Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 16 September 2015.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 16 September 2015 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

There are a number of references to the Members’ Update within these minutes.  The Members’ Update was circulated to all present prior to the meeting.  A copy is attached.

To receive any declaration of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider any recommendations to defer applications from the schedule and to note any applications that may have been withdrawn.

No applications had been recommended for deferral, or withdrawn.

Recommendation: Conditional Approval, subject to variation of the description and to completion of a Legal Agreement.

Proposal:Hybrid Planning Application, including:

Part 1 - Application for OUTLINE PERMISSION (reserving matters of (a) access; (b) appearance; (c) landscaping; (d) layout; and (e) scale) FOR: Demolition of all existing buildings on site; up to 1,500 new dwellings (Use Class C3); up to 12,000 sqm of employment floorspace (Use Class B2); a Neighbourhood Centre with up to 1,900sqm of non-residential floorspace (Use Classes A1/A2/A3/A4/A5 and D1); a new primary school; new sports pitches and associated pavilion building; highways infrastructure including an extension to the Nine Mile Ride and a new link from the Nine Mile Ride Extension to the Hogwood Lane Industrial Estate; associated landscaping, public realm and open/green space (including children’s play areas); and sustainable urban drainage systems.

PART 2 – Application for FULL PERMISSION FOR: 29.70 ha of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG).

This is an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) application for the purposes of the EIA Regulations 2011.

Applicant:Marino Family

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 11 to 120.

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included:

·       an update on Recommendation A, including a recommended amendment to condition 9;

·       a recommended amendment to condition 24;

·       a further written representation from Eversley Parish Council.

It was noted that Members visited the site on 28 September 2015.

Suzanne Sach and Rachel Stockton spoke in objection to the application.

Nicola Greenwood asked the Committee to consider adding conditions in relation to road safety and Greenways.

Roger Marshallsay spoke to the application on behalf of Finchampstead Parish Council.

Ian Pittock, a Local Ward Member, spoke in favour of the application but urged that electricity pylons on the site be removed with the cables buried instead.

Members asked about the provision of public transport and primary school places, road safety and traffic issues and the possibility of the developer replacing pylons with buried cables.

It was clarified that it will be up to the Council to deal with many of the transport and school issues through the use of S106 and CIL funds.

RESOLVED: That

·       application O/2014/2179 be approved, subject to the completion of a S106 Legal Agreement by 30 November 2015 and conditions set out on Agenda pages 59 to 87 with conditions 9 and 24 amended as set out in the Members’ Update and an additional informative to advise future developers to set up a liaison group for the SDL in co-operation with Crest;

·       in the event that the applicant fails to complete the legal agreement by 30/11/2015, and it is in the opinion of the Head of Development Management and Regulatory Services not prudent to continue negotiations, that the Head of Development Management and Regulatory Services be authorised to REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION on the basis that 1) the applicant has failed to sign the S106 legal agreement and thus failed to ensure delivery of the obligations deemed necessary to make the application acceptable in planning terms; and 2) any other reason of refusal considered appropriate by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

Recommendations: Conditional Approval, subject to Legal Agreements.

Proposal: Outline Application for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of up to 21 no. dwellings with associated open space and new vehicular access- all matters reserved.

Applicant: Harry A Coff Limited

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 121 to 146.

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included:

·       recommended amendments to condition 7 and 16;

·       a recommended insertion of a new condition 8;

·       corrections to the report;

·       an update on the provision of affordable housing;

·       clarification on parking provision, density and local schools.

It was noted that Members visited the site previously in relation to Sandford Farm developments.

Hannah Bowler, Agent, spoke in favour of the application.

Members expressed concerns about the density of dwellings and parking space provision.

Planning officers confirmed that the indicative design meets the guidelines, is largely a mirror image of the development opposite and that details such as the site layout and parking provision will be dealt with at the Reserved Matters stage.

RESOLVED: That application no. 150595 be approved, subject to the completion of a Legal Agreement and conditions set out on Agenda pages 122 to 128 with conditions 7 and 16 amended and a new condition 8 inserted as set out in the Members’ Update.

Recommendation: Conditional Approval.

Proposal: Full planning application for the proposed erection of 2 no. single storey extensions and modifications to the fascia and entrance of site, new pavilion structure and deck, updated cladding for gym and nursery, taxi drop-off point and associated improvements to the public realm.

Applicant:John Adams

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 147 to 160.

The Planning Officer told the meeting that no significant objections had been received.

RESOLVED: That application no. 152065 be approved, subject to the conditions set out on Agenda pages 147 to 150.

Recommendation: Conditional Approval.

Proposal: Reserved Matters application pursuant to Outline planning consent number O/2014/2242 for the erection of 100 dwellings, associated amenity space, garaging and parking, internal roads, pathways, sustainable urban drainage with pond and associated landscaping (accessed from approved access on Matthewsgreen Road).

Applicant:Bovis Homes Thames Valley Region

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 161 to 190.

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included:

·       summary information on parking;

·       an update on objections following the submission of revised plans;

·       a recommendation to authorise the Head of Development Management and Regulatory Services to grant planning permission subject to final agreement of plans under condition 2.

It was noted that Members visited the site at the Outline Planning stage.

Kevin Morgan, representing Wokingham Town Council, spoke to the application.

Charles Collins, Agent, spoke in favour of the application.

Philip Mirfin, a Local Ward Member, expressed the view that the proposed flats were out of character with the area.

Members asked about the route of construction traffic, the proposed balancing pond and when a new primary school will be available.

Planning officers explained that it would not be possible to predict the direction of construction traffic until the contractors are known and that this matter is currently being dealt with under a discharge of conditions application related to the main outline application consent for the site.  Balancing ponds are normal features of developments.  School places are not an issue with the number of dwellings in this development.

Members expressed concern about the height of the blocks of flats and a suggestion was made to visit the site again to review this.

The Planning Officer confirmed that, while it might be preferable in his view if the flats were placed elsewhere in the site, they did meet the Council’s separation distance from existing dwellings and he would not be justified in recommending refusal on those grounds.

RESOLVED: That application no. 150093 be approved, subject to the conditions set out on Agenda pages 162 to 165 with the Head of Development Management and Regulatory Services authorised to grant planning permission following final agreement of plans under condition 2.

Recommendation: Refusal.

Proposal: Proposed erection of dwelling, creation of new access and associated landscaping.

Applicant:Mr & Mrs Poulos

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in Agenda pages 191 to 210.

The Committee was advised that the Members’ Update included a reference to one additional letter of objection.

It was noted that Members visited the site on Friday 9 October 2015 to view the site in the context of the green belt.

The Planning Officer outlined the reasons for recommending refusal of this application, describing the proposal as inappropriate development which by definition would be harmful to the openness and visual character of the Green Belt.  The applicants had failed to demonstrate to the Council’s satisfaction that the site is sustainable with regards to its location and access to services.

Duncan Hartley, Agent, spoke in favour of the application, arguing that the house proposed is of exceptional design quality and as such should be approved as an exception under NPPF paragraph 55.

A number of Members agreed that the design was of high quality.  Rachelle Shepherd-Dubey argued that it was of such high quality and ecological design as to outweigh concerns about the impact on the Green Belt.

The Planning Officers expressed the opinion that the design might be approved for a Countryside location but it was not of such exceptional quality to justify approval in the Green Belt.

RESOLVED: That application F/2015/1336 be refused for the reasons set out on Agenda pages 191 to 192.

To receive the quarterly enforcement monitoring report – to be circulated with the Members’ Update.

The Committee received and considered the Quarterly Enforcement Monitoring Report.

RESOLVED: That the Quarterly Enforcement Monitoring Report be noted.

To consider any recommendations from the Head of Development Management to hold pre-committee site visits, set out in Members’ Update.

The Head of Development Management and Regulatory Services had recommended that a pre-Committee site visit be undertaken in respect of the following application:

·       F/2015/0770 - The Lodge, North Court, The Ridges, Finchampstead - proposed erection of 3 bedroom detached dwelling with associated parking access and landscaping following demolition of existing dwelling, to view the site in the context of the wider area and countryside setting.

RESOLVED: That a pre-Committee site visit be undertaken on Friday 6 November 2015 in respect of the following application:

·       F/2015/0770 - The Lodge, North Court, The Ridges, Finchampstead - proposed erection of 3 bedroom detached dwelling with associated parking access and landscaping following demolition of existing dwelling, to view the site in the context of the wider area and countryside setting.

A site visit agreed at the 16 September 2015 Meeting in respect of

150066 - Land adjacent to Norton Road, Wokingham, which was not carried out, will now be undertaken on 6 November 2015.