Oakley and Deane Parish Council
Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 21 April
2016
Present:, Mrs. Gavin ( Chairman), Mrs. Blackman, Mr. Bullions, Mr. Law.
Five members of the public attended the meeting; Mr. and Mrs. Wall, Mr. and Mrs. Brown, and Mr. Hunt.
1. Apologies
Apologies were received from Mr. Favell, Mr. Hewitt and Mrs. Taylor ( Borough Councillor)
2. Minutes of the Meeting held on 17 March 2016
These were approved by the committee and signed by the Chairman as a true record of the meeting.
3. Planning Applications
The following applications were considered;
16/00678/HSE – Raising of roof with flat roof rear dormer and front roof lights, 12B Lomond Close. The committee had no comments and
no objections to this application.
16/00967/HSE – Erection of single storey rear extension, 47 Hill Road. The committee had no comments and no objections to this
application.
16/00969/HSE – Erection of rear conservatory, 10 Garrett Court. The committee had no comments and no objections to this application.
16/00973/HSE – Single storey rear extension following demolition of existing, 14 Blackwater Close. While the committee had no objection
in principle to the application, they did make the following comment: we would request that the plans be amended to include a pitch to the
roof, rather than a flat roof as is currently shown in the drawings.
16/00635/HSE – Erection of garage following demolition of existing garage, 37 Highland Drive. The committee had already responded to
BDBC stating objections on the following grounds: the development is very large for the site, the inclusion of 6 roof lights in a garage seems
excessive and the neighbours have informed us of a 35ft tree at the border of the property which is not mentioned on the application forms
( and there are other large trees close to the boundary all within falling distance), the measurements were not clear on the plans we saw (
until members visited the site) and also, members were concerned about the possibility of back land development . Mr. and Mrs. Brown, and
Mr. and Mrs. Wall, who are neighbours of the property in Highland Drive, also have made objections and brought photographs to show the
effect of the application on their properties. This has already been proposed by BDBC to go to Committee and so committee members will
attend and speak at the hearing.
16/00830/FUL and 16/00828/FUL - Removal of existing temporary marquee structure and all associated structures including ancillary
storage containers. Erection of new purpose-built marquee and associated works. Retention of existing glass link. Oakley Hall. The
committee had already responded to the application, due to time constraints: The PC Planning Committee have no objections to this
application. In fact, we are supportive of replacing the existing structure with the proposed marquee which will eliminate the need for the
metal storage containers. The committee are keen to retain a marquee attached to the hotel as it provides a much needed local venue for
weddings and other events. We note that the application 16/00692/FUL has been granted ( this was for the retention of the existing
marquee) and our only comment on this would be that there should be a definite date at which the marquee should be replaced - our
proposal would be beginning of next year after Christmas and New Year celebrations are over, and the hotel will have the opportunity to
undertake refurbishments without interruption for guests .
16/00603/ROC – Variation of Conditions, Land West of Ganderdown Copse re Critical Treatment Hospital. As the Removal of Conditions in
question relate to issues such as selection of contractors, and constraints on those contractors in terms of delivery of the project, rather
than to the plans themselves, the members had no comments or objections to the application.
16/01019/FUL – Erection of 2 no 2 bed, 1 no 4 bed and 2 no 5 bed dwellings, East Oakley House. Mr.Hunt represented his father who
lives in Foxglove Cottage which adjoins the grounds of East Oakley House. Mr. Hunt expressed concern about increased traffic, about
proximity of one of the 5 bed houses to his boundary ( and the subsequent loss of privacy), and also to changes to the ‘’ heart of the
village’’, as this property is of the conservation area of Oakley. There is also a concern about access to and from Rectory Road, in particular
about refuse lorries and other large vehicles whose inability to turn without damaging his property is already a problem, and this will
increase should the new dwellings be built. The Planning committee reviewed the application, and made the following comments
The planning Committee of Oakley and Deane Parish Council met last week and discussed the above application.
The members object to the application for the following reasons:
No material differences to previous application:
the members noted that it did not significantly differ from the previous application, 14/03503/FUL which was refused on the following
grounds:
 Harm would be caused by virtue of the size, scale and form of the proposed buildings which would compete with and dominate the
surroundings of East Oakley House.

Conservation Area - harm would be caused by the density and design of the buildings which is not in keeping with the properties in
the area. It would also result in housing development wrapping around the south-eastern edge of the Conservation Area.

Inadequate provision of community and infrastructure provision
When the original application was subsequently appealed, the appeal was refused on the following grounds: the effect of the proposal on the
setting of the Grade II listed East Oakley House and three grade II listed ancillary outbuildings, and that the proposal would not preserve or
enhance the character or the appearance of the Church Oakley conservation areas.
Archaeological Interest of the area:
Having read the report from David Hopkins (County Archaeologist), we would like to agree that we believe this area is of archaeological
interest and should not be developed.
Housing type:
The current application is still (as was the previous one which was refused) for 5 dwellings -in this instance, 2 x 2 bed, 1 x 4 bed and 2 x 5
bed. The Oakley and Deane Neighbourhood Plan (which has successfully been through Referendum and will be adopted in May 2016)
specifically states that what is needed in Oakley is an increase in smaller dwellings, rather than more large houses.
We understand the resident of Foxglove Cottage has already objected to the application. I have returned the Public Participation slip as
should this come to Committee, the Planning Committee members would like the opportunity to attend and to speak.
The committee noted the following decisions.
16/00571/AGPD
Replacement Agricultural Building 90
Pardown
Raise no objections
16/00563/LDPO
16/00162/HSE
15/03950/FUL
4.
Certificate of Lawfulness for the
proposed conversion of the existing
garage together with a part front
and part rear extension with internal
alterations, 13 Dever Way
Erection of single storey front
extension to existing porch. Erection
of part single storey, part two storey
rear extension following demolition
rear/side extension to include
construction of slate roof and
installation of 7 roof lights, 10
Rectory Road.
Erection of a timber shed for storage
and installation of entrance gate. St
Leonard’s Field
Granted
Granted
Withdrawn
Other planning issues
15/04503/OUT – Adjoining Parish, Hounsome Fields.
Additional plans have been lodged but due to delays at BDBC Planning offices, Dummer Parish Council do not have all the paper copies of
the plans, so are intending to visit the Civic Offices w/c 25th April to obtain all relevant documents, and after that will issue formal
objections, and Oakley and Deane Planning Committee will support Dummer in their objections.
15/00975/FUL Leamington Court.
Amended plans for the application were received by members, and reviewed. It was felt that the objections to the application, which was
subsequently referred to Committee for further discussion, could now be withdrawn subject to the following: We would, subject to the
following condition , withdraw our objections; the condition is that S278 Highways Agreement ( provision of a footway) is to be enforced
before any houses are marketed.
5. Future meetings
18 May 2016 ( please note this is a Wednesday)