8120209/01 Rev E, no

development shall take place until a detailed scheme for off-site highway

works, including an uncontrolled crossing and bus stops, has been submitted

to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The off-site

highway works shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details

prior to the first occupation of any of the dwellings in the development

hereby approved.

14.Prior to the first occupation of the development a copy of a Travel

Information Pack shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local

Planning Authority following consultation with the highway authority Travel

Choices Team. The approved Travel Information Pack shall be provided to

each household initially occupying the dwellings to be built. It shall include

information on the alternatives to single-occupancy car use available to

residents, walking and cycling route maps, discounts, public transport

information, the contact details for the Travel Plan Co-ordinator for the site



and useful resources such as the Transport Direct Journey Planner website to

enable people to plan their own journeys.

15.No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a

Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in

writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved Statement shall be

adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide

for:

i Site clearance and construction

ii The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors

iii Hours of operation, including deliveries and loading and unloading of

plant and materials

iv The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors

v Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development

vi Measures to prevent mud and debris being carried onto the A417

vii Measures to control the emission of dust during construction

93.6m91.3mGP

Path

A 417

SMITHS RIC

KYARD C

OULIN

GS C

LOSE

COULINGS CLOSE

Sta

ElSub

65

1022

36

26 20

60

63a

6

16

15 1319

1

4

37

17

Brightwell

1824

50

63

51

House

23

3

14

21

93.6m

93.4m

LB

GP

MSREADING ROAD

WHITE RO

AD

Greensands

Portway Cottages

24

1

Portway

Mather House

1

25

Mida13

30

18

Old Well Cottage

2

Villas

75

9

4

1

2

Lynw

ood

Ordnance Survey (c) Crown Copyright 2011. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020449

0m 50m 100m

REVISIONS

Rev. No Date: Revision:

Client:

Job:

Drawing Title:

Scale:

Date: Drawn By

Drawing No: Revision:

NOTES:DIMENSIONS ARE NOT TO BE SCALED FROM THIS DRAWING

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE CHECKED AGAINST ACTUAL SITEDIMENSIONS BEFORE ANY WORK IS FABRICATED

COPYRIGHT RESERVEDTHIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF BHP HARWOOD

ARCHITECTS AND MAY NOT BE COPIED, REPRODUCED LENT ORDISCLOSED WITHOUT THEIR EXPRESS PERMISSION IN WRITING.

The White Barn, Manor Farm, Manor RoadWantage, Oxfordshire, OX12 8NE

T: 01235 765322 F: 01235 765373

The Mansion House, Hartham Park, Corsham,Wiltshire, SN13 0RP

T: 01249 700407 F: 01249 470077

[email protected] - www.bhpharwood.co.uk

@A4

PYE HOMES

Land to the North ofPORTWAYREADING ROADEAST HENDRED

Location Plan

1:2500

AUG 14 MPF

2740.100

0m 25m 50m

P1

P2

P3

P4P5

P7

P6

P8

P9

P10

P11

P26

P23

P25

P24

P1P2P3P4

P1P2P3P4

P5 P6

P5 P6

P7

P7

P7

P8

P7

P8

P8

P8

P11

P10

P11

P11

P11

P10

P10

P9P9

P10P9P9

P17P18P17

P18

P18P17

P18P17

P23

P24

P25

P26

VV

VV

94.2m

Ashfield House

Trac

k

P12

P13

P14

P15P16

P17

P18

P19

P20P21P22

P12

P12

P12

P12

Footpath link to pedestrian crossing & village centre

Recreational footpath link P19

P19P19

P19

P20P20

P20 P20

P21P22

P22 P21

P23

P24

P25

P26

ALLIN'S LANE

65

102220

60

16

15 131917

1824

50

23

14

21

WHITE RO

AD

Portway

1

Mather House

1

25

Mida

30

2

75

9

1

2

SMITHS RIC

KYARD C

OULIN

GS C

LOSE

COULINGS CLOSE

36

26

63a

6

1

4

37

63

51

3

Brightwell House

READING ROAD CottagesLynwood

4A417 to WANTAGE

P13 P13P14 P14

P15

P15 P16

P16

Public Open Space

SpacePublic Open

ALLIN'S LANE

65

102220

60

16

15 131917

1824

50

23

14

21

READING ROAD

WHITE RO

AD

Greensands

Portway

24

1

Mather House

1

25

Mida

13

30

18

Old Well Cottage

2

75

9

1

2

SMITHS RIC

KYARD C

OULIN

GS C

LOSE

COULINGS CLOSE

36

26

63a

6

1

4

37

63

51

3

Brightwell House


4A417 to WANTAGE

A417 to DIDCOT

ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTCONSENTED UNDER

APPLICATION NUMBER:APP/V3120/A/13/2195492

(ADOPTED HIGHWAY)

THE SITE

ADJACENT LAND IN THE OWNERSHIP OF THE APPLICANT

PLANNINGClient:

Job:

Drawing Title:

Scale:

Date: Drawn By


@ A1

A R C H I T E C T S


T: 01235 765322 F: 01235 765373


T: 01249 700489 F: 01249 470077


REVISIONS





Rev. Date Description

Checked

PYE HOMES


SITE LAYOUT

1:500

July 14 MPF RB

2740.101

KEY

Proposed tree

Shrubs & Herbaceous planting

Play Area

'Courtyard' surface

Community Orchard with wildflowers

Native Planting

Field boundary trees

- to be maintained to allow for maximum growth

Public Open Space

Existing Trees

Housing

Reinforced Grass Grids

Road

Native Trees & Shrubs

0 5 10 20m

Scale

Description

File

R

ef:

Drg. No.

Draft

Checked By

Date

Scale(s)

Drawn By

Project

Rev.

Status

THIS DRAWING SHALL NOT BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION.

Do not scale from the drawing, use figured dimensions only.

Levels and dimensions to be checked on site prior to commencement of work.

All discrepancies to be reported to the landscape architect immediately.

© Copyright Anthony Stiff Associates

Revision description No. By Date

\\N

as2\volum

e_1\D

ata\P

rojects\431 - E

ast H

endred H

ousing\D

ocum

ents and

Draw

ings\C

urrent (W

orking D

ocum

ents and D

raw

ings)\A

SA

-431-D

R-001B

.dw

g

Planning

Land north of Portway,

Reading Road, East Hendred

Landscape Framework Plan

1:500 @ A2April 2014

KBDAES

ASA-431-DR-001

C

Proposed Belt of Native tree

and Scrub planting to define

edges of developments and to

improve habitat diversity.





Proposed Tree and Shrub Planting to

reinforce boundary hedgerow and

hedgerow trees

Proposed Belt of Native Trees

and Shrub Planting defines

boundary of site and provides

visual buffer between housing

and adjacent countryside

ARABLE FIELD

Native Tree and Shrub Belt

creating green buffer between

housing and adjacent

countryside. Providing improved

habitat diversity.

Specimen Field Boundary

Trees that will be allowed to

grow to maximum height and

spread to help create a more

natural modulated edge to the

northern boundary


and Scrub hedging to protect

and separate lane from

development





Change colours and style. Re-design

areas around new layout of housing

A KBD 18/06

Illustration & Layout change to

landscape

B KBD 21/07

Play Area

Swale with Holm oak - helping with

sustainable drainage system

Green grid edge for

drive over surface

Community Orchard

with wildflower area

ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT CONSENTED UNDER APPLICATION NUMBER: APP/V3120/A/13/2195492PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTLANDSCAPE BUFFER

P1

P2

P3

P4P5

P7

P6

P8

P9

P10

P11

P26

P23

P25

P24

P12

P13

P14

P15P16

P17

P18

P19

P20P21P22


Recreational footpath link

Portway

1

12

Brightwell House


4

Public Open Space

SpacePublic Open



(ADOPTED HIGHWAY)

PLANNING

Client:

Job:

Drawing Title:

Scale:

Date: Drawn By


@ A1

A R C H I T E C T S


T: 01235 765322 F: 01235 765373


T: 01249 700489 F: 01249 470077


REVISIONS






Checked

PYE HOMES

LAND OFFREADING ROADEAST HENDRED

SITE SECTIONS

1:100

JUNE 2014 MPF RB

2740.114

SECTION AA

SECTION BB

SECTION BB CONTINUED

B

A

A

B

ALLIN'S LANE

65

102220

60

16

15 131917

1824

50

23

14

21

READING ROAD

WHITE RO

AD

Greensands

Portway

24

1

Mather House

1

25

Mida

13

30

18

Old Well Cottage

2

75

9

1

2

SMITHS RIC

KYARD C

OULIN

GS C

LOSE

COULINGS CLOSE

36

26

63a

6

1

4

37

63

51

3

Brightwell House


4A417 to WANTAGE

A417 to DIDCOT

ALLIN'S LANE

65

102220

60

16

15 131917

1824

50

23

14

21

READING ROAD

WHITE RO

AD

Greensands

Portway

24

1

Mather House

1

25

Mida

13

30

18

Old Well Cottage

2

75

9

1

2

SMITHS RIC

KYARD C

OULIN

GS C

LOSE

COULINGS CLOSE

36

26

63a

6

1

4

37

63

51

3

Brightwell House


4A417 to WANTAGE

A417 to DIDCOT

P1

P2

P3

P4P5

P7

P6

P8

P9

P10

P11

P26

P23

P25

P24

V2V1

P12

P13

P14

P15P16

P17

P18

P19

P20P21P22


Recreational footpath link

Public Open Space

SpacePublic Open

V6 V5 V4 V3

V7

V8

V10

0m 25m 50m

94.2m

Ashfield House

Trac

k

ALLIN'S LANE

65

102220

60

16

15 131917

1824

50

23

14

21

WHITE RO

AD

Portway

1

Mather House

1

25

Mida

30

2

75

9

1

2

SMITHS RIC

KYARD C

OULIN

GS C

LOSE

COULINGS CLOSE

36

26

63a

6

1

4

37

63

51

3

Brightwell House


4A417 to WANTAGE

THE SITE

ADJACENT LAND IN THE OWNERSHIP OF THE APPLICANT



(ADOPTED HIGHWAY)

V9

V11

V12 V13

A 16.10.14 Additional Visitor Parking

PLANNINGClient:

Job:

Drawing Title:

Scale:

Date: Drawn By


@ A1

A R C H I T E C T S


T: 01235 765322 F: 01235 765373


T: 01249 700489 F: 01249 470077


REVISIONS






Checked

PYE HOMES


SITE LAYOUT

1:500

July 14 MPF RB

2740.101A

East Hendred Parish Council Comments to Planning application - 26 houses –

P14/V1964/FUL, Pye Homes

East Hendred Parish Council wishes to object strongly to this application, based on the issues listed

below. A Public Meeting was held in the village on Oct. 10th to discuss this application and those

present unanimously supported the Parish Council’s objection. The Council also regrets that the

developer has not sought the opportunity to discuss this significant application with the village (as

occurred for phase 1), which is current recommended practice. The Parish Council was only given a

very brief outline of the proposed development on a site visit to discuss another development. In

particular the Parish Council considers that this application does not meet the NPPF requirements

for sustainability, as outlined below.

Main issues:

1. This application for 26 houses is the second phase of a previous development for 21 houses

that was approved on appeal. The Council objected strongly to this phase 1 development on the

basis of changing the character of the village, extension of the village outside the main built-up area

and highway safety. These same points apply to the phase 2 development.

2. The application site does not relate properly to the built-up area of the village which lies

south of the A417. In particular the site extends the phase 1 development into the expansive open

countryside (agricultural land). This would create visual intrusion, particularly from footpath 199/3

along the site’s eastern boundary. Due to this visual impact and the proposal’s impact on the local

landscape the Parish Council considers that the proposed development does not meet the tests of

sustainability set out in the NPPF. The phase 1 development was bordered by some existing

housing – this is not true of the phase 2 site. The appeal decision regarding phase 1 makes the point

that although that development would extend the limits of the village it would nevertheless be

closely located to the village, being just across the other side of the road, and it was bounded on two

sides by existing housing. This is not true of the proposed phase 2 development.

3. The District Council in their appeal statement commented that there was no natural

northern boundary to the phase 1 site. Commenting on this the Appeal inspector stated that the

scheme would provide a deep landscape buffer on its northern edge to provide a clear separation

between developed land and the expansive open countryside to the north. However the plan for

phase 2 shows this buffer being breached to allow further development and the required road

access through the phase 1 development to the access onto the A417.

4. There is also a lack of a natural boundary to the phase 2 site. The Developer has designed a 10m

deep field edge planting strip on the northern boundary to divide the site from the open countryside

beyond. Given the proposed break in the northern boundary for phase 1 the Council considers that

the planting strip will not provide a suitable boundary to prevent further development and for this

reason the proposal should be rejected.

5. If, notwithstanding these strong environmental and community objections planning

permission is granted, the Parish Council considers that it is essential that a controlled crossing is

provided for pedestrians from both phase 1 and phase 2 developments. The Council has campaigned

to get a safer crossing for phase 1 and has objected strongly to the proposed uncontrolled island

crossing in a 40mph area. Several plans have been proposed for the island crossing but all of these

do not meet the requirements of the County Council’s DMRB and are therefore sub-standard, due to

the narrow width of the road at this point. The Parish Council is not prepared to accept a sub-

standard crossing. Phase 1 and Phase 2 will comprise over 50 houses which would be isolated from

all of the facilities in the main part of the village unless a safe controlled crossing is available for the

residents. It is, after all, the presence of these village facilities which the applicants claim make this

location "sustainable", so it is absolutely essential that safe pedestrian access is provided to them,

particularly for parents and children going to the village school.

6. The Council strongly requests that the speed limit for the stretch of the A417 bordered by

the housing from phase 1 on the north side and existing housing on the south side and including the

White Road junction is reduced to 30mph to help with the safe crossing.

7. The inclusion of a play area in the site plan is considered a benefit for the village should the

application be approved. The northern part of the main settlement (particularly Coulings Close) does

not have easy access to play facilities and provided proper and safe pedestrian access was available

across the A417 for children this play area could benefit this existing part of the village. The Council

request that should the development be approved the planned play area and community orchard be

changed round to increase the distance of the Playpark from the main road and car movements.

8. Nine of the houses proposed in the development are deemed affordable. Provided a

significant number of these could be designated for village families this would provide a benefit to

the village, as there is a recognised need for such housing as shown by a survey undertaken by

ORCC. The Parish Council would request that a significant proportion of the affordable housing is

designated for village families

9. If the development is approved the Council recognises that section 106 funding will become

available. The Council requests that such funding is used for the following:

a. Suitable play equipment in the planned green space (play area), to the requirement

of the Parish Council

b. The northern boundary hedge (including oak trees) to be put in trust to the village

(for its environmental benefit) with suitable ongoing financial provision being made available

for its maintenance

c. The community orchard and play area to be transferred to Parish Council ownership

with suitable ongoing provision for long term maintenance, to ensure their continued

benefit to residents.

d. Improvements to the village’s sports facilities, particularly improvements to the

pavilion which needs some renovation.

The Parish Council recommends that Oxfordshire County Council gives due attention to the need for

adequate classroom facilities at both village schools to meet the increased need from the new

housing (if approved). In addition the County Council should consider a contribution from the

section 106 funding to help subsidise the bus service X1 to ensure retention of the evening and

Sunday services to the village (including the new housing)

appeal decision - vale of white horsedemocratic.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/documents/s24999...portway...

Documents