Recommendation: Conditional Approval
Proposal: Full application for the proposed construction of a reduced size
multi-use synthetic turf sports pitch with a 3m-4.5m high fence and 6no 12m column floodlights
Applicant: Mr Norman Patterson
The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 223 to 292.
The Committee were advised that the Members’ Update included:
· Correction to condition 12;
· Officer response to an additional letter of objection from neighbouring properties, represented by ET Planning Consultant.
Adrian Mather, Wokingham Town Council, spoke in objection to the application. Adrian stated that Wokingham Town Council Planning Committee had previously resolved this particular application and could therefore no reconsider it within a six month period. Adrian stated that since resolving this application, further information had come to the attention of the Town Council Planning Committee that was pertinent to the application. Adrian asked that the Committee consider all the relevant information and allow time for the Town Council to reconsider the application.
Emily Temple, Planning Consultant on behalf of local residents, spoke in objection to the application. Emily stated that she was representing 14 residents and commented that a formal stage 1 complaint had been submitted to Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) with regards to this planning application. Emily added that residents had commissioned an independent noise impact assessment which had taken into account noise sources including spectators, traffic noise, PA system(s), referee’s whistle and background noise. Emily was of the opinion that many of these noise sources had not been fully assessed or modelled by the applicant’s noise impact assessment. Emily was of the opinion that although condition 6 was intended to mitigate harm it did not meet the test to be an enforceable condition. Emily stated that light intrusion from the proposed floodlights would be harmful to residents, especially in the winter months and there was inadequate screening proposed between the residential properties and the proposed development site. Emily was of the opinion that the application had been returned to the Committee far too early, and urged the Committee to allow time for a further noise impact assessment to be commissioned.
Norman Patterson, Applicant, spoke in favour of the application. Norman stated that a revised community involvement statement had been submitted for consideration. Norman confirmed that the application had no association with or funding supplied by Sports England and that the school’s business plan was not dependant on the pitch producing any income from third party use. Norman stated that use of whistles would be restricted to Saturday mornings and added that this was easily enforceable by only allowing bookings which required use of a whistle to Saturday morning slots.
Maria Gee, Ward Member, submitted a written statement which was in objection to the application. In her absence, Chris Bowring read out the statement. Maria noted that the residents did not object to the Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) itself but instead the current plans for its design and use. Maria sought confirmation that a site visit had been carried out ... view the full minutes text for item 13