Issue - meetings

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement.

Proposal: Full application for the proposed erection of 6 No residential apartments with associated parking and access following demolition of existing.

Applicant: Mr Bal Hans.

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 45 to 74.

The Committee were advised that the Members Update included:

·           Clarification regarding Technical Housing Standards;

·           Clarification that Woodley Town Council did not discuss the application;

·           An additional neighbour comment;

·           Updated response from Earley Town Council that the application should be refused;

·           Correction to Councillor Shirley Boyt’s name;

·           Update to table on agenda page 56;

·           Clarification that images on agenda pages 57 and 69 were duplicates.

Rosemary Cook, Earley Town Council, spoke in objection to the application. Rosemary stated that Earley Town Council had concerns regarding the visual impact of the development on the Site of Urban Landscape Value (SULV). Rosemary added that the SULV was being eroded ‘bit by bit’ and needed protection and commented that Church Road was already very busy with traffic and Earley Town Council had concerns that this development would only add to this problem.

Tim Marsh, Residents’ Association, spoke in objection to the application. Tim stated that the proposed development site was situated on an exposed corner of the SULV and was therefore sensitive in terms of visual impact on the SULV. Tim added that it was Wokingham Borough Council’s (WBC’s) policy to protect the status of the SULV. Tim stated that the existing bungalow was in keeping with the character of the area and was not intrusive. Tim felt that the proposed two storey building would not be effectively screened by the tree to the front of the property, as the tree was deciduous and would not screen the property in the winter months. Tim stated that towards the rear of the development unit 5 was located in an exposed position which would be a prominent feature which would dominate the remaining open area of the SULV. Tim raised concerns over the parking allocation at the proposed development, and felt that the application should be refused as it was not appropriate to the area in which it would be located and was overbearing on the SULV.

Paul Butt, Agent, spoke in support of the application. Paul stated that the current scheme had been significantly reduced in scale compared to a previously refused application, with the bulk of the property being reduced. Paul commented that the inspector had no objection to the principle of development, and additional space would be provided at the front of the property for car parking. Paul stated that three outbuildings currently located within the SULV would be demolished as part of the application proposals, and tree planting would take place to provide a softer edge to the SULV. Paul stated that there would be an improved relationship with number 13 Church Road who had posed no objections. Paul concluded by stating that the application would retain the large garden, protect two TPOd trees, provide soft landscaping benefits and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20