Issue - meetings

181499

Meeting: 12/06/2019 - Planning Committee (Item 9)

9 Application No. 181499 - Land South of Cutbush Lane, Shinfield, RG2 9AG pdf icon PDF 709 KB

Recommendation: Conditional Approval subject to legal agreement

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposal: Full planning application for the erection of 249 dwellings, new public open space, landscaping, surface water attenuation, access and associated works at land to the south of Cutbush Lane Shinfield.

 

Applicant: Bellway Homes and the University of Reading

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 15 to 110.

 

The Committee were advised that the Members’ Update included:

 

·           An 37 updated list of head terms/alternative recommendation C on

Pages 17 and 37;

·           Replacement Table 1 on page 56;

·           Removal of the work ‘around’ on page 60 paragraph 40;

·           Typographical clarification on page 65 paragraph 73 stating that the total parking space allocation was 415 allocated spaces and 95 unallocated/visitor spaces;

·           Clarification regarding the SANG capacity.

 

Jack Hatch, resident, spoke in objection to the application. Jack stated that he was surprised that this application had returned to the Planning Committee so quickly, considering the amount of details that had changed including the SANG provision. Jack was of the opinion that many of the objections raised by residents and interested parties had not been adequately addressed. Jack stated that many of the objections had highlighted that the proposed development site was not originally present in the SDL and was instead released via an Executive decision. Jack was of the opinion that the surrounding area of Shinfield was not coping with the existing levels of housing development and raised concerns relating to the lack of highways traffic concerns raised. Jack added that there was concern regarding access to the proposed development, citing that the access road was very limited with regards to space, especially on the west side of the road where the proposed development would be situated. Jack was of the opinion that the proposed access was therefore not safe. Jack concluded by querying whether the proposed development met Wokingham’s needs effectively.

 

Mark Chatfield, resident, spoke in objection to the application. Mark stated that further consultation had not been carried out between the developer and the residents despite the significant changes to the application. Mark added that the report had noted that any archaeological findings on the proposed development site would be of little value, Mark felt that this was an opinion and he referenced that Shinfield had a longstanding history. Mark was of the opinion that there was no way to assess the impact to residents’ wellbeing should the site be developed, and added that the proposed development could create additional pollution. Mark stated that traffic issues were already commonplace around the proposed development site and felt that this development would only exacerbate these existing problems. Mark added that there was poor pedestrian access to the proposed development and that this could lead to dangerous situations. Mark noted that the reptile survey was undertaken in December which was contrary to advice given by Natural England on how and when to undertake such surveys. Mark concluded by commenting that local residents would concur that there was no capacity within local services such as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9