Agenda and minutes

Planning Committee - Wednesday, 13th October, 2021 7.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber - Civic Offices, Shute End, Wokingham RG40 1BN. View directions

Contact: Callum Wernham  Democratic & Electoral Services Specialist


No. Item



To receive any apologies for absence.


An apology for absence was submitted from Gary Cowan and Pauline Jorgensen.


Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 409 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 8 September 2021


Additional documents:


The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 8 September 2021 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following minor amendment.


Agenda page 13: “…and additional informative relating to asking the applicant to work with the farm owner tenant regarding the possibility of dual use of the land for grazing purposes as resolved by the Committee.”


Declaration of Interest

To receive any declaration of interest



There were no declarations of interest.


Applications to be Deferred and Withdrawn items

To consider any recommendations to defer applications from the schedule and to note any applications that may have been withdrawn.


No applications were recommended for deferral, or withdrawn.


Application No.211841 - Land North and South of Cutbush Lane, Shinfield, RG2 9LH pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement

Additional documents:


Proposal: Full planning permission for the Science Park Creative Media Hub comprising the erection of film stages and associated workshops and office space; and ancillary uses including equipment stores, café. Formation of associated access, decked and surface parking, and landscaping at the Thames Valley Science Park (TVSP).


Applicant: Shinfield Studios


The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 19 to 124.


The Committee were advised that the updates contained within the Supplementary Planning Agenda included:


·           Updated resolution to recommend grant of planning permission subject to notification of the Secretary of State of a potential departure from policy in the development plan;

·           Updated recommendation A;

·           Clarification to the report with respect of biodiversity net gain of 10%;

·           Insertion of plan numbers under condition 2;

·           Insertion of the word ‘ancillary’ in front of the word ‘offices’ within condition 3;

·           Insertion of the word ‘out’ after the word ‘carried’ within condition 7;

·           Insertion of the words ‘for monitoring purposes’ after the word ‘review’ within condition 16;

·           Insertion of the word ‘the’ after the word ‘for’ and insertion of the word ‘thereafter’ after the word ‘maintained’ within condition 17;

·           Deletion of condition 34 and subsequent renumbering of later conditions;

·           Insertion of plan reference for newly renumbered condition 38;

·           Correction to report that the ditch had been approved on 12th October 2021;

·           Insertion of letter of objection from Iceni on behalf of the residents of Cutbush Manor, Cutbush Barn and badger Cottage and officer responses;

·           Additional consultation responses received after publication of the report;

·           Insertion of text in relation to the procedure of referring this application to the Secretary of State;

·           Clarification that Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) has no set parking standards for studio use as this was not envisaged when the parking standards were set up, however five other comparable sites had been used for the parking calculations;

·           Confirmation that the heritage assets cited in paragraph 113 were Grade 2 listed;

·           Confirmation that landscaping details would be secured by condition 26 and evergreen planting could be secured if required.


Mark Cockram, neighbour, submitted a statement in objection to the application. In his absence, the statement was read out by Angus Ross. Mark stated that he supported the overall application for the Shinfield Studios and recognised the benefits that it would bring to the local area. Mark stated that he was however objecting to the positioning of the very large office A building which would be in close proximity to the Grade 2 listed buildings. Mark added that the office building would be approximately 50m from Cutbush Manor, and the office building would dwarf Cutbush Manor in a similar context to the Queen’s Head pub and the Civic Offices in Wokingham. Mark stated that the buildings of Cutbush Barn, Badger Cottage and Cutbush Manor were all over 400 years old and constructed on timber frame and brick, built directly on to London Clay with no foundations. Mark was of the opinion that the potential structural impact to these buildings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.


Application No.211530 - Land at Shinfield West, North of Beke Avenue pdf icon PDF 700 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Additional documents:


Proposal: Reserved Matters application pursuant to Outline planning permission VAR/2014/0624) (a variation of O/2010/1432) for the erection of 25 dwellings, 134.5m2 of Class A1-A5 floorspace including access roads, parking spaces, open space and landscape treatment. (Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale to be considered)


Applicant: Bloor Homes Ltd., Bovis Homes Ltd. and Linden (Shinfield) LLP


The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 125 to 200.


The Committee were advised that the updates contained within the Supplementary Planning Agenda included:


·           A further objection received from Shinfield Parish Council on 8 October 2021;

·           Amendments to conditions 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16. Conditions 10 and 14 had been deleted, and as such condition 11, 12 and 13 became conditions 10, 11, and 12, and conditions 15 and 16 became conditions 13 and 14.


Nick Paterson-Neild, planning consultant, spoke in support of the application. Nick stated he was speaking on behalf of the consortium, and they were delighted that this reserved matters application had been recommended for approval. Nick added that the application formed part of the local centre within the SDL in Shinfield, which was granted outline planning permission in 2012 for up to 1200 homes and supporting uses, and this application formed one of the final phases of this important development. Nick stated that the local centre was community focussed and had been positively shaped via pre-application and public consultation processes, and was in accordance with the approved local centre development brief. Nick added that the scale, type, and density of the development was appropriate and would provide for a vibrant and attractive local centre which complement the approved community building and care home. The consortium was working closely with a potential food store operator, Lidl, to deliver a food store. The proposals had been carefully planned and amended to ensure that the operator of the food store and its future delivery were not compromised. Nick stated that the proposals would deliver 25 homes, including 6 affordable units, which was an overprovision of affordable homes when considered across the allocation of the outline site as a whole. Nick added that the site would include flexible retail space to meet local needs, a public plaza which would prioritise pedestrians, high quality landscape and green infrastructure, energy demand reduction via a fabric first approach, 19 passive and 4 active electric charging points, and space to provide a food store in the future. Nick felt that this site was in an extremely sustainable location, and supported the officer’s recommendation of approval.


Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey queried whether photovoltaic panels would be installed as part of this application, and queried whether the electric vehicle points would be upgradeable to any future standards. Connor Corrigan, Service Manager - Planning and Delivery, stated that the outline application was approved prior to the requirement for ten percent energy generation, and therefore the proposals were policy compliant. Connor added that building regulations would contain sustainability measures. Simon Taylor, case officer,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.


Application No.212228 - Lambs Lane Primary School, Lambs Lane, Spencers Wood pdf icon PDF 259 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Additional documents:


Proposal: Full application for the retention of an existing single storey modular building for a temporary period of 7 years. (Retrospective)


Applicant: Wokingham Borough Council (WBC)


The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 201 to 220.


The Committee were advised that updates contained within the supplementary planning agenda included clarification relating to the resource base and the seven year permission period.


Bill Soane queried how the site had managed to get three additional years of use without returning to the Planning Committee, and queried whether any permission granted should now be for 4 years rather than for seven. Adriana Gonzalez, case officer, stated that she did not know the details regarding why this application had not come forward until now, and confirmed that the permission as proposed would grant seven years of permission from the date of the decision. Adriana added that the seven year permission would allow further assessment of the structure and potential future options under the maintenance order. Justin Turvey, Operational Manager – Development Management, confirmed that the seven year permission would allow time to further assess future standards and needs of the site.


Stephen Conway wished for comments to be passed on regarding the Committee’s concern over the time taken to bring this application forward for consideration.


Carl Doran commented that these buildings needed to be replaced properly, and he hoped that a permanent solution could be found in future.


Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey commented that these facilities were struggling to be replaced due to tight budgets for schools.


RESOLVED That application number 212228 be approved, subject to conditions and informative as set out on agenda page 202.


Application No.212509 - 160 Reading Road, Wokingham, RG41 1LH pdf icon PDF 221 KB

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Additional documents:


Proposal: Full application for the proposed erection of a 2no.storey plus loft level dwelling with an integrated garage to include 12No roof lights following the demolition of existing bungalow including alterations to the vehicular/pedestrian entrance.


Applicant: G Lupton


The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 221 to 244.


The Committee were advised that updates contained within the Supplementary planning Agenda included:


·           Reference to three additional neighbour comments received after the report was submitted for the agenda;

·           Amended condition 4.


Imogen Shepherd-Dubey, on behalf of Wokingham Town Council, spoke in objection to the application. Imogen stated that the proposals were for a large three-storey house including five bedrooms. Imogen added that the ridge height of the proposals would be 2.5m higher than that of the adjacent properties. Imogen stated that the other properties in the area were all two-storey family homes with no larger buildings in sight. Imogen stated that the proposals were downhill from neighbouring buildings, and the diagrams provided did not represent the street scene adequately. Imogen suggested that Members may wish to visit the street to get a true sense of the street scene and the character of the area. Imogen stated that the Town Council was grateful for the removal of the external garage and the rear dormer window proposals, however the third floor windows and the third floor useable space remained. Imogen was of the opinion that the height and massing of the proposal was not in keeping with the surrounding character of the area. Imogen was of the opinion that the proposals did not meet CP3a of the core strategy, and she did not want this application to set a precedent for larger properties of this nature outside of town centre settings.


Peter Mathers, neighbour, spoke in objection to the application. Peter stated that the existing bungalow at 160 Reading Road was not much smaller than the two-storey house situated at number 158 Reading Road. Peter stated that the proposal was for a property which was substantially higher than both numbers 158 and 162 Reading Road, and would have an overbearing nature that would disrupt the downward trajectory of the houses which followed the slope of the road. Peter stated that an officer report for a pre-application care home on the site address last year stated concerns relating to the centre section of the building being of three-storeys in height and being considerably higher than existing properties. Peter stated that this application would allow a building of a similar height, and therefore approval would be inconsistent with the approach taken last year. Peter stated that the proposals included eight roof lights and two small round windows in the roof which he felt was excessive. Peter raised concerns that the storage areas within the proposed third-storey may be used as bedrooms in future. Peter asked that the number of roof lights be reduced, and removed completely from side elevations, with the remaining roof lights to be obscured glass. Peter  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.