The Central and North Buckinghamshire Area Planning Committee met to discuss a change of use for a property in Steeple Claydon, and a planning application for a residential development in Buckingham. The committee approved the change of use in Steeple Claydon, and voted to defer the decision on the residential development in Buckingham.

Appointment of Vice-Chairman and Other Preliminaries

Councillor Patrick Fealey, Chairman of the Committee, opened the meeting by welcoming new members and announcing that the meeting would be webcast. He also proposed that future meetings should start at 2pm instead of 2.30pm, which was agreed. Councillor Frank Mahon was appointed Vice-Chairman.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Frank Mahon declared that he had predetermined the first application, and would leave the room while it was being discussed. Councillor Patrick Fealey declared a prejudicial interest in the second application and would leave the room while it was being discussed, with Councillor Mahon taking over as chair for that item. Councillor Robin Stuchbury declared an interest as a local Ward Member for Buckingham, who had called in the second application to the committee.

52 West Street, Steeple Claydon

The committee approved an application for a change of use at 52 West Street, Steeple Claydon. The application sought full planning permission for a change of use from a dwelling house to a children's home, and the installation of solar panels, cycle storage, and hard standing.

Anna Schaar, presenting the case for the council, explained that the application was being referred to the committee because 52 West Street is owned by Buckinghamshire Council, and the planning application has been submitted by Buckinghamshire Council. She added that the proposed use of a children's home would accommodate up to four young people aged 8 to 17 on a long-term basis, who would be supported by a team of permanent staff providing adult supervision 24 hours a day.

Steve Cooley, Head of Residential Services for Buckinghamshire County Council, spoke in support of the application, explaining that the council is setting up 10 new children's homes across the county in response to the national placements sufficiency crisis¹. He added that the home would provide stability, warmth and routine for the children who have experienced trauma and exploitation.

Councillors asked questions about the age range of the children, the length of time they would stay at the home, and the suitability of the location for schooling and other support. Mr Cooley confirmed that the age range would be 8 to 17, and that children would usually stay for a minimum of 12 months. He added that the location had been carefully assessed to make sure that the children would be able to access the services that they require.

Councillor Robin Stuchbury asked about the consultation with the parish council, and the tree at the front of the site. Ms Schaar confirmed that the parish council had been consulted, and that the tree would not be affected by the proposal.

Councillor Phil Gomm congratulated the officers for selecting a fantastic premise and a great community for the children to go to.

The committee voted to approve the application, subject to the conditions set out in the officer's report.

Land South Of Bourton Road, Buckingham

The committee discussed an outline application for residential development on land south of Bourton Road, Buckingham. The application sought outline planning permission with all matters reserved except for access, for residential development including affordable dwellings, a pre-school/nursery, sustainable drainage systems, public open space including a children's play area, access arrangements off Bourton Road and associated landscaping, infrastructure and ancillary development.

Tom Ansell, Principal Planning Officer, introduced the report, explaining that the application was being referred to the committee at the request of Buckingham Town Council, which had objected to the application. He added that the application site comprises an area of agricultural land divided by hedgerows, containing a small wooded area on its northeastern edge.

Councillor Anna Schaefer, a local ward member, spoke against the application, raising concerns about drainage and the emergent neighbourhood development plan. She stated that the Buckingham water recycling plant currently does not have the capacity for additional development, and that she was not convinced that the proposed conditions would adequately protect the River Great Ouse. She also stated that the emergent Buckingham neighbourhood development plan has some queries over it in terms of the number of houses and the spatial strategy.

Councillor Ady Osibogun, also a local ward member, spoke against the application, analysing the reasons why the application should not be granted despite the tilted balance². He drew the committee's attention to the summary of identified harm and negative weight, and the summary of identified benefits in the officer's report. He asked why it was significant positive weight for the site to deliver 30% biodiversity net gain, but only moderate negative weight afforded to the loss of best and most versatile land. He also asked why negative weight hadn't been assigned in respect of insufficient capacity for water resource and water wastewater infrastructure.

Councillor Jane Mordue, representing Buckingham Town Council, spoke against the application, urging the committee not to allow their plan to be undermined at such a pivotal moment. She added that the new plan is to go to an extraordinary meeting of the town council on 28 July and to referendum in September, and that it does not include this large-scale and outer character encroachment on this rural site.

Sebastian Fielding, a local resident, spoke against the application, stating that it would fundamentally change the environment and the proximity and the location of where he lives. He added that the purpose of the neighbourhood development plan is to take everybody's consideration into account, and to look at development to be in the betterment of Buckingham itself.

Sarah Jones, the executive head teacher of Lace Hill Academy and a representative of Campfire Education Trust, spoke in support of the application, expressing support for the application that also seeks approval for a new early years facility. She added that the proposed early year setting would provide an excellent opportunity to create strong foundations for children in the local area and act as a vital feeder into Campfire Education Trust primary schools in Buckingham.

Neil Hall, representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application, stating that new homes are urgently needed, and that this is a well-considered proposal on a suitable site in a highly sustainable location that would deliver significant benefits to the area. He added that the scheme includes improved crossings, funding for bus services, and contributions to the town's transport strategy.

Councillors asked questions about drainage, traffic, and the neighbourhood plan. Officers explained that the drainage issues were being addressed, and that the traffic impacts had been assessed. They also explained that the neighbourhood plan was at an advanced stage, but that limited weight could be given to its policies at this time.

Councillor Chris Poll stated that he could not approve the application because he did not have all the information he needed. Councillor Robin Stuchbury proposed that the committee defer the application for a site meeting, which was seconded by Councillor Poll.

The committee voted against the motion to defer the application for a site meeting.

The Planning Solicitor then advised the chair that if members were not provided access public representations and members considered they were not therefore in possession of all the details necessary to make an informed judgement, that any decision made by the committee was at risk of challenge on procedural unfairness and recommended that the application be deferred.

Councillor Llew Monger proposed that the decision be deferred until a subsequent meeting when members have had more time to consider all of the information available, and that a site visit be arranged prior to the meeting. This was seconded by Councillor Andy Huxley and carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned.